LTS

######... on DirecTV I'm losing the feed now so no postgame? FUGGLES!!!!!! Actually there are no fuggles in the beer I am drinking... but anyway.

What the hell did you do use Word to respond to that? You are clearly clueless. Regardless of your opinion on his "signing quality" he's still far better than 50% of the Sabres roster. So what does that say to you? If the WORST SIGNING IN NHL HISTORY is better than 50% of the team that signed him? Just curious. Frankly I just think he's a perfectly good player put on a bad team. By the way.... Rick DiPietro is the worst signing in the NHL.. ever. I know you said "one of the worst".

This just in.. Buffalo Sabres sued by Dyson for infringing on their patent of never losing suckage. I need another three beers...

A corpse wouldn't have laid on the ice as well as Miller did on that last attempt. Bring on RR and his comments on Leino... they should just let the players coach themselves the rest of the season. It's clear the morons behind the bench have no clue.

Well.. then DR believes he has a deal.. perhaps he's trading with Feaster? :) All I can think of right now is this:

So Leo has a goal and an assist in the last two.. he's playing for a trade. Nicely done.. I still think Leino is on the move... if RR just benched him for the game then RR should be fired.. unless Leino said something to RR in the locker room. Something like.. "This team is a bunch of !$!$#! and you are the !#!$%!@ leader." I can't wait for the post-game presser.

At this point.. if RR is still just benching Leino I think he's an idiot. I don't care what Leino said to the referee he's worth more on the ice. Since I don't think RR is that big of an idiot I'm sticking with... Leino has been traded. I know no one here would believe it.. either that or he's injured.. but I don't see that.

Pominville is going to LA.. unless they want Stafford or Leino. Perhaps his between the legs pass was enough to convince them? I realize it's Feaster on Sunday but can we stop talking about the Feaster Bunny already? He laid an egg, I'm not sure why anyone is surprised.

This Leino thing is interesting... he was on the bench but not on the ice in that period. Either his hip is bothering him or perhaps he's part of some trade discussion and they've pulled him from the ice? I love rumor mongering.

Stafford... pull him now and trade him!

Has Leino touched the ice since his penalty? Sekera goal.

Pittsburgh is going all in to be sure but they are going to have to move people either in the offseason or next year to keep that team intact. $32.4m committed to Malkin, Crosby, Neal, Martin, and Fleury next year. They've got 10 players who are either RFA/UFA next season. Kunitz, Malkin, Orpik, Letang, Niskanen Sutter, all in the last year of their contracts next year. Someone is going to have to budge. It's a good move on their part. I see them moving Malkin, Orpik, or Letang next year to get back a draft pick or two / prospects they gave up this year. Still, I'll be real curious to see how Pittsburgh does over the next 2-3 years. It could be mortgaging the future for now. Something I guess we Sabre fans wouldn't mind at this point. Win once, lose for another 6-8 years? I'm still convinced that Pominville ends up in LA, especially now that they missed on Iginla. I think the Sabres target Bernier. Does MIller move? Hard to say.. either now or later.

You can find information all over the net about aging beer. There are lots of great examples and styles. On my 40th a few weeks ago we had a 2006 Braggot, a 2008 Stock Ale, and a few other nicely aged beers. You can age a Double IPA if you want. They begin to take on a barleywine like flavor as the floral aspects of the hops gives way to the bitterness. Barleywines are some of the most notably aged beers, many of them being aged (if bottled properly) an easy 10 years. Imperial Stouts as mentioned above are also commonly aged. They'll lose carbonation over time and take on interesting characteristics. When beers have been aged on oak, or brewed with chocolate that will also tend to mature over time as well. As long as you keep the beer out of light, at a constant temperature (preferably 55 degrees to 48 degrees) you should be okay. At one of the recent Belgium Comes to Cooperstown events Ommegang did a vertical tasting of Three Philosophers. I believe they had samples from 2002-2011 so you could taste each and see how they developed over time. Stone brewed the 1.1.1 - 12.12.12 series specifically for the purpose of aging those beers until the 12.12.12. date. So if you think about the 1.1.1 brewed in 2001 was intended to be consumed 11 years later. JW Lees Harvest Ales routinely are aged for long years. I had a 1999 version last year. It was fantastic. it takes on a very liquor like characteristic at a lower alcohol rate of course. The problem with aging is that any substandard conditions or even a bottling defect could mean you end up with vinegar or a number of interesting side effects from aging. It happens.

I say this about faceoffs mattering. Statistically, air travel is the safest form of travel. However, if everyone doesn't do their job right then the outcome of the statistically improbably occurrence of a crash is very bad. Same with a faceoff. Generally, if everyone does their job, it doesn't matter.. but when someone doesn't... boom. Now... what about trades?

