...

These same experts, on average, have had the Sabres finishing somewhere in the top 8 every year since the lockout. Yeah, they know the Sabres reeeeeaaalllllly well. FWIW, I don't know what's going on with Grigs, but I share your concern. I think the attitude thing I can handle since he's so young; you want your 18 year old to be extroverted and confident. I do fear he was handled poorly last season which could either help to solve attitude problems or make them worse. If he has a work-ethic/attitude problem he needs to dorm with a grizzled vet for a year who will scare/force the demons out of him and reinforce the good habits. I thought I saw a lot of potential in him last season and I'd like to make sure that is nurtured and brought out. We know what happens when potential is squandered for whatever reason (Stafford).

Freak. Aberration, abortion, anomaly, chimera, curiosity, geek, grotesque, malformation, miscreation, misshape, monster, monstrosity, mutant, mutation, oddity, ######, rarity, sport, weirdo. Choose one. Choose them all!

My summary: ...well, except maybe Zadorov.

THAT'S 'CAUSE DARCY REGIER IS A GENIUS!

Garbage.

Mike Harrington ‏@BNHarrington 8m Darcy on trading a D now after taking 2: "I suppose it probably gives us options but that wasn't the intent." #Sabres

I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. Unbelievable. No, wait, tragically believable.

Stupid. That all was nipped in the bud nearly a month ago.

Doh!

Another d. They freaking suck.

Sabres take Fucale.

Way to go, Lindy!

They better.

The Sabres sucks. I need to follow another team.

What a posse for the Sabres.

How the hell do you get a tweet on the NBC crawler?

I would call it giving up, but that's not a bad thing. They would be giving up on him for a reason...whatever that reason is the public isn't privy to.

That's one less potential trade partner. I'd say his value dropped a tad bit.

... or "they", depending...

Okay, so based on what I've been reading, I'm amenable to revising my view on the matter a little. Frankly, I've never had to articulate these thoughts before, which were just an amalgam of observations over time sitting in the recesses of my brain. It would seem that it is quite likely socio-economics would be a measurable factor in the development of the hockey-child into a hockey-adult. However, I still maintain that it is not strictly socio-economics at work, but that family/commitment-based qualities are represented (way) above average in hockey-culture. While I have seen no studies to substantiate this claim, the anecdotal evidence is too strong and numerous to ignore. Now, let's talk about UFOs...

Anecdotal. Doesn't count. :P

Maybe. I understand your POV, but I don't find them equal at all. The parents of baseball and football kids can sit outside in the fresh air, sitting in their cozy chairs with a cooler of beverages, while their kid practices. It's simply not the same environment as going to a hockey rink, at all. Hockey is much more of a "hassle" for the for the parent.

I love it. I don't expect it to happen in Buffalo, but the idea is grand and would be about the only maneuver Regier could make that would earn some respect from me.

IMHO, no matter what the costs are financially, it takes more commitment from the family to get a kid up at 5am, and make sure he's at the rink at 6am for practice. It takes a commitment to car-pool to the next game, which may be an hour and half drive away. Then you have to sit on the hard, metal benches in a cold, smelly rink, not outside in a lawn chair. You need to get the kid into a rink in the off-season. The costs are nothing compared to the commitment.

BTW, don't get me wrong...I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, just have a discussion. That said, are you sitting on (solid/good/reliable) data about the socio-economic status of hockey culture? Are most kids involved in hockey from the upper-middle class or higher?