Thorner

You don’t “use” these vices you partake

Accurate, and it’s not just B/c they “aren’t paying attention” either: there is an element of that, we “see” more, but we are also more biased by nature: all fans feel this way about their prospects We talk about our system strength but there’s no way we are all digging into the nitty gritty upside of every team’s 6th best prospect etc. We’ll tout where there’s more familiarity

A moderator publicly criticizing what a veteran poster painstakingly takes the time to detail day in, day out, adding content to the board. Were you guys posting about Casey when you made this statement? I thought it was supposed to be about the post, not the poster? Obnoxious

It’s always about the take

Even this I find off base and vaguely offensive. Or is it just dismissive? You can hide behind erroneous statements like this if you like, but it doesn’t change the fact it’s not about venting: maybe you just don’t often have people tell you you are flat out wrong about something? There doesn’t have to be some hidden agenda. Some sort of emotion behind it that explains the disagreement: I literally just strenuously, vividly disagree with your ***** and bull stance that, “this is what accountability looks like.” Which is, indeed, what I initially responded to. It’s not just a bad take, it’s a really bad take. It should be called out imo you don’t have to take the L on it, as much as you should, but pretending it’s about something other than me legitimately disagreeing is where I’ll draw the line, myself Ps - thank you so much for graciously “looking past” the emoji I stamped on your post by way of the website features SDS implemented specifically to be used lol. Don’t hate the player, hate the game pps - I’ve given out, checks notes, all of 12 “puke” emojis in…9 years of posting nearly 40 000 times. 12. ( and I’ve received 30) you should be honoured

If anyone thinks the primary reason for buying out Skinner was “accountability” as opposed to cap savings, I have some magical beans you might be interested in. seriously. Stop carrying weight for a rich owner. It’s not sith. Im not saying they don’t want to win. I’m saying they are focusing on doing so at a cheaper cost than necessary, by choice. if you can’t see that…. “well then you are lost.”

Helen Hunt, more likely

There’s no way they could look themselves in the mirror and say the priority wasn’t savings, if they don’t spend the money. The Sabres DO NOT have plausible deniability, here. That’s my point. You want to grant them the “they actually are doing their very best (regardless of what I, dudacek think)” out and I absolutely will not do it. It’s definitely a line in the sand, we do not mostly agree, it’s paramount in my views on this regime. the failure to PRIORITIZE winning. If you can’t see that as always having been central to my arguments, one of our stances has certainly changed can’t believe I even have to formulate arguments to this, at this point. Just read Brawndo’s posts. There’s an internal cap. The priority isn’t winning. It’s winning while spending less How many times does the quiet part have to be said out loud at this point

It’s true, we don’t

I mean, I was legitimately asking if you changed your mind. I appreciate the attempt at clarification, but no, you’ve switched from “exceedingly arrogant” and “malformed” (strong, strong condemnations) to a paragraph in bold above that doesn’t critique the move at all until point 3, after defending it within the first 2, and even under point 3 keeps the door open for KA to address in season full disclosure: I’m really struggling with your motive/bias, here. Look, I always say you are the best poster. I’m not trying to be a d*ck. I think your take here, though, in this one case, is rank. Even a perfectly functioning clock is wrong once a..wait what - - - Fit and talent can be a factor: but it would be, imo, disingenuous to claim the SAVINGS weren’t the PRIMARY factor when the cost went *unspent*, yet the talent unaddressed. They cared less about addressing talent and fit, afterwords: but they certainly didn’t use the money. The priority was keeping the money saved. That’s where the focus went after the move: which proves the priority can they get lucky and it work out? Sure. But it’s a dicey situation because we all know, in our heart of hearts (come on, now) the impetus behind the move was $. The other factors you listed were merely justification. Haven’t you ever heard that old thing about how humans make the choice, first, then come up with the reasons to support their choice, retroactively? we were all right the first time, when the move happened: “it depends what they do with it.” we got our answer. Don’t move the goalposts. Out of respect for this community forum and the conversation we engage in, here, we really shouldn’t.

Honestly? Probably not. I think it’s pretty darn safe to say the move wasn’t born out of accountability if they didn’t even use the space gained. If we are looking at the simplest explanation here, you’d have to be severely drinking the KA kool aid to buy the idea it was done for accountability when they refuse to be accountable themselves. It was done out of accountability, but they just *happened* to not want to spend the money? it’s sort of getting to be a case of how willingly blind we want to be. They cut him because of cost, obviously You said it yourself: the idea it would be addition by subtraction is malformed

So, which is it? They didn’t use the money they saved. And as you already said, it’s not addition by subtraction. You had it right the first time, and switched for some reason. They aren’t better simply without the guy, so the theory the aim was accountability in the name of success gets thrown out the window: the team itself wasn’t accountable in utilizing the space gained Is it arrogant, or in the name of accountability? You are clearly playing both sides here. Did you change your mind in the last 7 days?

“GMs have headed to the cabin, we’ll have to wait for camp to see some moves” season appears to be wrapping up. We are now venturing into “Have to wait until training camp battles shake out before we see some movement” season

If they want to make a real statement, they should simply have Dahlin (or whoever) lead the team out onto the ice game 1 with the C on his shoulder. Right down to business: “watch the results.” What we will get, is a cozy, puff piece Sabres embedded special, we can certainly be sure of that. A vibes-based video on the eve of the season showcasing the big happy family

Ya I mean the bolded is what plenty have been saying, myself included. We really are trying to have our cake and eat it, too, attempting to make the playoffs with a self-inflicted boot on our car in the name of economic efficient effective. It can be done, but Ruff will definitely need to be the X-factor Imo he’s by far the lynch pin of any success we hope to find this year, the one component more key than any other UPL replicating his performance but this time for a full season a close second

"Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.“

Whenever our official social media account attempts to meme out it’s incredibly cringe. Just give @Doohickiethe job

There are guys like Wagner who, had they registered a hit, would have supplanted their original “first mlb hit” with a new one retroactively, as the game gets officially dated as a June game.

We used to do that with Eichel, no? When we had that old pp coach? Think he was on the wild at one point. Doesn’t he run the pp from below the goal line almost? Can’t remember the dude’s name Bob Woods maybe?

“I tried…couldn’t close…but at the end of the day we still *might* have what it takes to make it, if things break our way.” ^ frame it on the wall, as representative

Good Adams microcosm right here Lmao! Only because he had ventured to an advanced timeline already and seen the true result Universe won’t let anyone beat him

Well they played Nashville in the final and we have a Saros Or was it Rinne? We also have a Rinne

This was LA until Pittsburgh did it with speed and pace of play. If they sabres try to copy, the time it’ll take to catch up will leave then hilariously behind the trend anyways. Just build a balanced and talented team

Personally imo it’s far more useful than plus minus, but not to the extent traditional counting stats I DO care about lose value I see them as predictive: but while I might be cautious about the guy with 42 goals and surprisingly poor metrics being able to replicate that total going forward (see: predictive) they do *nothing* to tarnish what IS. Ie, that 42 goals is full value that season regardless of underlyings

Prospects are as subject to recency bias as much as anything, and more so than a lot Once you drive that prospect off the draft lot, it loses half its value - we all know that