Thorny

There’s mental toughness - unquestionably needed, haven’t seen anything to discount that in this group of players There’s physical toughness - unquestionably needed, the ability to endure the physical trauma attempting to be inflicted upon you from the other team. I don’t think the Sabres are a small, weak team so I’d imagine, provided the mental component from point 1, we’ll be ok on this front - but I hesitate to make any kind of judgment without seeing these guys go through the grind of a playoff series where the game literally changes physically. I worry about Krebs getting demolished because he’s tiny out there on his skates but he’s got a tattoo of himself, so, I’d imagine he pulls himself off the mat pretty willingly. Then there’s the other type of toughness people talk about, that I find is most analogously used under the term - the ability to physically intimidate your opponent / inflict physical stress upon them. Considering you can wear a team down with your speed and tenacity, I find this aspect if toughness to be the least important. But I’m biased. But, come playoffs, again: the game changes. I’m open to the idea we may need a guy or two who can bruise the other team over the course of a playoff series. A Lyubushkin type player, except good at hockey A Tom Wilson can get you over that edge. But I saw enough of the Penguins back to back cups to see you can also run your opponent into the ground with 4 skating lines

When you eventually get to a stage like Colorado, your depth allows you to play at a 97 point pace this season, in spite of injuries, rather than 79 point pace That’s not a hex haha

I’ve been fairly pleased with what I’ve seen / interpreted with their communications on the injury front this season: still early but seemingly less of the “its day to day. JUST KIDDING! He’s actually dead” type stuff

How does it look re: offseason?

What’s more likely, back up or starter? I think I come down here, as well. I wouldn’t mind betting on a guy with actual sample size though maybe that just isn’t in the cards with this money ball crew All these numbers look pretty par for the course for how you’d expect a team’s record to move via commonplace injuries, especially when lack of depth to withstand has been a talking point for the organization. Nothing unexpected or unusual. Sabres remain as one of the league best-off re: man games lost this year

Would you look to make a move at G too or is that market too dried up in your estimation?

I’m always curious with the “what could even have been done?” argument. If it immediately declines any deal perceived as an “overpay”? ie if it never allows for the scenario where you simply pay the price needed to be paid because, sure you are “overpaying” but the situation that arises by not doing so is in fact worse. Ie - eventually you just need to go ahead and pay what it takes to acquire said player, right, when you are damned if ya don’t, anyways? I suppose my question for the “what could even have been done in 3 years?” crowd, who will only defend away one singular move at a time but never tackle the odds of not one solution being found, in the *entire* body of work, and this is a legitimate question: could this situation potentially be indefinite? If no situation to improve the goalie arises that wouldn’t be construed as an overpay, in say, the next 10 years, are you still sitting here saying, “well, what move?” Legitimately asking. At what point does the time period grow so large that it would, to you, defy logic to suggest one sustainable move couldn’t have been completed in that time? Again, actually asking.

It’s an open thread. Make your posts about Tage Thompson. See if they gain traction. “I love Democracy” I’ll continue to respond to posts that quote me or engage in the discussions currently taking place Or a moderator can come in and separate it. But maybe they don’t cause there was a 10 hour gap where the thread would have been dead space anyways if not for a few folks following the natural line of convo within a thread

Nice. On a random note re: the above - Has Cozens ever actually played LW?

Ya. I think the book on whether Jack truly amounts to being a “franchise C” or instead just a really good-to-great player is an open one, with plenty to be written. Anyone who reads my posts on the matter over time can see it’s the more extreme natured stances I take issue with. I’m not really interested in proving that Jack is Him. I don’t care. My point has always been more along the lines of the idea that all the talk that Jack was an “untenable cancer unconducive to winning” was always bogus. How players are going to look in the playoffs is always an open mystery until we see it: for now it’s fair to say he’s playing just fine in Vegas and they are experiencing regular season winning, just fine. Best player right now, top 2, doesn’t really matter substantively to what I’m saying. He’s a very good player for them, right now. Miscast in Buffalo. Not uncastable.

It doesn’t seem like Eichel could have a chance at proving anything you list in the first paragraph until he plays in the playoffs so I guess we’ll have to wait and see. Considering the “variables listed above” are all, subjective, intangible, undefinable variables, yes, I do admit that my determination as to whether Eichel is “the best” player on his team is based on provable, identifiable statistics, and the underlying metrics that have proven to largely be reflective of good players. Of course, people WILL rely on the subjective, often, that’s only natural. Plenty say Messier was the more valuable player in Edmomton’s Dynasty than Gretzky. People will ALWAYS debate who a team’s best player is. Fir years and years people beaked Crosby by saying he “wasn’t even the best player on his own team”. That is to say, I’m pretty sure the “capable of” wording protects the argument - it’s pretty clear, let’s say regular season wise, to allow for the wait-and-see-on-playoffs valid take you had, that he has as strong, or strong an argument, as anyone on that team right now. 2-way.

