That Aud Smell

Good point.

Although, I just read something about how the Bills want Josh Allen. I’m not on board with this process if it ends with that guy.

It’s difficult for me to fathom that there are fans who would rather the team draft a bunch of potential positional starters rather than take a shot at getting a franchise QB. I’ve had enough of teams that max out at 8, 9 wins. Maybe Rosen/Darnold/Mayfield flames out. But, goddammit, take your shot, Bills.

I heard a report weeks ago about a conversation with a high ranking NFL FO type who was (anonymously) asked what the biggest misconception about the draft is. The response was something about how people still manage to discount how much teams will spend to get a QB prospect. The exec predicted that all of the top-ranked QBs (I think he cited 6, and the next tier probably started with Rudolph) would go in the top 10. I’m all in. The Bills should swing for the fences, and they look prepared to do so. They ended the drought. Now let’s end this QB purgatory.

With the Watkins draft (ugh), it cost that year's 9th and the following year's first to get up to 4th? Was that it? What would it cost to go from 12 to, say, 2 or 3? Is it, as Taro suggests, 12 and 22 to get into the top 5? Maybe also have to throw in a second-day pick as well?

The guy's a full blown sociopath.

I tend to like how Beane goes about his business.

Interesting. This is consistent with McDermott placing a huge premium on player-availability. I liked Cordy well enough, and always wanted to see him do well after he was maligned in his draft year as a poor fit at tackle. Godspeed.

My guess: They move all the way up to 2, take their guy, and sign ... McCown (the Josh one). Not great all the way around, but you hear all the time how McCown in a consummate pro. Show the rookie the way, etc.

Terrific value for Taylor. Now. Sign a bridge veteran, move up into the top 10, and draft the future #1 guy. Let’s gooooooo.

FWIW: It’s pretty much beyond doubt that Incarcerated Bob has actual sources with the Bills.

That’s from a show in Brazil, right? What a scene.

It'd be a short list, I imagine, but I'd be heartily in favour of this.

It's a good debate. And that's all we really have.

^ Me likey. Consistent with NOLA, their music appears to defy easy categorization. Metal? Funk? Jam band? Nearest things I could think of through 2:00 was Funkadelic with a dash of Floyd and Soundgarden. Oh. Hell yeah. Had to log off at 3:00. Will tune in later. Shifting gears, I have such a Dad-crush on these young ladies from Spain. I've long been a sucker for an all-grrrl rawk band.

I've heard this discussed -- not just as to Babcock. That certain coaches succeed in not even having *a system* -- they have several. Or, at least, systems 1A, 1B, 1B.i, etc.

Because I'm noodling around at hockey reference, and it looks like the team's Corsi % and Fenwick % are *just* slightly lower this season. About the same, really. If you were to annualize the team's Fenwick Against (SOGs and Shots Attempted (but excluding blocks)) for *this* season, the team would end up at around 3019 FA for 2017-2018. Last season, the team's total FA was 3122. So, that's an improvement of ~1.3 FA per game? Yay? Not for nothing: Last year's team had a much better PDO than this year's team -- 99.2 (20th overall) last season v. 97.9 (30th) this season to date. This year's team has a better SH% (6.7 v. 7.1), but the SV% has fallen off quite a bit (92.5 SV% this season v. 90.8 SV% this season). Come to think of it, that makes sense, if we are to credit Housley's choice to take more risks and leave the goalie exposed.

As for objective data(lytics) on the team's ... improvement from last season to this season: Has that been captured somewhere here?

I think all of those dudes report(ed) directly to Pegula.

I won't let the current suckitude prompt me to forget how much I effing despised the team's play under Dreary Dan. Even while they were earning more points in the standings. Nope. Sorry. That's a Faustian bargain I will not make. I am far from sold on Housley. I really, really (really) don't know whether he can be an effective HC. But I'll remain adamant that, in order to become a really good club, the Sabres as an organ-eye-zay-shun needed to embrace and execute a system that involved more risk, more upside, and more imagination than that which Hot Daniel preached. So, yeah. Kindly take that bullpuck and shove it. I'll read takes and assess them on their own merits, and then respond to them, without questioning a poster's mental faculties or independence of thought. I encourage you to do the same. Let the church say 'amen.' Although I'm not so sure about this part.

Holy chapped biscuits on the new Canes owner, man. Also, I am intrigued: If Francis stays on as President of Hockey Ops (maybe where he should have been from the start?), but if the new owner wants a direct line to and through the GM -- then what exactly is a PoHO doing?

The eff you talkin' about? BINGO. Housley may fail, but my sense is he'd be intent on failing, if in fact he must, because he tried to get this team geared up to play real-life big boy NHL hockey, not that small ice, low event bullspit Dan Jauron preaches.

Pining for the dedicated mediocrity of Dreary "Small Ice" Dan. Lulz.

Excellent work.