LTS

Coverage starts at 7pm on NBCSN as well I believe. The question is... when does Buffalo make the first pick?

Speaking of speculation... don't we have a thread for all of this? This is the actual trade tracker right? :) BTW.. I'm not pointing at you.. just using your use of speculation to point this out.

Is that a Honda or a Mazda?

Tim Cook, Rajit Yadav, Shelley Martin, Bob from Accountemps

That's marketing.. and our need, especially in this country, to make everything bigger than it needs to be. We're not a country based on information, we're a country based on who can yell it the loudest or make it the biggest. See also: GOAT.

Wrong Patches.. :)

Is he a guy who is going to change the culture in the locker room though? Beyond what he does on the ice, there was always the question of him and the rest of that core having what it takes to really be winners. And completely true that there's no way to game it out. I just don't see Vanek bringing enough to the team to really make an impact.

That's not always true. The Chicago Blackhawks have won a lot, but they were not good last season. The Rangers were once a team that just signed free agents.. they won, but never anything that mattered. Roster management is critical and just signing whomever you want to make the team better now will ultimately bite you in the rear-end.

I thought it was growing a killer 'stache.

If you throw a bag of crap into a crowd of hungry people they will go insane for it... until they find out what it is. During that time people will argue over what's in the bag, they'll beat each other up over it. They'll finally open it and realize it was just a bunch of crap. They'll be mad... Until the next bag of crap is thrown into the crowd. That sums up the rumor mill me for me.

That's an awfully spirited read into what I said. I didn't say they should lose on purpose or try to lose. I merely said it is better to finish last than 20th. If your team is built so it finishes 20th it is doing you a disservice. So, in the CONTEXT of what is being discussed, if the Sabres add Vanek and it only moves them up 4 spots in the final standings (or 5) from 31st to 26th it's not really helping them. It hurts them because finishing last would be better than finishing 26th. Keep in mind, since we seem to have spell things out in full legal disclaimers on here. I am referring to the addition of Vanek. I am not referring to a team that finishes 20th because of its core youth improving year over year. That is a positive sign. Vanek is a temporary free agent piece that should be signed to put you over the top, not a bump from the bottom. You have somehow taken the statement, reapplied it outside of the context of the conversation and have now implied that I think the Sabres should intentionally lose. At the same time, you are attempting to insult me by telling me that I contribute to the "culture of losing". It would be better to spend your energy working to understand what I am saying than trying to find a way to attack me.

I would love for the Sabres to find a way to get Tkachuk, but I don't see any way of it happening without giving up too much and setting the team back. I think he has an "IT" factor. Perhaps it's just my exposure to his personality and not others...

Does he lose that extra year option if he goes to UFA and signs with the Islanders? I think he doesn't, which is what I think you are stating with the Stamkos reference. That's what I am getting at... No way in hell I would sign a contract today. I would go to UFA, get my offers and decide where I want to go. The Islanders have to make a strong offer and they can't reduce it just because he tested free agency. If they did it, their fanbase would hate them more than they already do.

Coaches are like managers, business owners, etc. You find the one that fits the situation of your team and can lead it during that phase. If you need to change leadership to adjust with where the team is at, you do. There are coaches who are good at developing young talent. Overall they struggle to get a talented team to play to the next level. There are coaches who cannot develop young talent but can get a talented group to play to that next level. Some coaches will appear to be better in winning record, but it mostly comes from the team itself, not the coach. Some coaches will win the Cup.

In order to score you have to be in the play. Also, I hate the idea of Vanek the first time around. That's not true... it is as TrueBlue says below. Here's the question. The definition of better as narrowly defined by where you finish the regular season, yes. If, however, you consider that it also does not guarantee a top 3 draft position in the following draft one might argue that it reduces your ability to improve the overall talent through the draft. As such, is finishing 26th more important than finishing 30th (or 31st really). I would prefer to finish dead last than finish 26th. In fact, if you are not finishing within the top 20 and more importantly are not in the hunt for a wild card spot I would prefer to finish last.

At this point... how does Tavares not at least go to free agency and see what happens? Are the Islanders going to reduce their offer? Unlikely. Your 11 days away from finding out how much money you could earn. I'd stick it out. I'd wait 11 days to have a drink if you told me I was going to get a 20yr Pappy at the end of it.

It's a pretty typical workout these days. And yes.. he looks jacked.

San Jose wants cap space. Ottawa needs players. Florida doesn't want to give up players. That's how it works. Perfect. If Hoffman proves to not be toxic in Florida then it's a good add for them.

What was the difference between the power play in the first part of the season and the second part of the season? The entire team changed its course around December 2... even strength, power play, even giving up short handed goals. There were adjustments made. The team was not meant to win a lot of games last year. It was meant to be evaluated... the entire season. If this season doesn't show signs of improvement, then I would begin questioning Housley. That said, I still don't want Trotz. There's this emphasis that a coach makes all the difference. People were gonzo over Babcock and have since cooled considerably on him. There's the story that he can't get along with the young players. The theory on GM's is very similar. You get lucky and get a few good players and you look like a genius GM. One player bombs on you, despite the fact the entire world would have picked the same player at the time, and you look like a failure. A coach can help you win, but he won't make you win. The players make you win. A coach can certainly make you lose.

If Hoffman moves again then I am going to think that the GMs are sending him a message. Let's just shuffle Hoffman around the league until he gets dizzy. :)

All this finger pointing at Washington... I have not read what Trotz was asking for in a new contract. If he wanted $5M per season it might explain things a bit right? I don't want Trotz.. the man has FINALLY won a Stanley Cup and now everyone wants him. No thanks. Another new system, new thinking, new message... no, no, no. There's nothing wrong with Phil Housley, not a single thing.

Dangit man... I spent years crafting medical center security policies.... it's HIPAA.. HIPAA.. two As!!!!! :)

He's covering the wrong team. He's a good fit to cover the Senators though.

Interesting thought exercise... In the posts above, Tim Graham was listed as writing for the Bills. He was referred to having the potential to be a DB at times... I kept wondering what kind of strained reference it was to his writing to call him a defensive back. That he missed coverage at times? I couldn't figure it out. I finally figured it out... it's not defensive back. Yeah.. I mean... I guess that's how I think.

It's a good recognition for the guy in his profession. Some people have issues about numbers... I don't. He's obviously a mainstay of the organization, along with RJ. It's cool to see.