Thorny

Kevin (smartie pants) of sabres twitter mentioned something I didn’t think of: Byram’s market shrinking over night likely the result of teams seeing the perceived low-ball offers we took in our last 2 trades - teams can see we sell for objectively less value than worth because of $ prioritization Thankfully we know better. And thankful we don’t need a good return for Byram. Can just keep him, pay him, and I’m sure Kulich and Norris and co can hold down what I’m given to understand is an elite offence

Adams is going to be the GM for the foreseeable, for me likely liveable future I mean he’s earned it

Sorry, .88 at 23. Was only using “point a game” because it was often the term of choice leading into the deal. 70+ points. Call it the “Josh Norris” points per game pace And he’s actually not very good. Didn’t I say it already? Masterclass You should post about these things before! Not just after the fact depending on the result. People may learn from you

This is why i don’t really agree with the Adams hot seat stuff. He’s probably been allotted a mere half the amount of time he needs to right this

It would certainly be, that’s a great catch. But here’s what you’ve missed: last I checked the sabres have improved year over year under Adams tenure you can correct me on that if I am mistaken

Peterka wanted out. Given that fact pretty much any return is a +, not sure how we can construe it any other way. In that sense the return is found money. when you are trying to recover from the chasm a guy like Botterill left us in, it takes time. Can’t remember who the poster was but someone mentioned when you look at teams like Florida etc it can sometimes take even as long as 10 years or so to rebuild that and get yourself out of that hole. Some players like Peterka who don’t have the maturity to wait are going to be to the casualty

Ah so Peterka was likely to hold out That’s what I’ve heard too Nah

We traded a point a game winger for depth pieces, the reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and you STILL think we are selling the return short? Masterclass; potentially

What a change a day makes. Today, arguing Peterka is a good player makes your opposition the entire board. Yesterday we wouldn’t deal him for less than a star. What a world

Peterka’s metrix

It’s funny cause at first most people said “well it depends on Byram return, there’s another part to this” but now word is that market is weak - thankfully as the poll illustrates the move is a home run even without the follow up - with a strong Byram trade for at least a bottom 6 forward I think we can already mark offseason down as an “A” and we haven’t even reached the draft yet…Adams’ forte 🙂

I forgot, Peterka‘S metrics mean he is bad, Byram’s don’t. Sabrespace

In the running for most positive initial reactions to a sabres trade I’ve seen, overwhelmingly positive at nearly 2-1. Say what you want about Adams but the more time goes by the more his work is being greeted with praise

You would be fine that we extended a poor player after we said we could afford to trade Peterka cause the Byram trade will supplement the offence Welcome, 1C Jash Norris

Lmao Just lmao

Blinding light brigade nearly all gone. They barely shone at all

So we are being objective now but weren’t about Peterka got it

So you are saying the objectivity comes back once the player leaves what does that say about the things being said about the players we brought on?

We are at addition by subtraction within 24 hours. The fanbase is broken “Peterka had to go”

Someone else said it finally lol I can’t decide whether it’s more embarrassing or just hilarious. Like ordinarily I’d say embarrassing but like…the turn on him in real time is so shockingly brazen and barren and obvious it’s like..damn. I couldn’t even make my meme work when I said “within 24 hours we’ll love the deal” Nope - Peterka is a bad apple within LESS than 24 hours. No attempt to hide it.

We should definitely run with this entirely made up narrative Dahlin kicked him out, Peterka is a bad apple, Adams was right

That non-certainty of it is a good take I hate the deal and I haven’t once said it can’t work or that these players won’t be good. It’s, for me, simply the principle. I know the deal was limited by $ concerns, I know the priority when making the deal wasn’t fully “winning”. The sabres being bad for this long don’t owe us winning. But they owe us doing their best to maximize winning, when they do or don’t make transactions. It’s as simple as that, for me. My stance is the sabres crest and their fans deserve a no stone unturned approach - I believe expecting nothing less on each and every move is very reasonable

I suppose I’d understand the distinction more if a trade was strictly necessary - was just struggling with the idea the option of making the deal could be construed as good when the option to keep what we’ve deemed as better remains viable I do think there’s some trickiness in the poll options as they aren’t equal from centre - “hate” is further one way than “good”

But then don’t trade him - you reiterated multiple times leading up to today “we simply don’t have to trade him”. And then said you would not do it for less than Robertson so we did it for less than Robertson, and we didn’t have to do it - those are your stated suppositions. We did the trade for less than you said you’d be willing to, but are saying it’s a good trade when you specifically said it’s less value than you’d be willing to do the trade for Correct? You would have said no to the deal, but you like the deal for our team cause, it’s not “well I want more but I do like it” - at least I don’t see how a deal you’ve stated you wouldn’t make falls under the category of a trade you like when there’s no requirement to make the deal

So true. When you put it that way- I was just too stupid to get it. These guys are always one step ahead, admittedly