LTS

Let me put it another way.. why is the limit not 6 minutes then? The punishment was not arbitrary it was mandated by rule that was stated and clarified 24 hours earlier. The reason they clarified the rule was because they realized it did not apply evenly. For example, (and Murray said as much) some 4th liner who never sees special teams would never experience repercussions for being late. That's not fair to everyone, so to be fair, if ANYONE is late they sit. I hope he did not, but given the "misread a text" seems a bit odd one wonders if he didn't decide to test their commitment. Of course imagine the media frenzy if Reinhart says, "I wanted to see if they were serious.". So, it comes out as "I misread a text" It is their sole purpose in life. Look at the amount of training these guys put in all year long. If it was not their sole purpose (okay, yes, they have some other purposes day to day) they would not succeed as hockey players. We've all seen players who show up to camp out of shape... For what it's worth, if you read Harrington's article with Murray he said that he was there and if there was an injury they would have put him in. You can ask what if all day long and eventually find something that requires you to break the rules. That doesn't mean you don't create them and you don't abide by them except in extreme circumstance. Discretion is used.. but it must be used judiciously. Why would you not sit Reinhart for the game, because the team would have to skate with 17 skaters? They've done that before.. any time someone gets injured for a game they skate 17. Why don't the rules allow the teams to dress an alternate so in the event of injury (which is rarely caused by the player who gets injured) they can put him in? It would be fair right? The other team injured one of our players and now we're shorthanded. It seems like that would be a good rule to put in place. It would be more fair right? Point is, teams play with a short bench all the time because of injury, ejections, and other penalties. They live. They were not in danger of not having enough players to play the game. You're just upset that they have a rule that forces a guy to miss a game if he can't follow the rules. It's too bad. Reinhart broke the rules and put his team in that position. You clearly don't accept that. So be it.

What if you are 8 minutes late? I mean it's close right? The punishment was stated. Every player knew it. He got caught up in it. Period. If you want to argue that missing a game should not be the penalty that's fine but stop acting like it wasn't warranted in this situation. At the time of the infraction the team policy was CLEARLY if you are late, you miss a game. It was so clear that it was stated only 24 hours earlier. The problem with black and white rules is that people want to try and bend them. They work just fine but people love to bitch and not hold themselves accountable for breaking the "black and white" rule. Take speeding for example. If you get pulled over for going 1 mph over the speed limit there is no arguing what you were not speeding. You might say, it's so hard to tell, I mean what's the difference. Well, the difference is that rather than push your speed right to the absolute limit you could drive 1mph under to giver yourself a buffer. Unfortunately most people aren't wired that way and they'd rather argue that "it's just 1 mph over". Now, we all know that rarely does it happen that you get pulled over for 1mph over... but if you want to test the theory drive through Franklinville, NY and argue with the kind police officer when he pulls you over. Finally, I wholeheartedly disagree with this making the Sabres look like a second rate organization but I do fully agree that you don't get it. The way I read his comments is that he thinks the punishment is dumb but he accepts that he broke the rule. Every player is going to lobby them to let it slide. However, he sees himself as a team guy and I think he wanted to be on the bench to support his team and show them that he was a team player. I dislike this attention to detail in this situation and for his willingness to let it slide but I applaud him owning it and wanting to demonstrate to his teammates that he's there for them. This is not about following the rules so much as doing what it takes to win. Cutting corners and lowering expectations is never the way to win or succeed. I have taught my kids one mantra "If you cheat on the ice, you get beat on the ice." It holds true on the ice and off. If the drill says you skate to the line you don't skate to within 2 feet of the line, you skate to the line. Those who want to say it was "close enough" can also use that excuse when they don't backcheck hard enough and were "close enough" that they couldn't get a stick on the guy who just put the puck in the net. "Close enough" sucks. I could say some crap about hand grenades here. It was executed perfectly. As I said, based on Reinhart's latest comments I believe he wanted to be on the bench supporting his teammates. I think Jack and Dan butt heads and I am sure it's both on the ice and off the ice stuff. However, I don't think Gio is just trying to keep his career alive. You are talking about a guy who has been the Captain of two franchises, one of them being THE iconic franchise of the NHL. He's a leader and he's been around some unbelievable talent. He's WON and he know's what it takes to WIN. If he's an adult then why was he late? Reinhart was late, he cost the team 2 points (using your point). I would say that holding the players accountable is treating the players like responsible adults. Here's your schedule, follow it. Kids are more apt to get a slide from the rules than adults. Overall I am going to leave it at this. There is a camp in here that wants to make excuses for the "star" players. You have placed the blame on the coach, the GM, and questioned everything but the player himself. Is there no personal accountability in your world? Do you make excuses for everything when you feel something is "dumb"? That's a huge problem with society today. I don't want to do this because I think it's stupid or I shouldn't have to. You don't have to do it, but you don't get an exemption from the ramifications. What I want on a team are players who are always striving to perfection. It's not achievable but if you create a culture where being 5 minutes late is accepted then you will soon have all players showing up 5 minutes late. Then it will be 10 minutes late because hey.. what's 5 minutes right? You are setting the bar lower rather than higher. You are holding yourself less accountable. Our society does this all the time. "Oh this is hard? Let's lower the standards. There you are." Precious snowflake. Own your damn mistakes, own your lack of execution. I am going to leave one thing here. I've been coaching awhile and last year we used this video as a demonstration for the kids. I think it holds true to a lot of things. And this year's video, which I just watched. Hell you can watch them all on YouTube. That's a culture of winning.

