LTS

I think it's important to remember how much different a player can look and can play when they are happy with the situation and have a reason to play. It's not just that San Jose is a better team. He's in the playoffs and he has a chance to prove something. This is why you can't always dismiss a player on a bad team as being a bad player. We're all no different. When our situation sucks it's not easy to go out and bust your butt for them. Let's be honest, if you've ever worked in customer service. You are more likely to go the extra mile for a customer who has tried to help themselves and is extra polite in requesting your assistance as opposed to the idiot who walks up and expects to be waited on hand and foot as though it's an inconvenience they have to talk to you. The only difference is the situation those people create. Sports is no different.

Yea.. I would prefer the 27th too... although I am not available that day so it won't matter either way.

Well.. if you want the sure thing you'll need the 25th to be the date. Might be interested.. need to check the schedule and see what tickets cost. A few unexpected expenses have left things a little thin.

I wish I hadn't read this thread this crappy Sunday morning. It's examples like this writing that make me want to get into a secret military cryo-chamber and be forgotten about for 500 years in the hopes that by the time my chamber is accidentally unearthed the world has actually reverted from it's current Idiocratic state.

I don't think he should be. He did not hit Karlsson in the head. He hits him cleanly and I am sure the side impact causes his head to snap and may cause a concussion. However, Karlsson was digging at the puck. I agree with the call in that I think it's somewhat of a bad angle hit but without the head contact I don't think it warrants a suspension. And I would LOVE to see him suspended... not a fan of his.

Look.. Marcus Miller is a bass player, Stanley Clarke is a BASS player.. Victor Wooten? No slouch. There are plenty of great bass players. Which is why I used the wink.. :) At least a timpanist has to know notes... using your reference. Of course my favorite is when we play Also sprach Zarathrustra...

On every face-off the center should be the one deciding where he will attempt to win the draw and communicate it to his teammates. This is why they study the habits of those they will go up against. As far as set plays.. they may communicate a few during a timeout but after that I would think that the players themselves are picking what they want to do from a pool of things they have worked on. It's usually one or two that are in charge of determining the play and they know who it is. My guess is that they'll mostly be in agreement (this isn't football with a huge playbook) based on seeing what the other team is doing from their lineup perspective. In almost all cases the set play will be to get the puck to Jack (in the Sabres case). If you have a few back to back to back face-offs they'll likely switch it up because the other team will shade toward Jack. Kind of like a catcher calling pitches for the pitcher.

It's a measurement factor that is designed to take the size of the market out of the mix. Relatively speaking, more people in Buffalo watched the NHL playoffs than anywhere else. 100 people in Buffalo see an advertisement and 10 people in NYC see the same advertisement and the conversion rate is a consistent 10%. This would mean 10 people in Buffalo signed up and 1 in NYC. This of course gets kludgy really fast because the next part of the calculation would depend on what the product is we are discussing. Let's assume for a moment (for simplicity sake) that the product cost to manufacture remains constant. The cost to ship remains constant. The next part of the equation would be the cost of inventory. This would likely be much more expensive in NYC than Buffalo. Cost of operations similarly more expensive (you pay people to work more in NYC than Buffalo). Assuming other market factors remaining constant the margin dollars of the product remain the same. So, the company earns $5 for every widget sold (revenue - costs). The ad is much more effective in Buffalo because 10 people converted and only 1 in NYC. It may be different with other products but you'd have to factor in the cost of revenue per dollar spent in advertising. Of course the cost of advertising is set based on the viewership where you can see that Buffalo is the top market and likely driving down the overall cost of advertising. So, it might be more cost effective for advertisers to target NBC hockey depending on the type of marketing they need to get out. Lots of variables. You are talking about people paying money to go to an arena. This is people watching and having an interest in the game. Far fewer people pay to go to a game than watch on TV. More wildcards? Should 80% of the league get in? What would you think is the appropriate cut off? The reason they aligned the divisions initially is to help strengthen the rivalries.

