Thorny

This is a definite negative/potential pitfall of this particular type of strategy

That’s what I was mentioning before. There’s probably as strong or stronger a correlation be strong prospect pool and nhl failure going forward than success. It’s provably predictive, just not in the way we like

Well, technically what Adams preached is a perennial Cup contender ie just getting into the playoffs isn’t good enough. Ie we are sacrificing all this development time under the scenario where that’s the price we pay for greatness. So one could make the argument that if we spent all this extra time prioritizing the future over the now only to become a perennial playoff team, the strategy failed by the prism of its own standards. Certainly, making the playoffs and taking 5 years to do it isn’t “job well done”, now. Shouldn’t take that long and the expectation was to make it this year. But honestly, I’m willing to write off the “perennial cup contender” stuff as media jargon, and the whole thing as spin in the name of job security. At the end of the day we want the exact same thing as *every* team and spinning the way you’ll get to it probably amounts to bet-hedging in the end. I’m happy judging by a more league-relative standard. I don’t need greatness from the plan, I just need league relative competence. I’ll happily take a “mere” playoff team. As mentioned - that should have been this year. Did the plan fail this year? Yes. Do I think it’s solid enough to the extent it could succeed, to the tune of a playoff berth, if we stick with it? Yes. I’ve said it a lot: Adams should get next year. But that doesn’t mean the strategy should stagnate. It should be ever evolving and a greater aggressiveness is strictly necessary for next season when imo Adams is definitively on the hottest of seats

Typo. Should just say picks. The contention with Murray was always his dealing of picks not prospects. And I’ve posted the research on here a few times for anyone who actually wants to look it up: Botterill traded more than he brought in relative to Murray and Murray made more picks.

Did Matthews relocate?

Even in Junior he was seen as a more staight-forward type player. Perhaps that pointed to a lack of IQ awareness / playmaking. He has his stretches where he excels in that area but his raw physical traits have always been his best asset

Nah Reinhart called Adams to say thank you which was thoroughly detailed in that beyond blue and gold so we’re good

First Krueger year, right? Though I guess we’re in the 4th Donny year so whatever

I find I’m in the crazy pills minority know this: he hit him DIRECTLY in the head. I thought it was a good call. Probably makes contact even without the lean

I was a Reinhart guy and 55 still looks insane next to his name

Lundell was right there but Quinn looks good Hell Reinhart was right there

3 on 3 is an abomination

Stitch under

If we get to 40 wins, the season is a success

Will we make the playoffs when we stop the M W stuff? Or will we stop the M W stuff when we finally make the playoffs? 21 goals for a D is pretty cool

Dude, re: your last paragraph: you quoted ME. I didn’t “come at you.” I respect your overall posting contributions. I’m just telling you outright not to waste your time: if you respond to me with a big long write-up about how it’s “harder than people think it is” - it’s misplaced. Misplaced based on who you are responding to. I do not agree with your assessment and I ESPECIALLY do not agree I don’t have an understanding for the difficulties doing it. Calling into question my understanding of the way the NHL works. If you want to post to the cows come home about how “people are complaining on message boards and they just don’t get it, it’s so much harder than they think” that’s fine! but you *specifically quoted me* lol. I’m just saying: save it.

Point 2 is sort of what I’m referring to re:goalies next season being decided. Hopefully the Comrie treatment doesn’t affect perception of FA in general (it might) but it absolutely would for goalies

I guess they have no interest in “doing right by the player” here, eh? more less guarantees they have their 2 goalies penciled in for next year.

So, no improvement next year, miss the playoffs for the 5th year straight, would have them on hot seats for year 6, but nonetheless back? I can’t even venture a guess with Granato at this point because I can’t understand it anymore but with KA, I’d have him back next season but to me THIS coming year is his “hot seat” season

If you think about it, Granato being back would actually be insane, just given what we’ve seen, the issues we’ve seen the team continually fall prey to. And I’ve been one of the most reluctant to call for his replacement. It just…the more time goes by the more im surprised by that the guy going up to the podium game after game with no answers for the slow starts, with increasingly little to say is just…back we’re such a weird franchise Oh well. Still love ‘em

Most don’t have NMC, I don’t know how many times i need to correct this. You can keep saying it, but it doesn’t make it true ~ 75% of players don’t have NMCs. The league isn’t divided into the good 25% and the bad 75%. There are oodles and oodles of options through trade if you are also adequately utilizing the drafting and FA components of team building Edit - also, can you lay off your gaslighting routine for one day? Yikes.“Yelling about it on a message board isn’t going to make a difference, the smart fans accept it can’t have been better”. Stahp. It’s a *league relative* comparison. Adams and the Sabres have been bad *relative to their peers*. If you want to cry about how all those other teams are operating under different standards than we are, even when it’s not true, because it helps you sleep better, knock yourself out. But please, please save your *utterly* nonsensical “look, you just don’t get how hard it is” take for people who have no interest in intelligent hockey conversation

“Aptitude” being included in my use of “experience” I felt went without saying. I guess it wasn’t clear cause the point I was drawing was that I’m NOT interested in “leadership”. I want to draw a distinction between leadership and experience. I don’t want the Johnsons and the Eakins that was my central point. I’m not looking for intangible “leadership” qualities that are overblown in general. That’s the reason I used *experience*: simply referring to players that have already developed into their skill sets and abilities Ie better, established players the comp I was drawing was between young, inexperienced players and older, more experienced and developed players. not one between players with leadership abilities or without

Jets thing has hurt me deeply, being a local problem

I agree totally and have been saying the same thing for a while. To me it’s actually to the level of hubris: I don’t think we should be focused on anything but building the best team possible for the current moment, not turning our noses up at good because we feel the only thing worthy of our pursuit is the Stanley cup. Cart/horse. And I actually think the newest regime sort of underestimated the dangers of stacking a long form build on top of 9 previous years missing. Sabres have become a unique, anomalific environment over the course of a decade and they need a real-time jolt of urgency to shock us out of it imo