Thorner

Could also see him putting it all together during a playoff run one of these years. (Not a talent comparison) like the way Peter the Great would have an injury riddled season, sit out most of it, but manage to keep himself glued together for a 20ish game stretch in the playoffs I mean, if a team he’s on ever makes the playoffs, I guess

But not ever here. Speaking of great music, Gord Downie: we miss you. - - - As for the OP, I’m more of an -the insult Comic Dog fan. I’ll show myself out of the thread

Where’s @Curtat? Haven’t seen him post in a bit

I don’t think the evaluation from the Sabres perspective takes one iota of a hit the better he plays. Eichel-in-Buffalo and Eichel-in-Vegas both posses their own unique variable(s) and Eichel having success in Vegas does not mean said success could have been had here. My stance here remains that Eichel *could* have worked out in Buffalo, had things been handled better, in many facets, from the start. But I believe it to be the case that the situation reached a point of no return where it could not be salvaged in all likelihood. Tage Thompson becoming great hasn’t changed the evaluation of the Blues trade, from the Blues’ perspective. The universe where Thompson remains a Blue is murky, vague and unreadable. The trade already worked for them: trades and signings and draft picks are a means to an end, they achieved the end. No Blues fan would consider taking back the deal. The Cup isn’t awarded for GM efficiency, by the quarterback-rating GM equivalent: it gets awarded for what actually happens. The Sabres traded Jack Eichel and got better, pretty quickly. Those are the results. I’d have to have ridiculous hubris to claim to foresee *better* results supposing a different course of action from the GM. Just like one would have to have ridiculous hubris to question the blues deal as a blues fan by saying something like, “we should have kept Tage, we might have TWO cups!”. This isn’t the way the world works, we don’t live in a vacuum starting point with carefully controlled variables. This is why I never bought into the “we need to see Eichel fail to make the trade even better!” Hard pass. We already won. Go fix yourself Jack, I’m rooting for you

Win tonight, with a Pens loss Sabres are officially in a playoff spot

Lineup looks a fair bit different with even a singular significant F injury, which we’ve been abnormally lucky to avoid. A strong argument for why Adams is still “open to improvement”. If the price is right, we could always use more good players. - - - “No tv and no game makes Thorny go something something”

I wasn’t supposing you wish ill will. I was supposing you’d prefer he didn’t establish as a no-bs elite player moving forward. Given the choice, would you rather he become a top 5 player in the game, or not?

Even *movie theatres* (sadly imo) are going the way of the above, nowadays. Less seats, less screens, more communal areas with games and bars. They just opened up what I think is the second largest movie theatre in Canada here called the Cineplex Junxion, and ya. Everything is shifting from “designed and tailored to a singular, focused experience” to multi-purpose entertainment centres

I am evaluating his career as a whole: I’m just sticking with my analysis of the first 5 seasons within. When the trajectory is satisfying for what still amounts to the majority of his career, I refer to the most recent stretch as disappointing, yet not the sum. It’s an inherently logical stance, the only thing that can be asked for any argument: if he fails to get back in gear, and the “disappointing” seasons outnumber the good, and he fails to establish as an elite or even VERY GOOD player, ill simply shift my stance at that time. I think I’ve proven that I’m hardly staunch to a point out of vain bias. I’m sitting here typing out that the last 3 have been disappointing 🤷‍♀️ You can correct me if I’m mistaken, but I think it’s fair to say we’ve now ventured far into the thickets of semantics at this point - how we are framing the first 8 years the differentiating factor, due to our own personal leanings, while our actual analysis of each individual season seems pretty close. No? Our stances have been converted to the same language - I know this because if Eichel continues to amount to more less this, in a few years my stance will have aligned with yours. And if Eichel turns it around, presumably you’d shift yours. I don’t agree he’ll be done at 34 going on 35. I think he’ll still he playing and playing well. Perhaps because we disagree on our varying desires to see this happen, we’ve reached a reasonable impasse. We’ll have to wait and see

It’s regulation wins first then regulation OT Even “Wins” outright comes before head to head.

Honestly, I can’t see us staying in the race much longer. I’m sorry. It seems inevitable- we’ll soon be so solidly in a playoff spot that using the term “race” would feel wildly misplaced. They are all well shaven and clean cut though

I’M GIVING IT ALL SHE’S GOT, CAPTAIN! The ship can’t hold any more good prospects!

4 assists in 5 games? #notgenerational 😸

The thing about Crosby is he’s such a worker. Speaking of motivation. No one more driven. He’s the greatest grinder of all time. We can haggle on talent all day but the career Crosby is putting together, it’s top 10. Generational, whatever: he’s just Great. To me you measure greatness by career output, that’s why Brady is the GOAT but he’s like, the furthest thing from a generational talent. You raise a good point with McDavid. To me, he’s clearly a generational talent. No one has ever played the game at the level he has, as good as he has (not saying relatively, I’m not saying he’s the greatest ever) but athletes these days are better, they just are. Quicker, faster, stronger, better trained. Every sport. Jim Brown today would be an average running back. You’d have to time travel Gretzky forward and have him be born today with today’s advancements in health and training for him to compete on the ice surface with McDavid, but if you time travelled McDavid backwards, as is, he would quite literally destroy everyone out there. Again, this isn’t greatness, just talent. McDavid is more “purely talented” than Crosby, but Crosby has had the better career. In a list of top 100 players ever, Crosby still finishes ahead right now and it’s not close to changing for me. Tough pill to swallow being such a team game but championships are a prerequisite for greatness in perception, always have been.

