LTS

My BRISKET went into the brine the other day. Just waiting to be cooked. It will be done on Saturday though because I will be at the Sabres/Blues game on the 17th.

The difference is that Eichel's team was responding at the time. He just stood there. The Soderberg incident had no response, period. There was nothing to jump into. If Soderberg remained on the ice I would bet there would have been a response. He just got up and Eichel went to the box. I would disagree. He had a look of disbelief on his face. Looking around, as he likes to do, searching for a referee who believes the same thing that Jack believes, "I'm not supposed to get touched."

Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Cue the tank discussion. Cue the Because Buffalo discussion. Cue the management sucks discussion. The problem is not the team, it's the fan. The fan thinks the team is better than it is and then gets mad when it's not. The fan can't accept it when a GM says BS to a win streak despite the stats all indicating that Buffalo was getting lucky. The fan ignores that reality and instead thinks the team is better. The fan is wrong. But the fan doesn't care.

Why is no one questioning the Captain's response to this incident? It's not like he was injured on the play. He took a hit and got up looking like he could not believe he was touched. Then he just stood there. For me, that was exhibit A1 of the problem on this team. I'm getting tired of Eichel playing like he's entitled. There was no reason Eichel could not get up and get into the fracas.

Just hang them above you rather than next to you and they will remain out of frame. A friend told me about that. ?

Hey... let's play hockey. Weeeeee It's all I got.

YOu know what.. ignore everything I said. I'm not sure where my damn brain was regarding Matthews... I somehow missed some contract signings along the way... I wonder what days have been erased from my memory. I realized the other day I didn't know that Doughty signed too... I'm kind of concerned right now.. why would I not have known this?

I see forcing your way out as being unwilling to sign a contract to remain on the team as opposed to let's say Okposo, who did not have a contract to sign. At least if my memory serves correct. But yes, it's not really "forcing" so much as taking the option to not sign despite having the opportunity to sign the same contract with the Islanders (I am assuming they would have paid him the same). The Crosby/Malkin thing is interesting. I do think there's a difference when you are drafted 1st overall and a few years later the team goes out and signs a hometown hero UFA and makes him the 1C as opposed to Malkin who was drafted #2 and a year later had Crosby drafted #1. Matthews went from being the man, to being a man. Even Marner is more valuable to the team (in terms of points and points/game) and he needs a contract too. The question is, truly, can Matthews take the backseat? He's a 1C on a team that I don't believe can afford to pay him like their current 1C. The Pens did find a way to pay Malkin on par with Crosby. To me, it means Toronto has to let Marner go, or some other talented players. It's possible... but I don't think it's totally the same situation. There's a difference in analyzing the fit for a player like Duchene and using the abstract. I think going out and getting a 2C that costs $8-9M that produces at that level is not a bad thing (if it's available). But Duchene has been moved from two teams now and has not done anything for them while he was on them. I wouldn't want to invest into a player like that.

Fair questions.. If the game were evolved to be physical, I think today's players would be more physical than those from he 70's. I look at players like Tom Wilson and think, he's not going to have a hard time. The 70's players might be "tough" but they were not necessarily strong. Give an older player the current equipment and they will be faster, but they still will not be in the shape that today's athletes are in. They will not have trained to the point where the equipment will make that much difference. The thing is, I think you can point out a player or two in any era that might stand up to today's game. But address the sport overall and today's player will handle the older player quite easily. Interesting quick search result about NFL lineman and hockey player size evolution.. https://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-offensive-lineman-are-big-2011-10 https://hockey-graphs.com/2015/02/19/nhl-player-size-from-1917-18-to-2014-15-a-brief-look/

