SwampD

Again, you are taking my term “extremist” and applying the meaning for “violent extremist” to it. That’s not how I meant it because that’s not what it means. You’re implied meanings are your problem, not mine. I know lots of extremists. I even agree with some of them at times. I often agree with you!

Now that is awesome. I know two people that sold their dirt bikes for twice what they paid for them. They both plan on picking up and upgrade for cheaper when there is a glut in the fall.

Ugh. That's a good take. I hadn't even thought of that. Now I'm even more depressed. Thanks, jerk. 😂

One month and 41 pages in, it was only going to go south.

Pretty soon, there will be a sh!t ton of people who come to the realization that they don't actually like what they've been killing time with the past year. With the end of Covid in sight, I plan on taking advantage of the flood of cheap recreational equipment for sale (bikes, ATVs, boats, snow machines, campers, etc...), by people who never should have owned it in the first place.

We're just having some fun. But the idea that they asked another knowledgable coach about Ralph's system and he confirmed that it's worth staying with is, well, hilarious.

Watching competent goaltending that we had is even tougher. Cal Peterson. Because Goaltenders take so long to develop, until we are personally good, drafting one from the NCAA is dumb.

This is just wrong. Hits like this don’t happen all the time. I’m not saying suspension worthy, but it was absolutely worth 2 minutes.

Kim, I heard you the first time.

Except for the teams that win.

Hi. My name is SwampD. Nice to meet. You are obviously new to the board and haven’t been reading my posts about officiating for the past 10+ years.

Yep. I was at work and didn’t see that. The NHL, of course, leaves it up to the refs. Rule 42 - Boarding 42.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee. There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact. However, there is also a responsibility on the player with the puck to avoid placing himself in a dangerous and vulnerable position. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule. I have every confidence that a Sabre would have been penalized for that same hit.

Of course they aren't. I mean Why would they? Rule 603 | Boarding (Note) Boarding is the action where a player pushes, trips or body checks an opponent causing them to go dangerously into the boards. This includes: Accelerating through the check to a player who is in a vulnerable position, driving an opponent excessively into the boards with no focus on or intent to play the puck, or any check delivered for the purpose of punishment or intimidation that causes the opponent to go unnecessarily and excessively into the boards.

No. https://www.usahockeyrulebook.com/page/show/1084647-rule-603-boarding

What are the odds of hitting four posts in a game, two by one guy on one shift?

It’s funny. I thought Chad misspelled ruining.

Totally. I didn't watch the games last week. I wasn’t going to watch last night, but my buddy said he was bored and came over to watch. I was pissed at him by the second period.

Awesome. The one and only reason to watch.

Maybe?

Why would the Sabres have scouts for leagues that aren’t playing?

I know. It was a joke. I didn’t make a comment on the minimum wage. It should be raised. My comment was on the use of the term centrist as a negative. I’m sick and tired of being governed by the extremes, from both sides. As someone just a tick left of center (I think), no matter who is in power, I’m supposed to be outraged by something. It’s exhausting. I wish there were more centrists.

I didn't say you were a violent extremist. Which is what I'm sure you immediately jumped to in your head. I said you were an extremist. Given the discussions around here, I think it's a pretty good assesment. Maybe it would have better if I said you were a moderate extremist.

Pretty sure you want it to mean something else. I'll go with M-W's take - a person who favors rapid and sweeping changes especially in laws and methods of government.

You have more extreme views than most on this board. Hope that answers your question. Or should I say, you have views that are more extreme than most on this board.