Thorny

Byram is still popping off the page, here

Everyone’s mileage will vary on this but for the life of me I’ll never be able to understand how things like this can be uttered, and then in a matter of moments you can cross reference it with posts about how “trades are impossible” for Buffalo, and “everyone has a NMC” and “no one wants to come here” and be witness to the struggles we’ve seen with Adams trying to swings deals and then just be like “figure it out later.” huh? BPA is a *guideline*. It’s not an unadjustable, immovable creed. The fact it’s treated as such is such an extreme, outlier opinion. It has a logical end. Let’s say, just hypothetically, we take Schaefer this year. And let’s say, not unreasonably, we finish with a top 5 pick next year, and, also reasonably, “BPA” in that spot is a LHD. You go LHD again? At a certain point you are willingly watering down the value of your assets by not only contributing to a surplus at the expense of a dearth elsewhere (remember, the goal is *team building*, now, not asset accumulation), there is literally zero guarantee it can be rectified on the trade front. You are *so certain* of the gap when projecting out 18 year olds that systemic need *cant* be a consideration? “Best” *can’t* factor in position played, because you’ve, without a doubt, dialed in on the *objective* future talent gap? nonsense. There are fine arguments for BPA, but “you just always go BPA” isn’t a good one. Tasking a general manager with likely needing to make a trade, or a severely INCREASED liklihood they’ll have to make a trade, needs to be at least a consideration. It can’t just be tossed aside to the tune of “worry about that later”, because BPA is just The Way the Truth and the Life The modus operandi of this franchise is kicking the can down the road. The sooner that ends the sooner we can return to relevance

I wouldn’t necessarily make any of those assumptions, but: Moving Peterka just creates another hole. I still could easily see Greenway on L4, or you can easily bump Kulich down. Or, sure, you can trade him, too. Or you can just play him as an injury fill in because someone is *going* to be hurt. There’s always an erroneous element of rigidity when we do these things because we need more than 12 guys for 12 spots. There will be room for a good player. We NEED to make room for a good player

Ya we are definitely just all shifting around the same 8 guys Thompson Norris McLeod Peterka Benson Tuch Kulich Zucker …whoever the 9th man is it isn’t someone people have confidence in, and the top 8 doesn’t look good enough as a top 8, anyways. Screams one big outside F addition And Kulich is already a question mark / bet placed there, to boot.

Ya the difference there is just switching out Krebs for Greenway, wouldn’t have issue with that

We need to add in the top 6 somewhere. If Thompson is going to be at wing then it should be at C. Failing that, LW, I guess. We can take a couple chances but you can’t be taking chances everywhere. If Thompson is at C, I’m comfortable with a Norris/McLeod 2C platoon (taking a chance there) with Thompson holding down C and the unit’s overall talent supplemented by that addition Non additions at all in top 6 looks like Peterka - Norris - Thompson Benson - McLeod - Tuch Zucker - Krebs - Kulich or Peterka - Thompson - Tuch Benson - Norris - Zucker Krebs - McLeod - Kulich ..to my eye both are severely lacking a talent, be it at C, or W. Pick your poison

The 60th ranked C last year had 47 points The 45th ranked C had 60 points. You are going to want your guy to be consistently above 50. McLeod has a great narrative when we were expecting 3C production and “hey look he might get 50!”. If we sign him long term and pencil him in for 2C, the narrative can flip pretty quickly to, “and look, he might not even hit 50!”

