nfreeman

There is no question that the coaching staff blew the last 13 seconds. But still. The franchise is probably in the healthiest position it has ever been in: - MVP-level QB who is young, built like the terminator, under contract and getting better each year. - Great coach who is young, under contract, loved by his players and has rebuilt the franchise from a 17-year running joke into an elite NFL organization. Good veteran players with multiple options take less money to eithe stay here or come here. - Well respected GM who is young, under contract, highly professional and has built the FO into a model organization that is now getting its junior people poached by other teams seeking to emulate the Bills. - Deep pocketed, stable, committed owners who don't order QB changes, diddle the cheerleaders or get arrested with briefcases full of painkillers. - New stadium likely on the way that will keep the team here for the foreseeable future. 10 years ago this would've seemed like a miraculous outcome. Halle-freakin-lujah.

I love McD, but it has to be said: a Belichick team would never, EVER have played super-soft D on Hill and Kelce and given them those huge cushions with 13 seconds left. Given how well KC was playing, it might not have mattered, but that and the kickoff were possibly catastrophically poor heat-of-the-moment decision making.

Let the record reflect that I agree with swamp on a Bills loss. Josh has become one with the matrix. And the D (and the offensive line) got worked. I also agree with @Dreams Burn Down that lousy play-calling cost them a critical few possessions and, on a night when Mahomes and KC were in the zone, that was the biggest factor. What an incredible game.

Dude.

Dude.

Insane.

It’s go time.

Here we go. Time for JA to write the legend.

Come in D. Pull your weight!

Awesome.

Can’t agree with the statement on the D. KC is carving them up. But I agree that the O play calling stinks. False. It’s 2 penalties on the Bills and 1 on KC.

Another wasted possession where our MVP doesn’t get the ball on 3rd and short. Bad call Daboll. they are only going to get the ball 2 or 3 more times. They need to score every GD time or they’re toast.

Cannot waste any more midfield possessions. Questionable play calling on that last one.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!

How do? Because Eichel was more attractive in trade than ROR?

Please forgive my attempted witticisms. Tell me: other than "pacing for 40 points" based on a 37-game sample, what about Hall's time with the Sabres would you say was better than terrible? How would you describe his play? I would describe it as 5% to 10% more effective than Bjork's play this season, minus the mediocre penalty-killing. He was good at carrying the puck up ice on the wing at speed and then doing nothing with it. Otherwise he was invisible.

I've read that if Schoen got the NYG job, he was likely to hire Daboll as HC. Either way this hiring is a statement about how far the Bills' organization has come under McD and BB.

I think @Brawndo has posted not too long ago -- maybe in response to Lehner's accusations about poor medical treatment here -- that the Sabres have made a number of changes in their medical staff (Brawndo, I apologize if I am mis-remembering here). Still: WTF? Something appears to be amiss here.

That's not what I'm doing. I said that based on the eye test, he was terrible for the bulk of his time as a Sabre -- and frankly I still don't see how this is even arguable. You insisted on using stats to evaluate whether he was terrible. So, notwithstanding the small sample size of his time, which I think you'll agree renders a stats-based analysis fairly unreliable, I gave you some stats that are consistent with my (correct and incontrovertible) eye-test-based judgment that he was terrible. I have no interest in arguing whether a 40-point guy typically has streaks of poor production in a given season -- of course he does (although a 40-point guy who is also a 7-goal guy is probably closer to "terrible" than most 40-point guys). But that truism doesn't matter in evaluating whether Hall's 37 games as a Sabre were terrible.

I agree with all this. My point was simply that Hall was terrible for the Sabres. But I was totally on board when they signed him.

@Thorny -- you did say Hall was "bad" for the 14 games after Eichel went down, right? So, in counting the number of angels on the head of this pin, we're just talking about a sufficient number of games in addition to those 14 as to constitute "the bulk of his time as a Sabre"? And if we add the 11 games in which he produced only 3 assists vs NJ, we get to 25 games, out of his 37, yes? Do you not think 25 out of 37 games is "the bulk of his time as a Sabre?" I will also add that you frequently -- and correctly, IMHO -- cite small sample size as an important factor in hockey analysis -- but you're pointing to a stretch of 2 goals (a 7-goal season!) and 12 assists in 23 games as evidence of someone's performance being "objectively" decent by NHL standards -- when anyone with eyes who watched him that year was ready to drive him to the airport. I'll also point out that he's been panned regularly by the Athletic's Bruins writers this year, FWIW. And now I think I've beaten this horse enough.

Well, eye test is always subjective, and I'm not sure the concept of "objectively [anything] statistically" has any meaning -- but in this case I think Hall was freaking terrible as an objective matter. Since you are relying on stats, though, here are a few: - during the portion of the season when he allegedly made magic with Eichel, he had an 11-game stretch where his production consisted of 3 assists, all against NJ, a terrible team against which his competitive fires, such as they are, were presumably running hot since they dumped him after he won the MVP for them. - A few games later, after Eichel was done for the year, he had a 9-game stretch in which his production consisted of 1 assist. That's a total of 4 pts, all assists, 3 of which were against a terrible team, in 2 stretches comprising 20 of his 37 games as a Sabre. YMMV, of course, but IMHO that is being "terrible for the bulk of his time as a Sabre." EDIT: also, valuing assists equally with goals is silly. There's a reason 2 assists are awarded (most of the time) for each goal.

What happened to Vinnie H.?

@Thorny -- despite numerous glitches in his Hall tirade, @GASabresIUFAN is again right on the core issue -- which is that Hall was freaking terrible for the bulk of his time as a Sabre. This is one of those times where the eye test needs to take precedence over the stats (especially where the main stat is assists). He was shockingly ineffective.

FWIW, Paul Hamilton was on WGR yesterday and said he doesn't think Sammy is going back to Rochester.