LTS

I have a full green light to pursue this. I'm not booking anything until I have a ticket to the game (or tickets to both nights if possible). I will fly out on 11/6 and return...... perhaps Mon/Tue of the following week. I have no idea what i will do.. but as long as I procure a ticket, I am in. Unfortunately for my son, that's varsity hockey tryout week. So he's out. My wife just can't make it happen. So I am going solo. But yeah, if people from here are going, awesome. BTW: the flight I looked at was from NYC. I'll research the add-on to get from ROC to NYC, but if it's stupid, I'd drive a group to NYC to catch the flight over. $377 today, round-trip NYC to Stockholm. that's insane.

Watching After Life on netflix. It is the show I needed to see right now. I feel like it was written specifically for me. It has changed me.

Since I came back from a hiatus to discuss Swedish games.. I perused the board and found this. I was at this game with my son (his birthday present). The hitting, by the checking line, certainly brought the crowd to life. The following shift, by the "skilled" players, kept up the level of intensity and the crowd fed off that. It was stated somewhere in here, it's not the hitting. The hitting should be done by those who are supposed to hit. The skill players should be playing tenaciously. It was probably PA who said something about "giving a ****". That I agree with. I think it's hard for them to care right now. They know they are going nowhere, pride or otherwise. This team has to learn how to play with about 3 levels more intensity than it does now. And yes, the atmosphere inside the arena was pretty special at that moment. It harkened days of watching the Sabres route the Bruins, or watching them slap the Flyers in the playoffs. Sure, the players feed off the energy of the fans. The fans feed off the energy of the players. It's a symbiotic relationship. But only the players can play the game... they are the spark.

Yes. I am researching this very thing. Flight from NYC to Stockholm is pretty reasonable. (sub $500) Sheraton just up the road ($173/night) Just need to know what tickets to the game cost. --------------- And yes, this announcement was enough to bring me back because we had discussed at the SS Meetup.

Fair enough. I'm out.

You have experience playing games at Lincoln Park? Oh, you mean on a team that is more experienced and talented? Right. Makes sense. The claim was that he was a bad influence on the younger players, St. Louis doesn't have the same locker room. Last year, on this date., the Blues were 37-27-0-5. This year they are 36-26-0-7. Certainly O'Reilly has more points, but the Sabres had the worst offense in the league last year. St. Louis was slightly better. Through nearly the same number of games the Blues have scored 10 more goals this year over last year. At this point last year the Sabres were 31st in the league. They are 24th. No matter how you slice it, that's an improvement of 7 slots. The Blues have improved from 24th to 19th. That's decent improvement, for a team that brought in O'Reilly, Bozak, Perron, Maroon. The season hasn't finished and teams trend, but on this date, the facts are the facts. It's all sour grapes. Accept that the Sabres have improved. Accept they haven't improved as much as you wanted them to. But don't deny that they are improved. People now want to dismiss the Sabres 10 game win streak. If you do that you should dismiss the Blues streak. Without it they would be back in the basement of the league as well. Well, and without Jordan Binnington who is racking up some seriously impressive numbers in net. 16-4-0-1, .928SV and 1.81 GAA. That's 3rd best GAA average in the league of goaltenders who have played ANY number of games. You know the only other regular starter for a team that sits close to him? Ben Bishop, the goalie who beat the Sabres last night who has a .932SV% and a 2.08 GAA My last thought. I see people talking about how the Sabres need 6 forwards and some D and goaltending and in the same paragraph are calling for the coaches head. I find that interesting. So the coach should be winning despite the Sabres needing to improve 45% of their roster? Let's not discount that the Sabres had chances last night. The puck didn't go in. You put that game in the middle of a 5 game stretch where they go 3-2 and no one is really complaining. You put it after a game where they lost 3-0 and got blown out and people change the narrative.

The fat breaks down and drains away. You don't grab a hunk of it and chew on it. That is gross. Brisket is not a meat you cook in under an hour.... or even 2 hours. Despite this concept of "boiling" the brisket.. I'm not going to do that.. ever.. to any meat. It's going to get braised and slow cooked for a long time. Unless health dictates diet constraints I live by the "everything in moderation" mantra. I eat red meat perhaps once every few weeks.

So what happened? The thing that happens to young teams and exactly what Botterill and Housley preached. The game tightens up. The better, more seasoned, teams don't drop off the map like the younger teams tend to do. The Sabres haven't learned that yet. They are still too young and they have too many holes to fill to overcome it. Look at the Blues, they are pretty much the exact opposite of the Sabres. One can point to a coaching change, one could point to to Jordan Binnington (I have done both), but they are also a very seasoned team. A team that knows how to pull through bad stretches. What did Okposo say about a month ago? This team is still too emotional. There were players that were too high during the streak and once that ended and the losing set in they let it compound on them. The team, overall, just does not have the mental maturity to grind out a season. This isn't anyone's "fault" per se. It just happens to be that you can't flip the roster that fast all the time. The team is under performing a bit from where I expected. I think the loss of Berglund made a big difference in the Sabres being able to shutdown the other teams top line. There are a few other factors in there as well. People will point at Berglund and blame Botterill for trading ROR. I'm done debating that. But the fact is, Berglund was a player that formed a good shutdown line and then left the team. That's, as far as we know, something that was unpredictable. Disappointed? I am. I'm not depressed about it. I can understand how the team got to this position despite it not being where I would like. I expected them to be a little bit better but I did not expect the playoffs. I thought it was a possibility, but not a high probability. The team has not been successful that is true. What has the team done that makes you think it should be more successful than it is at the moment? The team has been mismanaged. I have no control over it. I can't go back and undo what has been done and I can't impact what will happen in the future. The amount of money and time I invest in the team is commensurate with their level of achievement. That's really the crux of my argument. I don't get that upset because they aren't worth getting that upset over. I guess a lot of fans are like the players Okposo described. Too high when they win and too low when they lose. When I say the problem is with the fan I think of situations like the Bills losing 4 straight Super Bowls. Right now, a fan would probably look back and say, man I wish they could be in a position to lose 4 straight again. At the time, the fans were reacting to the Bills losing a Super Bowl much like they react to the team having been so crappy for so long. In one scenario the team was highly successful and in the other the team has been a model of futility and in both situations the fans, eventually, were tired of excuses and reasons. Their responses sounded similar despite a team that had continually finished 2nd versus a team that finished out of the playoffs. I cut a lot of your post because i only wanted to address the last part. It was a very good post. The ownership aspects of the franchise are very real to the situation the team finds itself in today. I accept it however, because i can't buy the team. It's what happened. Through it all, I can say, at least there are still teams in Buffalo. As for the children.. I don't think the impact is as great as people think. Despite the negative outcomes, parents fandom tends to rub off on children. My son, who just turned 15, has shown no desire to stop being a fan of the Sabres. He still gets annoyed when he can't watch a game due to some other conflict (including his own hockey practices). He's an example of one, to be certain, but I don't think he's unlike many others who become a fan of a team because their parents were fans. Some kids will straight up find another team because of friends, or whatever. But I don't know how much team success plays into that.. maybe I am wrong.

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.