I go with right wing being an area of need because the chances of us finding a legitimate top 6 C this summer would be near zero. Wingers are more attainable / more likely we can get a difference maker there. It’s not that Thompson and Tuch can’t be the wingers, but a top 6 with Kulich and Norris as 1/2C is in need of help regardless of the wings. I think Thompson ends up back at C both because of necessity, and because he’s great at it. Norris can have a shot at 2C knowing McLeod is an ok fall back. IF we are upgrading in the top 6: and with Thompson at C that can come at RW. I’m also not opposed to Benson in the top 6 only because he’s defensively responsible: again contingent on a true impact addition at RW Peterka - Thompson - XXX Benson - Norris - Tuch Kulich - McLeod - Zucker ..4th line will be fine. Greenway LW (if he’s not up on L3 for Kulich). I’d be trying for a vet 4C add in place of Krebs. Not giving up on Quinn unless it’s a good now hockey trade…Malenstyn an option… ..they need the big top line/top 6 add to rejuvenate things. An actual impact player that buoys the whole unit. That’s far more needed when you are a low 70s point team. Especially on the verge of 15 years missed, next year. That would be much more apt than tweaking and plugging holes as if we haven’t taken on a ton of water, as if we were some sort of playoff mainstay and not a team that should be scratching and clawing for any point it can get + a partner for Power. Probably stuck with goalies we have. Those are the 2 key additions. I sort of expect a big swing. If we are merely granted an axing of the assistant coaches and a few tweaks, there’s no hope *bridge Byram unless we need his cap space for the winger add

It depends on the players. If they added just Marner and ran back the rest, I’d probably be excited. If they added more guys like this: 4 times over, i’d roll my eyes

And : we always do the “ya he’s got an injury history, but… well he’s never maintained those numbers over a full season, but…. ...he plays with Dahlin, but..” Nah, he *plays with Dahlin.* Rasmus is one of the very best players in the nhl - - - we don’t need Bowen Byram. We need what power may become. And I’m not punting the time line back 4 years for some draft pick either

-3 since being moved away from Dahlin primarily Dahlin Dahlin Dahlin

“Bye bye first overall pick we were supposed to build around from a mere 4 years ago! You just weren’t good enough, what more did you want from us?” ”Welcome to Buffalo, newly minted top-5 draft pick! We only want guys who WANT to be here. Do you WANT to be here? We have all the resources you need.” - - - ****or, instead,*** we can trade the guy we unloaded a player who’s now perceived to be quite underwhelming for. Capitalize on the optics win when it’s right there even if as a managerial unit you are too incompetent to see the separation between power and Byram in an on-ice, potential sense

Byram is a bum. Also not that hard

It’s #2

So fire the damn GM who gave him the putrid contract. This isn’t that hard. Im Not paying the price as a fan for this organizations ineptitude anymore. Why should we lose power because they don’t want to develop him properly Because the GM paid him at the wrong time Again baby/bath water

I guess I’m thrown off by the idea you said they were merely stylistic comps yet also that he had the projection to potentially be outright better. So it’s not just style it’s outright comparison of ability. But with your clarification it sounds like you are using it more in terms of development similarities rather than play style specifically, so if I’m reading that correctly I at least understand your metric even if I’m disagreeing with the ceilings

Well you said “better Dahlin or bigger makar” so Dahlin wasn’t stylistic, so sans qualification of talent it sounded like you were saying what separates Makar and Schaefer is merely size Considering it was in the very same sentence - - - And you said, “is Misa going to be MacKinnon.” That’s a stylistic comp? McDavid / MacKinnon semantics aside the one conjuring the imo ridiculous comps isn’t the one engaging in the hyperbole fwiw - is this thread meant to exist sans content? Like “oh Adams can just make a trade for power” is divorced from reality. Actually asking: are we supposed to respond as if the GM has the leeway of a GM in EA

Which are you referring to? The Montreal or winnipeg. was trying to read into him being on the trip. Damn

I really think Tage will start at C. He’s proven there

They did not play well “This team is bi-polar!” yes if you willingly ignore context

Tear it down to the studs for Schaefer

And 2 wrongs don’t make a right. the strategy that led to our ineptitude was prioritizing the future above the now. The overvaluing of draft picks Continually falling for the idea the mystery box is better than a competent approach to team building and development.

In ea sports NHL This thread is video game-ish central Schaefer is going to be better than maybe the most talent D man of all time in Makar, Misa is going to be better than the best player in the nhl, and these are just a couple of the players in the running for this year! I hear next draft is even deeper. Or is that the year after? Yes, the GM we’ve been absolutely begging to make trades for 5 years is going to swing one, under pressure, for a cornerstone asset in Power and it’s certainly a good idea to saddle him with that responsibility when the entire league knows he has to make the trade

Dahlin mvp

Very good 3C, “hey MAYBE we can make the playoffs with him as the 2C” type money. We know where Adams slots him