LTS

Indeed. I wonder how much it would cost for lettuce and many other items if we had to pay minimum wage workers to be in the field.

I've been working in highly functioning organizations with remote workers for years now. A person's ability to communicate and perform their job is not a function of where they are located. It's a function of themselves. I don't agree. The more I think about it the more I think someone heard Dahlin and Adams were meeting and Dahlin told him that losing is unacceptable and someone took out their jump to conclusions mat and decided it meant Dahlin was threatening to leave. That said, the inherent threat is there. Dahlin clarifying that he never used the word leave is enough proof of all of it. His remarks are spot on. The team sucks, he hates it. It needs to get better. But he has not threatened to leave. Working remotely is fine for a LOT of jobs. The guy who runs my entire organization is not located in a market where we do business. Most of the people in his leadership team are not. We've been highly successful. What is the advantage of being there, in market, day after day? And keep in mind, it doesn't mean he's never in Buffalo (all of a 3 hour drive away).

Cool. In the immortal words of Private Mahoney, "Thank you sir, I make everybody sick."

Probably crazy to celebrate someone who's making that much money.. because of course he could take even less.. but that's the position he's put himself into and we'd all take it if we could. So, kudos to him because if he's sincere, then I love it and if he's not? He's a great marketer. Either way.. just win.

Nothing personal, how old are you? I guarantee I'm older... perhaps I should not guarantee it. I would see it the way you see it. However, I bet money that my kids would see it as the "harmless lie to subvert corporate greed". The "go viral" to get brand attention. The company wants to leverage an "influencer" and thus a star is born. It's a very different world.

Nailed it.

No and I can elaborate more on what Dahlin said below. There's a lot about Jack Eichel and only part of it has anything to do with the Sabres itself. I'm not even going rehash any of it. He's not Dahlin, it's that simple. Eichel came to Buffalo a very good kid and somewhere along the way changed, personally. The rest is history. Again, F him. I don't care what he hated. He's not worth the time of day. I'd rather lose without him than win with him. That's exactly how much respect I have for him and, once again, it has nothing to do with his actual hockey play. The difference between where I work and a professional player under contract is that I can choose to leave. If I were a player who were, perhaps 3-4 years into my contract, and the team had not improved then perhaps I might get more vocal. But Dahlin is a player who re-upped his contract that started THIS YEAR for $11M. If he was that bent out of shape, he should not have signed an 8 year contract. That was HIS choice, he could have forced a shorter contract that would have had him end up a 27 year old UFA. He didn't. If he wants things to improve, showing up with sour ass grapes isn't going to make things get better. But, I don't see him doing that. So it's all speculation. This is what matters. Not what Bissonette says. He's 100% right and he's 100% echoing what we say. He's 100% sending a message to his team and his ownership. You can infer that at some point he'll have had enough of it and at that point who could blame him? He upped for 8 years and wants success. Simply by signing that contract he's saying he wants to make this team successful. After a few years, if it doesn't work out? Yeah.. then I can see him force the issue. I sure as hell won't be a fan of this team at that point.

I'd love if the topic came up just to see if he poked at it again. I'll watch tonight... why not.

Yes, he did want out. He had quit on the team because he's jack ass. I am quite familiar with Eichel's shenanigans. That said, none of us can talk about when or what trade could have happened without the neck injury because that never happened. It certainly provided a means for moving a player who was a detriment to the team. So, at the time I was very much F Jack Eichel and I remain firmly in F Jack Eichel camp. I would feel the same about Dahlin should he go the same route.

100%.. you failed to specify how big or when.

Every time I see a face-off win.

So is Dahlin going to get a neck injury? The issue with Eichel was he literally could not play hockey without surgery. It's not apples to apples. I get leverage and all that. Losing Dahlin would impact this team, I'm not about to defend some player who took an $11M contract and then turn around and forced his way off the team. If he was that concerned he should have negotiated a shorter contract. Him pushing his way off the team would negatively impact the team. A team we all want to improve. So, if he pushes his way off the team he's contributing to this team losing more. Why on Earth would I support him in his endeavor? I wouldn't.

