Weave

Asplund being bumped down to Bjork/Eakin replacement is effectively the same as losing his spot. He’s been pushed out of the top 9.

John Rigas. I know, semantics.

Wait….. did that happen?

I keep going back to our vet-to-kid ratio is all wrong. He might turn into someone’s valuable bottom 6er. He shouldn’t be ours though. We need to concentrate on developing difference makers and bring in good vets for the rest so the future difference makers are properly supported. Murray was a gambler. Botts was all about the safe play. Adams needs to be the best of both.

Man, you lay it out like that and it's no wonder my bitterness was extended another year. I mean, I knew but..... I did not have a front of the brain consciousness of just how tank-y this season is.

It's a numbers game now. We've reached critical mass with this current group of kids. There are too many kids to continue to support developing Asplund. We need to make room for the next one we think is going to be the ceiling that Asplund never reached.

After last season I would have been OK if we moved on from Thompson, and you know what? I wouldn't care in the slightest if he did for another team what he is doing today as long as we got good value and the team was properly balanced. Hockey trades where both teams win are the best trades. No remorse here. Who would I prune? Joki would be on my list if he didn't play the right side. We're flush with young D. Some need to go. If they are that strong as prospects we should get value coming back. Win win. I've seen all I need to see of Asplund, Bryson, R2, and I know this one will generate flames, but I wouldn't hate seeing Mitts go. He's 23 and we still don't know what we've got. If he really has that much promise he'll bring value. It's a competition for who gets developed and he's got alot of kids breathing down his neck for that spot. Kids I'd build around: Cozens, Dahlin, Krebs, Mule, Thompson, and the kids that haven't had their 9 games yet. That's like 8 kids on the roster spread among all positions. I'd move Johnson. We have too many young D to support developing him properly.

I think you're right. I feel the same about R2 and Asplund as well.

And IMO that will be a mistake. I think we have reached a point where team management needs to start selecting young players that aren't going to be difference makers and move them out. They are diluting the development and exposure of the ones we need to hit their ceilings. It's like a classroom with 1 teacher and 40 kids.

Not links, obviously, but I've seen tons of reporting and video footage of Chechen military types in Ukraine. I thought it was well known at this point. Edit to add, a quick google search returns a very diverse international reporting from respected news orgs reporting the presence of Chechnyan soldiers.

Nothing would be more Buffalo than having a convicted felon own the team. Again.

How can this not be self evident to so many people?

I hate that internet conversations are so damned digital. On at least two occassions I said that our vets were not the right ones, and it contributes to the problem. Of course we need the right vets. Saying we need the right players isn't profound, and its certainly not very debatable. You still need enough of them to make sure the kids aren't overwhelmed by their experiences. And I think its about as obvious as a sunrise that our kids have been overwhelmed because they haven't had enough support around them. And yes, that means the right support, not just lots of it.

I posted the numbers for you already. Neither Col nor Car left so many kids with so few vets.

Repeating ad nauseum, we support more young players with fewer veteran players than any other team in the league. And we keep doing it.

I love the way international communities are rallying.

And Chicago was an outlier. You can’t plan to succeed with an outlier strategy

We absolutely do lack vets. Look at the number of vets on the other teams. We have less than 1 vet for every one player under 25. No other team in the league supports as many kids with so few vets. And absolutely, 100% agree, at least half the vets we do have are the wrong ones. I addressed that in my comment about Eakin, Butcher, and the goalies.

My thought was, he wanted to scare Ukraine into bargaining away their full independence for a promise of not occupying. I don't think he expected Ukraine to still be calling that bluff today. I also think at some point it will no longer be a bluff. Then we'll see the real Russian military capability on display. I hope for Ukraine's sake that I am wrong about that.

This is not trivial. We do not have much for veteran support with a full roster. Pull 3 of them off the roster and veteran support is laughable.

I've argued in the past that the last thing we need to do is put more kids in the lineup. We are not giving the kids we have enough veteran leadership. The4 last last thing we need to do is skew the kids-to-vet ratio any more than it is already skewed. I decided to compare the rosters of all of last seasons playoff teams to our roster this year to get a feel for how well distributed age is in a playoff roster. The thing that stuck out to me was, compared to those playoff teams we have the 3rd most kids under 25 on the roster and have the fewest 27yrs+ vets on the roster. Of those 27yr old+ vets we have Anderson, Butcher, Dell, Eakin, and Tokarski. So 5 of our 11 vets are barely NHL players. There isn't a single team in the league that supports so many young players with so few good veterans. And we want to put more kids in the lineup? It's not a recipe for success.

Medication?

What they haven’t realized yet is, they’ve now had their Rapture and they didn’t measure up.

I really want this to be true.