Curt

They already announced that they are moving on from him immediately. He gone.

That makes sense, since it’s winning percentage. I think the best would be Regulation Wins-Regulation Losses-OT Games. OT games are a crap shoot. Good teams win in regulation. To me, regulation wins are the best gauge of how a team is performing.

I suppose if it has sentimental value it does add to the board’s culture. Confused me though.

Oh, so it’s just a .500 winning percentage. Wouldn’t that be a better name? More intuitive at least. As opposed to point percentage, which is what the NHL uses.

Dare I ask, what is Deluca .500?

Sam Bennett is more like Sam Reinhart fat-free, sugar-free, zero calorie.

I would like to actually SEE them in a global series. With a 2pm weekday game that wasn’t really possible though, for that game at least.

This is the only part I will respond to because I have zero interest in discussing contemporary politics here. What do you know of my understanding on the topic? Have you gotten to the part yet where you show that Rome declined because they were ninnies?

I love Carlin. His newer stuff is free, older stuff he charges for.

Thanks guys. I’ll have to check it out. Especially if it comes in an audiobook! I don’t read as much as I would like any longer, but I find the daily commute to be a great time listen to such things. Mostly history and sports podcasts.

Too many chart. Just kidding, I’ll check it out.

Nope. I listed some probable causes. Contributing factors. Can you make a case that Rome declined/fell because they were ninnies?

Rome fell because the Romans were ninnies? I thought Rome fell because of their decline in available slave labor, privatization of the military, civil wars, rampant corruption within government, incompetent emperors, climate change leading to poor harvests making it difficult to feed their larger population centers, and a dozen other reasons. But I didn’t learn about it in school, so I guess the answer to your question is no. Some people do teach it though. I recommend Mike Duncan’s wonderful podcast “History of Rome”. It’s really fantastic. Always engaging, never too dry.

Loser points are stupid, but in a league where over half the teams make playoffs, it’s only logical that a team with a loosing record gets in from time to time, loser points or not.

You are talking about puck skills. That’s not talent exactly. I consider talent to be the actual quality of the hockey player.

I think everyone understands time zones but understanding it doesn’t make it any easier for fans to watch a game that’s happening while most are at work.

I guess yes, because why not

Eichel, Reinhart definitely. McCabe, Mittlestadt very debatably.........

I don’t agree with this. I don’t think most of Dahlin’s mistakes have come from being tentative. It’s mostly high risk plays that don’t work out or just straight up fumbling the puck.

What’s going to happen if Buffalo wins 4 or 5 out of the next 6? It’s totally possible because they play some pretty bad teams. Will everything be ok then?

He is probably at the peak of his physical abilities and skills, but as an NHL rookie there are probably technical adjustments he can make to adjust to the game at this highest level and improve his 5 on 5 play.

It is talent. It’s a major factor. Lack of talent can’t be hand waived away as a non factor just because they won a few games with the current roster. Of course they can play better, but no team plays at the top of its game for 82 games. That’s not realistic. There are ups and downs. Almost any team in the league can go on a nice streak when they are playing near their best and/or getting a bit lucky. The difference is that the most talented teams in the league can still get somewhat decent results even when not playing their best. Talent helps you win some games even when you are off your games as a team. The lows aren’t as low. The Sabres are not among the more talented teams in the league. When they aren’t playing well, they are going to lose most of the time. Compare to Tampa for example. When Tampa isn’t playing well, they still win about half their games, while Buffalo will sometimes lose 6 out of 7 when not playing well. That’s because of the difference in talent.

I think they will be more around 10-12th, which would sadly be a decent improvement.

What’s becoming obvious to me is that there is a portion of this fan base that can not take losing any longer. I can’t blame them, but they are also overreacting to what is likely a fairly normal period of poor play that average teams often go through. I don’t think it’s proof of an impending downward spiral into oblivion. It’s just the normal ups and downs of a very average NHL roster. They just aren’t a great team.

Yup, Eichel is the problem because he is really good at hockey, but not good enough to compensate for the holes in the roster. It’s obvious. So Vesey isn’t the problem, but Eichel is? I’m not buying that one.