DHawerchuk10

Have to love the Euro Train!

Is he wearing a Yuri Khmylev jersey in that sketch?

Yeah, I totally agree. It seems like the "easier" pick is the right one in this case. I wouldn't cry if we picked Bennett or Draisaitl, but my gut tells me Reinhart is the blend we need the most even if it isn't flashy.

If we could get O'Reilly for Myers straight up, it would be a modern day miracle. Although it is pretty apparent that Myers is viewed from two completely different lenses (people who think what you see currently with him is what you get, and people who think he's barely tapped his potential). I'm in the 1st camp, so I hope Colorado is in the 2nd. I couldn't agree more on Ritchie...see my views on Tyler Myers. I haven't seen any of these guys play live in a game situation, so my opinion isn't worth much on any of the prospects. But from what I have read about him, and comments from people who have seen him play, this guy has bust written all over him.

These are great facts that you are bringing to the table! He also might have been one of the best passers the Sabres ever had. The guy could thread the needle like no other. He had 80 assists playing on the 2nd line in '92-'93, with the likes of Randy Wood. If that isn't impressive, I don't know what is.

Vaclav Varada does not endorse this message.

Different style? If that makes die hard Miller apologists sleep at night, go for it. I like the "he just wasn't good enough" excuse myself. I guess I can blame Leino's lack of production these few years on a "different style" as well.

I am "rooting" they give us next year's pick for similar reasons. I will be that much more motivated to wish ill of the Islanders, and if they do go in the tank, I can enjoy some Sabre wins without as much internal conflict.

Islanders need experienced defensemen, but not necessarily defensive prospects. Their prospect pool is pretty thick with talent on the back end (Pulock, Pokka, and Reinhart to name a few). With Strome and Nelson graduating to the big leagues, the cupboard is pretty empty with forwards. I see them going forward if they keep the pick, unless Ekblad suddenly falls in their lap of course.

It really didn't do much for Edmonton either, did it? I am always perplexed as to why people think of Vanek as "lazy" or didn't put a consistent effort in (not trying to pick on you, just see it differently). I can think of times he was late on the backcheck or went through hot/cold spells, sure, but that is the case for almost everyone. On average though, I thought his effort level was pretty good, and if anything, his weakness was that he got too down on himself. I just find it strange how people adhere to pre-conceived notions when their eyes tell them something different. Case in point: Zemgus comes back to the bench gassed, the majority of fans respond: "Wow, that guy is working hard". Vanek comes back to the bench tired, and the response is, "Vanek is out of shape", or "Does he smoke?". I honestly think it is only because one guy is out there taking the body, while the other guy is focusing his energy on beating defenders and setting up in front of the net. Throwing checks has better optics in terms of "hard work" I suppose. In any event....I needed to rant this morning....

That is a great line my friend!

Jeff Parker?

And once it does, he'll deal it for Bob Corkum.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say it isn't talent either (although I agree we aren't bathed in an overabundance of it). It is just that most of these guys aren't using their talents, which is a subtle difference. I certainly get the impression these guys are overthinking everything, and are too robotic. It can be perceived as a lack of effort or lack of talent, but it really is a lack of instinct. I have no delusions of grandeur, but someone who is not an X's and O's guy leading the charge might just be the perfect tonic. It might not lead to many more wins, but a more entertaining product. I am really keen to see how Myers starts to play.

That picture is pretty intimidating.

Nolan is only reason why Buffalo didn't fall into the abyss in '95-'96. Hasek missed significant time that year if you recall. We weren't world beaters, and ended up missing the playoffs, but boy, that team was fun to watch. And we had Rob Conn, Brent Hughes, and Dane Jackson on that team....not a who's who of Sabre lore exactly. Randy Burridge was our big time sniper.

I prefer "Jody"

Simply put, the answer is no if you like living in a free society as "good" is relative. Is it right for one group of people to support another group based on income or any other measur? As a group or majority, why don't I just vote myself more goodies at the expense of others? How do you truly know what other "harm" you are doing if you are simply focused on inexpensive health care (or anything else) for one group of people?

It also has many things I don't want, and there in lies the problem. My healthcare premiums have skyrocketed at work due to adherence to the "affordable" care act for no other reason that "others" want these things.

I thought about this same thing to, and it actually makes sense, but you have to look at it from a historical-political perspective rather than basic logic (as on its own merits, what you say is a 100% true). The reason why they are fighting so aggressively to halt the roll out of ACA is largely due to ecomonic inequality of the bill and its associated ramifications. If the bill is rolled out and is found to work out for 51% of people who have to pay for this in a minor way while increasing costs to everyone else, then guess what, you will never repeal it. There is obviously way more to this discussion than that (very simplified), but that is basically it in a nutshell. It is human nature to want something on the cheap regardless of the unseen consequence to others. It is the inherent problem to any 3rd party system.

What are your expectations based on his contract?

That is not how the stand your ground law works. More importantly, the stand your ground law was not used in the defense of George Zimmerman as it wasn't applicable, it was just traditional "self defense" case.

I read too quickly and was watching the news about how the DOJ is investigating bringing a civil rights case against him and I was responding to that "civil" aspect, not the the run of mill civil suit Martin's parents will most likely file, which you are referring to. And that isn't a "defensive" response by any stretch, but an important point that is widely ignored. Granted, I understand that it is moot relative to a civil trial, but should stand front and center for any civil rights violation. Racism cuts both ways, and the only evidence to suggest racism was involved is Martin's comment about Zimmerman. Everything else is speculation.

The only evidence that was presented in the trial (at least that was in the media) that proved "profiling" was the phone quote provided by the prosecution that showed Martin profiling Zimmerman. Not sure what they would bring to a civil trial given that. There is no evidence that his state of mind was racially motivated that I have heard of. You don't have to take his word for it....it was evidence submitted by prosecution via the lady who testified that is what Martin said.

He gave up his rights of self defense the minute he initiated physical contact. Zimmerman didn't "create" anything. Have you ever lived in a neighborhood with many recent break-ins? It puts you on edge. The unfortunate and tragic thing about this is Martin actually profiled Zimmerman in this case (called him "Crazy Cracker"), which probably ratcheted up Martin's state of mind and made him more confrontational that he needed to be.