tom webster

If you are at Airport and prefer Duff's, the one on Dick Road is closer unless you have a thing against visiting places that Obama visited.

They don't sign confidentiality agreements but he did violate their social media policy.

I had occasion to listen to Mike Weber on hockey hotline today and anyone that does not think that Ted Nolan had little of the player's respect as a coach should listen to him talking about the possibility of Babcock joining the team.

I'm getting old and I was drinking that night. Maybe it was just some other bald guy in a tux. Now that was funny

You sure about the game ticket? When I talked to him about two years ago he told me he never stayed for the game because he didn't get a ticket.

Turns out the crab legs weren't stolen, but the rest.........

See, but that's my point. They don't result in enough possession numbers to satisfy the analytic crowd but in a sport where goals are at a premium and season's can be defined by a goal here or a goal there, to dismiss them because the variance isn't high enough or possession numbers that occur fifteen seconds after faceoffs don't fluctuate enough seems to fly in the face of common sense. I have said publicly and privately that I need to learn more about these new numbers to truly be able to argue for or against but I have spent my whole life believing in numbers and not understanding how most people didn't understand what was so obvious to me. Now a lot of these same people that couldn't comprehend salary caps and spread sheets are quoting regression to the mean and statistical relevance. Forgive me if I am a little leary.

I know what last year's numbers were but the trade wasn't made for one year. I think Watkins will turn out to be good enough to justify the trade especially when you put it in the context of what would have been available this year and how well the team does this year. If it was all about the first year then Carl Garrett should have been the number one pick in 1969.

The analytics argument against face offs and goaltending is, I believe, their biggest weakness. They dismiss both because of the small mathematical variation from top to bottom. I would argue that paying attention to detail and finding those small variations can be the difference between winning and losing especially in a sport where variation is so small and randomness plays such a big role. That said, I understand the argument even though I disagree with the interpretation of the significance of the variation.

The point I was making about the Watkins' trade is they gave up the 19th pick in a draft that might not have had 19 first round worthy picks. Part of the GM job is knowing which year to acquire picks for and which year they are not as valuable. In the end, however, you are right. It comes down to how good Watkins turns out and what kind of impact he has on their team.

I, for one, think history will look kinder on the Watkins trade because of the weakness of this draft and the fact that I believe Watkins will distance himself from the other receivers taken in the 2014 draft. As for this draft, I think the Bills, realizing they had limited opportunities and a weak class took some chances that may.or may not pan out. Who knows? I know its part of being in 2015 but way too much thought is put into each step of the process when the final product is all that matters.

No one has ever questioned the Leaf's contribution to the bottom line. The same cannot be said about the Sabres. When Buffalo has the highest priced ticket in the league, they can take a year off from raising their prices also. That is one of those consumer things I find amusing. If the Sabres just raised their prices 27% when TP took over and didn't raise them again for 7 years everyone would be singing their praises instead of vilifying them. It is like you said earlier. He didn't lie he just spun it which is exactly what a marketing guy is supposed to do.

You can all go on and on about what's in the CBA what is required and what isn't what Black says or said or didn't and what Terry implied when he bought the team. While I have clearly stated my opinion on the matter I understand what the others are saying even if I question their motivation. What I think is indisputable, however, is that as party to a CBA that stipulates a split in hockey related revenue, the Sabres have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize said revenues.

All good points but I can tell you Donnie Henderson loves Duke Williams.

And Bucky Brooks, whom I respect immensely said scouts he trusts call him the real deal so I guess someone had him higher then you.

So let me understand this. Even if he becomes a hall of famer in your eyes it would still be a bad pick and we should of let Philly take him. I understand you not liking the player and thinking they should have never picked the player but this whole trend the last few years to assign value to when a player is picked is ridiculous.It implies that there is some exact science to grading prospects and we both know there is not.

And its the perfect solution. You are buying at the true market price and its up to you to decide if that price provides you with the appropriate amount of value. If the Sabres truly are selling at a price higher then the market will bear, the purchasers in the resale market will reap the benefits.

I just don't get the need to put value on something that someone else is buying. There is only one number that is important. At what price do enough people purchase tickets to maximize the team's income? Anyone trying to place a value on why I and the rest of us buy tickets or what satisfaction we gain from the same is ridiculous. We all do it for a variety of reasons and those that choose not to purchase them also have their own reasons. Any other opinion on what we do with our money is condescending and insulting.

I'm definitely interested. Thought my wife wouldn't be so I talked to a friend about joining me. Now my wife wants to go. Please keep me informed.

I follow him as well although sometimes I'm not sure if he is Foster Brooks or Oscar Madison.

I agree. If I thought they would be one hundred percent open and truthful with their answers, I would want to have some of his questions answered but its not like they are going to say we didn't want O'Connor because he sucks or he wanted nothing to do with us because we suck.....

Believe the other player is Gary McAdam

I know that is accepted practice to lump 1970-1996 as the same classic jersey but anyone that has done any collecting will tell you how those jerseys varied over the years. Ragtag, stitched together mismatched colors, hockey sweaters were never so religiously thought of until recently. The crest, those meant something. The sweaters themselves, not so much. Just my two cents, carry on.

It has been reported that Chiarelli claimed that he offered two seconds for Neuvirth, Stewart and Flynn but acquired Connolly after he was turned down.. We don't know if it is true. If it is, and I think it might be, it is likely a case of TM thinking he could get more and over played his hand. I don't have a problem with it though because it is part of his strategy. He swings big and sometimes you are going to miss. I think you have to be like that if you want to win the Cup.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but the best case scenario for Buffalo is Detroit or Ottawa, Calgary, and Minnesota advancing to the final four wihtout the Islanders being there and then the pick would move up to 18?