LTS

Let me add to this. If I, as a lowly beer league level player, know how to do this then so does an all-time superstar like Malkin.

I think there are two issues at hand here: 1. The Bills want to keep their defense off the field. This is their desire to run the ball or complete short passes more than take longer downfield attempts that might result in stopping the clock. 2. When the Bills need to make a play, Joe Brady over thinks things and tries to get cute resulting in a poorly executed play that fails to achieve its intended objective. You've nailed it here though. They are playing with fire and eventually they are going to get burned. It would have been really interesting to see if the Bills could have gotten downfield with the remaining time to kick a game winning FG had the Ravens tied it up. It would have required them to play downfield, something, as you said, they basically did not do.

From what I have read, the trade was with the Red Wings who pulled the plug when they decided to make the coaching change. This is likely what killed that trade entirely. I'm not sure you can blame Adams on this one. While I don't like Adams and the job he's done I do want to be real about it. He had a trade on the table and the other team pulled it. As to what the full trade would have been or if it would help the Sabres, that's impossible to say. But to the best of our knowledge, it was not Adams who failed to complete the deal. Why there have been no others? Well, hard to say.

UPL is a problem as he lets in too many shots he should save. The other players are ALSO the problem and it's not just the defense. They only cover part of the ice. As a team the Buffalo Sabres are horrible at defending.

When a goalie covers the puck in the crease in that manner everyone knows their head will be exposed to contact. He intended to make contact with UPL as he did nothing to avoid going through the crease.

Is there anything that qualifies that graphic or did someone just make an image with some sports teams logos on it? I'm not necessarily debating who's on it and certainly not the Sabres.

Ehhh.. it was intentional. There's very little these players do that isn't intentional. Malkin knew exactly where he was heading and exactly what could happen. He could have avoided it very easily but chose not to do so.

Certainly. The Republican party is well known for promoting a certain way of life and are very good at eroding the social freedoms we deserve to have. The Democratic party is also known for promoting a certain way of life. They are very good at eroding the financial freedoms we deserve to have. I'll just bring up a few Democratic led initiatives that have imposed restrictions on individual freedoms and rights. NYS SAFE Act NYS FMLA Act Social Security Unemployment DIsability I'm not here to argue the efficacy, justification, or purpose of these programs. I am mentioning these because they either impose an ownership restriction or a financial restriction on people. The gist of the entire argument is that Democrats and Republicans are both very good at eroding freedoms from its citizens. They do so either individually or through continued bi-partisan partnership. In almost all cases they will cite the "greater good" for the purpose of their actions. The question will always remain: Whose greater good? The answer will always be: It depends on if you benefit or are impacted by it, or not. Usually the discussion will fall back to "Well, it's just common sense." The problem with that statement is that if it were so common, it wouldn't be a problem, and yet here we are. As I said, I dislike both parties so do not think I am attacking or defending either of them. The only us vs. them argument in my books is people vs. government, period.

This doesn't help. You are talking about specific incidents. What is the American ideology that you are considering? I think everyone has different ideas about it, so how can I respond to your "anti-American" specifically about Democrats unless I know what you consider the points of "American ideology" are. Neither of us are here to defend the Republicans. You questioned my status on the Democrats, so let's discuss.

I see that you and I have the same relative chance of seeing the game. But, as far as it happening? Of course it did, because we'll both be here reading about it. 🙂

In order to talk about "anti-American" you have to define the American ideology. So, in your words, please define that and then I will be able to respond better.

I don't see wildly inconsistent. He might currently be enjoying that higher shooting percentage but until the end of the season comes around it's hard to know how it will all play out there. I see a player who is second on the team in +/- who wins more than 50% FO, 6th in scoring and a great penalty killer. I don't think McLeod is just having a career contract year. I think he's just a 25 year old player who's putting it together. I'd sign him. I wouldn't even consider not.

Well, at least I now know there's a game tonight. Do Malkin or Crosby have any milestones they can hit tonight?

Definitely. I only asked so if people wanted to converse on it they could at least refer to any specific coverage you had read. As far as the FEMA post it was more about how all the Republicans went haywire about it but now it'll be okay. A joke. And also about Democrats being just as bad, in their own ways. I'm equally disgusted with both parties and pretty much always have been. In my opinion they are the definitive two sides of the same coin. A coin that is fast depreciating in value.

Can you please provide a link with information for people to consume? But conversely... these things happen. https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2024/11/fema-chief-calls-passing-over-trump-supporters-isolated-incident-requests-wider-probe/401146/ I suppose some of those GOP participants should be quoted and naturally more Republicans said it was BS. So clearly if FEMA withholding aid from Trump supporters is a problem then certainly the Republicans should think that withholding aid from California is a problem. So, they are all on equal ground as far as I am concerned. Let's not pretend one side is any more righteous than the other.

He's definitely in the front row now.

I suppose if this is your standard you will be disappointed by everyone, everywhere, every time. Since you said you are genuinely curious about his understanding of fundamental hockey let's think of a situation, it can be any situation. There are 5 players of which one is Dahlin. In order for whatever "right" play is to happen, it requires that all 5 players (most of the time) execute with appropriate situational awareness and an understanding of what each of them is supposed to be doing. Let's say one player makes the wrong decision. This forces the other 4 players to either adjust to attempt to overcome that mistake or they can choose to cover their own position and let that mistake stand out. Nearly all players, if possible, will attempt to cover the mistake as that should, in theory, lower the negative outcome possibilities. However, overall, the chance of something negative happening has increased because one player did not do what they should. Extrapolate that to 2 or 3 players making mistakes and it gets worse. If I were to take this to a football offense I would use the recognition of a blitz as an example. If the WRs don't recognize it and they all run a longer timed route then the QB is hosed. It takes everyone doing their thing to be successful. Then, there are times when mistakes are made. It's that simple. They are not infallible humans, especially at the ages of 23/24. They are very good at hockey, but they are not perfect. No different than anyone who might be very good at what they do, they are not perfect.

