ska-T Palmtown

Fair points, except for the last - you have been around long enough to know someone will always take exception to anything this franchise does 😁- and rightfully so, until they prove us wrong! I know I would not be as frustrated with the trades of young talent (and I am only really at a 4/10 on that - with a cap of 7/10 for anything the team does. 3 point penalty for the fourteen year drought), if they were actually the young talent, not THE talent. Two more Zucker/Tuchs and trading JJP for D help looks a helluva lot cleaner on paper.

I sense a strong contingent of SS feels that the quality of the 3 year NHL "Vets" that are penned into the line up in Buffalo are not the type that might be penned into the line up for a true playoff contender. I think there is some merit to that line of thinking. However, the Sabres regularly get rid of "fringe players" that go on to serve very nicely in appropriate roles on playoff teams. This leads back to the same old song and dance of "if it ain't the players, it must be the team" And GM and Owner own the responsibility for what the "team" is. Sigh. And before LGR gets mad - I love love love me some Zack Benson. I don't think it is a stretch to think he will get some serious Selke consideration at some point in his career. Would he have cracked the lineup of a strong playoff team 3 years ago? Probably not. But again - team failure.

Aren't "we" at SS tired of this trope? I looked at the SC roster EDM and FLA ... here is the list of terrible franchises that let players go that ended up in the SC finals: ANA, ATL/WPG, FLA (yes, two players drafted by FLA played for EDM, lol), VAN, STL, TOR, NJD, NASH, PIT, CGY, DET, DAL, BOS, CAR, ARI, BUF (oops), COL Plus it appears that SIX undrafted FA's (5 for FLA, 1 for EDM) also played. Obviously we all know E-Rod got his start in Buffalo. It just doesn't shake out that only Buffalo trades away talent. All those franchises were either "dumb enough" to trade them or "terrible enough of a destination" that they could not resign them. In the modern NHL, players move around A LOT. Every team has a handful of home grown talent and a huge helping of "cast-offs" from other teams. 4 of FLA's top 5 scorers were from other teams. Including the almighty Sam Bennett. The loaves have made the playoffs for a long time (something we, the Sabres faithful, would kill for) ... they just traded away Marner. Shrug emoji sums it up for me.

This is nothing new ... but it is beyond pathetic The average number of playoff appearances since 2000 (not counting the Covid year) is 12 (note there were no playoffs in 2005). A standard deviation is 4.2 - which means anything between 8 and 16 is still kinda (?) "normal". Vegas and Seattle are excused. So, on the low end only Buffalo, Phoenix/Utah, and Columbus are outside of a reasonable variation. At the high end, Sharks (?!), Broons, Pens, and Caps are more than a standard deviation above the average. The median is 14. Bold italic numbers are active streaks. * means if you include the Covid year, the streaks gets one longer + means if you include the Covid year, the streak reduces to 5 (or 6 for the 'Nucks). If you discount Vaygus and Seattle, the average worst streak length per team is 6 years. Discounting the two covid years, roughly 1/3 of the teams that missed the playoffs one year make it the next. This is where that stats show it is not just "odds". By the 1/3 rule, the average streak would be roughly 3 years. Which means there are a significant number of teams who drop out of the playoffs for less than 3 years, then pop back in. And, to go with that - a bunch of teams that cannot get back in within 3 years. This peaked in 2015 and 2017 when half of the teams that missed the playoffs the previous season made it in the next year. It should also be noted that the last four years, just below 70% of teams have made the playoffs in any given 3 year period - the lowest in the 2000's, but with one more team not making it - this checks out. Diving further ... since 2000 - an average of 77% of the league makes the playoffs within any given 3 year period. Since 2000, every team has made the playoffs three years in a row except ... Buffalo 😞 (Seattle, too - but c'mon) Edit: Dive Deeper? OK ... Since 2000 - an average of 84% of the league makes the playoffs in any given 4 year period. This was greater than 90% in 2010, 2015, 2019, and 2021 ... Sabres, Oilers, and Phoen-tah miss in 3 out 4 of those years. A word about straight "odds" - over a three years stretch, based solely on 1/2 the league making it (was actually more than that most of the 2000's), it should be 87.5% of teams making it. The real data is 77% (which means about 61% chance of missing each year). Similarly, for 4 years it should be 93.8%, real data is 84% - which oddly enough equates to a 63% chance of missing the playoffs. The 4 teams who managed to miss the playoffs for a staggering 10 or more years in a row obviously skew the data away from the statistical norms.

for me - it is far more of a first-world NFL problem. I am actually nervous about the Bills living up to expectations, so watching the games is WAY more gut-wrenching. Back in the days when the Bills were Cheatriots punching bag ... hang out with friends at a Bills bar, eat wings, drink beer, cheer/cry. During the Kelly days - I was still in middle school / high school so I dealt with stress better, lol. I did stay home from school the day after "wide right". But I think half the school did.