I didn't really want to bury this in another thread because I think everyone in Buffalo deserves a pat on the back for this. You topped the playoff viewership ratings with NO team in the playoffs. This is why we have passionate hockey discussions around here. Buffalo loves hockey. https://www.bardown.com/top-10-cities-watching-hockey-in-america-last-night-included-three-cities-with-non-playoff-teams-1.1054964 Following are Top 10 markets for last night's coverage of #StanleyCupPlayoffs: 1 Buffalo 1.75 2 Ft. Myers 1.05 3 Nashville 0.87 3 Richmond-Petersburg 0.87 3 Boston 0.87 6 WashDC 0.77 7 Pittsburgh 0.66 8 Phoenix 0.61 9 Hartford-New Haven 0.60 10 St. Louis 0.59

What Vegas did worked because it was Vegas.... It's almost uniquely Vegas. I'm not sure that would work ANYWHERE else, let alone Buffalo. I might accept NYC as a possibility. No where else is really known for their "shows". For what its worth, I rather like the EA Sports NHL intros the Sabres manage to pull together. For a playoff game however.. I would expect a serious escalation.

From a youth coaching perspective I'll put it this way as well. My best skaters end up at D first, then C, then wing. My worst skaters end up at wing.. always. My lowest hockey IQ ends up at wing even if they are great skaters. Wingers are the bass players of hockey? ;)

I'm rooting for the Bruins... I have a few friends from Boston and I have no friends who root for Toronto. Now.. whoever wins immediately becomes my least favorite team in the next round. Is there any way the NHL can DQ both teams?

I might get lost writing this response but here goes. The first thing you should do is not associate a player with a position so much as understand what the position means relative to the play on the ice. What I mean is that while a player may line up at center on the face-off they may also NOT always have the center responsibilities during the shift and their responsibilities may change based on the situation of the game. I will explain this later. The center, generally speaking, is a defensive zone position that indicates the player who acts as the 3rd defender. Wingers are generally tasked with covering the top 50-60% of the defensive zone (basically, cover the point men and close off the cross zone pass). The centers primary responsibility is to roam around the defensive zone acting as the second body to the primary defender. If the puck is in the LD zone, the C backs the left D, looking to cause a turnover. Same is true with RD, RW, LW. From a defensive zone responsibility aspect, the center is your most important person because if they cannot keep up with the play, cannot read the play, there will be openings all over the place. In the offensive zone it works a lot like Taro said (especially these days). It USED to be you wanted your C carrying the puck, dishing it off, all that crap. However, the pace of play indicates that you switch to a F1/F2/F3 scenario (without the puck). The F1 (first player in) creates the pressure. F2 will move in accordance to the forechecking scheme (1-2-2, 2-1-2, etc.). F3 follows suit. When the offense controls the puck in the offensive zone then it really becomes a game of cycle, find the open spot, and move the puck. Generally speaking you will see the players stay within a certain area, however a puck carrier has to move to avoid the defense and the other players adjust as well so it can end up a free for all with each player eventually seeking to return to their general defensive position. This either happens while retaining puck control or almost immediately after the puck is turned over and the play changes direction. Players will communicate and adjust as they back check and eventually get into their defensive positions. The one overriding piece of this is when a coach sets a certain directive for a player. In that case the remaining players adjust their responsibilities and so what you normally see a C or a winger do might deviate from the norm. It is not uncommon for Housley to have Eichel move up to the winger spot and cycle with a winger in the hopes that his best player gets the puck and can carry it up ice. Earlier in the year there when Fasching was called up he was tasked with being in front of the net in the offensive zone. What you'll notice is that even during plays where it would see he SHOULD go get the puck, he would not because his job was to cause problems in front of the net. The remaining players, knowing this, will adjust their play to go get the puck. In theory this works because the defending team risks leaving a man open in front of their net. So, if they assign someone to Fasching it becomes a 4 on 4 in the rest of the zone. Love that you ask the questions... some of us really love to talk about the game of hockey. :)

There's a tradeshow out in Vegas at this moment but I'm in a new role and so I don't go to those anymore. I am more than slightly depressed about that. Lots of good playoff stuff last night. It's playoff hockey and it's expected. To spectulate that the Sabres would not play at a different level in the playoffs is silly however. Each of these teams plays harder than it does in the regular season and every team before them has. It's the playoffs and every team starts to look a little faster, hit a little harder, and get away with perhaps just a bit more.