I'd have to dig out the bottles I've had a few beers from up there. Had Lagunitas Sucks last night after my hockey game... very nice.

Let's be honest... trading away pieces for long term improvement is not at all the same as tanking is it? If DR can move players at the deadline, like Pominville, Stafford, and more then I am all for it. If that means they don't win this year that's fine. That's not tanking, that's presumably getting solid future prospects for the future. Perhaps it's a fine line.

I understand your viewpoint. I won't agree, but I understand it. The underlying problem is a lack of faith in the people running the show, really the GM. If you lack faith in the owner you should probably just quit being a fan because he's probably not going anywhere. I don't know if Regier can cut it as a GM. I have to give him credit for putting together a competitive team at times. I've seen two offseasons and 1 trade deadline where it appears he's done a good job. I don't think anyone predicted the lack of heart this Sabres team has now would be so bad. I don't think anyone predicted that Pominville would quickly become one of the faces of that lack of effort. Perhaps some moves confounded us, take Stafford for example since he's another favorite whipping boy. I think Stafford is a capable player. I believe that he's soured on Buffalo and the situation and that put elsewhere he will be back to the standout season he had a few years ago. There was optimism ending last year that Stafford had found his way. It's clear that didn't pan out but now it's up to the GM to move him. It's a matter of what he can get for him. Given his ability to flip players and our willingness, as fans, to let him go for nothing I'm thinking DR has a very low bar to get over for our approval. Too many moving parts to try and blame it on any one thing. One bad person in the locker room, or a coach that turns the team off and it can lead to a divided locker room and a team that is not focused. You can't always control that but I think the Sabres are moving in the right direction by bringing in a guy like Ott who seems to have taken over control of the locker room. I just don't feel fooled.. I suppose I never would based on the simple fact that it's sports so I don't get too crazy over it. But I think there is evidence to support the building of the team in the right direction. I'm really looking forward to this trade deadline to see what happens. If the Sabres tank the trade deadline then I'll probably change my stance on things a bit.

Yea, which means he's capable when surrounded by talent but not capable of carrying a team. That's better than not being capable regardless of the talent around you.

I'm not equating failure to failure. I'm stating that having top picks does not beget success as some would propose. I think it's absolutely impossible to provide statistical analysis on that. My goal was simply to say that it's impossible to tell. The Sabres have had talent as well to build a team around but either through the incompetence of the GM, the owner, or something else it never happened. We've already begun questioning ownership here. You've brought up Yzerman, Charles Wang. If we have incompetent leadership the plan falls apart right? So, we need a new GM at a minimum. Now strangely enough I recall seeing a lot of people in the "Keep 5" thread throwing Hodgson's name in there. I'm pretty sure the incomptent GM was the guy who acquired Hodgson. Is he "top talent" I don't know, but he seems to be a pretty strong player that might do even better if those other holes were filled. Which brings me to Colorado... who has Stastny, Duchesne, and Landeskog, O'Reilly, McGinn, Parenteau, Erik Johnson (top 5 pick), and they seem to still be sucking as well. If the team is tanking why would Regier get fired? I presume it's because they are losing but wouldn't it be completely illogical to judge the man on the job he's doing if you have your team tanking? Of course I don't think what's trying to be said is that they lose on purpose.. so that brings up the next question. Since they aren't losing on purpose, people must want them to lose based upon their lack of ability against the league. If that is the case, how is that not rooting against the team? After all, the only logical statement is that you hope, the team as it is comprised today, is not good enough to make the playoffs. In fact, it's worse than that. It's not that they don't make the playoffs it's that they are so bad they get a top 3 pick. So, you are hoping that every other team they play is better so that the Sabres lose. You want them to lose. So, if that's the case, when they are suddenly good, and you are rooting for the exact opposite scenario, you know, the other team to lose. Can I then say you are rooting for that team? Seems a bit hinky to me. I see where people try and justify this as some long term plan. It's okay to root for them to lose now so they can be successful later by getting a top pick this year. Except they might not get better next year because we've already seen comments that a top pick doesn't turn the team around overnight like the NFL. Okay, so next year they aren't much better, they finish 10th in the standings. The year after that they finish 9th. Okay, so now we are questioning if the top pick from this year is going to help the team. We are wondering what the next trade will be to get that team over the hump. Then we find out the guy was a bust, start it over. Kind of feels like the past 16 years doesn't it? So, in some sick twisted way are people really rooting for the status quo? Except you know for that one top 3 pick that might pan out or not. It just doesn't work for me. It's completely illogical to hope that your team sucks. It's the antithesis of being a fan. I hope the Flyers suck and for me to sit there and in the same sentence say that I hope the Sabres suck.. well I just can't do it.

