Thorny

They are 7 points behind the *2nd last place team* in the Atlantic. They are beyond cooked

Could really have used a tag team partner on this 4 years ago but better late than never

They don’t need a sports psychologist- there’s no wonder what the issue is. They aren’t unusually mentally fragile: young players are just naturally more susceptible to mental struggles and we always have *the youngest team in hockey*. It’s an error of roster building, not selecting players with poor psyches. We are developing and fostering those psyches through the environment we are bringing them all into time and time again One silver lining re: the sabres is how obvious all their main issues are. Would make them much easier to fix if the org actually cared

Better to reign in hell..

Reinhart also said he was open to a LT extension under KA. They went bridge during Covid It’s much worse for Sabres fans like me with no connection to the Bills, definitely All the suck none of the benefit

It’s not just about head to head matchups - it’s also about the fact that more teams = unlikely the cutoff point holds where it is because the greater the pool, the more likely one or more emerges who outpaces the trend Amen

Sorry maybe that wasn’t clear ; of course they don’t - but I’m dealing 5 overall and Konsta Helinius (sp?) and any highly touted prospect I can get my paws on for the veteran players when I can and then bumping cozens down and ipso facto aube-kubel becomes the aube one out

Makes sense I’m still sort of more in the mold of wanting to “bump everyone down a line.” I can’t muster up the energy to single out any one of the underperforming guys I just think the environment is such a schmozzle im hesitant to cast a definitive judgment on even someone like cozens. So, I’m thinking add the best we can while leaning towards age whenever possible, lessen the responsibility of who we can by bumping who we can down the lineup and the first to pay are the 4th line guys and such. Of your list, it’s guys like Krebs and Kulich all else being equal id deal before cozens/quinn etc first guys off should be the Malenstyn and aube kubel’s of the world

That’s a good point on coaching, certainty a factor to think about when debating whether Casey would have continued on here as he was. Most of our other players seem to be playing more less as we’ve seen them - we just haven’t gotten the jumps from the younger players everyone including the GM was pencilling in so, re: point 2 - I don’t need to debate a hypothetical when I’ve already seen that Casey did in fact “move the needle” here so far as raising the overall aptitude of our F group, in so far as leading most statistical categories when we dealt him

Mediocre would be a spa day

Also, my priority is to de-emphasize youth, which is our biggest handcuff, along with lack of spending. If I get my “ask” for 5 overall and, I get my “ask” for Jack Quinn ..between the two I like the first trade better because we are dealing the younger asset

IIRC we’ve had the convo but I’m not keeping pick 5 just because it’s pick 5 on some sort of principle. It’s as on the table as any other futures asset if a reasonable price is met

This is me, essentially. I think this is the first year I can remember I haven’t watched a full 60 minutes yet to this point in the season

It would be *so* refreshing if we dealt the pick this year and saved ourselves some time, for once.

So players can go on to great things elsewhere and win cups, but no one can be a better fit in Buffalo, actually? Would defy logic to suggest it can’t go both ways. Casey being mediocre in Colorado this year doesn’t change how good he was for us last year, nor does it diminish the possibility he would have been exactly that, here, again. id be much more inclined to think what we saw with our own eyes on our team last year was more representative of what we’d have gotten from him, here, than the results displayed in an entirely new environment That may not be true, last season could have been somewhat of an anomaly, but I certainly wouldn’t be opposed to finding out if a reasonable trade presented itself

This seems like the type of add we’d make to a T, tbh. Puck moving D lacking defensive ability are the pillars we are building this thing on, why not add one more

You really have to hand it to Kevyn Adams

We are so back

Shooters getting more talented and adept at sniping corners? A backing away from the “pucks on net” philosophy in the name of more selective shooting?

You said it

It’s not the same argument because for it to be the same argument one would have to utterly disregard the variable of “time” which is the most central component of what I’m trying to say. The sabres pushed the boundaries of not winning too far: it broke the franchise. There’s no expectation. Electing for a long form rebuild after missing 9 straight years already was a colossal mistake. The Sabres are not in a position anymore where they can be fixed by merely operating the team properly. *They need the defibrillator.* the regular current won’t do it. They need extraordinary tact for an extraordinary problem. They didn’t *have* an extraordinary problem 10 years ago the team itself needs to understand the expectation and environment has changed. We can’t do this by waltzing up to the podium and entering into next season as the youngest team in hockey after another solid draft. I couldn’t be clear enough about this: the results will be less than the sum of their expected parts: we are seeing it this year, we’ve seen it time and time again

Ordinarily I’d agree with you but the usual rules don’t apply to the sabres, we are a proven historical anomaly and should be treated as such in the name of accuracy, owing to the fact we’ve dug ourselves into a chasm worthy of that anomaly. It will require unusual tact to fix - that’s only logical. The Buffalo Sabres as currently constructed won’t benefit from an infusion of youth in any form whatsoever as the only way this franchise can get out of this rut is to prioritize the present above all else. We cannot be in a position where an 18 year old makes us better. Let’s just assume we aren’t selecting first overall (but probably even then) we can get back to worrying about draft picks once we make the playoffs once. the pick is traded and gone for me if someone offers accurate relative veteran value

Honestly it wasn’t about any one of them. We know how this all works, now - yeah there are some duds along the way but we are picking high and picking pretty good players, such is the nature of selecting up top. It’s not the players. It’s the group assembling the whole Applies to on roster players we’ve dealt as well

The issue isn’t the players we are selecting. The issue is we keep repeating the process. We don’t need draft picks This should be…abundantly clear to anyone still kicking around