Thorny

Just sit back and enjoy the magic

This feels like a Sabes win

Right in one

“Is a gaping hole at C really worse than the guy the GM signed for 7 years 50 million?” is an odd flex

Adams reading this list

Striking that amidst the cavalcade of shite we are on pace for about the same about points as we did every other year under Adams. Really says something about his performance the years we didn’t suffer an ungodly amount of injuries 78 point GM on average, rain sleet or shine

So it seems McKenna isn’t quite on the same level. Do you have him closer to a Power/RNH type first overall or a Celebrini/Bedard type?

What would you have said about Celebrini at this point in his draft year?

That you don’t have a resounding opinion on one or the other says enough to me

That’s kinda like looking at Transformers: Age of Extinction and being like, “ya it’s all the same, except Mark Wahlberg, Kelsey Grammer, Stanley Tucci, and TJ Miller are in it. Other than those actors, it’s the same movie.” It’s more about the auteur

I don’t care what they do, as long as it’s the decision of a new GM

He wanted out because Adams wanted to rebuild. He detailed this in the Friedman interview. If the team wasn’t set on a long form EEE rebuild, do the players stay? Yes. The injury disagreement was merely a symptom of the fact Eichel had already asked out due to the looming rebuild

And if changing the General Manager of your hockey club doesn’t make *any difference at all* than there’s zero argument that a 3rd line lineup decision makes any difference and it gets to the point where I don’t even know what we are doing here, then. Your stance mandates that we should change nothing because nothing matters unless the owner changes thankfully we don’t need to debate the value of incremental improvement because, as mentioned, even if you told me the result would change not at all, I’d want to see Adams canned as GM

im glad you deleted the other post cause it didn’t make sense. I wasn’t saying firing him fixes eveything and it’s “simple as that” I literally detailed that I would take a great deal of satisfaction in it even if nothing else changed. I wasn’t supposing it was a guaranteed fix all and never said that also I didn’t say to stop posting about it lol I was saying to stop missing my point in responding to me in saying, “but it might not change anything!” (you responded to my post, here). My point being that I literally do not care if it doesn’t change anything (even though I think it could) - and I keep saying that. I’m not triggered, I just don’t think you are registering the fact that one can be fully aware it’s not a guarantee of anything yet still want to see it.

To me that’s still way better

lol you get that this is an entertainment product, right? There are countless arguments that can be made for why there’s no reason not to fire him because we can’t rule out it’ll be better once we do, and it also can’t be worse so there’s no reason not to try. Or because it could be indicative of a changing mindset from Terry. Or it expresses accountability. Or because he simply deserves the appropriate response to his job peformance *leave all that aside* you are still taking issue with my chosen, personal metric for how I evaluate my entertainment product “oh, you only look for comedy in film and you found the film very funny and so you love it? It’s not that simple. Let me tell you why it’s not the film you want.” you need to stop missing my point here - I want Adams fired. I don’t care if it changes nothing. I’m sick of his face. I’ve been railing accurately against him for 6 years. He traded my favourite player. It’s personal. You can leave your arguments at the door in this sense - they have nothing to do with the satisfaction I’ll gain by seeing him canned what part of “I don’t watch the sabres anymore at all but will if he’s fired” doesn’t make sense to you? That’s my metric. I am stating to you, outright, that for THIS FAN, firing him makes a huge difference. You can’t say it might not make a difference because I’m telling you right now it does. if I am on an island, so be it

It’s so crazy that so many bad things seem to happen in seasons when the sabres leave themselves almost no chance of success from day one

Adams is a terrorist

If it was Pegula, he came up with the EEE plan *after* sending Adams out to spy on the team. His decisions were made upon hearing what Adams had to say, complete with his own biased way of saying it, however that was. Who actually came up with the plan is semantics, where Adams specifically is concerned. If he didn’t come up with the plan, he was chosen to implement it because he was agreeable to the philosophy. He would be as poor a GM on any team he was hired for because he’d only be hired by a team looking for a long form, job security rebuild where no results are expected the mere fact Terry would change GMs at all, if it happened, would suggest there’s a possibility he’s finally looking for something else and even if he wasn’t, it literally can’t be worse and at the very least it expresses accountability and even if no one takes any accountability for it, and even if Pegula hasn’t actually changed any mindset, and even if he doesn’t get lucky with a new hire and merely matches the putrid result of KA, even if it’s proclaimed nothing f*cking changed, I/we will know that’s not the case: Adams won’t be GM again: no one in this thread or any thread has pieced together an argument for why Adams shouldn’t be fired. It literally has not happened. Arguments have been constructed for why it might not make a difference. Completely different things. There is no argument for not firing Adams.

It’s that simple

I didn’t miss anything, respectfully I think you did how many times do I need to say it? I do not care if it is cosmetic - that’s not a deterrent to me wanting to see the change. Adams deserves to be fired so he should be fired. i cannot make it anymore clear that Adams getting fired is a big part of the reward in and of itself. I want to see him fired because he’s terrible at his job and that job has hurt my beloved team. I want to see him pay the price, if they fire Adams and Terry takes over as GM that day I’ll *still* be happier than I am now: one less yokel getting a free ride by tearing apart the Sabres I want the criminals locked up even if they’ll just be replaced with more criminals: it’s not just about society, it’s about the individual criminals themselves seeing justice. I want Adams to see justice even if Terry doesn’t. Perfect won’t be the enemy of good for me.

The attempt by my roster has left us scarred and deformed, but I assure you my resolve has never been stronger.

What I’m trying to say is there is a very, real scenario where there’s no perfect option. A very real scenario where bending on “BPA” is the best option. You can’t just adhere to the parameters blindly that aren’t getting you anywhere. It would be delusional to think the perfect trade exists and in the same vein foolish to rule out the idea we may need to squint at the margins a bit to ensure we draft a high potential F yes, maybe the guy you take is a 88/100 on your board and you have a dman at 90/100 but the handcuff your self impose by prioritizing the extra 2/100 would in fact be more detrimental the sabres are GOING to take a hit in the trade, if they can even make one. You can’t pie in the sky the reality if you actually care about the results. Would absolutely make sense to consider you may lose less value simply by “reaching” for a F. You can’t pretend all else is equal in terms of being able to recoup the value later if you naively adhered to hardline drafting rules. BPA works in theory. The theory doesn’t amount to anything if you allow the randomness of the system to supersede your ability to build a team. It’s no good allowing randomness and luck in combination with your self imposed rigidity to result in a scenario where you simply don’t ever come away with the F. It would be more beneficial to relax on some of the rigidity and take your chances with a forward: the scenario where you continually take a D and “worry about the rest later” doesn’t maximize the assets either: that’s the myth

If history suggests they won’t trade the pick it hammers home the idea we won’t be able to trade the guy the fans don’t want anymore for the player they couldn’t draft. They won’t draft a D and then trade a D we already have for the forward we actually wanted to draft, complete pipe dream if they want the good young F they’ll need to make the selection for that player or use the pick in a swap for such. The player we’ve already driven off the lot with the flaws exposed isn’t going to get a player without massive question marks. We don’t need another Norris