...

That shot launched off a Pens' skate, but it was still pretty.

Great third.

It only works to Risto's advantage if he signs a bridge contract. Even a bridge contract will be lucrative. Then he cashes in for the term and the big bucks. Meanwhile, GMTM gets to play the short-term fat contract card he wants to (i assume he has someone in mind since he talked about it) and in the interim the cap goes up so we can afford to give Risto the kitchen sink at the right time. If this is the way it plays out, Risto gets his due, and is a loyal team guy in doing it this way.

No ducking needed, that's a good one. Actually, then you can say whatever the team does, the principle metric it should address is puck possession. Yes? I would assume possession begets all other positive stats. Have Stamkos possession stats been posted in this thread? I guess I should look...

Not picking on you TB (GED...giggle), but your comment sparked a thought: it seems this time of year, every year, we're talking about what the exceptions to the norm are for the teams in the big dance. Maybe one of you focused people with the time will find the point interesting enough to dig up the info, but I think it would be interesting to collate those exceptions over the past 10 years or so. The hypothesis being that there's the accepted way it ought to be done, then there is the way the winners have done it. And that, there really is no particular formula that transcends each season; that the end result ultimately winds up being best described as "chemistry". ... or "alchemy".

Which teams are they that might be a good fit but need to dump salary? Any chance we could take on a salary dumped player from a team desperate for Stamkos and win the deal?

Boo.

Lets see if the momentum shifts.

I heard that going in, but didn't expect to see them play such a dominant game, especially in the finals.

Anyone here honestly see the Pens playing like this before the playoffs?

Agreed. Murray is too much of a real-world GM to not have a long-term plan. I would be willing to bet my Jeep he already knows what his initial RFA offers to Jack and Sam will be. I don't think Stamkos comes here unless Stamkos wants to come here and make it work. No way Murray over pays for someone not willing to play ball - if Stamkos agreed (in writing) that he's willing to play wing and willing NOT to be captain, then Murray might stretch the budget a little to get him here, but, otherwise Murray has the balls to walk away.

I wouldn't touch it.

Honestly, SJ is better than either of these teams.

Damn, talk about letting them play. Are we taking bets on this going to OT?

I don't want Pittsburgh to win.

is the Blues home crowd booing the team?

That's just awful goaltending for Pitt.

He reads like he can be Ennis' replacement. I like that.

True, I can see why you like this SJ team. They play a calm, heavy style. I'm impressed by how both the offense and defense attack in waves. I still want the Blues to win this series, but the Sharks are respectable. The boobies.

Abacab? At a playoff game?

Jones will want that back. SJ had all of the momentum before that.

That's it for Tampa. No way they have a chance without Bishop.

I won't deny you the sore spot you have. However, those population drains aren't happening willy-nilly. Over my life-time, I've heard countless anecdotes about how people may not want to leave, but they have to. So, in my view the problem isn't with the people leaving, for whatever reasons they have, the problem is that the area they're leaving didn't do enough to keep them there. That's on the people and, by extension, on the government the people elected.

Yes, I got that. I just stumbled over how you put it together, and it read to me like an umbrella accusation. Sorry. I should know to read posts thrice if they get me riled up the first time. In my defense, the replies you got prior to mine confirmed what I thought I had read.

I will blame PA for, perhaps, not writing his post in a more neutral manner, but I will blame myself more for reading too quick while trying to work. But, I would like to apologize to PA for misconstruing the objective of his post... I'm guilty of doing this too much, reading too fast, and I thinking I understood what I read. I try to teach my kids not to do this very thing. After re-reading his post a few times, I see that PA is only trying take that angle AS one facet. He is not accusing all people of being that way. He is musing over that particular type of motivation. And, I agree it is an interesting angle in itself, although, I contend it applies to a small proportion of people. ------ By contrast, I guess since the thread is already derailing, I'd like to see the list of superficial reasons, other than saying the destination is "trendy". And hippies moving to San Francisco thanks to Scott McKenzie isn't good enough.