Thorner

EHLERS!

Do you base where you find employment according to where your sister does? It’s probably just a coincidence

I’d be ok with that

For my part I just care more about maxing our cap value over the next 5-7 seasons (3-7, specifically, when it’ll get way tighter) than I do about years 15-20 of our 30 year impending dynasty im not that fussed about protecting that year 12 of Power you mentioned until I see what we amount to in the...decade proceeding it. We seem to be protecting something we haven’t even built yet, protecting an idea

I agree, it should absolutely be an established vet with Levi, one who is accustomed to a large workload

Those adjustments are necessary regardless though. The data just says that Hellebuyck struggles with the most difficult shots. Dunno why folks would be surprised by this. All goalies struggle more the more difficult the shot. If the exceptions to that rule are only the truly elite, like Shesterkin, ie their sv% goes down on these chances but not as relatively so, it’s not a mark against acquiring Hellebuyck, unless those guys are available. Hellebuyck’s relative “weakness” in that area is still stronger than the field, the goalies we’ve been rostering of late.

You may not need a great goalie, but you certainly need great goaltending. The logical fallacy is saying that just because goaltending can be unpredictable, that there aren’t some goalies more likely than others to provide that great performance. You can’t just throw your hands up at the position and pretend any old UPL might randomly go on a Hill like run, and call it a day. Not only is Hill the exception to the rule, he was still significantly more established than the Comrie’s of the world, coming into the season

How would you compare the goalie situation , year over year?

Depends if KA gets *his* price

I just don’t see a Myers like trajectory for a first OA pick but you are correct of course that there’s some risk

I feel like a bridge is by far the worst outcome. Maybe because I don’t doubt Power at all, but what’s the big point in raking up savings the next 2 seasons, if it’s not about doubting his likely development curve? Would we even *use* that cap space? Weren’t we way under it this year? We won’t maximize it just because it’s there. Id take 6, 7, 8 year deals before kicking the can down the road. Also can’t minimize the benefit the cost certainty would provide, as Adams plans the structure of the much more difficult to manage, convoluted seasons on the way. A bridge just leaves KA unsure what his cap looks like in 3 years and perhaps less able to make moves

That’s exactly what I think it would cost. And the Sabres should do it. 64 mil over the next 8, as opposed to bridge and then LT which using Chewy’s numbers would come in at 68 over the next 8 years, plus the savings of that course would come in the next 2 years, when we need it the least (8 mil savings, 4 mil per) as opposed to saving 2 mil per and 12 million over the final 6 years where we’ll need it way more It’s cheaper overall, the savings are at a way more opportune time, I care much less about the 2 years of extra control, 7 and 8 years from now, when the next 6 years is window-city. It’s barely a risk. How much would Power come in below 8 mil, in 2 years, even if he doesn’t develop as planned?

6 years 7 million would be better than 2 years 4 million, followed by 8x10. We need to stop prioritizing a time frame *7 years away* over the nearer, 5 year term. Window is now. We’d be spending an extra 3 million per year over the next 2 years, then saving 3 million per over the crucial next following 4 years. A savings of 6 million over the next 6 seasons, and 12 million over the last 4, relative to the bridge and then 8 year 10 million dollar deal course of action. That deal prioritizes the savings over the time period 7 years from now. Is this just a reluctance to declare the window open? I care about the next 6 years way more. That’s a lifetime in the NHL.

Agree. There’ll be a number that gets it settled, below what the number’ll be should we wait and sign him later, as I kinda expect him to off for Dahlin-esque value, probably slightly less. You’ll have to pay, though, as you need to make it worthwhile to Power to forgo a purely “bet on yourself” approach. I highly doubt he’d be hard-line on that, ie “pay me 10 now, or I’ll wait”, ie they can probably find LT number below that, but we’d have to pay a reasonably significant premium on top of what a bridge would cost, under the idea that it’s worth it because Power is going to earn an even larger deal going forward. That’s the risk, paying more now than we strictly could get away with, but if you believe in Owen it’s totally worth it. Imagine if we had Dahlin on a Thompson like contract. Dahlin’s will be a good and fair deal, but it’ll be full value rather than the bargain it could have been

me when everyone else takes the last ship outa this place also I’ll be fielding offers for the honor of hosting me in the spare room when I come to visit Buffalo

