LTS

Garbage. Whose career has he ended? Besides the incident with Miller has he even put an opposing player out of the lineup for an extended period of time? If this is your criteria then you better apply it evenly across the board. Are you also calling for Kaleta to be paralyzed? Shall we take every player in the league who has been suspended more than Lucic for cheap shots and call for them to be paralyzed. I will guarantee that Lucic isn't looking for injure any player for a long period of time. Meanwhile, you are wishing for him to be permanently incapacitated. Yea.. he's the scumbag. As for the Lucic / Emelin battle.. this has history and should only get better: (Emelin injured on his checking of Lucic) http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/12/video-bruins-lucic-hits-canadiens-emelin-from-behind/

His career is more than that and you know it. Lucic is 44th in the league in scoring with 53 points. 3rd on his team. Marchand has 43 points, 5th on his team and in the top 100 in the NHL. Players whine about BS all the time. Good ones and bad ones and most of the time they are wrong. That's my entire point about psychology of the game. It shouldn't have to be explained, especially to those on this board who have called for being paralyzed. They are doing their job. I hate them both as players, but wishing for them to be paralyzed goes beyond the boards and into their personal lives. It's uncalled for and completely ridiculous.

Oh FFS. Wishing for someone to be paralyzed? There's a psychological aspect to sports and clearly the players are very good at playing that game if people here are willing to stand by the statement that either of those players should be paralyzed. Disgusted. I'll hope for a crushing, legal, hit and for the team to never win a game.

Reality doesn't apply here, you know that. People just assume we have a roster of Perry, Getlzaf, Crosby, Malkin, Toews, and Kane. One thing I find interesting going into this off season will be the balance that teams have to play with: 1 - Having compliance buyouts left. 2 - Having to meet the salary floor 3 - The waiting game GMs play on a player they think will be a buyout Why trade away assets if I think you'll just buy out a player if you can't find the right deal. Why buy out a player if I then need to turn around and sign someone else to meet the floor. It's intriguing because you look at it in terms of just next year and you might think to yourself, no big deal. But that salary you left on your roster could be a real albatross in 2-3 years (assuming a longer contract) and you find yourself handcuffed because now you have a player you wanted to get rid of years earlier and can't at a salary that kills your cap. Should be fun!

Doing it more than right... that's absolutely incredible.

What? You mean you aren't supposed to pass the puck two feet, into your teammate's feet, using the same strength you would use to complete the pass were he 40 feet away? Short, hard, passes. That's the key. :)

Goal.. and an unofficial assist last night. (what else to call his pass to Ennis that earned Ennis a penalty shot?). He's staying!

A foot long poop is impressive, but in the end it's still poop.

The Trafford incident is one of those anecdotal items used to dismiss the system. Is there pressure? Of course there is. It is a highly competitive system and the further up you go the worse it gets. The more time you put into the game the more you want to succeed and the less time you've put into other things in life. Why are players afraid of acknowledging injury? Because they are worried that they will be replaced by the next guy. One moment of "weakness" and everything they've worked for is gone. At some point it ceases to be a game and does become a business. A high stakes business with high stakes pressure. That said.. some kids are naturally intense kids and will have a drive to compete at a level higher than others. Some will be worried about apple juice.

Really good stuff. The part about referring back to NHL players I think makes a huge difference. It's easy to write an article like this and then have people dismiss it with the attitude of "Well, they can have fun but only those players who are serious have a shot to make it." But if you see that NHL players weren't constantly playing hockey while they were growing up it drives the message home. My son plays hockey and I definitely think about these things as I have coached in the past as well. It is easy to get caught up in the game. From my point of view it's not because you think they are going to be superstars but as a coach you want each and every one of your kids to succeed and flourish to the best of their ability. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that they need to also enjoy what they are doing. I've been there, the too competitive coach. I still think about a few moments I've had and hope they will drive me to be better the next time. I always talk about the game with my son right after but I let him tell me what he thought of the game. It's his job to ask questions on things and if he wants help with something. If he wants my opinions he has to ask for them. He drives himself to the level he will achieve. I prod at some points but never in a situation to make him not want to play the game at all. If he wants some extra skating lessons and I can't help him then I will look for that. Ultimately he won't have much fun out there if he can't keep up with the other kids. Each kid is different.. my son would never ask about the snack, it's just not him. Before tournament games this past weekend while the locker room had music blasting he would get dressed and walk out of the locker room and watch the game that was currently on the ice. That's how he is... Thanks for posting.. I sent it along to our coach to share with the team as well.

I love this thread... because he's not going anywhere and everyone here will continue to suffer. He's not paid top line money but they need him until someone else comes along and makes him expendable. No one else has or looks like they will yet. Unless another team offers up something significant or he isn't willing to re-sign (yes, I think they will try to sign him). He'll be here to the next trade deadline. Sorry for your continued suffering.

Pavelec collapsed when the team was in Atlanta. I remember seeing that.

Of course. But at the same time, take this year. If Edmonton gets the top pick by chance do you think they are going to draft a F? You think they've learned? No one knows. But they'd be insane if they did.

Yea.. caught up on the Peverly situation this morning. Wow. You can see him just collapse going off the ice. They had said they defib'ed him to get his rhythm back in order and not that his heart had stopped unlike what happened to Jiri Fisher in Detroit. No way you continue playing that game.. absolutely the right call even if Peverly was known to be stabilized. We'll see if he continues to play. I wouldn't. Not enough money in the world to deal with that, assuming the playing makes him more prone.

