LGR4GM

This ... I won't call it news, so this story here is what Propaganda looks like. You will notice there is almost no explanation of what tariffs are or how they actual function. In fact they quote Navarro claiming tariffs will bring in 600 billion a year even though, that is easily dispelled by anyone who's not a lickspittle carrying water for trumps disastrous economic policies. Here there is evidence that it will raise maybe 250 billion in revenue https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/fiscal-economic-and-distributional-effects-20-broad-tariff and here is another paper saying tariff rates would need to be massively higher https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2024/number/4/article/trump-s-2025-tariff-threats.html to raise what Trump claims they will. Note, this doesn't include the damage done to every day Americans. There is no counter point to break the narrative that is being supplied by the White House, but instead only the rose colored quotes from the President and either his press secretary or others in the administration. In fact most of the quotes in this piece come from those people talking to Fox reporters in other venues or "safe spaces" where what they say goes unchallenged. There is not explanation about the retaliatory tariffs that could impact ppl. My favorite part is where they openly admit that the plan for today is shrouded in mystery, so they are just vomiting what they are told with no ideas at all. They also quote Trump talking about how these countries will negotiate so they won't get tariffs without any sort of pushback... such as this https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/01/tariffs-trump-markets-economy-live-updates/82741953007/ or this https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/28/business/canada-tariffs-carney-trump-retaliaton/index.html or this https://apnews.com/article/eu-tariffs-trump-reciprocal-liberation-us-von-der-leyen-f840e2963db21508937e644e3cb6d974. Finally at the end we have a long segment about why they picked "liberation" day and make it sound like some great freedom from oppression has come. This shouldn't come as a surprise because the author of the piece is a right wing hack who used to work for the daily caller. But if you need an example, here you go. Propaganda. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/what-liberation-day-what-expect-april-2

Also I am calling this out for being deliberately misleading and the type of ***** we shouldn't do. "Is shooting single digits" acting like it is some type of massive gap and OMG! when in reality if you had used the actual numbers... Kulich: 12.0%... not over, at. And he only has 14goals from everywhere I have looked so I think you accidently gave him an extra one. Benson: 9.7% They are 2.3% different in their sh% and you deliberately made it sound like a vast gulf. It was lazy and I dislike the subterfuge. It is a 2.7 goal difference for Kulich if he shot at Benson's level.

No it isn't. His goal scorer is much better. Their production is about the exact same per 60mins of ice time. 1.6 Kulich and 1.5 Benson.

We were never at pick 3 though. We went from pick 4 to pick 6.

But they wouldn't be to start next season. Tage, Peterka, Tuch, Zucker, McLeod... one of those guys gets into the top 6 and the other 2 end up on your 3rd line until injuries happen. I agree we need another top 6 forward but it has more to do with depth than anything. That is not what you said. "But this year, among all the guys you listed (Even Cozens) I think he has clearly been the best overall player to me." He has not been the best overall player, best goal scorer, yes. Best overall, no.

Should now note that since Jan 17, Noah Östlund has 17g, 16a, for 33pts and only 4 of those are PP goals. That is 33pts in 29games or 1.14ppg which if he had done the entire season, would put him in 9th overall in the AHL for ppg. If you adjust for age, that would put him in 4th for players 24 and under in the AHL. Note, I am saying if he had played at this pace all season, which he did not.

Depends on if Levi can adjust his positioning for NHL shooters and read plays at NHL speed.

This is not correct. He has been the best goal scorer which is not the same as best overall player. That distinction would fall to Benson. Kulich is running a -5.1 xGF and is primarily using his excellent shot while being, mediocre defensively. He scores at 1.1gp/60 and 1.6pt/60 Benson is running a +1.5xGF and is primarily being shuffled all over the lineup and into different roles while being above average defensively. He scores at .6gp/60 and 1.5pt/60. So you get less goals but about the same offense with Benson while getting better overall play driving metrics. You are drastically overrating Kulich based on his great shot while missing out on his otherwise "just ok" play outside of that shot. That said, both Benson and Kulich will have to be better in all facets of the game.

I think the reason ppl are okay with the forwards is because overall the team has produced enough offense to be a playoff team. I don't disagree with what you wrote about but Cozens is gone and Norris is in his place. Kulich and Benson getting better is highly likely just because of their ages, personally I want them to be better defensively as again, there is enough team offense. You are right though, Krebs, Benson, and Kulich are all similar in offense but that is what a 3rd line looks like even on a playoff team. It is probably a bit low as those guys should be in that 35pt range but that's what a 3rd line does. Ottawa's 10-12th scorers at forward are in that range for example. Again, my issue isn't we need to find more scoring, it is that we allow too many goals and chances against. I could see an argument where we don't produce enough chances for but the problem comes down to sloppy defense and bad goaltending. I need Kulich, Benson, Norris, and Quinn to be good defensively for this to go anywhere. I am fully open to replacing one of them with a more proven commodity.

This is such a stupid response full of the ignorant, arrogant, and otherwise boastful stupidity that is Donald Trump:

I think that Quinn's game has stagnated, which is probably a lesson I will remember, and that we must now seriously consider moving him this offseason. The best thing might be for him to continue to score, pumping up stats and raising his value. I keep asking myself if he is the type of player I want. Last year I felt the answer was yes because his 200ft game was coming along and he had so much offensive skills that he was breaking even. Now, I doubt that. Is it worth giving him the summer to get right and hoping he's an improved player next year? If we do that, how long do we wait to find out? Will it tank our season if we are wrong? The defense is the main issue in my eyes still but Quinn being penciled into the top 9 is something that needs serious thought.