Two things: First - yeah, Salt Lake City is not exactly an upgrade on Buffalo, unless he is looking for mountains. Second: My 5 pages of JJP hockey cards really hope he tears it up out there!

Over on Reddit, they found the victim's social media and he is bragging he only has a black eye. FTR, he has a VERY punchable face.

What harm could it do? I stan this decision!

Too many folks mentioned it for me to go and find all the quotes - but I don't buy the "Sabres are losing money" bit for one single second. I've posted it before, but many sources (CNBC, Forbes, etc) all put the 2023/24 Sabres (last year of data) as cashflow positive. One estimated a net operating profit of over $13M and another had their EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) of $15.8M. The two seem to jive given the franchise has no real debt and if the owner is responsible for maintenance of the stadium, I presume they get to depreciate that asset on the business taxes. The talk of someone worth north of $7B scrimping on $5M for his hobby team just does not sound realistic to me. That same year the Bills had a net operating income of over $100M. Even just Pegula Sports or whatever would view the total of the teams. Sure, no one likes losing money (which he is not), but with all his proclaimed love for hockey, etc etc - it does not pass the sniff test. Could he be wary of big name free agents after some pretty spectacular swings and misses? Sure. Isn't the joke around the league that bad decisions happen on July 1? There is also very little logic to the new Bills stadium argument. Again, this is a business, not a person. With steady operating income over $100M, there is no way T-Pegs is not financing a majority of the construction costs. Why? If you had $7B in business assets that probably give you a consistent return in excess of 10% per year - would you cash out a sizeable chunk of that money to avoid a 6% (guessing) construction loan? Heck no. I bet even with a $1B loan against the stadium, the Bills remain cash flow positive. The $1B he got from selling 20% ... he did not use that for the stadium, lol - he invested it somewhere to get more in annual returns than the cost of the loan. Also, some portion of that loan has got to be helping the bottom line on the team's taxes. Cash poor is a total myth that we, the fanbase, have made up and internalized to ease our suffering. T-Pegs could get a low-interest $1B loan faster than most people on this board could a $30k loan to buy a car.

Maybe Adams was like "how aboot 4x$4M?" ... i can see not dignifying that with a response, lol.

I also don't think trading for Byram solves Dallas's cap problems. He wants too much. The have like $5.73 or something. (notice the there is no "M" after that number, like five bucks ... seriously)

He has essentially played full seasons in 2 out of his 3 years in the NHL. Seems like the injury season should be looked at as the outlier, no?

I feel like I was mostly in some sort of broad agreement with your post. I was mostly using your post as a way into the convo, tbh. That said, while we may differ on our exact feelings of the JJ trade (and admittedly, I focuses almost entirely of the effects of that one trade in the second half of my ramblings), we both feel you can't judge the trade without the context of what happens around it, ie Terry simply pocketing the $5.5M or GM Howdy Doody actually doing something useful with it. In the end for me, if the Sabres make the playoffs this year, the JJ trade is water under the bridge.

I think there is some value in saying if, If, IFFFFF, the Sabres uses that $5.5M savings to get Robertson or Marner, etc - then we could look back on the series of moves having been an overall success - and that would be more meaningful, at least to me. By itself, still not happy with this trade. I liked JJ's game. There, I said it. It seems like some people (not necessarily you, JohnnySea) seem to think that strong 2-way forwards grow on trees. I am not even sure that brand of hockey is coached at the younger levels anymore. Even looking at the list of F's that get Selke votes, many of them are "meh" overall, but the crowd is thin. In one of the other threads, it came up that the Sabres were 3-29 when scoring 2 or fewer goals. Solve the goalie, become an acceptably mediocre team that comfortably eeks into the playoffs. Can some of that come from better D? Sure, I guess. But without JJ, they may play MORE games scoring 2 or fewer goals, thus necessitating a proportionally stronger performance from the D and G. Classic Looney Tunes where Daffy is trying to plug the holes in the dam, but runs out of fingers (? you, the kind disney ducks have)

I am fascinated by the Sabres going 33-17 when scoring 3 or more. I know few teams average 3 a game, but the Sabres did it FIFTY times. 50 games, 218 goals ... so for 61% of the season they averaged just over 4 goals per game. The other 32 ... 3-29 ... WTF? 47 goals ... or a paltry 1.5 (if you round up) ... 🤮 Scoring 2 or fewer 32 times and having your goalie bail you out (checks notes ...) THRICE!?!?! We can rag on the defense all we want - but ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we need look no further than between the pipes. Nothing further your honor. edit: tagging @stenbaro since they did the original work - I don't want to take credit!