LTS

I would be more clear on how I said that. Kicking should only account if the foot is barely off the ice. Clearly don't want someone raising a skate up too high there. But on a play like the Foligno play.. that should be a goal all day long. There is a desire to increase scoring.. let it happen.

This is one of those moves a coach makes that every player notices. Weber doesn't need to play, but you're in his hometown. You throw him a bone, put him in the lineup, and every player appreciates that the coach notices who is from where and what matters to them. Let's be real.. you can interchange Franson, Weber, Colo, etc. It's all the same pool of talent with the same kind of shortcomings. If Bylsma were going to sit a top 4 defender for this purpose then it might draw some scrutiny.

Just a personal request... for what it's worth. Could we not take gratuitous cheap shots at his weight? His weight has no relevance to his ability to be a hockey reporter. You don't have to acquiesce to my request.. I'm just asking. I know I quoted you ink, but others have done it as well. I think, at times, he has some insight that works. He gets to be with the team more often and in more scenarios than we are and I believe that does lend him a certain level of knowledge the public doesn't have. I also agree that at times he says things that are a bit out from left field. Now, onto the game. Going to miss the beginning.. I am sure it will be partway through the second before I get off the ice tonight. Hoping for them to hit hard all night.

It's not really clear. Unlike the high-stick contact which directly mentions the contact with an opponent or official there is no such commentary on the kicking motion. I have to think that if the puck would have entered the net through the kicking motion without the deflection or contact by the defending team they would still disallow the goal. However, if the puck were kicked away from the goal and then the puck ricocheted back into the net it would probably stand. Kind of a gray area as near as I can tell. As far as I am concerned, the kicking motion issue is too vague. A kicking motion should not be considered illegal. I don't care how you get it in the net short of closing your hand on the puck and throwing it. I would change it to be allowed on any deflection of the puck so long as it occurs below the cross bar.

Of course! I know I just stop watching the games. A night like tonight I would have already gone on to something else.. but tonight I go back up for the 2nd period!

You know a player knows he's got respect? When he gets the puck and everyone backs away because they are afraid what he'll do to them if they try and pressure him. Eichel picked up the puck on the half-wall and the Flyers immediately backed off. That's something. Good period so far but they are getting caught a bit in their zone. Flyers have a good forecheck going so the Sabres will have to skate it a bit harder in their own zone.

All this talk of have patience, out of patience, no time, all the time in the world stuff... All I can think of asking is this.. For those who have patience, when you run out of it what will you do then? For those who have run out of patience, what are you doing about it now? When do you stop tuning in to the games? When do you stop buying tickets? When do you stop visiting an Internet forum devoted to discussing the team you've run out of patience with? Just curious...

I was in Philly this past weekend (youth hockey tournament). There was discussion of buying tickets to the Flyers/Rangers game should the kids get eliminated from the semi-finals (played Sat night.). I flat out refused. The only game I would ever see in their arena would be one against the Sabres. Same with the Bruins. You are never too old... the Flyers can eat it. Go Sabres. I get to watch the game tonight, so I am happy enough for that.

I think the officials could make their lives easier by talking to the coaches. But I wasn't trying to address that. :)

No worries. Let's go into this further. Rule 38.2 states a video goal judge may call for a review on a goal scored through the apparent use of a high stick contact with the puck. This then reverts to rule 80.3 which defines when the goal should be disallowed. 80.3 states that if the puck is deflected directly into the net or it is deflected and hits another player or official and goes into the net it is a disallowed goal. In this case the puck hit the ice. Thus rule 80.1 is now in effect which says the play should be whistled dead because Kessel (really, it's any Penguin) touches the puck (unless a Panther touches it). There's no reason to believe the puck in the video touches a Panther player on the way to the ice. So, you would argue that it should be blown dead, if it really touched his stick. However, it was not. At that point the goal is scored. Rule 38.2 cannot be applied for a review because the goal was clearly not scored through the use of a high stick. No reason to review because no one is arguing that Kessel shot the puck into the net from a legal position. Therefore, the fast face-off is not a problem. There is no coach's challenge, no video review. It's a good goal. The only thing that can happen in this instance is a complaint to the NHL Officiating people about the lack of a call on the high-stick touch. Even then, you and I will disagree on whether it was contacted by a high-stick.

