Thorny

My *sole* concern has always been this board…and its members. The culprit has been..identified? I presume?

A flat junior chicken with unsalted small fries and a coke with melted ice

Oh ffs

No I use “amendable to the results” all the time and it’s indeed wrong - thanks for letting me know I had something in my teeth. The word I was looking for is “Amenable”, as you point out. I don’t agree “amenable” would be wrong, though, the meaning I was going for was: formal : able to be controlled, organized, or affected by something —usually used with to “Affected by something” the noteworthy portion: ie what I’m always trying to communicate is that Adams himself, specifically our *evaluation of* his performance - is affected by the results. Ie the results are the determining factor. It’s a competing viewpoint to the “what could Kevyn Adams have even done?” line of thought you see creep up, that would find Adams evaluation NOT amendable (affected by) the results we see

Of course it can be done. We are looking at a 5 season period, here. All excuses wash away like beaded water on resistant material But not the same half, every year

I enjoyed that film too. I feel like not enough people saw it. Also, I saw HERETIC (2024) yesterday. What a delicious performance from Hugh Grant. Hilariously compelling film. See it!

Chicken parm you taste so good 🎵

I’d also rather have Mittelstadt and McLeod. McLeod was a sweet trade. The message here imo as many others have said is to trade prospects for current players. Which we’ve been harping on for a long time. People will talk about the risk of dealing prospects who may amount to something…IMO who cares. You are wagering future acumen. Aren’t we through with the “future” by now? Way riskier to trade on roster talent, as we see with Mitts/Byram. It feels good to be the team that pulls ahead in the now, (McLeod / Savoie) because if your eyes are on the now, the current, we really don’t need to give a sh*te about the future. You start to find you don’t need to look down the road to a vague future to find hope

I don’t know that anyone was as outspoken against the deal as me tbh. Don’t really agree with the premise you responded to that the board would have made a different decision: the board loved the deal IIRC The issue is, as I said at the time, there was no reason to pay him when we did. He wasn’t going to bump up his AAV - was never going to be a stat monger even if he excelled, and he didn’t excel there was only risk to the deal, no upside: and the risk bore out

If the refs can’t take their anger at not being good enough to make the show out on the youngest (and therefore most in-need-of-a-lesson) players, what’s the point of being a REF

Cozens finding his game is quite promising

^ Canary in a coal mine if I’ve ever seen one

Have you followed his content on this website? Furthest thing from a troll. This is a diehard fan

“Lazy….arrogant…weak!” ”I’m not weak!” ”Then prove it.”

Senor cacareando Duff

Remember when Skinner hurt his ankle, miraculously returned, and sucked for a long time before regaining form? Quinn will be back

Realistically, and as mentioned in my post, the central point I was making was re: a roster standpoint. Ie if we want to put ourselves in the GM chair. I don’t have a problem with expecting Benson to be better as fans, your scouting analysis is beyond mine, I’ll defer to you. But as a GM, they can’t be counting on the raw production until we see it

Jack Quinn will be fine

Ya maybe. I’ve not seen you tout a player more than Quinn coming into this year, though - and he’s just not there yet. You were turning down my suggestion that Peterka could be better, outright, remember? I was certainly wrong on Quinn, too: though I still think he may end up our best F one day, I thought he’d excel this year

The key with Benson will be not expecting too much, too soon from a roster standpoint. Quinn will be really good: but probably not this year. Don’t make that mistake again

This is true. But by that metric: as of right now *no one* is going to qualify for 8th

A playoff spot is still right there for the taking

The thing with Adams is, and whoever the GM is in general, we can still measure moves he does make, that aren’t limited by the budget constraints (we don’t imagine budget is an issue on the 4th line, right? What we are spending there is comparable to other teams?) relatively versus other teams. Frankly, his offseason work was mostly terrible, even the stuff he did do: These guys aren’t good. Did Terry Pegula make Adams sign Beck Malenstyn? Did Terry know who Beck Malenstyn even was? Did you? I’m not trying to make a funny point: I sure didn’t know who he was - - - It’s not like Adams is incapable of making good moves. Zucker seems good. Me and you are simply saying he’s amendable to the results, over a LONG period of time, which is what we were granting. Honestly, the fact you said before he needed more time, and are now, after some time, shifting your stance, proves the inherent logic of your stance and your approach to the analysis That even, “the general manager who built the team is amendable to the results” seems to be a bridge too far sometimes, a contentious issue, makes debating or analyzing *anything* we see seem rather pointless