Thorny

Not saying you are doing this but I don’t think the answer is ever “well next year we’ll be healthy.” Which is I think the connotation of the above, in a sense. If we get Jack Quinn back for a full year, rest assured there will be a different guy we say, “if we only had him the whole time.” It’s just how injuries work. We’ll make the playoffs next year if the team is good enough even AFTER the inevitable key injuries. That’s the depth we need. And it requires a more practical approach. We can imagine how good we’d be with Quinn this year, but we have to go through the roster of every other team we are competing with and give them back a player they’ve missed too

No because the particular narrative with Murray isn’t just that he didn’t adequately manage his transactions it’s that he failed them specifically by sacrificing more draft and prospect capital than normal in the process- which isn’t true

If I’m in the mood for anointing, my pie in the sky hope for the future from Benson - Cozens - Quinn is something like: Point - Larkin - Stone

Live look at Kevyn Adams reading the above post -

If we are in the alternate universe where the shootout goes on for eternity between the pens and wings, the sabres can still make the playoffs

It’s not a reflection of pressure. They have been a 500 team all freaking year

Wonder if they put up a “welcome back to Buffalo” tribute on the tron

Good bounce back Doesn’t work like that. You have to go and give every other team their key injured guy back, too. Every team has one

Yessir

Playoff goals won’t count

Sabres doing the Pens/Wings a favour and it’s looking increasingly likely that my Pittsburgh prediction was aces

Tuch takes over the team lead in points outright

It’s not even leadership, it’s more appropriately described as simply experience. Why is being a young team considered a significant positive by some? Because you expect young players to get better. Right. So older players are better players, generally. So perhaps icing more older players would lead to better performance. It’s really that simple. We need a good coach to help with that progression, but even if you get the help that progression isn’t instant, and it can’t be avoided. The experience has to take place. The idea seems to be to more less just wait on it. So, by all means, change the coach. A good one will help that next stage become realized. But we are still talking in terms of in undefinable future if we aren’t willing to add more experienced players to the roster in the now

And they did the same thing last season. The record is a reflection of their talent and construction: not a reflection a of coach not alchemically inspiring them to greater heights. I’m not saying a coach makes no difference I’m saying the margins aren’t close to what you are making them, when we see such an EXTREME issue consistently arise, that of slow starts, it’s a player issue. I’ll ask again, how could the players possibly not understand the need to start on time? What could a new coach possibly say that would make them go, “oh, I get it.” ? If they can’t grasp such an obvious fact it’s assuredly on the group It’s a group born into, baptized, and moulded by a narrative from on high that preaches patience and process and imo an aversion to real-time expectations and this bleeds into the very fabric of the construction of a roster asking a coach to go in and wave his wand and change the very nature of what Adams assembled is absurd

I guess when I think of “listening to a coach” I’m thinking of the, “hey that guy played for granato at the USNTDP 5 years ago go get him” shenanigans we’ve seen. You are probably right that a more vet coach would provide more valuable suggestions, but if that sort of philosophy was imputed by the GM we may still have the same problem. I’m ok with the coach having input but the aim needs to be to field a good team with an identity within its very construction that ANY competent coach could work with, rather than that input bring geared more towards familiarity to coach

Ya that’s what she said - - - I struggle to blame a coach, that’s my acknowledged bias. I agree the data suggests a firing should be objectively argued. But I haven’t gone soft. I’ve been incredibly consistent in my stance for, what, 5 years now? Surely that can be recognized. My line with Adams has always been there, I don’t move the goalposts. The theory suggested he’d be canned if we miss next year and that’s my line

Hey look I struggled with my point, too, when writing it. I’m not sure if it makes sense either haha. My aim is rarely to add sense to the discussion but rather to promote questioning of the entire enterprise, and all its facets. I think what I mean by “intangible” is the thing Granato is most criticized for is the team being unready to play, no? So, a lack of motivation. A person’s ability to “provide motivation” is a significantly more intangible thing to measure than, say, a player’s ability to score goals, no? Betting too much on this intangible variable is a very frivolous course to take imo. Rife with inherent risk. For one, motivation may not be the problem. And 2, again, if *23 guys* don’t have the proper motivation, if you are asking one guy to carry the slack for 23, you are already in massive trouble all teams occasionally need a fresh messsge. That’s where the “coaches are hired to be fired” thing comes from. But if your team CONSISTENTLY misses the message and the message is “game starts at 7”, it sort of imo defies logic to blame the coach. How stupid would the players have to be to not realize the importance of starting on time. If they are incapable of leaning it, it’s a player issue. But they aren’t incapable. Can’t we just employ a bit of Occam’s razor here? It’s a team full of kids and that’s the likely reason for the lack of focus. The lack of expectations from the GM only feeds this It’s ultimately on the players. But the players don’t roster themselves: there’s someone responsible for the collection

I see what you’re saying but if we have too many Owen Powers the issue is the other weaker/redundant Owen Power on the team not the actual OP. OP isn’t the guy we’d shift away from

All having the top ranked prospect pool guarantees you, if you don’t build a team, if you don’t use it as a means to an end, is future years with the highest ranked prospect pool. As we have seen. A good prospect pool yields a good prospect pool more often than a good team

Because it takes forever to make up ground building purely through prospects because A) we have such a talent gap to make up b) it takes prospects a long time c) teams get a FREE 7 PICKS EVERY YEAR. Even the *good ones*. In the painstakingly long time we take to make a small bit of progress, there’s more than enough time for teams to address their much smaller holes through the draft picks they’ve been granted. Their draft capital is “weaker” but it’s relative: they don’t have the holes to fill on the main roster we do. You can’t make up ground purely through youth before disenfranchisement sets in. You HAVE to be fluid in a team building approach. It’s shocking this gets any pushback at all but the name of the game is variety. A GM need to be agile and adaptable and combine many different avenues for team building into a competent whole its always about balance

No, he didn’t. And for the 50 billionth time: *BOTTERILL* traded more picks and prospects away Nothing a GM does sets a team back “5 years”. The turnover to competitiveness in a league half the teams make the playoffs is *demonstrably* shorter for all but the significant outliers

Adams has done enough positive things to make me think there’s a *chance* he might LEARN to be capable, after failing thus far, thus I’d prefer to give him one more year Also, the thread title got my hopes up damn you