I think people hear certain words and immediately look to see if it can apply to a player they want gone rather than think it could apply to a different player. Perhaps if I am bored I will go through and list each player that each of his key phrases could apply to and then we can all guess what it means. I mean.. let's be real. He could use the phrase veteran with playoff experience needs to lead more and be talking about Nolan.

I think the easy way to put it is this. Kodi is a framework for applications to operate. The applications may not transmit content that they are not licensing properly and therefore are illegal. Kodi has a lot of great functionality in its own right, but its "extensions" are where things get ugly.. and fast.

Lots of people hack Roku or sidechain apps into Firestick. Then they go out and load Kodi and get one of the illegal streaming applications from there. All I can say is, beware of what you do. They are illegal, despite some of them claiming otherwise. 500 channels for $20/month isn't real. Basically someone out there is "livecasting" a channel and then this app is picking that up. It could go off the air at any time. The other thing to be cautious about is that when you load these "apps" you are inviting them into your private network. There has been more than one of these kinds of apps (same with loading non-play store apps, etc. on smartphones) that will get rights to operate and then begin monitoring lots of other data on your devices/network or worse. Remember, all of these applications are conduits to your private network. If you run your Roku and your PC on the same network there are possibilities (not saying probabilities) that the app can allow people into your network that could in return gain access or at least probe around other devices connected to your network. I'm not sure I trust Amazon, NBC, or any other legal entity either, but I trust them more than the illegal entities out there. I would steer clear of relying on ANY smart TV application platform. TV manufacturers are interested in pushing screens and one way they will do that is to slow or outright stop development and support of the platforms on the TV. You are far better relying on a cheaper device connected to your TV that will at least receive a longer string of updates. That's interesting. I use MSG>Go all the time and I haven't noticed any problems. I've done it on iPad, Android Phone, my PC (using Chrome). I wasn't aware of others having issues (not that I was looking either).

I feel like the reality of Kane is that he's not a fit everywhere. He wasn't a fit with the Jets. He was more of a fit with Buffalo and he might have the right situation in San Jose. At the same time it doesn't change the kind of player he is and his skill set wasn't going to be a long term fit with Buffalo, certainly not at the money he might command.

Your best bet is to go with Amazon Prime and add HBO and Showtime channels. The AMC will be tough as you will either need a cable subscription or to pay for another service like YouTubeTV, Hulu, etc. that offers it. I had Sling for a few months and it worked well. I only had it as an augment during the Olympics to what I get with Spectrum. Here's the thing. You can hate their equipment but you don't have to use it. Use an Amazon Firestick and then just open the app of each of the cable services you want and watch from there. I watch NBC, FXNow, etc. all by signing into my Spectrum account. (The Spectrum app is not on Amazon Firestick). You can also choose other "boxes" such as Roku, Xbox, etc. Of course the apps for the same service may run differently on different platforms. The Sling app on Xbox sucked but on Amazon was really good. With my basic package on Spectrum I get MSG so I can also use MSG>Go and stream Sabres games. You get NBCSN so you get those channels to through the NBC Sports App.

Hallelujah.. the most sane response so far. The team will start next season with a hope and determination of winning and unlike this season will not have guys on 1 year deals littering the lineup and a new coach trying to change the way everyone WAS playing hockey. No one wants to put it all on the line for a team that can't get anywhere. The only players who are going to care are the one's who need a new contract next year. Everyone else knows they are locked in for the long haul or they might get traded and in which case, getting traded from the 31st team in the league can't be a bad thing right?

