LGR4GM

Bye. They sell the team, it leaves, bye. I figured out years ago it's easy to live somewhere without an nhl team. Especially one that's been the dumpster fire Buffalo has been. Idc if they sell. And your quote here is a lie. That's not what I said.

Don't put a crap product out for 10 years and maybe ppl will buy it. It's on the owners not the fans for the attendance.

KA should already be finding his replacement.

Thinking about how SJ signed Strauss Mann right about now.

Honestly can't tell if you're being serious. Why would a team that has 71 points already, only get 62 next year?

Red means more shots. They aren't measuring the 10% without Dahlin. It's with Joker and without him.

I'm confused, it's a statistical chart that tracks with and without. Why would they call it with Dahlin is that's only 90% accurate? You can sort by with Dahlin but this chart is labeled correctly.

Shot attempts No, because all the minutes not with Joker haven't been with Dahlin

I argued this all year with countless posters, if all you looked at this year was the team's record I feel sorry for you. This year was about building a team and growing the talent because everyone knew we didn't have enough to get the playoffs. We have the 1st or 2nd most games lost to injury. Every single player that matters improved and the glimpses behind the scenes show the first real team culture in 15 years. But here you are, focused on one and only one thing while ignoring any other context. Don Granato took a bunch of losers and developed them into a team capable of winning and believing they can all while instilling the idea that this year wasn't good enough. Granato is the best coach since Ruff and he might be better, time will tell.

Because they don't have enough talent to make up for not playing at 100%, 100% of the time

Still need a partner for Power. Jokiharju is a 3rd pairing defender.

I'd give him 2yrs 4mil per this offseason and extend him now.

You like others miss my point. You're concerned with who owns it. I'm well aware the US navy does not, however the US navy and US as a country should take an interest in The Sullivans considering why this ship exists and is named thusly. Maybe the NFL and the US DOD can conduct 1 less flyover this year, would probably secure about 200k or more. My point isn't who owns it, it is that in the supposedly richest country in the world, where we spend 50k a flight hour for some aircraft and give billionaires 450 million like it's nothing, it's pretty telling a country that screams about their patriotism seems willing to let the USS The Sullivans die a watery death like the 5 Brothers of her namesake who sacrificed so much, for so many. If the US wanted to save the ship, they could without blinking.

well *****

Good thing we have really tall defenders with long reach who can clear the rebounds.... he says hoping that is the case.

@Taro T I do want to give what you are saying a separate response. You have 2 parts to your side and that is at what amount points would it have not been worth shutting VO down based on injury, so if he would have had 20 or only 10 where do I draw the line. The other is development and where we factor that in. I think for myself 15 points is the number and it is what we saw happen. VO was probably 15 points below where he should have been. That is at the threshold I would have kept him playing because of the development. 20, I would have pulled him and let him rehab for a few weeks. That said I don't know enough about the wrist injury, maybe rest would not have mattered at all. I think of that line from Miracle where Herb asks if he can injure it further if he plays. I honestly hope that answer what you are asking and I really am not angry or trying to be a dick. It is hard to argue 3 separate ideas between a few different posters at once.

To be honest I want you to be right even though I think some don't think that is true. VO getting 80 points for say 3-4 years in a row (or there about) would be amazing and if that happens I will donate to the charity of your choice 50bucks. I just feel his ceiling is around 65. If VO gets 80 points or more, I will donate 50 bucks each season it occurs to the charity of Bob's choice. Just remind me and send me the charity info if/when it occurs.

I have provided those statements and it is an argument. If Olofsson dropped 30points because his injury prevented him from being effective, I would have shut him down. You are now arguing semantics and other details. You brought in development, you brought in what if it was only 20 points. That wasn't the original question or conversation and this place LOVES to do whataboutism, in fact it thrives on it and that's fine because that is how we expand threads and move on. I am however containing my response to only the original idea that VO without injury scores another 30, I think that unlikely and if it were true that means his injury was more significant. The problem is this place thinks "argument" means animosity as opposed to the more academic rhetoric of it all. I don't think Bob is dumb or bad or I should be angry with him. I think he posted something I disagree with and I think we should go back and forth on it until we've explored that topic fully. You and most on this board want to treat it like a wgr call in option where you say what you want and then expect very little response and if you get more it is "not in good faith" or as nfreeman loves to do when I question him in anyway shape or form accuse me of "temper tantrums" and call any counter argument gibberish. (He does this because it is a tactic to discredit the argument against his posts and because he doesn't like me. It is why we rarely interact anymore, he does not argue in good faith). I always attempt to debate in good faith although I fail sometimes. You seem to assume I am upset in replies, usually I am bemused but maybe I should play up the other persona more. The arguments here are an exercise is debating points on the team, I personally wish some of the old posters would come back and argue their side more. Blue and Hoss were always good at it. I think Bob has made some good points and I like his optimism, I simply disagree with it. Good points from Bob include the linemates VO had, the injury (which we are debating), and VO's growth this year.

I love Victor Olofsson for the record. He is a 7th round pick who has grown each year and really worked out to develop. The dude took his one great trait and translated that into an NHL career and then when out and improved on everything else he does. I want him here for the next 4 years because I want a 30g winger on this team at a reasonable rate (4.5mil) and that is exactly what we see in VO. I just don't think he is going to eclipse what Reinhart is and that's fine, Reinhart is gone and I wish him well.

Yes, Sam is a great player and Olofsson is good. That's all I am saying is that VO is a good player and a 65 point season seems like the ceiling, not 80+

Always a reason Sam isn't as good as he is. Linemates, injury, luck, ice time whatever it is yet we see a guy who produces with literally anyone he plays with. I think that if Reinhart was Asplund's winger, Asplund would have more points for sure. I would 100% say that without a doubt.

You are trying to argue something completely unrelated please stop. If and only IF the injury was apparently so debilitating it caused Olofsson to drop 30 points on the season should he have been shut down because there is no development then. I am saying Olofsson is streaky, sure the injury impacted him, but it wasn't to the tune of 30 points. I would go with maybe 10-15.

Basically what I am saying is that Olofsson's injury did not keep him from scoring 76pts this year. Further you know he seems to never be injured year after year after year.... Sam Reinhart. Reinhart is at 74 games compared to Olofsson's 69 games but the excuse is now that Olofsson would be at Reinhart numbers without injury and I don't buy it because an injury that prevents you from getting 30 more points in a season must be more severe.

@Taro T what are you confused about? @bob_sauve28 suggested that Olofsson without injury would have 76 points and I am saying that if Olofsson was so injured that he would have had another 30 points on the year, he should not have been playing.