LTS

I could have sworn last week most of the people on this board didn't expect the Sabres to finish 30th and now when Murray says it people want to slam him for lying? He didn't say they wouldn't suck. Last Thursday night people were calling for riots in Buffalo because the team was going to ruin the run to 30th. Also, Ted Nolan coached this team last season. He chose to sign a 3 year deal knowing what this season would bring. He signed up for this entire situation. There's no arguing that. Everyone in the NHL and this entire board knew full well who was going to be moved from the roster before the end of the season. It's not a surprise at all that it happened. What am I missing that warrants a defense of Ted Nolan and saying he was screwed by the GM? The GM offered him a contract, he signed it and the GM had an entire year to evaluate Nolan. Murray said he was partially to blame for the lack of communication. Murray didn't want Nolan but he wasn't going to get any coach to come in and fill that position so he took his best option. Nolan knew it too. How can anyone think otherwise? These guys know the business better than any of us. They know what is going on. Next up.. draft lottery.

I must have missed the other reasons then.

It can be a cold biz. Then you read stories where the CBJ GM trades Leopold to the Wild for a bag of pucks just so he can be close to home with his family. It ain't always so bad. Frankly I think Murray will be deemed one of the best GMs in the league. He is the cold biz. He's about as calculating as I have seen. The Church of ZFG. The real work of Murray is about to begin and I look at the Ducks as an example of what he can accomplish.

Haha. Nice. :beer:

I just bought 120 proof bourbon for tonight.

I hope they win and in the ensuing chaos and mass carnage all of the people who have suspended normal logical function eradicate themselves from the gene pool. That sound elitist at all? It's not meant to.

C'mon man.. entertain the thought. You'd be unhappy if someone just dismissed you. Granted I'm happy you did so with a clip like that, but still. What else is there to talk about?

Wait.. so guys can skate freely around the ice and now it becomes unbearable to watch? Cherry picking is a strategy. It could also mean that the defenders now play a guy on the cherry picker. This then means you have 4 v 4 in the offensive area. So..... why not?

Drunk it is! No need to call me out specifically though. Curious what the off-season / trade deadline deal Murray might have promised the Blue Jackets next year for them to start Bobrovsky. I'll trade you Marcus Foligno for a 4th round pick in 2016 if you start Bobbo tonight.

So this year.. Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg, Montreal, and possibly Ottawa are all in the playoffs? Canada is happy. Here's a thought for flow.. why even have offsides? Just go wherever the hell you feel like it, when you feel like it. No reason to artificially make the ice area smaller by restricting where players can go.

It's strange isn't it? As all the equipment improved, the training improved, the skill of players improved the overall game itself did not. Better sticks create harder shots. Better skates create faster players. Better training creates faster and stronger players. These necessitate protective equipment changes. Players no longer fear puck or body. Goalies still forced to stand there and take the shots so they want protection (really, 108mph?!) Game over. As much as I hate to say it, I think the only way to improve the game is to increase the rink size (that;s some money right there) AND the net size. Another thought that popped into my head.. what if the crease size increased? If players were all forced to stand a little further from the net then perhaps there would be more space for shots to get through? I have to think about that one. While it sounded nice I am going to guess there are serious problems with that idea. :)

But a 100% chance of having two picks in the top 14. :) The avg goals scored in the CBJ vs. Laffs was 2.5. That's not too bad! :)

In youth hockey they learn it because coaches allow it and because its easier to glide to a point than to stop and restart. So, by gliding by they can circle back into a position without having to use all that energy to stop and start. It's the wrong way to play hockey, but they do it. We worked very hard to get the kids to crash the net on any shot. The problem then became once they were there they didn't want to begin skating again.. (a coach's work is never done!) At higher levels going to the net usually means you are going to get popped. Some players don't like that. Those players suck.

I don't want the Pens to miss because I don't want Edmonton having another shot at #1. I want the Pens to make it and the Isles to miss.. because that means the Sabres have an extra shot at #1. While I dislike the Penguins immensely.. I have to root for them because it's better for the Sabres.

I'll be wearing my Coyotes sweater tonight. Old school original, but I'm wearing it.

