Thorny

Agree, functions as that as well in actuality I could see it going either way or staying mostly the same here, we won’t know until we see. Can make a case for either. But smart money here seems to me a more less even trade off - at least from the perspective of the moment

They need better if they can get it Was supposed to be no stone unturned, playoffs or bust LAST offseason

An interesting thing proposed by I think our good Brawndo was that Adams has been shopping Cozens since summer so there’s a bit of a Rorschach test there - adams correctly foretold the cozens dip? Adams putting DC on the block contributed to his lack of performance?

It was posted by Brawndo that the sabres tried to ship him for EP first, so we do know who Adams preferred

Losing cozens isn’t actually addition by subtraction. If you legitimately are asking this question, put yourself into the minds of those showing a lack of enthusiasm: the GM who made the deal JUST SIGNED THE GUY he traded away, to a 7 year deal, either contributing to the player’s looming futility or drastically missing on his evaluation or both. The same GM who created the “addition by subtraction” 50 million dollar monstrosity is supposed to be allowed to trade said player for their fix? At the very least benefit of the doubt may be excused in the interim - - - Adams should be fired, not making trades. We are of course still discussing the merits of the deal but that’s going to be a dark cloud of context irremovable from a balanced discussion

I feel this way too. Sort of odd for a trade. It very well may end up that one team benefits way more, but my immediate reaction is that my overall feeling about the composition of our team today is exactly the same. Especially when you add the two signings even a non run back from Adams feels like a run back haha

The new one was so good, too

Because I admitted he’s likely back? It’s hard to read it any other way I’ve never maintained he WILL get fired merely that should

Adams re-signed 2 players, and did a substantial core shakeup. Not only is he almost assuredly back next year, he might feel he’s almost done for the summer

I do. I mean look at the C depth. im not saying it won’t or can’t be good. Is that a “we are assuredly breaking a 14 drought” F group, through? Surely that’s the line when we are flirting with that sort of accomplishment

The organization pays me very little

Peterka - Kulich - Tuch Benson - Norris - Thompson ??? it’s too early to map this out but maybe that’s the stylistic fit they see …it’s a lot of youth. And a lot of question marks at C

I preferred when the mystic intangibles remained exactly that. Rather than given a name and counted on specifically Our addition by subtraction is off the chart. Not even master Yoda has a count that high

Who are the other 3 that make up the top 6 then? Already granted Kulich.. the top 6 doesn’t promote confidence at this time

Sounds like a trigger man for a team with a depth of play drivers whoops

Thompson Tuch on line 1 you mean? Ya possibly wouldn’t really like look of all left shot Norris line though.

I’m losing track of the amount of times this has been uttered when does the addition come?

Peterka - Thompson - Kulich Greenway - Norris - Tuch ..good? Is there a stylistic fit here? it’s lacking playmaking. Peterka and Tuch I suppose

Cozens was one of the few players on this team I sorta liked so that aspect is a downer

If we run a Tage - Norris 1/2 c unit the playmaking will need to come from the wings in

Just a poor match with Tage

Yep, happening both ways

Such a good point he’s dealing the guy he overpaid

He’s fine. The trade is fine. It’s probably the biggest move we see before puck drops 25-26