2005 - Crosby, Ryan, Jack Johnson, Benoit Pouliot, Carey Price (Crosby clearly, Ryan, certainly, Johnson and Pouliot.. not so much, Price.. maybe) 2006 - Erik Johnson, Jordan Staal, Jonathan Toews, Nicklas Backstrom, Phil Kessel 2007 - Patrick Kane, James van Riemsdyk, Kyle Turris, Thomas Hickey, Karl Alzner (Sam Gagner, 6th) 2008 - Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian, Pietrangelo, Luke Schenn Of those 20 players, 9 of them are players I would consider top talent (Crosby, Ryan, Staal, Toews, Backstrom, Kane, Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian) Of those 20 players quite a few have been flipped to other teams (E. Johnson, J, Johnson, Staal, Kessel, Pouliot, JVR, Turris, Schenn) Now, we could potentially discount Kane/Toews because I would consider that like Malkin,Crosby. I just look over those top 5 picks and I can't say that it really helps. Ryan is a legit star but he appears to be on the outside looking in in Anaheim. If you want me to say that picking in the Top 5 improves your chances of landing top talent I will. I agree with that. But I just can't get behind wanting a team to lose to get there. Most of the teams that succeeded did so because they had multiple top picks. So, are we willing to sit here as fans and want the top pick this year and next year? Can we sit through another season of sucking? I think we want to say yes. I think we want to say, if there's a plan then I am behind it. But I think that when January of 2014 rolls around we'll be desperate for a team that shows something. I think this team can improve without having to get the top picks.

The Sabres had a lot of injuries last year. I remember what we kept saying about that point.... The Panthers improved when they obtained Campbell, Kopecky, Versteeg, Fleischmann. Still their top 5 in scoring right now are a -8, -7, -12, -18 (Campbell), and -5... that's scary.

Perhaps they should have tried harder to get him last year instead of Kassian. What do we have to send them all the character tough guys? It's a simple truth.. if the Sabres traded Ott they would lose Weber, they would lose their backbone, and they would, most importantly, lose every single fan they have. Ott IS the face of the Sabres now.

Here's my problem for anyone who wants to get a top pick... there's no guarantees you are going to get better, next year, the following year, or 4 years later. I just can't get behind the idea of going for a #1 pick because of that. If you knew, absolutely knew, that the top pick was going to be an all-time great then sure, I might be behind it. I'm looking at drafts from 2008-2012... Oilers - Top Pick Last 3 Years - currently suck Tampa - Top Pick in 08, 2nd pick in 09 - just fired their coach, sucking Islanders - 1st in 09, 5th in 10, 5th in 11, 4th in 12 - not looking too good (less points than Buffalo right now) Panthers - 3rd in 10, 3rd in 11 - sucking Jackets - 4th in 10, 2nd in 12 - sucking Avalanche - 3rd in 09, 2nd in 11 - sucking There are teams who have managed to sneak into a top 5 pick over the past 5 years (Blues, Bruins, Devils, Canadiens) but they've had other pieces that were in place to turn it around quickly. If the Sabres are that bad then what is a Top 5 pick going to do for them? It's not a guarantee of improvement. For those teams that I listed as sucking, if they weren't in the top 5 they were usually 6 or 7 or so. They've had top picks and nothing comes from it. This is why I cannot get behind the idea. I understand the concept, but unless you are Pittsburgh who gets Fleury, Crosby, Staal, and Malkin over a few drafts you are most likely going to suck. A team would have to flip some talent in order to improve greatly. I keep waiting for Edmonton to do it. Three #1 picks on the roster and some other higher picks and they are getting nowhere...

The next coach has fallen. Sounds like perhaps they'll be looking to move people too given their lack of success. Maybe not, they are a better team on paper I believe. Steve Yzerman made the announcement early Sunday morning. "Guy has poured his heart and soul into the Lightning organization for these past three years and we appreciate all the work he has done," Yzerman said in a statement. "But ultimately I am not satisfied with the direction we are heading and I believe making a change today is in the best interest of our franchise.

Indeed. It's pretty good. The Scotch menu is pretty serious as well. Ahh that would do it. We had a great time last night. The beer selection was not the best but they'll always have their OT20 DIPA on tap and that beer is heavenly... the $5.25/pint just makes it better. It's an exceptional beer in my opinion. Would I call it my favorite? I don't think so, but from a technical perspective it's done right. Not a huge Pliny fan. It's one of those beers that I think is overrated. It's pretty thin lacking the body I prefer in a beer. Union Jack.. that's another story. :)