Thorny

You expect more action league wide compared to normal in the fall?

Also, I make an effort to be a person online, be honest, not hide behind a faceless avatar, so I take your point on stuff like that. Here’s my Twitter account What do you think about Dowd

I never said stop doubling down, did I? I just pointed out that you took a super high degree of difficulty argument by taking the position Mitts had done “jack squat” If you take the L there and shift to “didn’t do enough”, you’d have a better fighting chance ill tko your argument rather that leave it staring at the ceiling Being unable to shift your stance is message board poison

Absurd take imo It’s not cynicism in this case, not close. It’s merely an objective reading of the actual results. What you are doing - sometimes people need to have a black light taken to this bs- is spin. It’s intelligent spin, but my gosh is it ever spin. Your argument doesn’t make sense because by the logic of the argument you could wilfully ice the youngest team in the league every year, by choice, and never have any expectations. Dunno about you but by and large I don’t think people are dim enough to fall for it, nor would the perception of the team be positive *Being a young team isn’t an excuse*. Going into year 4 and 5 of a rebuild with the youngest team in hockey is a tactical error. You don’t get to cut off your nose to spite your face and claim “patience!” The line is the line *regardless of strategy*. Young team, old team, combination of both, big, small, fast, slow: the history books are filled with centuries of data illustrating that no plan needs to take close to this long. I don’t think you understand the key point: being up and coming team after 5 years of “building” isn’t good. That’s an extremely, extremely poor league relative outcome and demonstrates inarguably poor aptitude: the exact opposite of the management team you’d want running the show even if we did eventually get in the playoffs in year 9 I apologize for the bare language but your argument is very bogus. This is primarily because it fails by the principles of its own detail: it doesn’t haven an internal logical consistency. How could you possibly claim a 90 point finish is proof of being up and coming when it would *literally* have us in the exact same spot as 2 years ago? We’ll have gone nowhere in those 2 years, proving that 90 with a young team isn’t proof of anything at all. Hockey watchers can see and understand this. Your point IS a hot take because it’s wrong - the perception of the sabres won’t be positive. This is the tact the rest of the non-prospect washed hockey world take, “oh really? Wake me up when you are in the playoffs.” No one cares about a team missing 5 straight years being framed as “up and coming”. They’ve all heard it before. WE need to wake up, put our big boy pants on, and measure results the way the rest of the league does

And there won’t be a ton in the fall Good pull, does feel like MOJO so far we shall see

Vast amount of insider rumours are engagement driven - - - You may be right. It’s just funny it does sort of feel like the setup to the “well, we tried!” punchline at this point. At least that’s my perception but maybe we haven’t seen smoke like this before. I’m excited to be excited: if the moves happen I’ll be gung-ho As for “knowing soon”, I agree. I know we can’t rule out other moves but let’s be REALISTIC if we pass the draft and FA without much substance and we’re in “GMs are hEaDed to tHeiR cAbInS” territory…given past (league wide, trade action) precedent we’d need to start thinking about lowering the bar

It would be asinine to write off his ability to return to that level, and it would also be a mistake to lower the height very much of what’s still an even higher ceiling. No, I don’t think his ceiling is Duncan Keith, first ballot hall of famer, who hockey news named the 26th best defenceman ever, (heck I’d settle for the 26th defenceman today, a bonafide 1st pair D), but he definitely has a skill set that screams all star potential, if things really clicked. there’s so much more that goes into it though, as we all know. He could just be this It’s not a BAD gamble, it’s just assuredly a gamble

He should. Probably shouldn’t have left yourself in a spot where one tough playoff cut off line means 5 straight years missing the playoffs AND the cutoff this year was low? zero sympathy. 5 years.

My immediate reaction when he mentioned Ek was to get excited I just don’t think it’s worth getting hopes up after I thought about it a bit more, seeing that lack of smoke. But ya sometimes these things happen out of nowhere, true

“Over the long run” seems a conflict of interest, too

This needs to happen lmao the Eichlerrrr

It’s the strongest line in the sand I’ve ever drawn with this team, for my sanity. And I mention it from time to time so I won’t be tempted to back down from it: if we miss the playoffs and Adams is back, I will not be. silver lining to missing for some, I’m sure

I think it’s about him making moves that make the team good it’s literally about making the playoffs. Full stop. To your point, division success will help facilitate that but it means nothing without conversion

lol the consensus in the hockey world would be that the sabres are eternally bad not that things are headed in the right direction. Aside from unserious prospect outlets who aren’t in the business of doing anything but selling their bottom line, literally no one takes the narrative we are “up and coming” but Sabres fans and media. It’s a significantly greater divide than you realize. The rest of the league lives in the real world where success is measured by results not future watch headlines Saying a guy who may go 5 straight years without making the playoffs “isn’t close” to being on the hot seat is an exceptionally sad state of affairs

Honestly I doubt he’s outright lying

The obsession with calling these kids “leaders” before they’ve even joined the ranks of adulthood in seriousness is beyond me. It’s what they say about prospects when they need an intangible to round out their scouting profile. Brendan Lemieux Esque

I would calm our jets on this tbh. The Ek rumour is basically non-existent aside from Tom’s comment. I don’t see any smoke there like even in rumour circles

The current issue being it’s indeed a concept, not only until the forwards are addressed, but disappointingly also maybe because of what we’ve seen from Byram re: his ability to contribute said skill He’s one of the reasons currently the puck gets stuck in OUR end

Why? It’s the internet

I was thinking the bold is possible, too

Oh i thought you meant other young players would step in in much the same fashion they did, not literally them. Benson was already here. Quinn, sure: but I still maintain we need both, given where we finished, so if Skinner isn’t here he needs replacing

Ya I’ve heard the Hogan argument before but no true golf historian agrees with it so I sort of defer. All 4 majors in a row is literally unheard of Tiger won the US open by *15* strokes that stretch lol. And the competition wasn’t half part timers like the 1940s. Hogan was great but he’s not on Tiger’s level

There have been 233 men to win majors, only 88 are multiple winners. First time winners are more common. A stronger depth of field outweighs a top heavy grouping. Ultimately it depends how you wanna look at it Jack can say “18-15” Tiger, I don’t think many disagree 2000 Tiger was a level for a golfer unmatched, overall career aside If you are taking anyone at their best to win one tournament, it’s gotta be tiger it’s tough to argue Jack didn’t have the best majors career of all time. He has the number. Tiger does have the most victories overall so GOAT comes down to particular opinion - - - On another note, that 15th win was pretty big for Tiger’s legacy. I know 18 was the goal, but without that “return to glory” comeback win, his career arc may have lacked resolution narratively

Was going to mention that, good point. He changed the game - that’s always a huge factor for me can’t go wrong with either

The field wins almost every week man