I think it's important to note that finishing last does not mean you are the worst team in the league. It means you performed the worst for the season on aggregate but given that we have to account for time and changes to the team and its players over that time it also means that the team could have improved but not enough to overcome the hole it started in. In addition, this season was not about winning. It was about getting the full organization better suited to meet the development structure that the GM wanted. He could have filled roster spots with the players in Rochester but that wasn't the plan. I would expect less of those UFA castoffs to be on the roster next year. In addition, I would expect that some of the existing players who fall into that category will also be moved. There are likely to be surprise moves as well. Because the people IN the business know far more than the people NOT IN the business. And yes... if SabreSpace was the GM of this team it would finish dead last every year.. because claiming you can run a team as well as an NHL GM is not much different than saying you could coach it or you could play on it. The bottom line is that it takes a skill set and an understanding the vast majority of us don't have. I mean, if you could be an NHL GM wouldn't you WANT to be? I would. So... yea.. I am glad SS is not the GM of this team.

I guess only Sabres fans can call out people on the team for quitting. Chad Johnson is 100% correct. He might not be the best goaltender but he can certainly speak for the crap defense he received at times. He might let in a bad goal here or there but how many times did you post about the defense not clearing the net, not picking up a man, etc. Save percentage is an interesting stat. If it were broken down into saves a goalie realistically could have made and those he should have made it might be better. Because when a defender leaves the far side of the net open it's not really the goaltenders fault because more often than not those end up as goals. He may not be the best but we knew we had a crap defense and he's basically confirming it.

Why? Because that's not how it works these days. There's no other way to explain it. The season very well could have been worse. If they continued their pattern of winning and play that they showed in October - November the season would have been that much worse. A lot of players can bust their ass all day long but that won't make them good hockey players. Fair enough, but the concept is that you could go Iron Mike on players at one point and it doesn't work like that today. Funny, they actually started playing better and winning more then. So, for all the checking out they did it's amazing what happened. Season Opener to 12/25/17 - 9-20-0-7 record, 30th in the league to Arizona. Dead last in GF 3rd worst in GA (trailing Arizona and Islanders) 12/25/17 - end of season 16-25-0-5, 29th best record in the league (Rangers and Canadiens were worse) 25th in GF 5th worst in GA Interestingly enough, the Coyotes went from worst in GA to 6th best in the same span) They might have checked out, but they started winning more.

Why are you big on Quennville? Shouldn't a coach as great as he is have gotten his much more talented Blackhawks into the playoffs? I'm serious about this. I think he's a great coach but I wouldn't go dropping my current coach for him. A coach is a piece of the equation and unless the new coach is a better piece of the equation than the current coach I wouldn't replace him. I don't see how anyone can evaluate where Housley fits as part of the equation yet. This team was not formed to win this year. The youth was kept in Rochester, on purpose. They filled the roster with guys who are looking for UFA contracts every year. That's not a recipe for success and NO coach was going to win with this team. Some coaches might have won more games, but it wouldn't have resulted in a playoff run. Nolan blows as a coach. I can't even believe there's a discussion on it. In the entirety of the International Hockey community the only people who believe Nolan can coach hockey are a few disillusioned Sabre Fans and Poland. How's that worked out for them? They needed a fluke play to get into the playoffs and then laid a massive egg. They've sucked for longer than the Sabres. You might want to find a better example than a franchise that save for the Cleveland Browns has defined the word useless for the league in which it plays.

He could have said that, but it wasn't really true. They aren't loaded with a bunch of aging veterans but they aren't as young as they seem either. The youngest in the lineup was Eichel at 21. Reinhart is 22. Both of them are in the 3rd year. I think ROR is honest with himself that at times he lost passion for the game. I mean, early on this year the team was horrendous.. at some point you aren't looking forward to coming in and getting knocked around. He's blamed them before. Stop trying to get the square peg in the round hole. It doesn't work that way. This isn't the 70's. I am sure Housley could have come in, Day 1, and knocked the crap out of the players. I'm guessing there's a north of 75% chance they would immediately stopped playing for him and this season would have been even worse.