darksabre

Man. That's a bummer. It's not surprising though. I know a lot of guys who played college or juniors who basically stopped playing and really don't have any interest in picking it up again. I think it can happen with anyone that if you do something long enough you kinda get tired of it.

It all starts and ends with you guys. You bring it on yourselves. It would be a very simple problem to solve. But apparently grown men would prefer to be big babies and cry about how talking about the games bums them out.

Some people really like projecting negative connotations onto entirely harmless posts about stats and then getting upset about it.

February 23rd, the Caps game.

I think they also have cocktails. I want to say I remember there being liquor bottles at the main bar in the harbor center on the player benches side.

Um, they have beer at the Beauts games too.

Yup. I never played the other ones so I wouldn't have guessed the ending. Now that I know what happens, I'm not super excited to get there.

That's a good idea. I think I might do that with where I'm at currently. Make another save so I can go back and play around.

So I found out things about the RDR2 story I didn't want to know and now I've decided I'm not going to finish it lol Also, Ace Combat 7 comes out today. Very exciting. I loved the originals way back in the day.

Unfortunately we already have plans for that day, so we won't be. Getting to more games has not gone well for us this year. I know we're theoretically going to the bar after the SabreSpace Meetup game, but there is a Beauts game right after the Sabres game. Maybe we should keep the party going there and then go the bar? At this point it'll have to be the Playoffs in March before we get back to one.

Yeah. I think they will if he's still here.

She survived by a few votes. But it's not looking good for the May government. One foot in the grave.

I didn't realize Baloo was an RFA. That's going to make fulfilling his desire to get traded pretty tough. Most teams would probably prefer to have the Sabres not qualify him and take him cheaper in UFA. Burakovsky is definitely the most interesting name on that list to me. Maybe Oleksiak.

I haven't said a damn thing of substance in this thread.

I'm still happy to see Chris Tanev in the NHL. Kid has had himself a nice career since the Frozen Four 9 years ago.

I would really like Ullmark to get this start tonight but I don't trust Housley to do it. I would also really like them to try LITERALLY ANYTHING different with PP1.

Stop. You guys are killing me ?

I literally did it after the Edmonton game but no one cared because they were too busy flipping out.

Sure it is. And I have no idea what you mean by the first bolded. As to the second bolded, as the team gets better, they won't need as much luck, because it will mean that they are exercising control over more variables than they were previously. Kind of like how knowing what you're doing is better than not knowing what you're doing at the casino. That's why Jack, who still needs luck, doesn't need to be as lucky as a less talented player like Larsson. Because he has more control. Just not infinite control.

Jack has worked on that exact shot hundreds of thousands of times? The one in that occurred uniquely in time and space last night? I had no idea Jack was a time traveler.

I feel like people are taking my calling it "lucky" as some kind of diss on Jack.

Okay, if we're going to be pedantic, then fine. The odds are the odds. If this is gambling we know that some games of chance have better odds than others right. Games of chance. Luck and chance are the same thing, right? It's something where the outcome is based not just on the actions you take, but on the environment around you. Things you can control vs things you can't. So Jack, taking control of all of the things he has control over, can only do so much there, right? He can only impose his will so much there to make that goal happen. And he probably knows what things he can control in that situation. He knows he's shooting the puck when he starts that drive to the net, but he doesn't know if the goalie is going to give him that hole or not, especially at that angle. And he knows it's a bad angle. So, taking the chance, he shoots anyway. And wouldn't you know it: he gets lucky. Everything he didn't have any control over came together with all of the things he did have control over to let that puck in the net. So what we're arguing over is how much control it is fair to say Jack has over that situation. That's what this is. And my calling it lucky is totally justified given how little control Jack had over all of the variables that make that particular goal so difficult and unique.

I don't want Jack to think about that. I would want Larsson to, though. To add on, I think what we're seeing on the PP1 with its failures is that Jack and the other skill guys are thinking about the odds too much. They know their abilities and they can assess situations faster than a guy like Larsson. This leads them to avoid taking chances and letting luck play a role.

You're missing the mark. When things are routine, they're routine. Luck beats the odds, no? Jack's goal wasn't routine. It beat the odds. It was lucky. And it was great.

I don't think every goal scored is luck, mostly because not all goals are created equal. The events that lead to them, the quality of the area where the shot comes from, the capabilities of the shooter and the goalie. I could go on. There are a lot of non-luck variables that go into any given goal. That's what makes Jack's OT winner so great. Yes, he's a great shooter, but he was shooting from a spot where few have success, and Rittich had things pretty well covered up except for the tiniest of holes which Jack just managed to get the puck through. Everything had to be just right for that goal to happen. I don't think he would score that goal 9 times out of 10. He's good, but he also had a horseshoe in his pants in that overtime.