If a puck is kicked and then deflected by a stick, it is a goal. If you hit the puck legally in the air and hit a guy in the face I am 99% certain it is considered no different than shooting the puck from the ice surface and hitting someone in the face. This actually happened in a Sabres game.. I want to say Brad May would up to take a slap shot and as he pulled his stick back it nailed Paul Kariya in the face. I believe he scored on the shot. No penalty as it was the normal playing of the puck. They mentioned at the time that even if it happens on the follow through it would not be a penalty. It's not natural to everyone. When I was growing up I played a lot of street hockey and I didn't have a stick for some time. I learned to play both lefty and righty. However, at some point I just migrated to being a righty only player. Eichel is a righty and he has a hell of a wrist shot. First answer to the blocking shots question is.. padding and practice. Players don't often get hit in unprotected areas. However, when it happens it hurts like hell. At that point I want to go with genetics. I have the luxury (to date) of having never broken a bone and it's not for lack of trying. I deflected a slap shot one time as it was leaving the D-man's stick and it went straight up and hit the end of my collarbone near my throat (thankfully it hit the bone). Hurt like hell... I skated off the ice bent over and was out next shift. I don't relay that story to demonstrate how tough I am but to say that I feel rather confident that others might have ended up with some kind of bone damage.

I fully accept your opinion on what you believe to be acceptable. I'm not arguing what you believe. However, the rule was, if you are late, you sit. There is no more justification needed and it should be easy to understand. You do this, that happens. It's a lot easier than you do this, and that happens, unless this another variable is such and in which case then option C happens, but if variable Q is set to Y then option D happens. It's not a choose your own adventure book. It's a logic tree with two outcomes. Starting point. "Was Sam late to a meeting?" Yes? - Suspended a game. No? - Nothing to see here. Yes, it would. I believe that 100% I'll care about what I want to care about. You clearly still care too. The coach did not create the situation, the player did. When the Sabres D leaves a guy open in front of the net do you also blame the forward for not playing where our D is? And my point about you still caring is underscored.

A few things happen here. There are codes for lines, I have them even with my 12 year olds. If I make a change I let the players know ahead of time unless I have to do it on the fly and then I'm calling their number (or their name because they don't always remember their number). In higher level hockey the players generally know their situations and if the coach is rolling lines or if they are shorting shifts. For example, if you are pulling your 4th line off the rotation you'll tell them. At that point the bench knows 3 lines go and unless the coach inserts the 4th line back that's how it goes. Players jump from the middle and go off from the doors... this works great at higher levels. With my 12 year olds I have to manage the player on/player off two-step.. it's a catastrophe. I can't wait until they jump boards more.