Waiting for him to give that to Byram because he feels he has to justify the trade and double down.

The short version is I think it is exceedingly flawed to say "in the last 3 years his sh% was this 11.9% (it's 12.05%) and therefore his 22.4% his off by 22.4-11.9 when you are ignoring that the 22.4 still gets factored in and would be 2/4 seasons over the 11.9% you are using.

Again, you need to toss out the first 10 games and his sh% is 12.04. A 10 game sample with 3 shots and no goals is also skewing the data a bit. I also don't agree with your conclusion. You can't toss out 1/4 of a sample and act as though it is an outlier that shouldn't be averaged in. On top of that there is a prior season where McLeod shoots at 14.1% so even if we adjust for this season, it stands to reason that his average is not 11.9%. You are doing the very thing you are arguing against, comparing 3 seasons and ignoring 1 and then claiming his sh% for his CAREER is 11.9%. It is in no way more accurate to compare 3 seasons before coming to Buffalo and claiming Buffalo's season should just be ignored. How, who, and where he plays all changed. He went from 14mins a game to almost 17mins a game. Also, I did what you said in the bold, I looked at the 3 prior years (not 4 because again, 3hots and 10games is useless), and I looked at this season. Hence why I suggested 13% is probably the closer number. He is used differently here, already has a season over 11.9% so in the 4 years we are talking about, he has 2 seasons over 11.9% and 2 more seasons within .9 and .6 of that respectively. As I said, his career sh% if you adjust for the overage of this year is probably around 13%. I think that is a fair number for McLeod.

The Sabres went from 2.98goals per game to 3.26gpg and still were no-where close to the playoffs. This team has a major issue on defense and goaltending that need aggressive changes, and that is something Adams is not. He is slow and plodding, he doesn't seize or create opportunities.

If Pegula wants to fire Adams and make Ruff his POHO while finding a legit GM and a legit coaching staff, I am all for it. I think Ruff has limits and it took him months longer than needed to figure out Cozens shouldn't be on the PP and McLeod was playing better. The goaltending seems to struggle under ruffs system in multiple places now, idk if that is on him or bad goalies but I would guess a combination there-of. At minimum, Ruff can't build a system that protects goalies.

I don't think you should toss out 85 shots from his sample which is basically 1/4 of his total shots taken just because it bumps up his avg. He needs to shoot more and I would be willing to hear that his sh% is closer to 13 than 14 but I wouldn't toss the entire sample. Especially when he switched teams so the way he was utilized changed. Edit: also I am nitpicking but his career avg without this year and ignoring his 10 game rookie year is 12.03%, not 11.9. If you are willing to completely toss his 85 shots from Buffalo, you also have to toss his 3hots from his first 10 games.

And the problem is all indications are that Adams is going to run it back again with the same players in the same positions. We might even have the same assistant coaches. Adams lacks imagination and the will to make the hard choices. That is why he has this decision by committee thing, sure he makes the final call but he feels built up to make that. It is like he needs a lot of outside justification and then he can do the obvious thing. I also firmly believe that it helps him offset blame when things don't work, "we all agreed and it just didn't work out" seems to be his mantra. He's not a leader. Lindy and the entire coaching staff should be removed. They aren't good enough. Marty Wilford still having a job is just mind-bogglingly bad and the only excuse is Terry needs that Yacht money and Wilford was under contract.

I added a poll now that we are nearer to the end of the year. Ryan McLeod is a RFA and will be 26 by the start of the 2025 season.

McLeod continues to produce (probably over-produce on goals) so again, what should we pay this guy? Our center spine next year will be Norris, McLeod, and Kulich. Krebs will be around for fill in duties and perhaps Östlund gets a call-up (ik ik, young again but we can't argue over that in every thread all the time). Would we be willing to do 5yrs, 5mil? Is that too high? 4yrs, 4.5mil more in the ballpark? 19g, 29a, 48pts in 71games thus far. He should only have about 12-13g if you use his career sh% and he is on pace to only have 100 shots, so he really needs to shoot more. What would a 15g (avg sh%), 30-35a, 45-50pt center with good defensive metrics be worth to you?

I was wrong. I think some of the xGF can be explained by being on a better team, Cirelli is still the better defensive forward but I think it is fair to at least talk about McLeod in the same sentence with Cirelli. That said, McLeod shot at 22.4% which is 8% higher than his career average. Unless McLeod ups his shots on goal per game, he is going to see a regression in scoring goals next year. Sam Reinhart doesn't run at 22% consistently as a shooter. McLeod: 19g, 29a, 48pts, 51.6fo%, -5.5xGF Cirelli: 26g, 27a, 53pts, 50.7fo%, +19xGF yes, I know this thread is old SDS but I thought it deserved some life after as the season nears the end. I was a little too cold on the trade and should have been more upbeat. Overall this board though was fairly happy with it and thus far it has worked out.

This team lost 13 games because they were young and soft. Their pp remains awful because Appert is an AHL level coach who needs to be fired. Harrington's take, as you note, is willy nilly. You can't just take the good and act like the bad doesn't apply. Wonder if Harrington is covering for the org as a favor, or he's just bad at his job.

This is why Cozens isn't a good hockey player:

You know, I went back and found some Leinonen stuff... I'll admit, he looks better. Curious to see him in NA.

Seems the new team boost has worn off of Cozens. He processes the game so slow.