It wasn’t a seemingly deep D at season’s start, though. Plenty of people pointed out beforehand, not in hindsight, that depth could be an issue. “The additions were fine. They just didn’t play as well as we expected they would” as a valid defence would sort of eliminate all ability to evaluate the gm, no? As long as he gets guys he THINKS will be good, he’s in the clear? Kinda a low bar. Unless the performance of these guys dropped off the map like say maybe a Hall, I think we can say the output of the D thus far has been more less reflective of the group assembled

Everything has to be a one sided moment in time where only one possible conclusion can be drawn, that fits happily into the determinations we’ve formed in advance, rather than a long, gradual process with a multitude of potential off shoots along the way, where in this unlimited universe it stands to reason there are MANY potential outcomes. Consider there are infinite parallel universes (there are) - (sorry) Of course Adams COULD have signed Ullmark. Before he became a UFA. Beyond it being strictly possible, it defies logic to think it not reasonably possible when Ullmark from all reports was negotiating with the team for a long time. and ya, the GM said it lol

You have my endorsement.

Plenty of noteworthy names from the time who didn’t utter noteworthy racist statements, though Who are equally or more so deserving. The argument for keeping Smythe in it is simply “because that’s the way it’s been” It wasn’t just a comment, he actively had a part in preventing Herb from being able to join the NHL

He’s their MVP, by far. He’s not their tipping point piece Regardless of when he was granted/he assumed the role

This is semantics, though. I wasn’t using “around” in the manner you took it - it wasn’t a comment about whether he can, to a certainty, “start” as the focal point - in the manner we saw them place the franchise focus on him. It’s “around the concept of Eichel being the best player on said team” not necessarily that he’s the ideal starting point. I think in the right situation it would defy logic to think that was *impossible* but truthfully I’m not interested in arguing that, really. Too much unknown. The way the Sabres structured around Jack clearly did not work. But what about, if they hadn’t tanked to get him? Or if they made ROR captain? If the Sabres centred their entire build focus around Jack to the detriment of the rest of the roster, there’s plenty of blame on the organization for doing that, not just Jack. They had to cave to the 18 year old’s demands? Eichel is capable of being the best player on a good team. This is the point of what I was saying. Your contention is about when that player can be added to the fold. We can’t know whether based on the data, a good team can be built up around Eichel, from a starting point of “bad” - all I know is that the Sabres build, around Eichel, didn’t work. But that’s already apparently obvious. With only one failure to build around him from the staring point of bad team, where there are *myriad* of variables present, it can’t be suggested to be already proven that it cannot be done. If anyone wants to claim to a certainty that the Sabres were doomed from the beginning and even with a proper GM, COULD NOT possibly have built a good team, once Jack was here, have at it, I guess. Who knows. I’m content in the point I’m making that Eichel is capable of being the best player on a good team. That the Sabres, too, could have so too built a good team, with a Jack in the fold, up to and including him being the best player on said team. The way in which they anointed him as the saviour and stripped away everything to get him, and so placed the franchise on his shoulders from the beginning, clearly did not. How exactly that team needs to be constructed in terms of the order of addition is anyone’s guess and to think there would be an full-stop rule rather than a myriad of potential scenarios based on fit would be exceptionally dicey imo

Speaking of the Art Ross, Tage currently sits in 1st place in the race for the secondary Art Ross awarded to the player who sits at the top of the non-McDavid - and - cake - job - linemate rankings: the scoring trophy available for mere humans. Dahlin, in second, is closing in on Karlsson for 1st place in D scoring (no separate alien category, here) - - - Tage, in 3rd for league scoring, is the same distance from 1st (15) as he is from 42nd. McDavid should be winning the Hart every year

So you must have missed the part where I said he shouldn’t be erased from the record books? We don’t need to name the trophy after him, that’s all I’m saying Hardly a cancelation. But with notably racist comments attributed to him, I’d rather name the Smythe something else ymmv

Probably about as much as I’d have on Jack being a front runner for Selke. And I’d be sitting at a push currently for my “Eichel top 10 in MVP race” bet - - - Eichel leads his team in points. He’s the only player above point a game on his team. He’s a plus 17 (for those who care. Pi - he’s #1 team relative), 21 of his 29 points are ES, and he has ZERO penalty minutes, all with excellent advanced numbers on a team at the top of the league If you think my view on Jack have been proven anything but MORE accurate this season, you are barking up the wrong tree. Unless I missed the part where I said Jack’s talents are nullified in totality by the mere occurrence of Jeff Skinner having more pointz. Particularly when this is the only time you ever quote me

The Sabres *could* have built around Eichel, successfully. The Sabres *did not* build around Jack successfully. It reached a point where, from all reasonable accounts, the Sabres could *no longer* feasibly build around Eichel, successfully. Eichel is *not* blameless in this and it became an untenable situation, for both parties. It’s Kudos to KA on making that decision. In a vacuum I’d prefer he was still here. Seeing the way the *intrinsic* logic of Adams’ plan has borne out, I wouldn’t reverse the trade if able to, and at this stage wouldn’t consider it. As always that’s a sliding scale and can be revisited. It was never “addition by subtraction”. It was “addition made possible by necessary subtraction” a distinction.

Borderline blasphemous

Anderson will never be gone. Not as long as those who remain here are loyal to him.

“Do I look nervous?”

How about Jost?