Thorny

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

Make Ken Jennings coach

What did Dahlin say? I heard Tuch parrot it but missed have missed it

Goes hand in hand with my over usage of the “shell game” phrasing. I have a theory you can divide into sort of 4 tiers can’t win >>> Pick which way you lose >>> find a way to win >>> avoid losing the Sabres are basically right in the middle of the scale at this point, but still too dominated obviously by the “pick a way to lose” tier to find a way to make the playoffs. We HAVE increased the overall talent, but basically the theory goes it’s not that the team has only one big strength or (one big weakness), but rather now possession of the overall talent acumen to “choose how we lose”. In that we CAN have good offence or good D (generalizing) at any one time, if that’s our focus, but not the overall talent to have both. So competent teams can still exploit that imbalance. Thus, shell game So, no shell unturned…or whatever. Upgrade the overall talent *even if you think it’s “set” in a certain area.*. Things shift fast. It’s like the “don’t draft for need thing cause things change fast” is pretty accurate after all. Once we add a bit more, I think I’d we had had a proactive summer last year we may already be there, but if we have one this summer, we could find ourselves soon in “find a way to win” tier, where, regardless of what a team chooses to shut down on a given night, was can counter

Has anyone been following along with the latest Kevyn Adams burner on twitter? Joined February 2024. Posted every day on *every Sabres post* we’d be making playoffs this season and that we were in excellent position to do it while sitting 8 points back, up to and including during the Dallas game, then immediately shifted tact upon elimination

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