nfreeman

I was pretty disappointed in Mitts-Cozens-KO being a complete no-show after being so good vs Minny.

I agree with most of this, although I would not support committing for 5 years to any goalie. I just think based on KA's track record, it's pretty unlikely that he takes on more than a 2-year commitment for any new goalie. I also doubt that he brings in more than 1 goalie from outside the organization. I think he expects UPL to have one of the 2 spots in Buffalo next year and Levi and Portillo to fight it out in Rochester.

SabreSpace tech desk PSA: Roku products are far superior to Amazon fire TV products.

I would take a 1st for KO in a heartbeat, with retention, and while you're right about this year's KO vs last year's Foligno, I still don't think anyone would give up a 1st for KO. KO has too much Sabres stink on him, as well as plenty of his own stink from recent seasons. And Toronto was trading for playoff leadership, which Foligno had provided in Columbus in 2 decent playoff runs the 2 seasons before Toronto traded for him. That factor isn't present with KO. Also, KO turns 34 next month and has another year on his contract, which would be a $3MM cap hit even with max retention.

Well, I’ve been quite critical of KO, but he’s certainly done a great job in resurrecting his career this year. He’s been a good, solid player, albeit well overpaid. I don’t think anyone would offer the Sabres enough for him to make trading him worthwhile for the Sabres.

I’ll be pretty surprised if they bring in a goalie with more than 2 years on his contract, via either trade or FA. I think KA doesn’t want to block his 3 prospects.

Yikes. Is anyone else utterly unfamiliar with the bottom 6 forwards, the #2C and all of the D other than Laaksie?

This is probably an overreaction, but the last 2 wins are probably the high point of the season for me. Cozens really brought the speed, the power and the fire last night. That was the WNY Ryan Kesler we've been hoping would emerge. If that's who he is, he will be a major difference-maker in the rise from the ashes. Well, I agree that these injuries were important (as were the injuries to Anderson, VO and Miller IMHO), but the #1 reason with a bullet is goaltending. Separately: - Cozens, Fitzgerald and Skinner all brought the fire last night, and it made a huge difference. That was an inspired, together group of Sabres we saw -- maybe the most this season. - I loved Samuelsson obliterating someone behind the net, Mitts doing the pre-emptive Forsberg shoulder forecheck (which someone else noted upthread -- great description, btw) to crush a Minny defender just before digging it out from the boards, and Skinner screaming "LFG" after scoring. - I'm not sure Skinner has retrieved 100% of his mojo from his 40-goal season, but he's in the neighborhood. Those 2 goals, especially the GWG, were great and looked to me like he looked in that 40-goal season -- i.e. he was able to vacuum up loose pucks in the high-danger areas, and whenever he got control of it, he was definitely going to beat the goalie. - As noted upthread, adding Mitts (who looked much better last night) and a contributing VO (although he's still not shooting the slapper) gives them 3 solid forward lines, which makes a huge difference. Come on boys. Keep bringing it like that and you'll give us a reason.

Wow. So if Vegas misses the playoffs, the Sabres could end up with, say, the 14th pick from them, plus their own pick at, say, #4 or thereabouts? I'm not going to advocate for a Sabres tank, but I sho 'nuff will root for Vegas to keep losing.

My point was more about think tanks and academic analyses generally -- which are all funded by sources and produced by authors with agendas, just like the industry-funded studies are -- than about the economic effect of stadiums/arenas, which I agree are almost certainly a net economic negative for everyone other than the team owners. As for your 2nd paragraph -- how nice of you to throw a stink bomb into this thread!

Now that is a highly questionable presumption, good sir.

As someone who's frequently expressed concerns about guys putting up numbers in garbage time, I think the issue is more that the opponents don't bring their A game when they are playing a Sabres team in March that is running for the bus yet again -- so the numbers that the guys who may be getting better might just be a mirage.

Well, google searches for "Pegula overrule Darcy" and "Pegula reject Darcy" deliver zero hits. But there's this: https://www.diebytheblade.com/2011/2/22/2008007/terry-pegulas-first-press-conference-completely-awesome Negative proven! Heavy-spin-to-the-point-of-outright-BS-driven-by-reflexive-animus established! Checkmate!

So you’d like me to prove a negative? By… watching every TP video available online and not seeing the statement you say he made? No thank you. As for reflexive animus, there’s only one poster in this tete-a-tete suffering from that malady, and it’s the guy who referred to the owners as “rich scumbags who rape the earth.”

I'm finding it kinda challenging to get excited for a game these days.

Your fix is certainly true in most cases, but I'd note that the magnitude of the grift in NYS, and of its destructive effects, are in the 99th percentile relative to other state and local governments. I agree that the huge number associated with the stadium -- and that's before overruns, which are a lock to be enormous -- brings the issue into stark relief.

In the abstract, perhaps, but in reality the greedy and corrupt grifters that have been running NYS for generations would simply find other ways to spend the public's money and continue to keep their skim until the bitter end.

I think PA's post reflects a large amount of spin and would like a link on this.

I will also repeat something else I've said on this: the Sabres' franchise value is probably pretty GD depressed right now, with attendance at rock-bottom, the team looking at another bottom-3 finish and various pandemic and other economic hits to WNY reducing demand for tickets for the foreseeable future. It would not make economic sense for TP to sell the team, or a portion of it, now. It would make much more sense to wait a couple of years for the team and the economy to (presumptively) improve.

Respectfully, the other owners wouldn't give a crap about keeping the Sabres in Buffalo. For that matter, the Leafs are probably the most powerful franchise and they would gladly support the franchise moving. The other owners care about the Benjamins, and Buffalo doesn't provide many of them. Many, many more would flow from Houston or a number of other places. I'll say it again: don't kid yourself about the NHL, about clauses in the contract or about anything else on this. If TP sells the team, the risk of losing the team will immediately jump from 10% to at least 50%.

They are 11-36 in their last 47. If they weren’t trying to tank then they really pooped the bed.

I think Asplund could bump any of those 3 out of a spot on that line, or could get healthy-scratched. I'd guess it will depend on how each of them is playing at the time.

I expect Quinn to take Asplund's spot pretty quickly.

FWIW, Hamilton recently said unequivocally that his sources have told him the team is not for sale (and I think he said no minority stake either).

SFiNS -- you know I luv ya, but you should know by now that when you lob hand grenades into conversations on touchy subjects, as you've done upthread and in the Hasek thread, the poopstorm is inevitable.