TrueBlueGED

Well, that's annoying :lol:

The Trevor Siemian hype on WGR is going to kill me. If we go into next season with him as our starter, I'll lose it.

Neither here nor there, but have you decided where you're going yet? Or narrowed it down, anyway.

Howard WGR‏ @hsimon62 9m9 minutes ago More going back to loss to chicago, sabres now 1-4-2 in last 7. took 1 goal lead into 3rd in 3 games and lost all 3. (at Arizona, Nash, at pitt) The injuries to start the year certainly didn't help, but they're also not the reason we aren't making the playoffs.

Nope. The fourth lines really don't, either. The days of depth players being physical guys devoid of skill are over. In my view Bailey is an NHL player, and even if he never develops the sense/hands to be in a scoring role, he's got a spot on my team.

Should have gone without her. <------ is not married. Obviously.

As if I needed another reason to dislike him.

Victory is mine!

So momentum doesn't matter, until someone has had it and lost it? Only the second instance of momentum matters, not the first? Why? And how is what you said any different than simply one team executing while another is not? If the other team gets two scores in a row, doesn't your team then have to change strategy? Maybe you have to move to a strategy that is less suited to your team's strengths, thus making you less effective. Wouldn't these underlying changes in approach be really easy to confuse with the nebulous concept of momentum?

Exactly my point! Why give a damn about momentum if it can stop on a dime and completely reverse itself? One could argue that's all "momentum" actually means.

That's a perfect example. They had ALL the momentum. The Pats should have curled up in the fetal position. If momentum had meaning, Atlanta would have run roughshod in the second half and won by 40.

In-game momentum may exist, but it's relatively meaningless because it's so easily broken.

Yea, I don't believe in this stuff at all, I was just clearly posting what I thought Weave was hinting at.

They're mentally soft and crumble the moment there's adversity. Not winners. Lacking "it."

You're deranged.

I'd go watch the game in the foyer.

Kane's hot streak stared when he was skating with Larsson and Gionta. Really don't think his linemates are why he's playing better.

The argument against Bylsma isn't that he should have this roster competing for a Cup, it's that he's not properly utilizing and getting the most out of what he has to work with.

I legitimately don't know what to make of this. I mean, I don't even have a take, good, bad, or otherwise. I'm just confused. Is there precedent for GMs addressing their team sans coaches in the middle of the season?

How is he underrated? There is currently not a single, solitary thing he's doing well.

He needs to stop with everything and go full Costanza. I'm serious. He needs to do the exact opposite of his every instinct.

Did you have to endure O'Hare on your way through Chicago? If so, I completely understand.

I'd trade Samson for OEL. I'd curse Bylsma's name while doing it. But I'd do it.

Lots of teams have talent problems. Islanders, Blues, Wild. Then they change coaches, and suddenly the talent problems aren't as severe. The Sabres obviously have roster issues, on the blue line especially. But I can't get to a spot where that's the only problem.

I think this is more likely than I care to think about. His statements show he's well aware he could use a top-2 Dman, but I'm not sure he necessarily thinks he has to revamp the middle pair. Wow. I think you're about to be excommunicated from your own church :p