The punishment is established. You do the crime you do the time. We're not arguing whether it should be changed. At the time of the infraction the rule was... miss the game. Thus.. you miss the game. Regardless of winning or the coach being a good coach the issue remains the same. A player was late to a meeting and was disciplined. Successful teams don't have that problem. Details matter. Fine.. late, point is irrelevant insofar as the disciplinary action was "you miss a game". You may have deferred punishment, but I doubt any coach would do such a thing and yes, while he's not my dog it really does make a difference. Regardless of what your opinion of the level of punishment is the player knew at the time of his infraction what the TEAM's STANDARD was and the resultant action. Not sure where the point I bolded is coming from. It was listed as a small infraction.. and I said I agreed with that. Who said repeated violations? Boom. It sounds like the team has had some disciplinary issues all season and Murray has grown tired of it and wanted to make it abundantly clear to the players. I would imagine that this wouldn't be needed to be clarified if it was 1 player, 1 time. So it sounds like "more to come here". It doesn't mean, to me, that Bylsma isn't going anywhere. If Murray had to step in and clarify then I would wonder if Murray already sees issues with the coach not being respected by players. Murray may have stepped in to clarify to the players that regardless of who the coach is you still have to be a professional.

The option for suit in the press box is only available as an option if you choose to delay implementing the disciplinary action. I do not believe it should have been delayed and therefore the suit in the press box option was not available. Reinhart had to dress per NHL rules. How long he sat there is still up for debate. If the Sabres could have put him in the press box and then chose to put him on the bench anyway I would be firmly in the camp of fire the entire front office. However, he had to dress and had to sit on the bench. There is no scenario, that we are aware of, that allowed the Sabres to NOT put him on the bench dressed as a player. Again, why was he there so long? That's a different conversation for me... I don't know, but I want to. Missing a meeting is something small. He didn't get busted for drugs, driving drunk, assault, sexual harassment. It's small. You do the crime, you serve the time, you move on. I am not acting like there is more to it. He missed a meeting. That's what is being said and no one is refuting it. You miss a meeting, you miss a game. That's how it works. The players all know it and it happened and so he missed a game. In addressing hypothesized scenarios about him being on the bench the whole game? If he CHOSE to be there to be support his team then I think he earns major points from his teammates. Everyone knows its out there for display the entire game. If that's the case then I think it shows some serious character from him. Everyone makes mistakes, how they chose to own them is what I care about. If Bylsma chose to put him on the bench against his wishes then that's the equivalent of dressing him if they had the option not to. It's out of line and unwarranted. If it's another reason... then I'll respond when it's posted.

In which case I addressed your "alternative" methods in addressing it because it's along the lines of what Georgia was putting out there. So what do you do if Eichel and Reinhart blast Bylsma and O'Reilly, Okposo, and Kane support him? I am sure you say that you dump Bylsma and then trade O'Reilly, Okposo, and Kane. Where does that really leave the team however? I want Bylsma gone but I think the situation is a bit more complicated.

What method though? Benching? I think we can accept that it happens to players all the time. Ovechkin was benched for the alarm clock incident. Who put Reinhart in the situation? It wasn't his coach. Reinhart missed the meeting and thus created the entire reality of possibilities that could have occurred from that point on. You don't delay punishment or do it when it's convenient. It's not punishment then. What lesson does Reinhart learn more from? Oh, I missed a meeting but they'll suspend me when it's convenient for the team to not be impacted as much. or I missed a meeting and I earned the right to be suspended and because we have a player out suspended, and two injured, and then one got sick I am now forced to dress and sit on the bench. My team is significantly impacted by my lack of discipline. I am 100% fine with Bylsma benching Reinhart. I don't know why he was on the bench the whole game and since I don't I'm not judging anything in that regard until I do. Overall, I blame Reinhart 100% for this situation. If he doesn't miss the meeting none of the other issues would have occurred.

But, would you want to go play for Babcock if you were a UFA? I think that's the point. Also Zetterberg led the Red Wings in points in 2014-2015. Washed up? He had 66 points. He had 48 points in 2012-2013 (2nd on team) and 48 points in 2013-2014 (4th on team)

Who do optics matter to? You? Because right now you and I know the same amount about the situation and I certainly don't feel the same way. Whose reality are we in? Look at the quotes in those articles. Trotz called Ovechkin not playing for "personal reasons" and Ovechkin owned the alarm clock. Finally, you are not accepting the fact that Reinhart had to dress and be on the bench. You can't not accept that. The Okposo sickness happened late enough that Reinhart had to dress. No one is debating that. Even IF you want to debate why the Sabres didn't have another player ready you can't put that on this situation. What GM or Coach sits around and says, "Hey, I should have this player scratched most nights just in case I have a player who misses a meeting and another who gets ill right at the last minute?" Doesn't happen.