But the real question is not if Dahlin is fine with it. It's more is the source full of crap and just looking for attention. thus "clickbait". I don't think anyone's going to make an argument that Dahlin is happy with it. I don't think anyone would make an argument that ANYONE is happy with it.

Did it make you sick? Really? As you said, he did nothing unusual and in fact scored a goal that any NHL player could score, but you are sick over it? Then, to double down Ullmark made you just a sick. You must be feeling awful. And the "slip through our fingers" narrative.. I swear we need to get a pinned post where long running topics that come to an agreement can be summarized so people stop perpetuating myths and fan fiction.

First.. the source. Second.. the "threat". Dahlin has zero leverage. He's under contract until 2032. Third.. yeah, turn it around. At least we all agree on something. End summation: Nothing to see here. I'll put money on Bissonette trying to sow seeds of discourse. He's an NHL shock jock, and not a good one.

Tage is whatever they put him at... but he sucks at face-offs, that much is certain. He's proving he can score on the wing and he scored while playing center. Thompson is a forward who can score.

Oh boy, here we go. Hits.. the questionable stat and as many commented on about his first game, the statistician was being extremely generous. He scored a goal, good for him. I honestly couldn't care less about what Cozens does at this point. He didn't do it in Buffalo. He's not a player on the team anymore, so he's just an opponent now.

The coaching is perhaps the biggest problem on this team, outside of the owner and GM. Ruff is not the coach. He's a figurehead to train Appert on how to become the next HC. The retained the assistants who had proven they are not capable of being assistants. Nothing changed with Ruff coming in and taking over for Granato except the name on the door above Head Coach.

An emotional, veteran, leader that wants to continue his career in Buffalo. I'll take it. Perhaps having two players who actually have some respect around the league choosing to sign in Buffalo will help. Either way, I am quite happy with this. Everyone who always looks for the negative in everything can have their concerns.

Players don't want to play in Buffalo.. "F them" Player re-ups a contract to stay in Buffalo. "Why would he do that? He's injured all the time. Blah Blah Blah" No wonder so many people liked Eeyore when he played for the Sabres... The Sabres suck, it's not because of Greenway. For once you are allowed to be content (maybe even a little happy) that a player wanted to sign in Buffalo and it's one who actually plays a decent game.

You did. My commentary is those who like to live beyond their means or believe they are entitled to certain life luxuries despite not having the income to support it. People choosing to have children when they can barely afford to feed themselves. People who choose to pay $150 on sneakers instead something more practical when they lack the disposable income, etc. By contrast, knowing my former company was going through changes I implemented spending reductions in our annual budget beginning in 2023. When I was eventually let go in October 2024 I was in a position to absorb the change. Had I just kept on spending, even reasonably by how I normally spend, I would have been in a much worse situation. This would then be compounded by a poor job market, rising costs, etc. My point is, we live in a very materialistic society and many are not strong enough to resist marketing. As such, people feel justified in spending more than they should to possess items that drive minimal real value. They perceive it as a great value because they are coerced via marketing into a false reality. This may be through the application of social pressure via "status" and not having it should you not have the latest cell phone for example. It's not meant to be a true blanket statement, but more like saying obesity is an issue. There's far too much of it to be relegated to an isolated incident.

If you take a GDT in its entirety and just substitute out the opponent and the players for names of the next opponent and players, would it read the same?

I would venture a guess the only reason the Devils were in on this was because his father, ex-NHL'er Scott LaChance, is the head of USA Scouting for the Devils. I get a feeling the Devils know already whether Shane LeChance will sign a deal.

I understand but this team needs roster players, not futures. The value of trades in the off-season is higher than trade deadline unless teams get into a resource war. That said, I don't think Cozens in the player that makes teams say "Hell yeah, Stanley Cup here we come!" He's the type of player teams look at that think a do-over could help finish his mistakes. So perhaps it's a trade with a non-contender, but I think teams are more likely to give up more, be it futures or players in the off-season. As for seeing what the team does without him? Does it matter? If you believe they need to move him anyway the team will eventually be what it will be without him. This season is toast anyway. I also think they likely don't want to mess up what's happening in Rochester right now.

Some.. definitely. Not all, of course. But I think we all know people who stretch their means farther than they should because they have some belief they are entitled to obtain more in their life than their livelihood supports.