What’s the old saying? It’s much easier to be a gracious winner. Jack won, he achieved the ultimate goal. Considering I don’t actually think he ever had a problem with Adams specifically, and combined with the added maturity age grants, I’m much more inclined to think Jack would draw from his positive Sabres experiences, now, if asked for a recommendation. Maybe that’s just me. Bitterness tends to evaporate, especially with success Unless he really, really has it in for the owners, I guess

They won’t and it wouldn’t

It’s possible. Would be difficult, imo Jack was probably the rightful Smythe winner. Not sure Tuch’s 200ft/defensive impacts are as strong, particularly as a winger. I’d guess he could be right up there in points with him on a Sabres team that went to the final, considering the excellent offensive season we just saw from him and our scoring in general. My guess is Tuch would, too, in fact be a guy who elevates come playoffs time, which would be great news for us. Mostly, I just hope we get to see what the answer is, and I’m praying we get a crack at it next season Perhaps. Or, maybe it’ll hurt our prospect pool, a little bit, to win. I think that would be the more relevant takeaway as far as what fans should prepare for, as of today

Dude, that’s an undisputed W, glad to hear it - - - Agree on the toughness required in the playoffs. Vegas had one of the more salient slogans I’ve heard: “It hurts to win.” Ie, to get what you want, expect a painful sacrifice

That’s just a Winnipeg price. Big Macs here are $34

As for wondering whether we can get past round 1, I’ve said this before: I literally don’t even get that far in my daydreaming. Hubris. Every quote we hear from the team about how it’s not about making the playoffs, it’s about the Cup, reeks of utter hubris to me. I’m sorry, that’s just me. I literally only daydream about the day we make the playoffs. That’s all I care about. A 12 year drought has *definitively* proven that be a worthy concern, a ridiculously happy result in and of itself. Just make th f*cking playoffs. You won’t hear me bitching if we get swept: bookmark this

Oh it’s absolutely a massive, Grand Canyon sized missed opportunity. The sort of player Jack proved himself to be, in the playoffs specifically, sort of locks that in definitively. But it’s a situation that became untenable over several years: I believe it probably got to a point, at the end, where there was no opportunity to be salvaged. Ie, KA took the best course of action for the Sabres based on the time and situation given to him (Gandalf paraphrase, auto +1)

Michkov definitely feels like he’ll be our guy - rumours he’s a big risk making falling to 13 very possible - our willingness, even desire to select Russian players - insanely talented - 4 years away from the NHL. Hey that’s a further 4 years we get to clear the runway of any Blocks. Being one of the only teams where timeline is seemingly not an issue gives us an advantage where Michkov is concerned

Adams’ reasons for not allowing the surgery make sense, but the idea they literally had no choice isn’t true. At all. Allowing the surgery was always an option. The trade request from a year previous, that Jack rescinded, was re-awoken over the injury dispute. Maybe Jack changes his mind if he gets his preferred surgery. Maybe he plays in a few games after said surgery to re-establish value, which Jack never ruled out. He specifically mentioned he knew he might need to do that to aid a deal. We also don’t know who would, or wouldn’t have traded for Jack if he got the (a) surgery before the move. KA didn’t allow the surgery, as others have said correctly, because he wanted to protect the asset value. Everyone knows this. But he didn’t have to operate in this manner. He could have allowed Jack the surgery he wanted. He didn’t, Vegas did. This is what I was referencing the other day: the perception will remain out there, at large, that the Sabres were “wrong” because Jack ended up really benefiting from a surgery his former team wouldn’t allow. These people aren’t going to drill in to KA’s Sabres-based reasoning, for the most part. Not that “he wanted to protect the value of his asset” will fly with the average person, anyways. I don’t believe how Adams approached the situation would have a negative perception around the league, though. As mentioned, his mode of operation does make sense and I understand why he operated in the fashion he did. Was speaking merely to the perception among consumers: anyone can peruse any hockey thread anywhere online and see the sentiment exists in a large way that Jack was right about the injury dispute and the Sabres wrong. In realty, Jack was right, but the Sabres in how they operated, were, too. KA got more less the exact trade value he wanted in the deal, his strategy worked. That Adams could have operated in a different manner, but instead stuck to his guns to the tune of successfully implementing his trade strategy, make the deal all the more impressive from his perspective. No need to minimize the role choice had in the matter, which is always paramount