Taro T

Well, he wasn't above ANYBODY currently on the roster at the end of the year. Even Rousek got action ahead of him. And now with Quinn out for 2-4 months, he should be 13. But, were you in his shoes and only got into 1/3 of the games last year, why would you sign on again this year?

More than 3/4 of the teams have winning records. And the absolute worst winning "percentage" is still a respectable 0.475. Truly despise the loser point.

He got into 26 games last year. With the possible exception of Olofsson (who technically is still here and may be here in October) they've brought back every single player that was ahead of him on the depth chart plus they'd likely like to see Rousek and Kulich some action this year. There was no way he was coming back IMHO. He wants to play.

3 networks plus PBS and most cities had a Channel 29 clone (low power high band channel running primarily reruns day and night). We were lucky in that we could pick up 5 & 9 out of TO and 11 out of Hamilton and on a really clear day 8, 10, & 13 out of Ra-Cha-Cha.

The truly brilliant was the Trapper/Henry M*A*S*H, no doubt. But the 2 additional years with Good Ol' Ferret Face were still great and they did a good job breaking in Winchester his 1st year. (Saying season 6 was still "brilliant" was a bit of an exaggeration; but it was still very good IMHO.) But after that, it really went downhill IMHO. Gene Reynolds walking away as Executive Producer after Season 5 was a big loss. Even though he did stay on as a "creative consultant" it wasn't the same.

Funny you should mention M*A*S*H; been "watching" that to fall asleep to the past few months. The 1st 6 seasons were absolutely brilliant. 7 & 8 were still good way more often than not but have just started on season 10 and not sure will make it through to the end of the Alan Aldafication of what had been a brilliant TV series.

He made himself the story and was always in the news/fluff stories being reported about the NFL. Don't honestly recall ever reading the gossip pages (even when there were such things), so not sure if he was on the cover of People or a story on Entertainment Tonight nor any of their myriad competitors. Thought he ended up in Maxim and TMZ and the like; but never read any of them either, so who knows?

Very likely the case. They both expound upon leadership philosophy. They both ask their players to play a high tempo game. The big differences being that Granato epitomizes the "Servant Leader" while Krueger though talking the talk of the servant leader was much more of a "Top Down" guy. And, that Krueger from his years of being in management for underskilled organizations (Edmonton, the soccer team he was whatever they call the team president/GM over on the other side of the pond, the Swiss National Team at a minimum & likely even more) would coach a very defensive low event game hoping to keep things close enough that his team could steal a goal or 2 and accordingly steal the game which unless you are getting the hard earned W's is a very joyless game; while Granato coaches a more offensive high event game wherein he wants his players to be creative which makes for a much more enjoyable game. Pretty sure Krueger will never get to a point where he allows any but a handful of his players to be creative and only the ones he sees as truly gifted will he allow to get to there and only in the right circumstances. Remains to be seen if Granato's team can dial in a bit more structure to their game. From the brief glimses we saw where they DID play a more structured game (the 2nd & 3rd periods of the Ryan Miller game being the prime example), believe he can successfully find that middle ground where the players both get creative and stay fully in the moment to be able to react quicker to when the attempts at creativity fail in the offensive zone and play more structured in their own end but stay fully in the moment to be able to support the moment of brilliance that a Dahlin or Thompson or ... can bring.

You forget that Owens was a Bill half a drought ago?

FTFY. Not positive established is the right word for it because personally consider Levi to be "established" even though his resume is only 7 games long. But, you get the jist.

Pretty sure he doesn't really care what Anaheim will get for him; he's just tired of having a very poor team in front of him and wants a chance to play for a team that's relevant again. Fairly shortsighted view IMHO because that team should actually be rejoining the NHL by the time his 4th remaining year is finished. But careers are short and can't really blame him for only focusing on today and himself.

@Thorny's in heaven right now with that thought. 😉

Relooked at the CBA (and the MOU) to refresh the memory. (E.g., Did not recall the exact dates that things happen for instance, especially because those dates were different the past 2 seasons post-Covid.) But it is in yours truly's words.

