Thorny

“COMRIE WILL BE THE OTHER GOALIE!“ ^that guy? ya, I ‘sppose he’s just worn me down.

My current guess for how it unfolds, notably sans Olofsson: Skinner - Thompson - Tuch Peterka - Cozens - Quinn Mittelstadt - Krebs - Greenway Girgensons - Jost/FA/Trade - FA/Trade New Rookie/Rousek Samuelsson - Dahlin Power - Jokiharju Stillman - Lyubushkin/FA/Trade FA/Trade Levi UPL - - - I likely see 1, maybe 2 depth, role-player adds to the bottom of the F unit. Probably a RW replacement for KO. I don’t see the Rookie I listed as the actual 13th man: if that listed rookie option makes the team after a 9-ish game tryout, we probably see at most 1 new outside depth F addition and possibly as few as 0. As to the D, I think we see one, 6/7 type add, for sure, and certainly not zero, but very likely not more than 1. Goaltending, the more I’ve thought about it probably gets run back (from the end of the season). It’ll be a quiet offseason. We likely make all of our picks, and add a couple with VO (look for KA to add a 3rd for this year to further replace our own (though we do have the Kings 3rd, currently) and perhaps a 5th to replace next season’s), and the addition of another Jost and another Lyubushkin level player to their respective positions. I think KA would be open to additions slightly better than the mentioned 4th liner and 6th/7th d-man, but that no betrayal of his valuation will take place: he won’t overpay slightly to get a solidly 3rd line, middle pair D player. If we can get that instead, great, but he’ll sooner add the 2 depth pieces with metrics to the tune of them presumably thinking they can unlock that “one line UP” level, with those players, internally/through system fit.

The organization wasn’t “completely dismantled and rebuilt.” Much of the rostered players were inherited. Even Granato was inherited. We can say a lot was changed without the hyperbole A huge part of the reason we are improving is because of Adams and his team. Another huge part of the reason is because we’ve been adding high first round picks for a decade and it’s reaching a tipping point

Once the calendar turned to March, Tage also “only” put up 6 goals and 14 points in 19 games, while skating to a -10. Yes playing hurt but so was Dahlin. It’s only my opinion but I did not see Tage living up to his expectations to a greater degree than Dahlin this season. Didn’t “expect” 90 from Tage but I didn’t expect 70 from Dahlin, either. Skinner, to me I have no problem with grading him out as #1 relative to expectations coming in. Should be noted all 3 of those forwards on that line aided eachother, whereas Dahlin was *invariably* partnering with a player significantly below his overall aptitude In addition, I can’t remember the last time we had a d-man finish top 5 in d-man scoring. We had a forward finish higher than Tage in forward/league scoring as recently as 3 years ago

Math checks out on this. Still far outstripping any other single seeding placement

3 guys with better grades, even relative grades than Dahlin is tough

Kraken uniforms really pop on tv

Who the hell is Kevin Stanlend

One more playoff goal this year for Eichel than McDavid. won the lottery

Yeichel!!

Much better game from Jack thus far. Both goalies have made some phenomenal saves tbh

It’s interesting - in my mind there’s sort of 2 schools of thought here that both kinda have an internal logical consistency and aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive: the bold above more less frames it. “May as well have just spent the money and ended the drought for a season or two.” Under one school of thought, relative to the league in general, I think this makes sense. On paper it’s not a difficult mathematical proposition - when half the teams make it. (Relative to the league), proclaiming “just make it already” actually does seem like a fair ask. In a vacuum, candidly id actually say that was my preferred course of action for this team, this year. I actually personally think this is part of the framing and context for Wawrow’s question yesterday. Isn’t finishing 20th a failure, relative to the league? There’s an argument. But perhaps the more salient factor, and probably the factor more at play, is relativity to the Sabres. Perhaps best summed up by “easier said than done.” Odds are subservient to actual results. The Sabres missing the playoffs for 12 years is a real thing, a real tangible thing that represents such a statistical anomaly so as to make “randomness” as the potential answer null and void. The Sabres, for one reason or another, in fact for a multitude, ARE what their 0/12 record says they are: they, *regardless of the league* have had a thoroughly documented issue converting on those “half the teams make it” odds. When we can safely rule out that it’s by chance, any sort of true trend bucker like *actually making the playoffs* is fundamental cause for celebration, imo. It *means* something in and of itself simply because it happened in a sea of not making it. Relativity factors in again: MAKING it is also a bigger deal for Buffalo than other teams. Making it means so much more than off-season conversation that we “should be” a 110 point team. Just make it. That’s the pudding

