Thorny

There’s no way they could look themselves in the mirror and say the priority wasn’t savings, if they don’t spend the money. The Sabres DO NOT have plausible deniability, here. That’s my point. You want to grant them the “they actually are doing their very best (regardless of what I, dudacek think)” out and I absolutely will not do it. It’s definitely a line in the sand, we do not mostly agree, it’s paramount in my views on this regime. the failure to PRIORITIZE winning. If you can’t see that as always having been central to my arguments, one of our stances has certainly changed can’t believe I even have to formulate arguments to this, at this point. Just read Brawndo’s posts. There’s an internal cap. The priority isn’t winning. It’s winning while spending less How many times does the quiet part have to be said out loud at this point

It’s true, we don’t

I mean, I was legitimately asking if you changed your mind. I appreciate the attempt at clarification, but no, you’ve switched from “exceedingly arrogant” and “malformed” (strong, strong condemnations) to a paragraph in bold above that doesn’t critique the move at all until point 3, after defending it within the first 2, and even under point 3 keeps the door open for KA to address in season full disclosure: I’m really struggling with your motive/bias, here. Look, I always say you are the best poster. I’m not trying to be a d*ck. I think your take here, though, in this one case, is rank. Even a perfectly functioning clock is wrong once a..wait what - - - Fit and talent can be a factor: but it would be, imo, disingenuous to claim the SAVINGS weren’t the PRIMARY factor when the cost went *unspent*, yet the talent unaddressed. They cared less about addressing talent and fit, afterwords: but they certainly didn’t use the money. The priority was keeping the money saved. That’s where the focus went after the move: which proves the priority can they get lucky and it work out? Sure. But it’s a dicey situation because we all know, in our heart of hearts (come on, now) the impetus behind the move was $. The other factors you listed were merely justification. Haven’t you ever heard that old thing about how humans make the choice, first, then come up with the reasons to support their choice, retroactively? we were all right the first time, when the move happened: “it depends what they do with it.” we got our answer. Don’t move the goalposts. Out of respect for this community forum and the conversation we engage in, here, we really shouldn’t.

Honestly? Probably not. I think it’s pretty darn safe to say the move wasn’t born out of accountability if they didn’t even use the space gained. If we are looking at the simplest explanation here, you’d have to be severely drinking the KA kool aid to buy the idea it was done for accountability when they refuse to be accountable themselves. It was done out of accountability, but they just *happened* to not want to spend the money? it’s sort of getting to be a case of how willingly blind we want to be. They cut him because of cost, obviously You said it yourself: the idea it would be addition by subtraction is malformed

So, which is it? They didn’t use the money they saved. And as you already said, it’s not addition by subtraction. You had it right the first time, and switched for some reason. They aren’t better simply without the guy, so the theory the aim was accountability in the name of success gets thrown out the window: the team itself wasn’t accountable in utilizing the space gained Is it arrogant, or in the name of accountability? You are clearly playing both sides here. Did you change your mind in the last 7 days?

“GMs have headed to the cabin, we’ll have to wait for camp to see some moves” season appears to be wrapping up. We are now venturing into “Have to wait until training camp battles shake out before we see some movement” season

If they want to make a real statement, they should simply have Dahlin (or whoever) lead the team out onto the ice game 1 with the C on his shoulder. Right down to business: “watch the results.” What we will get, is a cozy, puff piece Sabres embedded special, we can certainly be sure of that. A vibes-based video on the eve of the season showcasing the big happy family

Ya I mean the bolded is what plenty have been saying, myself included. We really are trying to have our cake and eat it, too, attempting to make the playoffs with a self-inflicted boot on our car in the name of economic efficient effective. It can be done, but Ruff will definitely need to be the X-factor Imo he’s by far the lynch pin of any success we hope to find this year, the one component more key than any other UPL replicating his performance but this time for a full season a close second

"Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.“

Whenever our official social media account attempts to meme out it’s incredibly cringe. Just give @Doohickiethe job

There are guys like Wagner who, had they registered a hit, would have supplanted their original “first mlb hit” with a new one retroactively, as the game gets officially dated as a June game.

We used to do that with Eichel, no? When we had that old pp coach? Think he was on the wild at one point. Doesn’t he run the pp from below the goal line almost? Can’t remember the dude’s name Bob Woods maybe?