I'm getting wrecked no matter what anyone does.

So.. what happens if the Sabres finish 29th and win the lottery? Does SS explode?

No one is to blame. It's not a tank. If it were a tank then they would suck for failing. Tanking is intentionally losing and that's clearly not what happened here. The lack of talent is not enough to guarantee a poor season. Dare I say it, they wanted a cohesive locker room that stressed a team first attitude and winning is a byproduct of it. Even if the talent level is low. It's life.

Good point. You'd think I would have caught that when looking at the roster. I think that underscores what I had said in another thread about preferring Malkin over Crosby. I always thought Malkin came after Crosby and then looking at the draft it didn't make sense.

Hmm I missed that part. I know up top it wasn't that the game ends in a tie, I misspoke, it was that the basketball and baseball play indefinitely and until there is a winner. Thanks for the catch. I still prefer his approach. I hate ties and while I don't mind the shootout I hate the loser point.

Heard an interesting point on WGR this morning. Pittsburgh finished with 58 points the first year Crosby was in their lineup. 2003 - Drafted Fleury (Finished 03-04 with 58 points) 2004 - Drafted Malkin (no following season) 2005 - Drafted Crosby (Finished 05-06 with 58 points) 2006 - Jordan Stall (Finished 06-07 with with 105 points) The Sabres are at 52 points. So, a team with Fleury, Malkin, and Crosby only managed to finish 6 points ahead of the current Buffalo Sabres lineup). Of course that's cherry picking. Chicago shows a much better result from their drafting. But if nothing else it demonstrates just how bad things can be even with star players. I would have never imagined Pittsburgh finishing with 58 points having Crosby, Malkin, and Fleury on the team. Other fun facts from the 05-06 Penguins Roster... Mario Lemieux played 21 games and was still a point per game. (retired mid-season) Ziggy Palffy played 42 games and was a point per game. (retired mid-season) John LeClair was on the roster. Mark Recchi was on the roster just under a point per game. Brooks Orpik on the roster. Sergei Gonchar on the roster. Fired Craig Patrick as GM and hired Ray Shero. Hired Mike Yeo as Asst. Coach Hired Michel Therrien as Head Coach Hah.. this is kind of fun looking at that team. Oh well.. I feel better about the Sabres now.

It was a good essay.. two small problems. 1. He neglects to call out football as a game that can end in a tie. It is far more physical than basketball and baseball and they get a week off between games. 2. He chooses to reject the basis of the loser point, which is, the standings remain closer together generating more interest in the final outcome of the season. Other than that I loved his statistics and ideas.

One other thing that is bugging me. There is this assumption that a single player is going to change this franchise around overnight. As though getting Eichel or McDavid would change the Sabres drastically for next year and that getting pick #3 would reduce the Sabres to being horrible for years on end. I'm not tracking with that. I'll admit that it would be better to have pick #1, then pick #2, and then pick #3 but I'm can't believe that the Sabres will be drastically different next year if they have pick #1 over pick #3. The argument against #3 is that the Sabres will be as horrible as they are this year. I can't buy that. Perhaps its this perception that fuels people into this rage about winning. The Sabres are going to be a better team next year, period. This isn't even in question is it? Moreover, the Sabres get an improved shot at the top 3 picks next year (if they don't improve enough). The future without the #1 may not be as bright as with the #1 but it's not "The Day After" either.

Frankly, I think players don't play for a crest so much as they play for the locker room. Once upon a time it might have been for the crest but now with free agency it's more about the guys who are in the room who are going to help you achieve your hockey dreams. Players care about fans. They like to feel support just like everyone does. They also dislike negative reinforcement of boos when they score and cheers when they lose. They can avoid talk radio and news paper articles but they can't avoid it when they are in the rink. The players in the locker room all know that the breakdown of the 20-22 players who they will be with, day in and day out, next year will change drastically. Those who will be around will like having another talented player in the room. Those who are leaving would like to keep earning a paycheck, even if it's in the AHL or a Euro league, etc. The fans will still be there next year. Fans root for the crest because that doesn't change for them. There's your misalignment of priorities and why you have this problem.

Stop it. Just stop it. Keep it contained where it belongs, please.