shrader

Every single team in the league could use the same exact what if scenario. especially when you get past the first round picks. The Braydon Point inclusion is the ultimate in hindsight. The Sabres still had two more picks within that unusually large 19 pick window that the author offered, drafting Jonas Johansson and Brycen Martin. It's probably a safe bet that they weren't taking Point and it's not the trade that caused that. And you know who else passed on Point in that draft (3 times)? Tampa.

That's the typo you choose? I'm more worried about the practice of shaving players that they apparently have in Edmonton and Colorado.?

My favorite part of the what if game is that it ignores the people they actually did draft. Those aren't looking so great either, so that doesn't exactly suggest to me that if they had more picks they would have gotten those right. Also, of the actual players they traded away, Compher's really the only one that leaves me wondering.

I’m shocked to see that he’s actually younger than me. It feels like he was here at least 15 years ago. And now as I look up his stats, oops, he was.

Sounds like we’re due for another great board crash of whatever year it was. I can’t wait for all the posts complaining that their post count isn’t high enough. It’s the board upgrade that keeps on giving! Maybe their will be some quirks and a few more gems with a Moosehead name in caps and exclamation points will fall through the cracks.

When the Sabres are in the crapper, we get posts about the definition of the crapper. It always comes down to semantics on/in this place, doesn't it?

You somehow get into the toilet with your tablet?

Come this time next year, he'll be a Montour de force.

Is there any indication of who goes into the lineup after the Guhle trade? Is it just Pilut or has he already been there long enough for a game or two? I really have no idea where that team is in terms of available bodies and injuries.

Don't turn around.

There's a group of 3 women in the office next to me right now talking very descriptively about doctor appointments for their lady parts. I can't find my headphones quickly enough.

If you think that's the only thing that has changed, you should probably avoid looking at your credit card balance.

It needs to be alliterative. I've got nothing.

Something needs to be said for having realistic goal. If the only goal is to win the Cup, that's a 97% failure rate league-wide. Truth be told, for the majority of the league, the Cup is not the goal. At least half of the field must know at the start of the year that it's not happening. As you're suggesting, they need to set in place those building blocks that will hopefully get them to that Cup eventually. For a team that hasn't sniffed the playoffs since what seems like the Clinton administration (oops, that was the Bills), just getting there does sound like a good place to start.

Shut it down now before someone takes the bait that's dangling out there in a couple threads now.

I love how the wind chill is at that point where the two scales cross over, the rare temperature where it doesn't matter which units you're using.

Was that really necessary?

Even more damning when you consider that she's throwing that body check from beyond the grave. That certainly does bring an added intimidation factor.

It's not even worth the hassle though. You're probably more aware of the specifics of cap recapture, but that hit would be minimal with how his contract is structured, fairly lightly front-loaded.

I'm not sure on the exact measure, but it should basically be how much your plus/minus differs from the team average. If the team as a whole is a -5 and you are a -3. Your team relative would be +2. There may be some minor tweaks in the formula, but that's the basic idea.

I'm confused. I don't see anything in your quote about a pulled goalie. Basically it boils down to this. A goal for is counted as long as you don't have more players on the ice than the opposing team (including the goalie). Goals against count as long as you don't have less.

Players no longer on an ELC have to agree to being assigned to the ECHL. But as for the Moulson scenario, that goes right back to the discussion in the Beaulieu thread about how doing right by the player goes a long way. They worked with Moulson to find the right situation for him and there's no reason to think they wouldn't try to do something similar if they had an issue with another player.

And then there's Steve Bernier. If I remember correctly, he scored twice in his debut and then wound up with a grand total of 3 goals for his entire (short) Sabre career. And wasn't Juneau a lesser version of Barnes for that one year? I feel like I remember him doing very little but then putting up a very useful performance in the playoffs.

And just think about how he probably had other concussions that were never diagnosed seeing as how it was 1996. Lafontaine may has well have been living in the stone ages compared to what they do today. 35. The only issue with someone like Okposo when it comes to retirement would be a bit of cap recapture. I'm too lazy to dig it up, but I believe that hit would be $1 million per year over the rest of his contract if he stopped after the season. It's pretty minimal, so there wouldn't be all that much need to go the LTIR route.

Looking at their team as a whole for that stat? Yeah, it's not pretty. A 10 goal lead for worst goal differential? Wow it's bad out there.