Duchene is a guy who has done nothing to improve any team he has been on. It would be a massive mistake to bring him in. It's true, it's always a risk. There aren't a lot of big names that hit UFA status that are worth signing, at least not for the money that they command. The only time it seems to happen is when a player is forcing their way out off the team (Tavares). Could, but unlikely. Toronto is happy with Tavares (any team would be) but they are also set up to have to deal with that contract now as well. Does anyone see Matthews as a 2C in this league? Because he's the 2C for a few more years with Tavares there. What you've seen are mistakes made by an leadership group that was learning how to navigate the world of professional sports while attempting to erase the mistakes of the prior ownership group. What I saw, and what I think a lot of people are clamoring for now, is to adopt the "throw **** at the wall and see what sticks" approach. Anecdotally people will find instances where that works out. Fundamentally, it's not a viable approach. Each time the Sabres make that play for the "quick fix" and it doesn't work out I think its incumbent upon the fan who wanted that fix to take a moment of introspection. It's understandable as to what drives the fan to complain and lose patience. The luxury the fan has is that they get to complain each time a change in the course of action occurs when it doesn't have the result they expected, even if it was the fan who wanted the change. It's easy to find something that says "they got the wrong guy". Everyone has a different patience level that is borne out of many factors. I don't hate on those who are frustrated and want change. I disagree with them, but I understand where they are at in their heads. I happen to agree with Botterill's assessment. It's not the popular message, but it's accurate from where I sit. I truly hope the Sabres management does not find the need to try and take a quick fix approach. It's high risk. Choose right, you win, choose wrong, the recovery time is increased and the overall pain is increased. The Sabres are back to being where they were before Murray traded away picks. He chose wrong, or at the very least, didn't create the environment in which those decisions would thrive. That led to the change in leadership that led to those players being moved out. I'd like to think the Sabres are not in that position again, but bringing in too much outside influence may disrupt the locker room and thus create a bad situation in which no one thrives. Lather. Rinse.Repeat... I hope not.

From a pure physically fit standpoint it's clear they were not as good. Training camp was where players almost got into game shape. There's no saying that they might not be able to be as good if they trained the same, but the bottom line is that humans are evolving and continuing to grow bigger and stronger. As such, it's safe to say that today's players are better than those of 40 years ago. Take that, then add the increased knowledge of how to play the game, the changes in how skills are developed, and you end up with a pretty convincing body of evidence.

I feel like you are just trying to find an avenue here to say the Sabres need someone who can fight people. I'm looking for things like I saw last night from the team irritating Malkin. That's all you need.

This will be a tough game. Gotta jump on their D and crush them. Rough up Tavares and Matthews.

I'm not quoting it all... That's a really great write up. Your grandparents should be brought out to the general public on Exhibit A for how to co-exist. I would have loved to hear some of those conversations. I think our political beliefs are very closely aligned. I call myself libertarian but not with the platform. For me the core problem isn't politics, it's that politics have finally come to represent our society. We're a materialistic society that are all about self-promotion over the the benefit of all. "Me first and perhaps only me". There are obviously people who don't think this way. I can't be surprised that politicians feel that way too.

Enjoy your one-sided conversation. You've clearly refused to read what others have said.

Yep, to the point that those with 300 level tickets were being handed 200 level tickets so you could move down. Took advantage of that. I would never pay that much for the Frozen Four... just couldn't do it. I'd have a hard time paying that much for any game unless it was a Stanley Cup clinching game... of course, that's my situation, not everyone's. ? Yep, to the point that those with 300 level tickets were being handed 200 level tickets so you could move down. Took advantage of that. I would never pay that much for the Frozen Four... just couldn't do it. I'd have a hard time paying that much for any game unless it was a Stanley Cup clinching game... of course, that's my situation, not everyone's. ?

Here's the secret... If you need your coach to continually fire up the team and have them ready to play, you have the wrong team. Players need to be self-motivated. Coaches are there to help turn it up when the self-motivation falters, they are not there to replace it. This team is still looking for those 1-2 players who will do that. They don't have them right now. They haven't had them in a long time.

Pessimism is the coping mechanism of the masses. You are either right, or pleasantly surprised. There's no negative in it, except in being right, which you really didn't want but you expected it, so it makes it better. Also... I'm not sure I disagree with you. I'd like to hope that he doesn't even get the nomination for his party. And i guess I do.. and I will be disappointed, but not surprised by any outcome.

