Thorny

I mean, everyone should be “concerned”. It’s not like the default is that we are good until proven otherwise, it’s really the opposite. If we are thinking playoffs are even a 50/50 consideration, any loss is “concerning”. What we don’t possess is knowledge that the team will in fact be bad this year. There’s concern for what we will be, as it’s so up in the air, but when you’ve only played one game it’s definitely still exactly that: up in the air. Far too much emphasis is being placed on one game, on that I agree and spoke to earlier. It may be true the team will take time to learn Ruff’s system or whatever, but it’s a self imposed staffing decision, and unfortunately for us doesn’t mitigate the necessary results in any way. These standings points aren’t less important because we are gelling or something, and obviously no excuse has been provided The online world will dollars to donuts swing entirely the other way if we win tomorrow. “We back” will be the refrain. Everyone knows the script. Send me a pm if so inclined. You have my twitter, too.

Well, it has officially started, but I take your meaning

He’s stood out the most today of the 3 easily

Wasn’t gonna post during game but here’s 1: It’s one game not meant to belittle any reaction. They are justified and deserved. The team may suck this year and have for far too long but you can’t glean much from 1 game. You just can’t. We walloped NJ in game two with Marcus Johansson as our 2C and everything seemed great, a few seasons ago It’s too soon to say on THIS year

You won’t know if there’s a goal at all never mind who scored it

BENSON! there, I beat Brawndo

Just straight up on sportsnet in Canada lol

This is incredible.

So it’s not about IF the Sabres make it, it’s a question of by how much

Go team! Hopefully they get off to a quick start, I feel it’s probably a reasonably big deal for this squad. Let’s have a good season! I’ll check back in with you folks in a few games. Keep fit and have fun

Put aside the Ranger. Become who you were born to be.

It’s not. That would be what we call a coincidence. We missed the playoffs by 1 point, 2 seasons ago. It wasn’t an insurmountable point as long as one Jeffrey Skinner remained on the roster. That would defy logic.

Reality is often disappointing

Don’t think about it..just go: 3-2-1…and say the guy who you’d trade first. Then do it again. Then you’ll know. its sort of like the coin flip trick

Apologies, “rank” would work better Ranked bottom 10 league wide in spending. So, our relative range

Can’t remember the other, the Caps?

I don’t really like the “after they traded Skinner” thing. “Trading Skinner” isn’t the magic formula for spending less and winning: 2 occurrences are what we’d call a coincidence. There are plenty of years where Skinner would be a capable player on a playoff team, see: every year. He’s not worse than the worst guy on every playoff team nor is he some sort of horrendous cancer than stops a team from winning. We did that with Jack. It’s just a silly thing to harp on. Yea, maybe we are configured overall similar in some ways to Carolina. That would be worth thinking about. But Carolina is the exception that proves the rule, and the majority of teams that are structured like them DIDN’T make the jump I’m not saying we won’t. But attaching that to Skinner is twitter-Esque, no offence, low hanging fruit

Playoff baseball Ayup

Pretty much agree. The issue will also sort itself out very quickly. Unless we have a really bad problem, or a really good problem

I feel like the numbers make it look a bit worse than it actually is, somehow, but nonetheless it’ll be a daunting task. all the sweeter if we pull it off

At this point the only thing in thread i have an issue with is the counting of UPL as turnover. I think we’ll benefit from a lack of 3 headed monster should we choose to not apply one, and therefore there’s potential ground for improvement there (relative to our start last year) - but it seems to be counted for the sake of the hypothetical as a full season change based on the percentages used and that seems inaccurate to me. Not as inaccurate as my embarrassing reading comprehension, but nonetheless inaccurate

lol no, it was my mistake. You said “with” clear as day My entire post was responding based on that misreading send in the tar and feather (singular)

Really? I’m saying your use of “track record of excellence” is poorly, wantonly applied, and to the wrong players Though I realize now you said “with” excellence which does alter it. lol - admittedly, my mistake. Still, I disagree thoroughly with the subtext, the suggestion of your post, regardless of where you come down on it: no, I don’t think we benefit due to the “track record with excellence” of the players we brought in relative to the ones we sent out: it would be an incredibly small factor, if a factor at all, relative to the talent comp

I always love the “oh you folks will never be satisfied, not until “fill in the blank” happens” as if the goal posts are being moved on this end lol. The disgruntled side has called their shot a zillion times over: *make the playoffs.*. The entirety of the goal post moving is on the other side. There’s no stated expectation of when success is to be expected. It’s just, “wait.” It’s like how in football they eye ball where the ball finishes, and then measure with a literal chain. It’s a pretty hilarious juxtaposition edit: also, great new name. I’ll subscribe to your newsletter