Thorner

It’s not they they didn’t play reasonably, it’s that this is their *best* case result generally, right now. I’ll say it again: in an 82 game season, bad teams win games. They have games where they play well. A lot of them in fact. This is just the Monty Hall problem. Game show host opens the one door that tricks you into thinking you are in a better position than you are mathematically You need to make a change just like Monty hall

Goalies don’t count as part of the roster, are you joking? If that was the case, we’d have seen upgrades at the position over the years. It’s not actually possible to do that, they are just randomly assigned at the beginning of every game. What saves they make also isn’t dependant of the shooting quality of your forwards. All shots are assuredly created equal. I mean, if you follow sports

What you are describing is a bad hockey team. Nothing special there, and par for the course. Sabres are just an anomaly cause they do it every year “They were not good.” Right, I forgot we got “rostered” tonight whoops I mean “goalied”

My thoughts on today’s game: With 48 points in 50 games, Sabres will need to play at a 120 point pace over remaining 32 games to get to 95 points and a likely playoff berth They’ll need to play at a 110 point pace or commit an inferior season to record than last season

Nope, just her and her social media gal. Unfortunately I can’t be there this time. Got rejected on account of being too un-fashionable

My amazing wife will be at New York fashion week

I think his bark probably still precedes his bite. There’s a lot of that Concept stuff still out there: as mentioned i think he’s a reasonable player but any GM worth his weight would continually be exploring avenues where we might find value to exploit. I could see someone overpaying. Or paying. If not, keep him

His impacts this year have been a sizeable net negative he’s been OK on D, but the amount of ground he gives up to everyone else in other facets more than offsets the value he’s bringing relative to other players. Think of it like this: maybe when he’s on the ice we give up 3 shots for every 4 that other teams do, but we *take* like 5 less shots than the other teams we are comparing to. So we get outplayed when he’s on the ice whereas not so with the other example

Muel earned his rep because of a small, irrelevant sample size last year that led to people calling him our team mvp. It was being argued last year that we’d sooner remove *any other player* from the lineup than Samuelsson. There absolutely needs to be pushback here after that. He’s a reasonable player that was extremely overhyped. The receipts are there, I just refuse to quote anyone. The blowback is relative putrid decision making process re: his contract. He’s been bad this year, but lots of players have. I still think he provides the type of value I’d like on my team: but not being in a position of, at all, needing to commit long term at the time we did, all we’ve done is take on a bunch of unnecessary risk. It’s not a comment on the player, it’s a comment on the GM

Those calling him soft I suppose represent an exception, but those arguing re: his contract…that clearly has nothing to do with blaming Samuelsson. And if Adams is down right now, yes, I’ll kick the guy while he’s down. He’s a handsomely paid professional general manager. Do better than generally awful

For my part, only way this doesn’t end in disappointment is a 120 point-pace run over the final 33 that ends in a playoff berth. And really, only the second part of that sentence matters. No more “moral victory” trophies left in the Achievements list.

As for the OP question…No not really. Playoffs are nearly impossible and this season’s worth was always measured in playoffs. Expectation wise, but also commitment wise I posted less here during the break tho so I’m excited for SS to be back more. SS is great. I’ll always enjoy being here, don’t have any concern about that aspect

I am sort of candidly terrified to see what my reaction to actually being good again will be. Sometimes there isn’t any going back.

“Could care less.”

It’s also rather telling that you gave my post an eye-roll, and (re: the bold) then proceeded to agree with the root of my argument. Haters be hating

Predicted Skinner’s return to form Predicted Dahlin’s. Defended Dahlin when everyone was down on him during Krueger years. Defended Reinhart and Casey Mittelstadt. Advocated for giving Casey time. Staunchly defended our Captain, Jack Eichel: I’m positive all the time about our guys. You are conflating “not often positive” with “don’t often agree with your take” And, I gotta say, Chewie, that being well familiar with your takes: I’m good with that for now.

Well then they should add one if they can. Have to start somewhere

Just a little bit of sugar today Send out the red x, get the (T)horns

Paid for his present, which might be too much, but is certainly inarguably not an underpay, at the risk of a contract boat anchor because of his injury status. We could have everything we are getting from Samuelsson, but without the risk. Instead, we have a bunch of risk. There was no league wide precedent for signing a guy for that long with only a handful of professional games. No need to commit anytime soon. The likelihood of his injuries presenting a long term availability issue is significantly, inarguably higher than the liklihood he offensively pops off the the tune of ever earning a bigger contract. Awful contract. Needless commitment during the beating heart of the “we wAHnt players who wAHnt to be here111” era. A misfire of shallow, obvious messaging. A masterclass revelatory farce from Kevyn Adams Thanks for playing

@Sabres Fan in NSyou can deal out all the red Xs u like because you have no way to actually refute my argument- but it’s a pretty poor reflection of your unwillingness to admit you are objectively wrong. I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed

At this point calling Samuelsson “muel” is like in cartoons where the fat guy is called “tiny”

^