Very true. Other than life. If I were free, and in buffalo, and perhaps a few less expenses right now I would buy into a game at that price point. Especially this one! But.. no sales to Leafs fans.

Sure there is... they are called price controls, ceilings, floors, etc. Governments do it all the time. Corporations do it too. They are called Minimum Advertised Prices (MAP). There are also strict controls on the price certain items can ever be sold for, advertised or not. I see it all the time when shopping for my son's hockey equipment. :) I know what you are getting at though. But then again, just because you can doesn't mean you should. Absolutely no selling of tickets to Leaf fans. Period. :)

I wouldn't use Wikipedia to quote an NHL rule. It doesn't even read like an NHL rule. Rule 80 covers high-sticking the puck. 80.1 High-sticking the Puck – Batting the puck above the normal height of the shoulders with a stick is prohibited. When a puck is struck with a high stick and subsequently comes into the possession and control of a player from the offending team (including the player who made contact with the puck), either directly or deflected off any player or official, there shall be a whistle. When a puck has been contacted by a high stick, the play shall be permitted to continue, provided that: (i) the puck has been batted to an opponent (when a player bats the puck to an opponent, the Referee shall give the “washout” signal immediately. Otherwise, he will stop the play). (ii) a player of the defending side shall bat the puck into his own goal in which case the goal shall be allowed. 80.3 Disallowed Goal – When an attacking player causes the puck to enter the opponent’s goal by contacting the puck above the height of the crossbar, either directly or deflected off any player or official, the goal shall not be allowed. The determining factor is where the puck makes contact with the stick. If the puck makes contact with the stick at or below the level of the crossbar and enters the goal, this goal shall be allowed. A goal scored as a result of a defending player striking the puck with his stick carried above the height of the crossbar of the goal frame into his own goal shall be allowed. Rule 38.2 - Every goal is to be reviewed by the Video Goal Judge. Goal Review Situations: 1. Puck crossing the goal line. 2. Puck in the net prior to the goal frame being dislodged. 3. Puck in the prior to, or after the expiration of time at the end of the period. 4. Puck directed or batted into the net by hand or foot. 5. Puck directed into the net off an Official. 6. Puck struck with a high-stick prior to entering the goal. 7. Establish correct game time. That said. His stick is not literally straight up. It is straight out. Moreover, I don't think it hits his stick as much as it deflects on the goaltender's glove and then hits his body. And yes.. the high stick is not subjected to a video challenge. As I see it.. the worst case explanation is that the puck contacted a high stick. That call was missed but the puck did not immediately deflect into the net and therefore cannot be reversed due to contact with a high stick. The best case is that it never touched his stick and it's a good goal. Also.. dug up more about when the off-sides can be reviewed back to. If the puck leaves the zone or all 5 players on the offensive side of the puck clear the zone at any point then you cannot review the offside prior to goal. However, if it sits in the zone for 2 minutes and all players on the offensive side of the puck have not left the zone to reverse an off-side call. And any penalties committed during that time are enforced and recorded as the time of the offside occurring. Rulebook: http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2015-2016-Interactive-rulebook.pdf (new sections are highlighted in orange)

He does. Go back and look at the links posted when Murray was hired. His biggest asset was his ability as a talent evaluator. He gets a lot of credit for Getzlaf, Perry, Ryan, Lupul in Anaheim. Marc Staal in NY. Karlsson with Ottawa. There are more as well. But the thought process was he was pretty influential in the drafting of the players by those teams when he was involved. As far as Buffalo goes it's a bit tougher to judge due to the short time period. The losing was a necessity brought about by poor drafting prior to Murray. That just has to be accepted. Could he have turned the team around faster and made them a middling ability team... probably. That would have solved nothing. If you don't want to look for the links just google "Tim Murray talent evaluation" and you'll get some articles.

