LTS

If you haven't noticed Ristolainen has checked out on this team. He doesn't shove guys in front of the net, he doesn't hit anyone. He's not interested in putting himself out there anymore. He clearly wants to leave and I believe the Sabres want him gone, time will tell if they will have to give him away for nothing.

First bolded: I don't blame Russia. Interference in election politics has been going on longer than the Internet has existed. It's just easier now, because the world is collectively much more ignorant now. Second bolded: Thank you. I guess now, see below and let me know what you think. It's stuff like this that always makes me pause. I have no idea on how to interpret the information below. On the surface, it lends credence to the notion that they did not get the picture and it addresses why they didn't just print one. And the show goes on...

This is not asking someone to stop acting like a snowflake. It's name calling and has no place here. First bolded: I fear you are incorrect here. I only need to look at my community Facebook page to know that people, despite the obvious truth in front of them, refuse to believe it if enough people tell them it's not accurate. It's a sad state. Second bolded: perhaps I missed the full outline in the initial post. If so, my apologies. It seemed like the initial take was "they make sure these are distributed immediately" and "I have been in X number of location over Y Presidents and they've always had the picture." I used generics because I don't recall the number. I didn't see the part about her not making sure it was up for about a year. See my first quoted post from you above. Your first comment was indeed as you say, the second, not so much. The second paragraph can be handled elsewhere. --------------- In general, I love when people post quotes from the "founding fathers" and frankly from political texts of years gone by. Politics were so much more philosophical than matters of law. Exercises of thought. I suppose that's what had originally enamored me with politics.. and then I studied them and learned it just wasn't true anymore. Sigh.

Ahh, I thought Stephens was a F. I suppose Spencer could be a different kind of D.. who knows. I'll be quiet now. ?

Actually, it could be logical. If there was an established pattern in history so obvious that it never happens, one might be inclined to simply not mail a picture knowing that people would never believe that one was never sent. As such, you can claim that the person did not hang the picture, as is protocol, and remove them. This entire discussion is exactly what the outcome of that would be. He said, she said, and no proof, but the person is removed from the position. As you have admitted, this President has done many things that prior administrations have not. I would not use the actions of the past to confirm those of the present when the current administration has been routinely engaging in activities that no other administration has even approached. There is no proof of this, as I said above. You believe they are lying. Objectively, there is a perfectly good possibility why they could be telling the truth. There is no irrefutable proof of either position, only the outcome.

Interestingly enough, this could be one of those moments where analytics screws over the eye test. If analytics said their PP was lucky you'd be inclined to correct the "luck" before the "regression to the mean". However, in the off chance that their actions were redefining the model, the analytics would not match up with what was happening on the ice. Hey, who knows. Frankly I don't buy into it. The PP looks the exact same as it did at the beginning of the year, teams are still pressuring the Sabres PP because they stand around too much and they rely on cross-ice passes to one-timers. Those passes are routinely blocked. The only thing that is completely different is that they've gone back to having Eichel try and rush the puck into the zone during which 8 times out of 10 he turns the puck over or they do not gain possession.

Who knows what will happen... but.. Spencer is brought in as a D, so that a D can be called up to Rochester, because a D from Rochester will be needed in Buffalo because a D in Buffalo is getting moved out. This is why I don't crap on things until they get a chance to play out.

It seems to me that the NHLPA should be more involved in helping the NHL hand out longer punishment for this kind of stuff. I am sure the NHLPA, overall, doesn't care as much because their members still get paid. However, it's not good for the game. I think in instances where the infractions are egregious, players, even without a prior record, should be sitting out for weeks.

Is he the top 6 forward they need? I would worry about his injury history, but at this point, it seems every Sabres forward is going to be injured.

Perhaps a problem... I'm really curious how a coach gets players to not pay attention to the ice though. I'm not saying it's not possible, but it seems like you continually hear coaches from youth on up preaching that you have to be looking for the guy without the puck, he's the most dangerous guy on the ice.

Obvious to some... are they the same ones who were mad that Gilmour was sent to Rochester? Are they the ones who want Reinhart traded? Are they the ones who think some other GM wants Ristolainen so bad that they'll give up a top 6 forward for him? I've seen what people find "obvious" around here. What's obvious is that we don't know much about much, but like to pretend we do. You don't have to be content, by all means continue to get all worked up over the things you can't control. Fight the air to your heart's content.

Man.. I can't even imagine.

Ahh, attack me and label me. The perfect response from a person who cannot think deeper. Thank you for proving my point. Then you follow it up with "I don't care about next year" You won't care about next year now.. no. You will next year, when the team has put itself in a position to continue sucking even longer because they made really bad trades in an attempt to win now. So, you'll be moderately happy this year and then when the team has no depth you'll be off whining about how the GM sucks. Oh yeah, and when you have no depth the injuries that are part of the game hurt the team even more because the drop off from talented player A to replacement player B is greater. But.. yes.. trade all the depth for a few good players and then wonder why things suck when they get injured. Johanssen isn't Crosby.. Rodrigues isn't Johanssen. Go check out the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 seasons for the Penguins.. they didn't have Crosby but still made the playoffs. Why? They had depth. The expansion draft is relevant if you were lobbying for Botterill to trade prospect and picks to get roster players that then would have to be exposed and potentially put the team back into the dark ages. That was my point. Certainly the team has nothing to fear right now... He clearly hasn't done enough to fix the roster. That is answered by the state of the roster. The question, is whether there was the ability to make those changes or not. Is Botterill incompetent or is the league situation such that he is unable to make the changes without taking significant risks? I'm not sure we know the answer to that one.