I think I need a reboot, my inner programming isn’t really syncing with any of the formulas on this website anymore

But what we do next season doesn’t have retroactive bearing on whether we could have made it, this season. Unless you mean like, “oh if all we were going to amount to is 95 points, we should have sold off a little more to get the job done last year.”? I suppose I understand that, I mean I’m disappointed we didn’t make it this season, too. But if we only amount to 95 points the idea we could have easily shifted to change our fortunes this season, with no regards to butterfly effect doesn’t really jive to me. I think personally I’d just see this season as the 16 point jump that facilitated a 4 point, makeable jumping distance for next season

We can define the “next step” as whatever but is anyone really going to be disappointed if we tally 95 and squeak in next year? Not I. Sign me the eff up. It’ll have been 13 years. A good chunk of my total life span. If we have learned anything along the way it’s that we shouldn’t take entrance into that second season for granted. I could easily foresee a scenario where internal growth is offset by fewer career years next season. Just get in.

Was just being facetious, using the “most hated team” phrasing I’ve seen used around these parts. That’s why my follow up said “I don’t really.” My standing on this board re: the Jets is pretty well documented over 8 years now. No I don’t hate them. Yes I root against them tbh I functionally root against all the Canadian teams. Too much over saturation of my media market, for me. The Jets obviously take the cake on this front so hold a special place in my psyche. Sometimes even rent free. Once the Sabres defeated them on track suit night, the feeling honestly died away, though. Now it’s more in fun

I’m sorry you find the term “radio silence” offensive. For my part, calling a specific argument “ham handed” is a little different than saying there’s “something wrong” with how someone thinks, but in all honesty, I don’t mind, i wasn’t/am not offended. I get that a lot so I’m used to it. As for the numbers thing, give me one sec

Yes? It’s detailed in the article you didn’t read

@SDS you are following along, yes? It’s just joking around, or whatever? Statements like “Eichel has not added *anything* to their success” fit along with that? Because that is what is being argued. He hasn’t added anything. By all means go off

You do realize your facts are all wrong? Sabres recorded 59 points after the Eichel trade last year, Vegas recorded 67. Vegas also had 20 more this season. Like, in reference to your comment that sabres have been better than Vegas since, in other post

The Knights were significantly better than the Sabres this year, dude. Vegas falling off the map last year in the second half because half their team was injured isn’t revelatory. If you come back with something noteworthy, we can try again

TLDR you get to be Gandalf tldrr you get to be the good wizard guy

They only “haven’t amounted to anything” from your perspective because you never imposed a ridiculous ceiling on him to begin with. This is what I’m trying (and, yet again, failing) to explain cohesively: I don’t have an issue with your framing. But for many, “anything” included *even the ability* to be the best player on a good team, a good playoff team. It was said he wasn’t good enough to be the focal point of a playoff team, that the Sabres would in fact make the playoffs before Vegas. These are also not the most extreme things said. Under the prism of these statements, yes, he assuredly has achieved something

We may indeed be two sides of Saruman but assuredly *you* are Saruman-as-he-should-have-been

The accomplishments are relative to the folks saying that he was such a cancer they’d never be able to amount to anything with him there. That he was an organization-crippling cancer. These are things that were actually being argued and said in presumable good faith. I’m not sure how you can share this board with me for so long and launch yourself into this conversation in opposition to me when from the very beginning I’ve always been clear that it was those extreme, logic defying takes that rankled. When is the last time I quoted you on this issue? If you can’t see the difference in the takes I have issue with, I’m not sure how to explain it further like if you want to pretend all these Jack takes on your side are created equal, I can’t do that. You are forgetting how extremely off base things became, how absurd the projections of his future career became. I can’t do that