“I tried…couldn’t close…but at the end of the day we still *might* have what it takes to make it, if things break our way.” ^ frame it on the wall, as representative

Good Adams microcosm right here Lmao! Only because he had ventured to an advanced timeline already and seen the true result Universe won’t let anyone beat him

Well they played Nashville in the final and we have a Saros Or was it Rinne? We also have a Rinne

This was LA until Pittsburgh did it with speed and pace of play. If they sabres try to copy, the time it’ll take to catch up will leave then hilariously behind the trend anyways. Just build a balanced and talented team

Personally imo it’s far more useful than plus minus, but not to the extent traditional counting stats I DO care about lose value I see them as predictive: but while I might be cautious about the guy with 42 goals and surprisingly poor metrics being able to replicate that total going forward (see: predictive) they do *nothing* to tarnish what IS. Ie, that 42 goals is full value that season regardless of underlyings

Prospects are as subject to recency bias as much as anything, and more so than a lot Once you drive that prospect off the draft lot, it loses half its value - we all know that

5 goals away from 6th, and 5 from 17th Mind the full picture, Mr. Bombay There’s nothing simple about it, it’s wildly up in the air. You can squint and skew all you like, but the Sabres were actually 15th in even strength goals, mid pack. People tend to use 5v5 synonymously with even strength (ie move on to PP discussion after breaking down 5 V 5) but that’s not really a comprehensive analysis. Non-negligible portion of game is played at even strength NOT 5 V 5, not negligible in the sense the overall numbers clearly change when factored in, not to mention the fact we are clawing for every point we can get. We can play the “get everything to average and we’ll be fine” game, but it’s a dicey proposition as it doesn’t leave much room for error. It’s requiring a lot of improvement in deficiency areas just to match our high water marks which are only hovering around average to begin with You are right though, if we can improve by ~5 and move into the top 10, rather than decrease by 5 and move into the bottom 20, it’ll go a long way. In combination with improving special teams and in combination with maintaining goals against there’s no denying the PP represents massive opportunity for improvement. The more likely issue would appear to be, at least anecdotally to me after watching for so long, not so much improving areas that are lacking but rather maintaining the areas that aren’t as you do so. We saw the shell game in full demonstrable effect when comparing the switch from 22-23 to 23-24 did we change the PP coach? Actually asking

No, I frankly think it’s remarkable that you can’t see that your experience with the Sabres provides a blinding explanation to your questioning of the Chevy praise, that staring you right in the face. You are asking to see more success from the Jets before detailing Chevy’s moves as excellent, and what I’m telling you is that our experience with the Sabres has shown us that the sort of “excellence” he’s displaying is DEMONSTRABLY evidenced by the fact they’ve made the playoffs 7 times within a market situation perceived to be as bad or likely worse than ours. You seem to have an appreciation of the difficulty of KA’s task while not equally attributing those difficulties to another team. We don’t need the type of work Adams is providing. The type of aptitude Adams is attacking the roster with, that you continually find a way to construe as “not actually that bad” leads to 24th place, and that to get to our goal of making the playoffs, we do indeed need a level of excellence. At least, from time to time. The shocking contrast is their ability to do it 7 times and us not at all shows that we are *settling* for ineptitude, as fans, rather than acknowledging, when there are only 32 jobs, anything less than the excellence required to make the playoffs even once is simply unacceptable. Because it’s out there if we want it: everyone else has found it.

When you are in a market like Winnipeg or Buffalo, you have to show some excellence of expertise *just* to field a perennial playoff contender. Some prefer to sit and cry about it, woe is me. Using it as an excuse to defend 24th place finishes every year. Other franchises realize there’s only 32 jobs in the world with the power to shape an NHL team into a contender, and there’s no excuse for not employing the person who’ll find success

You are legitimately a superhero. SuperSabresman. If faster than, and unaffected by speeding bullets, how could the contrast between making the playoffs 7 times (and a conference final once) and our 13 years of missed playoffs, over the duration of the time period that the Jets have returned to Winnipeg, phase you at all? Living here, being witness to it, I can’t tell you what I would give to switch up on fortunes, even just a little. To be part of a frenzied playoff craze, even if just for a couple weeks..I’m broken, or you’ve forgotten, or both Or, more likely, you are SuperSabresman. Take off those nerdy glasses, you aren’t fooling anyone

Following this trade tree to its conclusion is our unspoken mandate

It was a funny trade my apologies

Nah, I’m not saying Savoie was top 6. I’m saying the connotation of “big trade” was a top 6 level player Coming back our way Arguing McLeod is a big trade because for us it’s big because we had no 3C is semantics You know what I mean. At least hopefully now that I’ve clarified