Thorny

Matthew Fairburn of the athletic: The priority isn’t winning. I’m sorry. Byram has assuredly not played affectively on his off hand. His numbers there are atrocious

We should vote on new names. I vote for Camp Krusty

It’s a good point. They even mentioned, as this team always does, that they had a pidgeonholed role in mind for Bowen upon arrival: that of Dahlin’s partner. It should be noted, considering Byram’s quite poor work on his off hand (not all D can do it) that it was necessarily placing Dahlin on the right. Which, I am fine with, if it needs to come to that, but I’m not sure I would have actively sought a trade that might make it necessary: as good as Dahlin is on the right, there was an excellent deep dive last offseason that demonstrated he’s better on the left. Even if just by a little

The thing about Power and Byram is that Power was better than him last year. So I’d definitely say the likelihood Casey adequately “backfills” two centres he performed better than is greater than the likelihood Byram can capably backfill a player he performed worse than. Wild, I know. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Byram elevate his game going forward, but certainly not to the extent I expect Power to. The gap between Power and Byram should only grow imo. But I’m pretty high on OP

And the counter to that counter would be that forwards on average drive play in todays game far more substantially than D men - - - I don’t see the Vegas model at all. I see a bit of Nashville

Not only was Casey better than Byram outright, the distance from Casey to our other two centres is drastically closer than Byram to Dahlin and power Casey is arguably at the TOP, being a capable fill in for either is a freebie argument. We are still trying to figure out if Byram is good, outright! Let alone the idea he’s a capable fill in for our 1 overall D men

Cozens and Thompson are more in need of the fall back insurance. Do you disagree? Do you not see Dahlin and Power as more so the strength of the team, moving forward? nm the fact Casey can play wing in the top 6, too Byram’s metrics on the right were terrible. Far less positional flexibility with Bowen

If we’ve gone and spent so much high draft capital on D, yet feel the first vacant spot on that depth chart is equally important to fill as the first, equally far down the lineup vacant spot on the F depth chart, there’s something wrong there. It doesn’t jive in an accounting for assets sense. Imo liger’s analysis is the most salient, here

Don’t agree with the redundancy argument. There’s context beyond having a few positions filled on paper: he’s not just a 3D, he’s a 3D behind two first overall picks (who shoot the same way, to liger’s point, in a position where handedness actually is a factor (at least more so than at F). Casey was part of a forward group relying on depth, specifically, a hopeful run 4 lines setup. If our first overall picks on D aren’t elevating their partners to the extent we need another first overall lined up beside them, we are up that creek everyone mentions. All the same arguments assuredly do not apply, in my estimation And that’s counting Casey as equal to the other two centres, as opposed to granting him the fact he was actually better than them last year

A thread actually making bank on a Thursday afternoon during the summer, centred around dastardly Casey Mittelstadt discourse we’ve all apparently had enough of?

The striking factor should be that Casey, I think we could at least agree, was indisputably *quite good*, and Byram, during his time here, was simply not. But I’m not sure if even that is a bridge too far. Also, @thewookie1 it should be noted the thread sort of instantly proved your “endless gloom and doom” point erroneous. Within a couple minutes of my postings you have freeman saying…well exactly what you said you wanted to hear, to a T, and dudacek capably supporting his stance. For every poster like me who is merely content to comment on what I’ve actually observed, there are those that like to speculate about what might be

I remember freeman used to come after me all the time for tailoring arguments to no one in particular and conflating multiple stances into one: who is saying Cozens sucked? Not me. I’m simply pointing out that Casey was our best, which I know you hate* lol (*a joke, if I may) Yes, if someone is saying Dylan was horse manure and Casey the second coming of Bilbo Baggins, they’d have a peculiar argument

Who’s doing that? Which posters only post negatively? There might be a couple here or there, but there are those who only post about shining rainbows, too. It’s balanced. OF COURSE the overall tone will be negative, and far more negative, because the forum is a *reflection of the team* and we are here to discuss that specific team that has been *historically* bad for 13 years. What exactly do you honestly expect? Do you want people to pretend we didn’t trade the player who performed as our very best forward last year for a player who was thoroughly mediocre during his time here so far? Like seriously lol. It’s going to get talked about. Isn’t it ok to wait until Byram actually plays well before we say the trade will end up ok? Are we allowed to comment based on our 13 year, and 4 year experience under this regime or do we need to remove all context and arbitrarily focus on saying nice things? Your argument seems to be, and you reiterate it several times in your post: “if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” That’s fine. I’m not sure you are going to find that all too applicable to a sports message board you miss a step in your analysis, and probably the only step that matters: no one thinks ranting literally fixes the team. But if so many people are doing it, it should probably tip you off to the fact it might go a little bit of the way towards helping address the angst of the poster. Imagine harping on anything but the franchise that made this happen, imagine taking issue with the fans This board is FAR more positive overall than, say, twitter. Frankly, the team should be counting its lucky stars it has a place that talks THIS NICELY about what is, again, one of the worst extended stretches in pro sports of all time. May I draw your attention to the fact the leading option in the poll is that Adams had a “good” offseason! Hope springs eternal, even for this franchise. There’s rampant positivity, in a relative sense TL;DR: if you don’t like the Mittelstadt talk, don’t read it