That was more than a fraction of a second and as I said.. his entire path was going to deliver an illegal hit, unless the the player turned counter-clockwise into the ice just so he could face Kassian. This would make no sense of course because the puck wasn't there.. there would be no reason to turn that way. Kassian was on a bee line to deliver an illegal hit and the fact that the player turned only made it that much worse. It was an approach from behind to begin with. And I don't care what you think about Scott. It's irrelevant to my point. John Scott was not on the ice. You would think it's near impossible to disengage but you know what's funny? Watch these players chase a guy into the corner and when the guy with the puck turns abruptly it's almost freakishly fast how quick the defending player can stop and follow the player back in the opposite direction. It just doesn't hold up, sorry. And yea, he knew he screwed up. Because of just hitting the guy from behind he now just boarded the guy from behind... at least I can give him credit for having the intelligence to realize he did something wrong.

Hey.. he's that good right? That's all I am saying. I'll assume he'll be playing in the WJHC next year. We shall see. 2004 - Malkin and Barker over Ovechkin? Malkin has 64 points and is +12, Ovechkin has 67 points and is -25. Barker is in the KHL, so no benefit there, but I still take Malkin over Ovechkin. 2007 - Kane - 66 pts, +6 / JVR - 52pts, -2 , Turris - 51 points, +17 - tough call. I love Kane but that's an incredible point differential there. 2009 - Tavares 66 pts, -6 / Duchene - 59pts, +4, Hedman 41pts, +3 - I know Tavares is injured and he's great, but look at the F/D you get there and hte points. 2010 - Hall - 61 pts -12 / Seguin - 66 pts +13, Gudbranson - throw him in... Seguin is outperforming Hall right now. 2013 - too early to tell. It think that a team will do fine having the next two the majority of the time. One player can only play so much.. two slightly lesser players has to provide more benefit. I don't recall the Penguins going into suck mode the year they did not have Crosby and the Capitals have done a fine job of not being great a few times with Ovechkin on the roster. Bottom line.. it would be a good problem to have right?

I think it's an interesting question though. Truthfully I was completely unimpressed with McDavid at the WJHC. He didn't look anywhere near like the best player on the ice. Sure, he's dominating juniors but that's an overall lesser group of talent to go against. I seem to recall him sulking a bit when things weren't going his way, etc. Perhaps I missed a few things in that tournament but I was just not impressed. It seems that a team might benefit even more from have picks #2 and #3 over #1 even with the top talent on display. Just for fun the draft picks from 2004-2013 in order 2004: Alexander Ovechkin, Evgeni Malkin, Cam Barker 2005: Sydney Crosby, Bobby Ryan, Jack Johnson 2006: Erik Johnson, Jordan Staal, Jonathan Toews 2007: Patrick Kane, James van Riemsdyk, Kyle Turris 2008: Steven Stamkos, Drew Doughty, Zach Bogosian 2009: John Tavares, Victor Hedman, Matt Duchene 2010: Taylor Hall, Tyler Seguin, Erik Gudbranson 2011: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Gabriel Landeskog, Jonathan Huberdeau 2012: Nail Yakupov, Ryan Murray, Alex Galchenyuk 2013: Nathan MacKinnon, Aleksander Barkov, Jonathan Druin It seems to me that in many cases, having the next two would be almost better than having the #1. Do you think the Oilers would have preferred next two in 2011 or 2012? I suppose that with Crosby's draft you could say that he's better than having Ryan and Johnson and that might be right, but what we don't know is how good Pittsburgh would be if Malkin was not there as well.

I agree. There are multiple factor at play. Pysyk CAN be in the AHL so send him there. Let him lead a team (like he is doing) - in fact dominating from what I read. Let him experience playoffs. Keep the UFA and other short term guys up in Sabres uniforms, let them showcase themselves for whatever its worth. It's a good move. They were doing the same with McNabb.

And potentially boarding as the player is out from he boards and he'd be crushing him into the boards at that angle. There's just no good decision there. HIs best bet is to keep skating hard and chase the puck into the zone..

Would you rather have first pick or next two?

BEAUTY.. thanks. I think based on that the Sabres could blow the #30 spot and be okay as long as Edmonton gets it. No way they take a forward right? RIGHT? :)

Really. Explain it differently.

That hit is a textbook example of what not to do. If he gets anything LESS than 10 games it would be a joke. (Yea.. I know). He should get to sit out the rest of the season. I mean, his angle was from behind to begin with and then when the guy turns back he gets destroyed into the boards. Awful.

Since we are talking tank... can someone explain how the top pick is determined? I was under the impression that all non-playoff teams have a weighted shot at the #1 pick and then the finishing order kicked in. How do people get a 25% change at the #1? Is that the weight applied to the #30 finisher? Are the weights posted anywhere? Gonna miss this game as my son kick's off this weekend's hockey tournament with a game at 8pm. Can't wait! Umm go Sabres?

That's not really true. McNabb was in Rochester this year because they wanted him and Pysyk to lead a team. He'll be a very good for LA and good for him. I think the players that the Sabres got back offer promise of talent up front. McNabb gave the Kings a big body and a good defender to replace Regehr in the end. The Sabres have Ehrhoff (for now), Myers, Pysyk, Ristolainen, Zadarov. I'm guessing that Murray isn't thinking that McNabb is expendable because of the last two. I liked McNabb but he was a player who could flip D potential for F potential and he brought back two potential F's in the process.