Scottysabres

Quinn cracks first, scores a lot. Peterka comes in close behind and plays opposite wing of Quinn, mowing down d men in front of the opponents net so Quinn can score a lot, Mitts centering and they become a Sabres folklore line behind the French connection.

Typo on do to don't as my response.

The culture didn't change while they were here, they aren't catalysts to the change if they stay. If the culture changes, it won't be because of Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, it will be inspite of them. The kids will lead the charge on the change, indeed, it has already begun. Cozens, Mitts, Dahlin, even Tage. And I don't believe all 3 will be here next season. I don't know who Adam's will move, but as of right now, I don't see Risto and 1 of the other 2 gone. Ok. I was responding to sabremike on the lack of talent issue.

Your reaching Thorny, don't pull a muscle 😉

I said this: "Wright and the next "wonder kid", it's the right time to rebuild the rebuild" In response to @sabremike comment: "People simultaneously ranting about needing to change the losing culture while calling for getting rid of the few NHL players we have so that we have a roster that's lucky to win 15 games and gets killed on a nightly basis is itself quite a disconnect." I would have thought the Wright and "Wonder Kid" comment was self evident as a response to sabremike's comment on losing talent to rebuild.

I'm not sure it would work Curt, and I'm not planting a flag saying this is the end all be all of it, what I did say was that the culture would be indifferent if Eichel, Reinhart and Risto stayed, or go. And there is factual prolonged multi-seasonal data to support that.

Many factors. The consistent post Jan. 1 season collapse Players losing passion for the game after enduring time in Buffalo No real sense of urgency in play on the ice, as well as coherent leadership in the locker room. I.E. no accountability. Lack of on ice team mate support. Disappearance of the "never give up the ship, never surrender" grit, right the end of games. Yes, as was mentioned, management and coaching turnovers have an impact, that does not, in not only my opinion, but an opinion shared by others, constitute a pass on the players accountability in all of this. No, you said that. Go back, you may quote what I said.

The logic is simple, break the cycle.

Wright and the next "wonder kid", it's the right time to rebuild the rebuild. That aside, Eichel, Reinhart, and Risto (if he's included in your thoughts on this) have been on this team for 5 or longer years and the culture has actually consistently gotten worse, drawing last place finishes with consistency. And while it would be correct to point out the management and coaching turn over rate, the players on the roster bare a shared responsibility to the consistency of that culture. In the final objective analysis, no, trading Eichel, Reinhart and Risto would not be anymore detrimental to that culture then if they stayed.

Yes, YEs, YES!!! Come on LA, you need Jack Eixhel, You want Jack Eichel. Put the right package together (including Byfield of course) and he's all yours.

Had my U/S yesterday on my lower left ab area. Sign of an old wound, some inner muscle scar tissue, that may have rubbed the wrong way, hence the pain. It should subside they said. Sadly, the U/S caught a small fat deposit on my liver, drop 30lbs was the conversation there. Not a bad day and still covid free.

Not surprising, especially since the Buffalo Journalism Awards incident in 2018. I think Sam went overboard there, but, I don't know all of the details, just that kicking that Ham-Sammich out of Paul's hand, then giving him that massive wedgy was just a bit overboard................

While I do agree insulating 5he overall franchise situation is most certainly the lowest risk move, I do have to ask, given the 1 yr rfa status of Sam, and given his current value that his performance has elevated, which is the greater risk, getting assets for him now or waiting, at least until the deadline, and changing his performance recedes a bit thereby reducing, even to a tier lower degree his value? And when you answer, you'd of course have to consider the off season changes, on ice as well as coaching staff and other, as yet unforeseen and unresolved Eichel and Risto scenarios. Yes, itsa lot to take in, yes, it's a lot of plans that would need to be readied for any eventuality, including the situations mentioned above but not limited to them. There is also the draft to consider, what talent and where is it ready level wise, what of the existing pipeline, where will the personnel in it be evaluation wise? But wait, there's more! 😉 What is your overall philosophy? Well, put yourself in KA's shoes, derive from his statements that philosophy.

This is a red herring at best Brawndo. Change isn't so linear as change for the sake of change. Often, almost always, change takes place for improvement. In this case, the NHL product in Buffalo, New York is sub par, changes to said product are necessary for said improvements. So to say change for the sake of change completely ignores the reality on the ground. "We can do better" than this when attempting to object to trading any player, including Reinhart.

a portion of my point, thank you NS.

I'm sorry, must be a trigger word. Does curved bell better suit the conversation? I'm honestly open to the dialog, nit-picking the words aside. The question still remains.

Ok, so, we have a benchmark. Suffering, even on a starvation style scale is acceptable, but not home invasion and assault. So we've drawn a line?

Yes, there could be a sloping escalation scale. Deprive them of services their tax dollars pay for, you could even go as far as depriving them of gainful employment, starve them out, as it were.

I hardly see an argument here, if the government decrees vaccinations mandatory, and roughly 30 to 50 million adult citizens with children refuse to comply, what do you see as the likely outcome given the urgency of the situation, considering a mandatory scenario? Do you honestly believe they are all going to do so willingly, peaceably? And if they don't, then what? Is it so ridiculous? History says its unlikely, but not impossible.

Sure, there are consequences for every action a living entity does.

I see, so, your pro forced vaccinations then? Even if that entails breaking down your door, physically tackling your 18 yr old daughter, your wife, in their own home, to accomplish the deed?

This is not an actual vaccine in the sense that it is a preventative measure from the virus itself, at least, not yet in any event. So to insert it in to a bundle, such as the polio vaccination is premature. But, it has proven an effective profilictate to the impact if contracted. From the CDC's own site, posted merely 3 days ago: "Although COVID-19 vaccines are effective at keeping you from getting sick, scientists are still learning how well vaccines prevent you from spreading the virus that causes COVID-19 to others, even if you do not have symptoms. Early data show that vaccines help keep people with no symptoms from spreading COVID-19, but we are learning more as more people get vaccinated. We’re also still learning how long COVID-19 vaccines protect people. For these reasons, people who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 should keep taking precautions until we know more, like wearing a mask in indoor public places, avoiding large indoor gatherings, and washing your hands often. Vaccinated people do not need to wear masks outside except in crowds." So, as you can see, they openly state they are unsure if it affects the contiguous side of the subject. Also, if you've been vaccinated, by their own admission, you can still contract covid 19. Therefore, prudence lends itself to getting vaccinated, for the good of the many. But in the end, it's still an individual personal choice.

While I am currently between the first and second Moderna shots, I find the entire mind set of shaming over vaccinations completely repugnant. Seriously, this society is so F'd up, for example, at family conversations the same die hard "my body, my choice" voices are demanding other family members get the vaccination and actually espouse it should be forcibly done by the government if necessary. I just sit back, shake my head and chuckle at it. The hypocrisy of it all.

A desire for change is a tad different than finger pointing, wouldn't you agree?