Thorny

In January, Sabres had 11 games, 9 of which were against non-playoff teams. Easiest month by far, and we’ve played 10 of the 11 so far. We’ve gone 6-4. Likely needed better than 7-4 here considering the ground we need to make up, but it’s still been a good month with a dub. 6-5 would of course be a different story

This isn’t unusual we are a bad team, but that there’s a tier of putrid below is not uncommon. You often see tiers like this. I don’t consider 27th place passable (nor 24 - I think passable is 16th) but that we can jumps 3 teams if we win and all 3 lose isn’t odd at all.

We’ll have to factor this into the timeline to competitiveness accordingly. This buys the GM a few more years imo

@Hanklike shooting fish in a bucket

I don’t have anything interesting to contribute but I will in fact bookmark this thread in preparation of the inevitable “who even was there?”

Why not? All the kids are doing it It’s absolutely true though and you are right. Just because we can observe a series of poor choices since, doesn’t mean any of them necessarily needed to be made They were a playoff team in 2010. It’s not like the literal universe after that was like “oh, you lost your co-captains, this can’t continue.” Same thing with the tank: we’ve been free to the extent of having the ability to make choices that would get us in the playoffs several times over but the issue is that the decision to tank was a symptom. It’s not cause and effect. But because there’s a common denominator involved in the original decisions, it makes sense they’d make poor decisions moving forward.

They’ve got their professional payouts, they need to learn to be professionals now. Give it time, have some patience: learning how to play hockey takes time. Once they learn the system, we’ll be good It’s only the 4th year of Adams’ tenure. It takes time

Tuch and Krebs Probably like Dahlin more than most

Already up to 8.8% today and we haven’t even dropped the puck! A win today may get us up above 10% or so

The Sabres long stretch of poor opponents finally comes to an end today. We didn’t make up the required ground, but a win today at least makes it a respectable stretch

Attempting to normalize the world-wide anomaly that is the (sports-relative) suffering of the Buffalo Sabres is just gaslighting. If any fans have a right to complain, it’s Sabres fans

I would have guessed the odds to be lower than 7.7. I was happy to see that number

I was merely responding to this: Maybe I’m taking it too literally but my point is that coming within one point last year PROVES it’s reasonably possible for a GM to field a playoff team here. Otherwise, you’d be arguing that you are certain there’s nothing we could have theoretically, possibly have done differently last year to bridge that one point gap. And I know someone wouldn’t possible make an argument like that

It’s not a matter of belief it’s a matter of fact: I’m not making an argument. We missed the playoffs by a solitary point last year. I can mathematically conclude it is well within this franchise’s ability to field a playoff roster

https://buffalonews.com/playoffs-is-the-expectation/article_8b0b754f-4af5-54a2-ae56-0e69a0250198.html “Next year, playoffs is the expectation. We all believe that we will be there, and we know what it takes now." Sure sounds like playoffs were the expectation. Unless there’s a massive disconnect. Disconnect between players and management? Mehhhhhhhhhh wouldn’t worry about it

You are either trying to win, or trying to develop a winner later. “Nothing” isn’t an option. Just fire everyone then - that’s not a valid suggestion, even on a message board. If we weren’t trying to win in 21-22, Adams was therefore, necessarily, managing the team that season as a means to facilitating winning in the future - the facilitation of his plan. That year simply *had* to be a tool for building the future, the endgame: otherwise it would be nothing at all. Is the suggestion that we can’t count that year because Adams *couldn’t* be taking steps during that season towards building and developing and evaluating? Was he not? Of course he was. If you don’t count it you are just writing off a year he fully worked on instituting his plan and then saying that work took place in some imaginary untouchable vacuum because we only choose to measure from the following year. Just…No lol - - - @Brawndo Didn't they *say* playoffs was the expectation, this year? We all said so in the offseason before this latest goal-post moving. If not, fine: I guess they didn’t set playoffs as the expectation until year 4 of Adams’ build (and year 5 of his tenure). But next year is still year 4. In which case, ya, maybe they give Adams a mulligan after next year (I just won’t be around for it). Even in that case, I dunno where you get the 2 or *3* more years after this one thing from. Even if they aren’t counting on playoffs till next year, three more years after this one would be missing this year, missing next (when playoffs is the expectation, if it wasn’t this year), missing the FOLLOWING year (thus missing on expectation at least 2 times (but we all know it’s really 3), and him still coming back. That would be Adams returning for his 7th year as GM, without having a playoff appearance to show for it

That’s exactly the point. It takes a lot of incompetence. Manual, human, incompetence. Choice. Potential for better.

No, next year would be year 4 post Eichel. One can’t reasonably conclude 21-22 wasn’t the first sans-Eichel year. He didn’t play a game for us and was never in the equation. The goal wasn’t to win that year, remember, it was the first development year, the first year KA’s plan was being implemented from the draft, through the offseason and into the season. Why on god’s green earth would that year not count? The fact Eichel wasn’t traded until the season actually started is irrelevant because the ETA of the return didn’t matter relative to the results that year. If that year wasn’t the first year of KA implementing his plan (trading Jack was part of that plan!!), what the hell was it? The plan was *inclusive* of trading Jack. There was no obstacle present to KA to implementing his plan in 21-22: he did exactly that.

Could be. It’s just funny cause then he’d necessarily need to start next season behind the bench, too. Which, even as someone more less neutral on Granato seems to be a very risky play And questionable at best considering results

It sure is tough titty when you start measuring roster moves by way of results

John is right. https://moneypuck.com/predictions.htm Moneypuck actually gives us what I’d call surprisingly high odds of making it at 7.7% currently. That is far from a negligible possibility.

It’s actually insane how much the loss of Rick takes away from the games. That’s settling in for me. Obviously obviously beyond anyone’s control but…ya

I actually thought there was a slight chance we’d see a firing today because we won yesterday: sometimes you see GM’s wanting the coach to go out with a win for whatever inconsequential reason. But we are on a west coast trip so prob was always unlikely. Maybe the all star break but I’d imagine he’s actually got the whole year, like others have said I just hope garbage time numbers doesn’t factor too heavily in the decision at end of the year

Believe me, I am right there with you. To me, we are at the most significant breaking point I’ve seen between the 13 years catching up to the fanbase when it hasn’t yet to the current regime: they want a bit more time and the fans understandably don’t have it. I think one can make a very strong case for Adams to be fired right now. No one can claim results aren’t the most important marker of success and NHL teams very infrequently miss the playoffs 4 straight years. Only a handful of teams league wide are generally at that mark. Generally franchises make moves at this point. But for better or worse we all kinda, grudgingly or not, kinda accepted/are at least aware that Adams was granted 3 free pass years: 1st was apparently written off, and the next two were “development years”. Ok, fine, but the price you pay by willingly offering those years to the gods as a sacrifice is the acknowledgment that teams often undergo returns to competitiveness in a much quicker timeframe: ie if you are going to forgo competitiveness that could reasonably be achieved in a more immediate fashion with a different strategy, you need to convert in a timely fashion once your free pass years or up. Or else, why have them at all? Which brings us to this year: the likely failure to make the playoffs in the year that was the minimum expectation. Even though we granted the 3 free pass years, im still inclined to think the most fair appraisal, most removed from my 13 years bias, is that the guy should get one mulligan. You should have to fail twice. I give him next year if it’s my choice (he’s getting it regardless) I don’t see an argument for bringing him back after 5 missed years - in fact I don’t think I’d be around to take the time to engage in it, if he’s still here at that point