Meh. It's simple really. I'm going to watch. Even Episodes 1-3 had their moments even if most of it was garbage. I'm not going out at midnight to see it.. but I will see it. It will happen. I loved the trailer. They are trying very hard to keep things a secret. Interesting use of lines from the movie that are not aligned with the scene it appears in. I hope it's everything a person could want. It will do well just because it's Star Wars but I am hoping that for me it has more connection. I was 4 when the first film came out and it was a large part of my childhood. By default I am already emotionally invested in it.

If I am Terry Pegula (or Russ Brandon) and I walk into that arena tonight (if I'm not in London) and I see a multitude of Leaf sweaters sitting in my arena I would set out to find each season ticket holder who sold their seats and not allow them to renew next year. If owning tickets came with one single policy ... Thou shall not sell to a Leafs fan. It would be worth it. The house better be decidedly Buffalo.

We're going again this year. It was a most amazing experience. This year I am one of the coaches so I get the dorm experience as well!

Indeed.. I hope this as well. Well, he was the Asst. GM. But that said, he traded for Ben Bishop when Anderson was injured. They already had Lehner in the system. They moved Bishop to Tampa for very little (Conacher and a 4th) at the trade deadline the following year. I would imagine the thought being that Lehner was their goalie of the future as he started the following season. The concussion is what made everything else goofy at that point. The goalie situation went even more goofy in Ottawa after Murray came to Buffalo. But Brian Murray said that Lehner was movable once they acquired O'Connor. I would imagine, that if Tim Murray had the same in the Bishop handling then he must believe that Lehner was a better fit long term than Bishop.

I choose to look at what we have more data on for my projections. Tim Murray has a solid track record of identifying talent. For now I am willing to go with his opinion on Lehner.

Now you know.

The ability to start the play out of the zone is all on the defense. However, the forwards have a huge say in that. If you recall last year the opposing teams had no fear of the forwards and so they would play a heavy forecheck. The forwards were slow with the puck so even if the forecheck was beaten by the D the forward was collapsed on before he could leave the zone. Look at this year. They have the forwards higher in the zone. The speed of the breakout is much faster and as such the opposition D is leaving the blue line earlier to not get caught. All of this opens up the ice and allows the Sabres D man a bit more space to make the plays needed. Once that happens you need the D man who hits that pass or skates it out himself. But without the open ice the best D man is going nowhere.

The Sabres out shot the Lightning 16-3 in the first period. They out shot a team that is favored to be in the SCF mix again this year. When was the last time the Sabres had a +13 in shot differential in a single period... hell in a whole game? I'm happy. This team wasn't supposed to be a playoff team. it was supposed to improve dramatically and then next year continue that momentum. So... away we go. For those who still can't get on board.. think of this perspective. The next time you watch a game listen for the phrase "but not out". You won't hear it as much anymore. Be happy about that.

Appreciate the insight on the season ticket sales. It'll be interesting to see where it goes. I'm not doubting that ownership has a short time frame to turn it around (1 year?).

Well.. that's just worse if you ask me. If he owns everything happening in the arena then you'd think he'd want as many people in there as possible. The cost of putting a fan in a seat has to be minimal in a venue like that. A few extra security guards, a few extra ushers, a few extra people to clean up. An empty seat generates zero revenue, in ticket sales or concessions. Fair or not, you need butts in the seats. With no one there it has to be hard to even keep the team break even. If people don't start showing up the NHL will put pressure on them to move as it looks horrible for the league to have highlights of a team with empty seats everywhere.

Meh.. Wegmans has started to annoy me. Too much operational efficiency leading to decisions being made that I don't like. Sometimes you just have to give'em the damn pickle. Had a sub from Wegmans the other day.. it was awful. Our local supermarket does so much better. It's got a lot of upside but I rarely shop there anymore... just not as huge a fan as I was in the past. I still abhor Tops though.