I hear Matty Moulson is available if the price is right, as well

Putting “argue” in quotations shows you are my kind of people

Again, I’m not haggling with you over him failing to live up to even elite, of late, in fact I made that point in another post: that he’s not generational because he’s not generational, but if he doesn’t solidify as “elite”, that’s on him: he has the talent for that. As I explained to dudacek, my position isn’t swayed/your argument isn’t made stronger, relative to the point I’m making, by saying “8 years” when I didn’t reasonable expect elite within the first 4. You could just as soon say “Jack Eichel hasn’t stabilized as elite within his first 26 years on earth”. Adding years to the total to make it look more impressive isn’t relevant to me, cannot stress this enough: if that’s your preferred method of framing, go for it. But it stuck out like a sore thumb within the presence of dudacek’s usually excellently formed arguments and I’m saying the same to you. Under the prism of not expecting generational (you can grant me this stance, yes?) but rather elite, Jack’s development curve over his first 4 years, linear upward trajectory, culminating in a 5th year, staring at age 22 (you know, the age Dahlin is) where he *did* amount to elite is exactly what I wanted to see. I cannot stress enough that what’s interesting to me is the most recent stretch where he very clearly needs to find a way to get things back on track. - - - If he never does, and just remains a “good” player in need of the right fit, of course I’d reframe my stance on his overall career over time: it would become a disappointment relative to what I think he could have been. This isn’t the terminology I’d use thus far. When the majority of his career thus far has been on a satisfying trajectory and then reached what appears to be a significant rocky stretch/chance of plateau, my view incorporates exactly that: he has had a disappointing stretch since exactly the onset of covid. Whether he can salvage his “elite” career needs to be seen. The burden of proof is squarely on him, but I’m not casting judgement on his career so far, labelling it “disappointing”, I’m just not close to there. He’s 26.

Because our roster is so successful but also so young ie won’t need immediate replacement, order of priority: 1 on ice talent 2 cap space 3 prospects 4 draft picks This is all so exciting. Our set up is very good right now. The way you wanna be.

I’d wayyy rather keep the cap space asset to pay the guys we’ll need to pay and use draft pick capital. Cap space dries up quicker. you get a new set of 7 picks every year for free. Edit - if it’s just a one year thing I think I’m with you actually considering it’s going to expire at the end of the season anyways.

“He isn’t going to bring in anyone from the outside unless we really don’t have a candidate.” But he did inquire on Meier, did he not? There’s a distinction between “won’t bring in Meier if it’s gonna to cost one of the players he refuses to move on from” and what you said which is a more absolute statement. That he “won’t if we have someone.” The implication being, given the rest of what you wrote, that he specifically wants it to be an in-house player. On principle. I feel like the fact he’s at least open to the idea of plugging in Meier states otherwise.

Derp. But still good news. Of course any deal needs to fit within Adams’ set parameters but there’s no one being ruled out simply “because”, no desire to specifically only go with in-house development to the tune of ruling out bigger name outside additions as an absolute/by principle, as some have suggested he might. I’m sure there are plenty of GMs who didn’t inquire at all. Open to improvement, not just fixing holes, as his statement says.

Maybe his message or style just wears thin over time, I have no idea. Hope for his sake he bounces back

You don’t have to live up the tag of “generational” to live up to reasonable expectations. It’s a ridiculous burden to put on someone. This is my case in point: Rasmus Dahlin. Dude is the best defenseman in the NHL. Dahlin has lived up to expectations where Eichel could not, thus far. Dahlin was touted as a generational defenseman. Is he generational? The answer? It’s not relevant.

Is it 2019? No one is having the “Jack was supposed to be generational, is he?” conversation anymore. It’s over. He wasn’t generational. Not arguing with you. At some point you need to let that go though. If the topic is “did he live up to being generational”, like I said: it’s 2023. No one is interested in that argument, literally no one. It’s not even an effort thing - which might prevent him from being an elite player. As of right now, it is preventing him. It’s a talent thing - he doesn’t have generational talent. This became clear early. McDavid is a generational talent. If we are framing this by way of “personal disappointment” instead, as dudacek suggested, anyone realizing and accepting early on that the analysts were mis-touting him, and realize that using them being wrong against the player makes no sense, will have an easier job filtering that aspect out from their “disappointment” or lack thereof. Ive already expressed how I adjudge his seasons based on the expectations I actually had. Ymmv. He lived up to my expectations first 5, and the trend has been disappointing the last 3. Thats my analysis.