Think deeper. The problems of the Sabres STILL date back to before Botterill. You can assume that there were moves out there that could have been made that would have helped this team. You may be right. The Sabres might have been slightly better this year. Then the expansion draft of 2021 would hit and the Sabres would not be able to protect enough players. Their prospect pool would be crap because they likely had to give up picks and players to get those better players and in 2022 the Sabres might be back to complete suckitude. That said, the injury to MoJo is big... he improves the lineup. The depth isn't there for the Sabres.. we knew that. Injuries will kill the team. They have plenty of them.

Well, if the coach doesn't have someone, then it's not really the coach's fault right? Just curious, because you were questioning the coach's ability. I'd like to see more from Ralph to shake things up, but I think he's also handcuffed and most of the problems on this team fall on the players. They are the ones who are not completing passes, not skating hard enough, not covering the back door passes, etc. Yeah, I agree. I'll be curious if more changes occur.

I hope Botterill trades Reinhart for a 3rd round pick.. and when he's asked why, he points to the camera and says "There you go SabreSpace. I did something." ?

Can any coach correct Ristolainen's terrible passing? Just curious.. ?

Look at the lineup and injuries. Olofsson has been ineffective on the top line as well. Who else do you put there? I know people want Skinner, but you're effectively neutralizing every other line by putting the best players on a single line. That said, it might still happen during the game. I could see separating Jack and Sam and seeing what happens. It might get there. At the same time, the perception might be that separated, and with this lineup, it might not generate anything. Anyway... the Bruins are damn good. I expect Buffalo to get lit up tonight. Plenty of backdoor goals being scored because the Bruins can move the puck effectively and Buffalo will be leave the backside open. It'll be ugly. Good luck!

When I use the term narrative, I mean the long standing comments on subjects that have been overly digested, crapped out, regurgitated, reconsumed, and crapped out again. Things like: Discussing the ROR trade, the tank, signing of Drury/Briere (lack thereof), etc. They get injected into conversations after you've hoped they died off. Those narratives. It's not even what I agree or disagree with, it's that at some point there's nothing more to add to the conversation.

Sadly it's not just sports. People can now go out and find scraps of information that litter the Internet like turds in a cow pasture. People who post those turds have shined 'em up real nice too. There's no shortage of things to reinforce any particular viewpoint you wish to express. The problem is that people tend to do it with a high level of emotion and a low level of thinking. It's easier to let the heart win over the brain, even if its not intentional. Some people can live with warts and others need cosmetic surgery to remove them. I suppose the teams warts are no different. AS for the comments by the GM? The team has too many D and other GMs know it. So he has to say those things. The team is also losing and has suffered injuries. If I were an opposing GM I would not be looking to give Botterill a fair deal right now. The only way a trade happens is if another team suffers a problem they need to fix worse than Buffalo.

Getting my MBA was the best thing I could have done. While I don't think anyone has ever said, "Gee, you have an MBA." I have heard comments on the fact that 11 years after undergrad, I put myself back through school, in a rigorous program, with a family, and was able to succeed. Now, if you want to go down that path. You also have to ask yourself, what's your focus. What's the school known for? In Rochester, for example, Simon School (Univ. of Rochester) has long been known as a financial school whereas RIT has a vastly different MBA program. Both are exceptional, but have vastly different fits. The networking aspect is important, and if you do the executive path it's a great way to go. I would put stock in the comments that have recommended moving down a level and into a bigger company. There's a world of difference there. The bigger company may also then help you pay for your MBA. One thing is for certain, the MBA didn't really teach my anything I didn't already know overall. It did, however, teach me how to better analyze, frame, and deliver the messages I needed to deliver. It gave me insight into many things that have happened in the business world that I might not have otherwise known about and as such can pull as references on a moment's notice.

Oh, I'm sure. He's gotta find a way to get the team to relax a bit and have fun playing hockey. Right now they're all like "Oh no, not again." You know, like when some posters on this forum start back up the narrative they love to push every now and then. ? They've got a ways to go... and trying too hard (which is not the same as playing hard and fast) is certainly not going to get them there.

Wow... I'm glad I've learned to stop reading most of the posts anymore. I'm not sure how you survive. Looking forward to tonight's game.. unless they look like they did the other night. Then I'm looking forward to Disney+, a good book, or something else to spend time on. Good luck everyone. I hope you make it through.

It's not necessarily that Eichel wasn't playing D. It's also the message it sends to the rest of the team. I'm not saying it was that case against Chicago, frankly the whole team looked lost in that game. Overall though, if your $10M leader isn't leading there are players who won't want to follow. The first goal is almost forgivable. It happens. In fact, if Eichel doesn't hit the puck that's probably not a goal. The second goal has been a problem for the Sabres this year. They are far too focused on the puck and not enough on the space where the puck is going to go. He's guilty of puck watching, perhaps looking for a turnover so he can jump on it and head back up the ice. He's not the only Sabre who has missed backdoor passes this season. The team is lost on their D zone coverage far too often.