So, if I like fart noises, are you attacking me since I fall into the "in general" category? Just accept it. You think people who like fart noises should grow up. I'm not entirely certain what fart noises do to harm you directly. I suppose someone could watch that video and have it positively impact them. Perhaps it brightens their day a bit from what had been a pretty bad day to that point. I wonder, how do we weigh out the importance of the impact of that video then. Is it trash because you don't like it or does it have value because it made someone feel a bit better? Perhaps the wisdom needed is to accept that we all have differences and we should accept those differences. By accept, we should be glad that someone found value in another's creation even if we didn't. We should encourage people to express their differences and we should encourage people to accept that which makes us different. Homogenized thinking is dangerous and attempts to create it should be rejected.

I didn't read Hamilton's statement so I don't have full context but one way to read it is that this team cannot handle the way Dahlin leads. It doesn't mean Dahlin is wrong in how he does it. I do see someone who gets tired of the mistakes of players and I see a young adult who hasn't learned the wisdom to always handle that well. What I don't see is a player who does not care. Who does not demand more from himself (perhaps too much). I have made arguments in the past about Dahlin and the C and questioned it, but he's the only player on this roster I would give the C at the moment they decided to hand it out. Tuch has all the makings of the "feel good" guy. No thanks. No accountability. So an absolute HOF player makes a play and you think that does not make Dahlin captain material? I love his personality. I think he does some bad things on the ice still but I also don't see him as infallible, like any human isn't.

I think that any discussion regarding the value of a player has to include whether the person stating the opinion believes the team is ruining the player or the player is bad. Posters on here consistently lament the performance of players who have been traded away. This is something that I am sure does not go unnoticed around the league and therefore lends credence to a belief that the players themselves are not the problem. The problem either lies organizationally or it lies within the mix of players who are not being brought together to complement each other and play as a team. I don't think any individual gets to cherry pick which viewpoint they want to use for any given player. For example, if someone believes Cozens is truly not a good NHL player then one would need to also avoid making arguments that he could be traded for anything worthwhile, at least 1:1, etc. Right now I believe the prevailing wisdom of NHL GMs is that Buffalo is a fundamentally broken franchise and that any player on this team is worth more OFF this team than ON it. There might be few exceptions, but I don't think those players are getting traded or for anything valuable at least.

Not even remotely considering this. Dahlin has the C and he's one of the best players on the team, if not the best. He's driven. The problems with this franchise do not lie with Rasmus Dahlin. Revoking a C from a player is a massive event to the point that it's rarely done. I don't consider trading a C as revoking it.

This Dylan Strome? I mean, perhaps he's not the best player in the world, but using the phrase "all time bust" seems more apropos for players like: Alexander Svitov - 3rd overall, 2001 - 37 points in 179 career games. Nail Yakupov - 1st overall, 2012 - 136 points in 350 career games. Dylan Strome has 348 points in 479 games. Hardly a bust, let alone an "all time bust" We are and that's not the full fan base either but your broad sweeping generalization is the stuff great Internet arguments are made of. As is not identifying the difference between what people want in slice of time versus a longer period of time. :eyeroll:

They won.. this is good. I want them to win. Until they win the Super Bowl I'm not sure I'll overcome the stigma of 4 straight SB losses so I will remain guarded in all commentary. Next week is a huge game for them against a team that rolled them earlier in the season. A team whose offense matches up very well against the Buffalo defense. A team who has a QB that many think will win the MVP again this year despite what Bills fans (and many others) want for Josh Allen. It's a statement game regarding any MVP outcome later in the season.

As @LGR4GM said. You want a face to focus on for poor defense? Here it is. But then again.. just go deeper.. and let's see what's really changed over the past few seasons: Marty Wilford: Coaches defense and penalty kill Seth Appert: Assistant coach and forwards and power play coach Matt Ellis: Coaches centermen and faceoff circle improvement Seth Appert who ran the same PP in Rochester as Granato did in Buffalo. No real change. Lately they are slightly different once they get in zone, but their zone entries are still horrible. They are still horrible at face-offs. Nothing really changed. Ruff was brought in as a consultant head coach to pave the way for Appert and I am sure Ruff's opinion now is that these guys should not be coaches.

There some risk for Vegas acquiring Eichel, but not huge. They gave up Tuch and Krebs basically. Krebs who people want traded and Tuch who sometimes plays to his potential and sometimes does not. Neither of which have been the answer here, nor would they have been the answer there. Acquiring a player is more than the 100 pts. It's the $11.5M salary that comes with it. For that much money you want something a little more solid than what Pettersson brings to the table. This isn't like Eichel where you bring on $10M salary and if he cannot play he's off the books. This is $11.5M for a player who if they cannot perform is still $11.5M and cannot be moved. Think Jeff Skinner, but more expensive. You bring in Pettersson for Power and you lose cap space, not gain it. Perhaps you meant just move Power out for nothing or for a lower cap space player, not sure. Either way, $8M less the salaries of the player coming in likely do not get you very good defensive D. The decision time for this organization is now on Cozens, that's a given. As soon as he moved from 24 to 25 the thought process on what a player will be begins to change. The contract given to Power is unfortunate, but 22 is way to early to decide what he will become. He makes some bad plays and he's not physical, but he makes a lot of good plays too. Yes the plan is not working and has not worked. I don't see Pettersson being the help the Sabres need. Regardless of his one time output what he has shown is an inability to take a team on his shoulders and lead. If all the discussions about him are concerning his mental approach to the game does he really make sense to add to a team whose entire identity is concern over their mental approach to the game? No.