7+6=13

I apologize for the lack of knowledge and hope I'm not irritating you. So it's because of his age he can't play in Rochester but he could have made the Sabres? Can you explain why that rule is in place? I'm trying to figure out what it protects or protects against.

Thanks for the explanation. Is the fact he has to either be on the Sabres or go back to Juniors next year due to him being designated there to begin with? I guess what I'm asking is could he have gone to Rochester this year if the Sabres chose?

Serious question because I don't know. If a player is posting those type of point totals at that level - is it possible that the player would get better being moved to Rochester?

I get wanting defenseman to contribute but as a general rule they shouldn't be judged on points. I'm not defending Gorges but points isn't what I'd like to see from him.

Sure and the way this team is structured now - that's where he should be. Simply because there's limited options (I know you know). Problem with Kane is he's a guy that likes to have the puck - but in order to be the type of player with the puck you must be an excellent passer or have puck handling skills that overrides defenses ability to take it from you (keep away handling). He's not either. He really should fall in love with not having the puck but he's not a fundamental player. He plays faster than he's capable of controlling so he doesn't see the rink well enough to be in the right spot - for a better puck handler/passer to set him up. I love Kane's "go". He goes 100 miles per hour and digs and lets see what happens. He's the perfect 3rd line type of player that has enough skating skills to really add to the scoring in the middle of the lineup. Too bad that role will never be realized here and he's just good enough for the money to not let a team afford to have him there.

I don't know the trade was a bust but I'll give a few of my thoughts on Kane. His game isn't fundamentally sound enough to be relied on for top 6 play. Ideally we need one more speed offensive player with excellent puck handling to enter our top 6 to move Kane to the 3rd line. IMO that would allow his style to not only be tolerable but if he gives you 15-20 goals it can elevate the team. IMO that's the perfect role for Kane - to be on a team good enough to get him to the 3rd line. The issue is I don't see Kane as being satisfied with that role and would probably cause his effort to diminish at best and at worst cause team problems. I like Kane and he's the type of player I want on the team when it's somewhat complete especially considering his age. However his salary and I think his self evaluation will stop that from happening. In saying that, I would make any attempt to trade him for the sole reason that I don't want his game in the top 6.

No way. She's a machine like no other. Not many candidates could have ran as hard as her - especially if you look at any of the others talked about. The country was just ready for Trump.

Ignoring facts is pretty commonplace.

And she couldn't care less about you and your family. You got duped.

Please don't pretend at minimum she's just as disgusting.

Then I guess they were ready.

They weren't going to vote for her.

Not really. The college is the accurate depiction of the country.

Embarrassing effort tonight and we won't hear one of Bylsma going off. The reason is hockey players are good soldiers and are playing as they're coach is teaching them. He literally can't jump they're crap because they're playing his style.

That's because there's no structure to the offensive game plan. There's no flow to the offense and it's mainly due to IMO how we possess the puck.

The reason Bylsma was finally fired in Pitt. was the team wasn't as good as they should have been. It wasn't tolerated there. Seems like a similar story here. My hope was he could get us to a point and we'd find out if he could succeed past that. He's proving to not be the type of coach to progress this team.

That's the personality of the coach.

Like another poster said the fans aren't frustrated because of that period - it's that we're supposed to be an exciting team to watch. Ok, maybe not the strongest defensive team but certainly an offensive team. Jack and Kane aren't the reason we look this bad on offense. I think it's Bylsma and his conservative style and what appears to be a lack of discipline. This team needs a different coach and it'll happen sooner than later, IMO.

I'm disappointed that Bylsma thinks one of the issues is Sam not providing enough for our offense.

I can't remember a game where the referees where in the way more than in this game. Obviously it cost us big on the Foligno turn over but I was saying it prior. They were in some odd positions tonight.

You've got to give him some credit though. He's trimmed down quit a bit so there was obviously a dedication to conditioning.

I'd take the under with that number.

Zero chance he get 147 points. C'mon he's a nice player but let's see him score 40 goals first before we compare him to Gretzky. Crosby got over 40 goals once in his career and now you're saying McDavid is better than Crosby ever was?

The sky is definitely not falling but the fact your first statement wasn't able to happen obviously has fans feeling snake bitten again. I don't think any reasonable fan thought our defense got markedly better but that we'd hang with most teams offensively. I also don't think any reasonable fan should have thought we would win our opener. The defense would have to win the game along with Lehner needing to stand on his head. It's a difficult pill to swallow having to wait for what should be the best part of our team - offense.

After watching tonights performance - Kane is the very low on the pecking order to be worried about or wanting gone.