Weave

Allen has 190 passing touchdowns. Is that correct? Wow!

We need to play 6-8 games over Deluca .500 AND the 6 teams ahead of us all need to keep their pace. Playing 6-8 wins better than we are currently is probably not enough.

They were bad enough here that we wanted them off the roster. On extremely good teams they were good enough to be on the every game roster. No, they weren’t stars elsewhere, but they were effective enough to play regularly on teams with Stanley Cup ambitions. Hmmmm.

Yup. This is the fallacy of just looking at points or points percentage. You have to consider the likelihood of all of the teams you need to leapfrog succumbing to the scenario you need to get in a playoff position. We are approaching inevitability.

Yet good enough for Stanley Cup contender rosters. They played to not get injured here (or just went on IR vacation).

Oof. The Zach Bogosian, Taylor Hall approach.

I wonder if Colorado would trade Mitts for him?

I am surprised noone brought up this beauty from a post practice Lindy interview. Reported by Matthew Fairburn; ”Sabres coach Lindy Ruff clearly wants more from his top six. "Our centerman inside this system has a lot of work to do ... I've asked those guys personally, if this is too hard, I'll put you on the wing. You'll play the wing. That's for Dylan (Cozens), that's for Tage."”

I’m still entertained.

We’ve seen Lindy do this before. In years past when the energy wasn’t there, when the top 6 isn’t producing. Lindy usually put an energy guy on each line to get some change of pace on each line. I’m surprised he didn’t do this sooner.

I might just have to quit this place if we go back to rooting for losing again.

Show your work. I don’t think this is accurate.

Nope. You got it.

KA is done. I don’t see how anyone recovers from that performance. Book it.

Overpaying for McDavid is basically how we got to here. We overpaid badly for Eichel and had nothing left to actually ice a team.

You never said “owner”. This is the quote I responded to. Were “owner” in there somewhere it would have certainly changed the context. “I mean, some people saying they'd rather Buffalo lose the Sabres because we have this team? “ Anyway, since you meant something different than what you typed, I’ll move on.

“Used to”. If he comes free, I’d give him a shot. Thats about it

You aren’t way off other than, it may already be too late. You’d have to be at least college age to have seen a Sabres playoff game as a baby.

The “we aren’t a destination” thing predates the Eichel injury mess. We’ve been overpaying or losing out for more than a decade. Certainly the Eichel mess hasn’t helped heal that wound at all. At the end of the day, the team has to demonstrate that they are not only serious about winning, but are capably pulling it off. And of course we can’t demonstrate the 2nd if we haven’t committed to the first.

Fair. But the “we aren’t a destination “ is coming from the team not fully committed to winning, which is a snowball started down the hill with the word “suffering “.

This is what the tank has wrought.

Pick your purgatory, lol.

And it’s damned if they do, damned if they don’t. At this point you have to be into drama to make the effort.

Noone said they want to lose the team. A few have said, including me, that given the evidence that the current owner is unable to figure out how to run a winning team, there is no risk in losing the team. Another difference with distinction. Context are hard.