For those in the Babcock camp.. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/chris-chelios-blasts-mike-babcock-free-agents-veteran-detroit-red-wings-toronto-maple-leafs/ Read the article, not just the long URL. It has refernces to Roenick, Zetterberg, as well.

I'm not even going to try and quote anything said up to this point. Discipline policies are well known. No organization doesn't have them. Reinhart had to dress. Accept that. You don't know WHY he was on the bench for the FULL game and it's dangerous to speculate. You can hypothesize a million different things but since none of it is provable at this point it doesn't support any of your points regardless of your point. I firmly believe that Bylsma would have benched him if they were in a playoff race. Failure to do so would only weaken his position as a coach. He might gain favor with 1 player but anger others. Rules are written and rules are followed. All of these players bust their to play at this level and want to succeed, every one of them. They are a team and during a season they hold each other accountable. You will likely not hear it but I am sure more than 1 player has said something to Reinhart for his screw up. There may be some who want to make excuses for him and if they then that concerns me. There is no one to blame but Reinhart for this situation happening. Think about what you are upset about and then distill it down to a good argument. If you are mad because you hate Bylsma as a coach then accept other coaches who you might like have done the same thing to players that mean more to their team than Reinhart. If you are mad because he sat on the bench the whole game then accept you don't know WHY it happened so stop jumping to conclusions. If you are mad because his punishment should have been delayed a game because it hurt the team you should ask yourself, who missed the meeting? Who is responsible for being at the meeting? Who controls Sam Reinhart? This is all one Sam Reinhart. http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/10/alex-ovechkin-missed-a-game-because-he-set-his-alarm-for-p-m-instead-of-a-m http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/ilya-kovalchuk-stripped-of-ska-captaincy-benched-for-two-more-games (not just in the NHL, and during the playoffs, and the captain no less) http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/gaudreau-flames-players-benched-discipline-1.3442455 (this year, and during the Father's trip with the team) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/three-benched-calgary-flames-apologize-hartley-says-hes-moved-on/article28704283/ (references a benching of Seguin in the last game of the regular season when he could set a goal record) Point is... players screw up, they get benched and they hold themselves accountable. You want to find a fact? Try and find out why Reinhart was on the bench the whole game. That's all I would want to know at this point.

My heart hurts from all those wings Saturday.

You have to think Reinhart is not feeling well and they didn't have enough time to call anyone up? But why not say something? I know Bylsma does strange stuff but no coach is putting him on the bench and not shifting him at all to send a message. If he's on the ice in the second then it's suspect discipline.

I could probably fly to Vegas and catch a Sabres game for less than what it would cost to get a ticket to that Citifield game next year. Scary.

Next year he's a 4th line player... and that's a good thing. So yes, bring him back.

Not a chance I feel old after reading that. :( Go Sabres... I might be out shopping for baseball equipment.. oy!

Oh.. oh.. oh... yeah. Just need to start sooner... :)

I've recall certain narratives being pounded at times but I'll be perfectly honest that more often than not I am able to filter out the noise. So, in the overall game of life I can't recall because it was not really critical information to store. I think he was able to bring value to the forum. He was also able to take away that value. In any event, it was good to meet him.

Going to be a great night. Gionta deserves this and it's great that it's happening in Buffalo. For all intents and purposes he's a local guy. Shouldn't be too many Panthers fans in attendance. I mean, imagine that, you live close enough to Buffalo and you are a Panthers fan. You are definitely doing it wrong. Go Sabres.

It helped that he told me who he was right away. :)

Losing on purpose would indicate that you take active steps, in each game, to assure yoruself of a loss. Murray is rebuilding the team and just like rebuilding a house you have to start with a new foundation. If your house was destroyed tomorrow you'd have to live in a hotel room or some temporary place while a new one is built. It would not be as nice as your house (or the new one) and it would suck for everyone. Eventually your house is built and you hope the architect designed something great. It was a full on rebuild, it was never a tank.

I'm just going to go with hell yeah. It's about all i have at this point. A whirlwind of 36 hours that's just so damned awesome.

I'd prefer to see an arena full of Sabres fans but when your team is playing the kind of season the Sabres have it's not a surprise that tickets are going to be sold to Leafs fans who want to believe they have a great team.