Weave

Yeah, I'm not a fan of it either, but I can't say with any confidence that I know what's the better move overall.

Quite a few teams on that list that traded a significant number of 3rd rd picks. At 19% average its a low risk asset to move. And yeah, Buf is definitely below average by a fair degree in the 3rd round.

I guess I wasn't as struck as some of you. He looked to me like he was a step behind in the neutral zone and D zone. He almost appeared slow to me, and he's never looked slow to me any other time I've seen him play. He played better in the O zone but there were a number of times where he was clearly physically overmatched. He lost alot of puck battles. But he also looked like he had a good sense of play. He went to the rights spots and put his nose where it belonged, so that's good. His line was probably the most effective line of the night for Buffalo. He seemed to mesh well with his linemates. And he hustled. He competed. Overall my initial reaction is pretty neutral. I'm cautiously optimistic that we'll see obvious growth this season.

I wanna throw the other perspective out there. Skinner almost certainly doesn't need anyone else to be effective, but his two linemates do need him to be playing within the same system they are playing for the line's effectiveness to be maximized. I'm fairly sure Ralph's point here is that Skinner would be drawing down what Ralph wants Jack and RW1 doing with his freelance act. Same with Staal and Sam. So Ralph puts someone on those lines that will commit to the system to allow those two pairs to maximize their effectiveness within Ralph's system, And Skinner gets moved somewhere that has the least impact on the other two players. So why doesn't Ralph adapt to Skinner? If the team is built for Ralph's system except one guy, why would you change the system when it is just one guy, AND Jeff's certainly capable of adapting himself to that system are both valid responses. I understand and sympathize with both sides to the conversation here. There are plenty of successful coaches who adapted to their stars, Muckler being one, and also plenty of successful coaches who bent the team to the coach's will, Trotts and Laviolette come to mind immediately. Kreuger is of the Barry Trotts mold obviously. Lots of criticism here for Ralph not willing to adapt. Less so for Skinner not willing to adapt. It's interesting for sure. And in a short season there is virtually no time for this to be worked out.

They sure don’t look like a group that has played together long.

I don't have the interest to repeat this task 29 times. Hell, I don't have the interest to collect it once. But if league wide the rate is just under 20%, that's got to suggest that quite a few teams are above that if some are below.

I've not been as critical of Buffalo's drafting record as others. 1 out of 5 in the 3rd round is not good odds at all. 2 players per decade. So when we look at a GM with a 3 yr tenure, I'm not inclined to judge based on 3rd round and later results. But man, it's a bad look for the organization as a whole when you are half that hit rate over a decade.

League wide, 56 players out of 300 played at least 100 games. 19% Buffalo had 1 out of 13 play at least 100 games. Not quite 8%. I’d say the draft criticism starts to be rational here.

The only agenda I’ve ever recognized is the criticism of a team that wasn’t trying in earnest to win.

Tons of judging here. 7 dependents might well be his mother, siblings, their children, his wife and child. If I remember correctly he grew up poor. He may feel obligated to keep them out of where they came from. The gambling, obviously, is a huge problem if you’re in the hole. How many folks with addictions on this site?

And ruined everyone in the process. Amazing feat, really.

Pastajoe and I agree. The end is nigh.

I don’t know about that last part. Was it not apparent to you that Mittlestadt’s play was better than last season? Even his last preseason? Was it not apparent that Cozens looked a bit out of place? Is it not appropriate to alter your pre-preseason thoughts accordingly in at least these cases? No, that game was not the final arbiter for these or any other player, but if the game is meaningless for judgement purposes why is Kreuger scheduling them and why would he impress upon the players to take that game more seriously?

It may not mean much in terms of how the team plays this season. It means something in terms of beating out others for an opening night spot. Limited opportunities to show the team in game situations where you stack up relative to others. Limited opportunities to show under fire that you understand the system and how you fit in it.

I agree with most of this. Tage showed up looking to win a spot on the roster, and did, maybe even a spot on the top line. Mitts showed improvement. He obviously put in the work this offseason. I'm not sure it's enough, but he's improved his positional play a fair amount. Cozens looked overmatched. That surprised me given that he's been playing at a high level for weeks now. Skinner looked like he had something else he wanted to do last night. Roots didn't impress. Neither did Asplund. I don't think Asplund is going to be an NHL'er. Okposo still has gas in the tank. Staal and Reinhart look like they could be lethal. Reider has a nice shot. The defence will be fine.

After one scrimmage and minimal practice time with the team (but he's been playing at a higher intensity level than everyone else for weeks now) it sure looked like Mitts was more ready than Cozens. I wasn't impressed at all with Mitts work on the O zone. I was impressed with the improvement in his overall positional play. How's your confidence level if it goes Skinner - Mitts- Sheahan, bucause I think that's more likely at this moment.

I seem to recall that the last complaint to be heard resulted in the judge threatening sanction.

Skinner looked disinterested at times.

Haven’t been able to pay as much attention as I’d like. From the glimpses I’ve seen Cozens doesn’t look quite ready. Is that what others are seeing or did I miss the good stuff?

Sure. trump can't. I was referring to all of the Trumpians in government who knew the claims of fraud were bull ***** and still cried "the sky is falling".

I didn't comment on whether the court cases should have been heard. Yes, I agree, Donald had a right to file a grievance, to have his day in court. And the courts did what was expected of them. Sincerity matters, however, in our leaders messages regarding those court cases. They all knew it was bull *****, but whipped up the masses anyway. It was our leaderships responses to court cases they knew to be long shots based on slim technicalities with no evidence that put us here today. Sure, let him have his day in court, but recognize and acknowledge that the cases were without any real legs.

What does Allen need to do to be 1st team all pro? Wow.

We were early adopters for sure. Don't recall who started it. It's become a favorite of mine over the years.

Totally disagree with the first half phrase. There is a point to it. The point is quite revolutionary. You should be concerned. You should not minimize this. This movement has the support of law enforcement. The coup they are attempting will spill blood. And it just may change a bunch of people in government because it does have backing. This is serious whether the initial attempts were substantial or not. This was always serious. And that is why you were getting so much flack previously.

While it was inspired by the content of your post, my post was not directed at you.