Thorner

Totally agree

Don’t agree at all with your conclusion, actually. Don’t they say 2 NHL players per draft is pretty decent? For a guy who lasted 3 years total, he seemed to draft at at least a league average rate, and delving in a bit more probably slightly above that. Maybe “keen eye” was a stretch, but I was more referring to those impressive later round picks anyways. I count 8 NHLers over 3 drafts, those are B/C scores at least, and far off a “pretty bad” designation. Admittedly, the Nylander pick looks rough - - - Edit: yup, about 2 per team on average “If you want to take something simple out of this to remember for the future, it’s that an average draft class produces about 60 NHL players(between 51 and 69), and about 40 of them(between 36 and 49) will go on to play a significant career in the NHL (at least 300 games played).“ https://dobberprospects.com/2020/05/16/nhl-draft-pick-probabilities/amp/ At the end of the day, the biggest problem wasn’t poor or even mediocre drafting, it’s that a scorched earth tank requires you to draft at an ungodly rate. You aren’t supposed to look at NHL draft years and routinely see your team snag 3/4 guys, the lists look more less like the ones you posted. Botterill for reference drafted 6 NHLers so far in 3 years.

Once we make the playoffs I dunno if I’ll much feel like arguing about anything*, ever again. As far as I’m concerned that’s rest time after 10 years of this seemingly endless debating cycle. Game day threads or bust. *obviously a lie

Agreed also it’s annoying that whether you type defense or defence you get a red error line on your phone. At least on my phone

“Hi, Sabres fans!“

Missing the playoffs 4 straight years as a GM is inarguably unacceptable. Doesn’t matter the plan, doesn’t matter the context, it’s too high of a number for that to be reasonably plausible for someone apt, and trying to win. A plan that takes 5 years to get in isn’t a good plan, regardless of starting point. Almost everyone to a man has said playoffs are the baseline expectation in 23-24. If the narrative starts changing to “another building year” or whatever, I’m just going to show myself out lol. And that’s not me saying he should be fired if we miss. No. Merely the season be declared an abject failure with a hot seat resulting for next season

Have always said: Murray had a keen eye for talent. Team building, not so much

I really know sh*t all about the cap and if it was the right price. I’ll defer to you on that. I’m more interested in the philosophy

He’ll have to live and die by the results. If it works, it was reasonable. If it doesn’t, he made a big mistake. No wiggle room. He’s beholden to the results, now

The most charitable reading is that Adams is thinking the group gets in the playoffs through internal improvement. That’s fine. It’s reasonable. Could easily be accurate. But it does have to actually happen, then. No “hindsight is 20/20 arguments” need apply should they fall short

I have to be careful which of the Kevyn Adams being Kevyn Adams moves I get into it about. It’s Kevyn Adams’ world we are just living in it, I am aware. I take it back. It’s a great signing. No improvement needed. (I don’t care about Gus ending his drought as much as I care about me and MY drought ending, but I’ll continue rooting for the guy) (I’m also prepared to say “great idea, no improvement needed” when it comes to goaltending.)

This board sorely, sorely misses the “meh” emoji reaction. Miss it around here so much. This signing and this player is THE perfect spot for it. He’s certainly reasonable on the 4th line, and he’s also one of the sports most reasonably upgraded.. meh What do you mean “ok for one year”? Actually asking. The bare minimum expectation this year for Kevyn Adams’ squad remains playoffs, right? Just checking

Oh, ok. Seems decent. Pretty much just thinking this

8.75 feels a smidge high tbh but a couple of our other contracts make it an easier pill to swallow

Still agree. If it’s not a positive experience for you, one shouldn’t engage. I’m happy to discuss Jack’s Cup victory for those who want and enjoy the discussion, but then again for me the experience was notably different than for most

Why? Because the system is completely loaded. Even our future-loving, analytical prospects gurus don’t have time to hype up all these dudes. Time for a trade!

Ya I mean he only played 19 regular season games there, total (25 including playoffs). Not even a chance to adjust. And much too small a sample size to draw any sort of convincing statistical argument imo. That’s jumping right in to an existing system, MID season, too: Hellebuyck would have an off-season and then preseason of practice. I also haven’t seen numbers that suggest Hellebuyck is worse than average at those types of shots, just worst than some other elite goaltenders. I see a goalie that, overall, all situations considered, is statistically elite, year in and year out, that might be simply “very good” if we *didn’t* improve our defensive structure. Considering the rumours the Sabres were asking about Hellebuyck, if we can assume those can be believed, I’d imagine Adams wouldn’t be showing interest unless he thought Hellebuyck was a fit: he has all the data we have and then some In addition, Hellebuyck has played under numerous systems with multiple coaches over the course of his career and he’s been very good to great year in, year out If the argument is Saros or Hellebuyck, sure, I get it. But there isn’t a universe in which Hellebuyck isn’t a significant upgrade over what we currently have, so unless there’s some other better option, the idea that a Hellebuyck might not improve upon Comrie and UPL in *every* area by a vast degree, and merely most, doesn’t deter me from being in favour of the addition Im not signing him to a big extension as part of the deal, before ever seeing how he fits in. I’m merely very interested in the idea of adding what will likely be a great goalie for us, next season, for the risk of merely a 1st round pick. To me that’s worth it, but others have made clear they consider it a “rental” and don’t like it at that cost

Maybe that’s why, what? If you believe the reports of Anderson being in negotiations are true, I don’t see how that meshes with the idea his sister signed with the beauts because he’s about to be a Sabre. If that was her key factor, seems an awfully risky bet to lock that in if Andersen still very well may sign with Carolina. These factors point to it being a coincidence, if you believe the reporting re: Anderson’s contract discussions

Why ignore the context? Do you not believe the context makes it plausible his reaction was that of someone who was triggered by 2 hours of grown adult men mercilessly booing him? Because that’s what it was, a reaction. It wasn’t unprompted. Clearly he was “gotten to”. To me it’s wildly understandable that he didn’t take the high road. The fans certainly didn’t. The fans got the exact reaction from Jack they wanted, really, that’s the funny thing. You boo mercilessly to hopefully get a reaction. With the Cup win, with the distance and time... Jack always spoke highly of the city and community I’d imagine he’d focus on his feelings in those areas if asked in a normal environment

A women’s team? Who, Carolina? As far as I can see no, there’s only 7 teams in that league

For the record If being close to family is the deciding factor I can’t see his sister making the Beauts decision on that principle jiving with the news that Andersen is in negotiations with Carolina One would think there’d be a reasonable level of certainty if she made her decision based on that idea

The most recent one was significantly better than the one before it. It was still over the top, but it was more in line with the ridiculousness of the first 8. 9 was weird. It was like they were specifically attempting to jump the shark. 10 was actually tongue in cheek and more self aware

I guess the idea is paying a player their worth, now, while they deserve it, if you can accurately calculate it, rather than making them indisputably proving what they are worth, and then paying said player based on that performance that, at that point become past performance, where the performance in the now term might not be reflective of the $$ value they earned with *previous* play. Calculated risk for GMs I guess. Pay for performance not past performance. Way more likely to get an albatross deal when Age becomes a negative factor

Dom Toretto close, I hear