Oooo, this is a fun thread. My parents were never political. I had no basis from them. We weren't religious either and that's just the way it goes. My initial leanings were probably heavily Republican. Growing up we did not have much and my Dad worked his butt off to get us what we needed. We didn't ask for handouts (although I found out later we actually did get some at times when his company was on strike). Speaking of which, I also learned to hate labor unions during that time (a great sticking point between my Dad and me until he retired). Basically, my mentality was, work for stuff and you'll get what you deserve. But it means really working and not being so damn conceited that any job was beneath you. During my time in high school I found the concept of law and history interesting. So, I went to school, as a dual major in Computer Science and Political Science. Ultimately dropped the Comp Sci. as I really suck at calculus and apparently it was very important. My focus in Political Science was in comparative politics and law. I did a lot of sociiology and psychology as well. It changed a lot of my viewpoints. I decided I didn't want to be a politician (sell my soul) or a lawyer (sell my soul) and sadly I was also not going into law enforcement. I grew up hating big companies because they inevitably were 50% of the problem with labor unions making up the other 50%. Both sides deluded in what was best and in the middle employees getting screwed. I hated large corporations but during college I learned more about money and life and kind of wanted a lot of those things. I had never had money so wouldn't it be good to bust my butt to be able to make a really good wage? Somewhere along the way my views softened and I am happier just making my way in the world. I've stepped WAY back from money is everything. I'm consigned to the fact that I learned this too late and am buried in the system and can't break out of it without seriously impacting my wife and kids. I'm still a fiscally conservative person and I am socially progressive. Both sides are wrong. But as I've said in other threads, I've largely given up trying to change the world. I would love to do it, but I've lost faith. I still raise my voice once in awhile but I usually end up regretting it as I get shouted down by people on either side. In the end, I feel like a person who has tried hard to never be defined in any camp and just looked for what made the most sense.

The best I got from the "discrediting" is that they claim he is trying to get a lighter sentence. As I saw someone say somewhere... "So the guy who was convicted of lying for President Trump is now being accused of lying about lying for President Trump?" As I read the statement, it's pretty damning and frankly needs to be followed up on.

It's unfortunate that you can't understand that people like different things from you. It's worse that you can't accept it and instead have to insult others because of it. People get really excited when cars wreck in NASCAR, right until they realize someone was seriously injured. People love big hits in football, until their favorite player doesn't get up. Too many people take pleasure in the pain suffered by others. I think the easiest way to explain things is this. It's hockey, not boxing. If i wanted to watch guys punch each other, I'd watch boxing. Presumably that's why they created the sport. Fights break out here and there, they do in every major sport, and that's fine. But staged fighting and a predominance of fighting in a game should not exist. Hitting and physical play are part of hockey. I've no problem with Dahlin getting clocked. But, I'm not looking for a team full of people who just go around and try to hit people either. It's a losing strategy because skilled players will generally move the puck before they can get hit. It's hockey, it has components of skating, passing, shooting... I think to see those too.

Indeed. How much farther can people go if they work together? Well, tug of war shows me how far they don't go when they work against each other. It's really that simple.

The Canes... getting it done.

The guy who was deep in the O zone and busted his butt to get back in and help break up a 3 on 1 and prevent a shot. The guy, but for a small puck wobble made a really nice move and couldn't quite get the shot off. He was there too. You are exactly right. But... This sums up everything I think about this current situation. There are people on here who are going to complain just because they want to complain. I didn't expect you to say it though, inky. And I agree 100%. People bitch about the talent on this team and then bitch when the team doesn't play well. They blame the coach for not getting the players better prepared while simultaneously complaining that the players don't care and have no talent. The frog doesn't have wings and the queen doesn't have balls... the Sabres are not the team people think they are. That's not on them, that's on the people who thought wrong.

You also have to count short handed goals... The Sabres have given those up as well. ?