Depends upon whether the arbitration was for a single year or 2. Signing after getting a 1 year award means the player can't sign a new contract beyond that until January 1; signing after getting a 2 year award means the player can't sign a new contract beyond that until July 1. The player and team can still try to negotiate a deal outside of arbitration until his arbitration hearing begins. Once the hearing has started, the player and team have to wait for the arbitration award being rendered within the next 48 hours after the hearing to make their next move. Player elected arbitration - if the decision is for $3.5MM or more (prorated up for increases in the average salary since 2014) then the club can walk away from 1 award for every 2 players that took the team to arbitration (1 or 2 players went to arbitration, 1 contract can get walked away from; 2 or 4 players went to arbitration, 2 contracts can get walked away from; etc.). If the club had elected a 2 year award, and decides to walk away from the award they only get out of the 2nd year; the 1st still holds. And either way the player is a UFA after the team has walked away from the player elected arbitration award. (Either immediately for a 1 year award that was walked away from, or on July 1 for a 2 year award that the 2nd year was walked away from.) If the team chooses to go to arbitration, the player can still sign an offer sheet from a team provided he signs it by 5PM on July 5 (which is also the deadline for player elected arbitration requests to be filed). If the player signs an offer sheet, then obviously he won't end up going to arbitration. (Teams file for arbitration in June (exact deadline gets effected by the end date of the SCF) or if they offered a player a QO but it is still unsigned at 5PM on July 5 they can file for arbitration that next day July 6 until 5PM. If the player elects arbitration, he loses his ability to negotiate with other teams. With player elected arbitration, as stated above, teams can walk away from roughly 1/2 of the awards and the players are UFAs after the award was walked away from. With club elected arbitration, once a decision has been rendered that is what the player's next contract becomes. The player can't walk away and a team can't walk away if they chose arbitration. The team has 48 hours after the last arbitration that it may walk away from to decide whether to accept or walk away from an arbitration decision.

@Derrico will be interested in knowing how this kid looks in the scrimmage in the AM. If you would, let us know your thoughts after the 3v3. Thanks.

Umm, actually, should Comrie (or UPL) clear waivers, they most certainly would send Cooley down to the ECHL. Thing is, they don't expect Comrie (nor UPL) to clear waivers. Which is why Tokarski, who has played well in VERY short stints in the NHL, is getting $450k to play in the AHL. He's the emergency 3 should one of the top 2 goalies go down. They don't seem to expect to be able to get Comrie &/or UPL back into the AHL. So they have the "s### has blown up" option in Tokarski. Hoping another move or 2 are coming, but if one doesn't work out Adams has his plan C (or plan D) in place.

Is an Iron Lung an option? It wouldn't affect your face.

Elmer Ferguson is the writers award and Foster Hewitt is the broadcasters award. 3 of one, 2 of the other. Buffalo has historically been very blessed with the coverage we've received of our Sabres.

Yeah, that is what this kid wrote. Sorry for being 6 GOOD beers into the evening. Could've been more precise. Apologies. Never said any of them are "elected HHoF members," merely that 5 Buffalo media people are in the HHoF; which is precisely accurate. And yes, Jim Kelley is one of the 5. One of the other 2 is from the "long-dead Courier Express." The other is not.

Looks good. But could you (or somebody else) explain how the evals that he's given places the Sabres at 5 in the rankings? It seems from a cursory look that the 3 behind the Sabres should be ranked higher.

And honestly, expect 2 of the other 3 to be easy. The 3rd could be tough. (Personally didn't realize he was in the HHoF. But that doesn't mean others didn't know that themselves. Expecting PA to be the hero here.) Because he wasn't a Buffalo media guy when he was inducted. There are still 3 others regardless.

Harry Neale was a TO broadcaster when he was inducted. He doesn't count. Got 3 to go.

Dude, the deal is supposed to be one of the people that answered the question gets a crack at the next one. Not, if somebody doesn't come up with all 37 answers on their own, you get to go again in perpetuity. There are 5 media members in the HHoF with Buffalo ties. Name them. 3 should be very easy. The other 2 could be easy or hard.

Pretty sure according to another thread that he's in arbitration. Should the Loafs walk away he'd be a serious consideration.

Again, technically true. But TB and Vegas the past 2 years seem to show that to be a fallacy.