I like how your biggest problem with the Sabres isn’t that they have issues, it’s that people talk about them

Well said

I really think the two just feed into eachother at this point, Pegula and Adams. Adams *is* Pegula. This cannot he stressed enough. Adams is the guy Terry appointed to spy on the team and fire a bunch of personnel. He quite literally employed him as the weasel. The Sabres have control on Casey for a couple years - they could have easily afforded him in the now. That this deal will probably save money in the FUTURE, the time period in which Adams cares most about (job security), is clearly why we can see it benefits both. They are peas in a pod Buying out Skinner and neglecting to use the cap space is *indisputably* Pegula’s internal cap, born out of the desire to save money, zero to do with accountability, but dollars to donuts, when the boss goes to Kevyn and says, “can we win without that salary?” he’s getting nothing but an affirmative answer. Adams isn’t dumb. He’s a good politician. The scenario is *mutually beneficial*. “You save me money now, the expectations stay low. Youngest team in da league. Youngest team in da leagueeeeeee!” Byram made us YOUNGER, he made us CHEAPER, and he made us WORSE RIGHT NOW. This checks…all the boxes

This is exactly it. Trading the assured better player now, the guy who’ll help us most now, help us get to the playoffs most now, for the hope we’ll get the better player at some time in the unforseeable future. Prioritizing the future at the expense of the now, if necessary, is exactly Adams to a T and it’s why he fits in so well, part and parcel with Pegula’s EEE strategy

I see the McLeod trade in a similar vein - it was nice to see a prospect moved for “now” talent even just to see it done. But you aren’t dead inside, even if it feels like it. The fact you are even still debating watching the blue and golds puts you well beyond the curve in my estimation. You are a great fan. When we eventually make the playoffs, I promise: Oh there you are, Peter

I’ll never forgot my dad telling me as a kid, “the scoreboard fell. But Hasek caught it.” Both parts of the sentence seemed so absurd, I was so confused. That half of it was true was still pretty astounding at the time I think my follow up was, “did it happen during the game?” Haha

Absolutely. Good teams continually, demonstrably find their way out from underneath the “undesirable” contracts: chalk it up along with “how are we going to pay our RFAs??” to the “problems good teams have to deal with” side of the cart we like to put before the horse at every available opportunity. The first step is doing everything you can to win right now. THEN you worry about maintaining it (ie the future). But that isn’t how we’ve built for years, now. We’ve done the opposite: “only make moves for now IF they don’t harm the future”. The future that never will arise without prioritizing the now. Eyes always on the horizon. Never on right here, now, what’s right in front of us. Some little wise green guy said something like that I think

Good post. There’s no perfect. We are letting it be the enemy of good far too often imo

Board stalwarts like yourself contribute greatly to that and beyond. Not pointed out enough, personally, what you add to the experience. The fans are the experience at this point, frankly

It’s interesting: the team being a crater for a decade has sort of gradually robbed from, and sullied the discussion around the team itself. At some point, putting on my nerd glasses and deciding I’d like to reasonably turn down a potential addition because I’ve found a metric i don’t like, and have a “crafty” idea for someone I think would fit better, loses its charm when you realize those other guys aren’t coming. Or, really, anyone. Debating intelligently between which guy we want sort of just eventually devolves into, “honestly, I’ll take what I can get.” anyways. I miss Rick.

I understand that but I’m no more convinced adding Kadri is bad than I am that “no move” is bad. In fact I’m reasonably convinced “no move” is bad given recent past precedent Less certain Kadri would be bad the biggest boon to not adding Kadri is that it keeps our options open for something better: but the rub is that we never capitalize on that opportunity lol so in essence, every one of these hypotheticals becomes a binary choice. “Kadri, or nothing.” I’m almost always going to say “yes” in a vacuum because, well, the sabres do indeed apparently live in a vacuum. I’ve seen the results of doing nothing. So many times, that I expect similar until something else miraculously emerges from the dearth. At that point everyone can laugh and say I was foolish to doubt them. Those days can be there for anyone who needs them. Ill just laugh and be happy we are finally good