DarthEbriate

You were right... you were right about me. (and the Sabres)

Your overconfidence is your weakness.

I guess what I was hoping to see (last year and this) was a young team that lost because they couldn't play defense, but they runned it and gunned it to no end. Entertainment and all. Dare I say it... like the Leafs of 3 years ago. Then, as those young guys grew up and learned how to defend at an NHL level, suddenly the team gets a significantly better. Now... the beginning of this season our PP was killing it, and that's exciting, but it's also not something that you can rely on night-in and night-out all season (you may only get one power play, and the PP and PK go through spells here and there). Alas...

It's been a little too real this decade. Hey! I'm a second liner? When did this happen? Someone must've told them about my little maneuver on the ice back in Pierce in '85.

Likewise. But he's a baby defenseman in the NHL and he's not being protected. He's getting the full Ekblad treatment. Karlsson was also garbage in his own zone for awhile. But hopefully, (and there's always hope in sport), it'll click in a couple seasons and he'll fill out, and be Hedman or Karlsson... but slicker. And rasmussier.

Hey, did Luke give up...? well... yes, he did. But then Yoda lifted that X-wing out of the swamp and Luke was all... "I can do this! I can save my friends." .... and then he had his hand lobbed off.

Or do it until your players individually establish your reputation. You'll still give up penalties to the Crosbys of the world, but everyone will. If all your players are known to play hard to (and just after the whistle), they'll let it go within a couple seasons. It's like... Boston. They were garbage for years. But Chara and Leddy and Boynton? they all hacked away and took some penalties were suddenly the big bad bruins again (and yes, they also started to ice a very good roster). But you bring in those types of players instead of the Jokiharjus and Piluts and Montours (all good and up-and-coming players) and you get a different roster and a different approach from the refs. (and no, you don't just go get Chara, but Leddy and Boynton and Hjalmarsson, etc. -- there's a guy like that up for FA every offseason.

Well, it's one of those things... if we did it consistently it wouldn't get called as a one-off over-aggressive play, it'd just be natural that we always protect the crease. Like in the NFL, the Seahawks D used to hold and mug and grab on defense every play. The refs called it a couple times, but eventually it wore off and they just let them play. Refs can be normalized just like everyone else. (And like how the superstars always draw the fouls/penalties)

Oooof. That is a rough stretch in the third. Not quite able to bounce back when things don't go their way. Nor should it. I'd prefer that's what we do anytime someone is standing on top of our crease awaiting a rebound.

Not shouldn't at all, but if the indefinite the makes more sense to local populace than the possessive, I'm not too concerned about it.

I'm not so concerned about a minor flub with an extra r. She sang the instead of our, which makes perfect sense. I'd hesitate to have an American singer attempt the Swedish anthem and call out an outlier. Our anthem singers go silent for a verse so the crowd can sing, or encourage the crowd to yell "Stars!", or whatnot. Or they embellish to no end. We woke up on time today. Nice shot-pass to Mitts for the tap to Johansson. Good save.

She started the SSB nice and low, which is the key. I also liked her arrangement of it -- nice and slow with a couple different approaches than we typically hear on this side of the pond.

Making a cheesecake, digging the Tampa game crew's suits, and ready to lock S-foils in attack position.

Spoilers! Search your feelings...

The last two times we've had a no-show on the first night of a back-to-back, we've played very strong the second night. I'm seeing a strong bounce back effort. A victory? Difficult to see. Always in motion is the future.

PJ didn't mail it in, but the original Guillermo del Toro script and PJ/Boyen's original script were both two-part films. Along the way it was decided upon a third film (I suspect studio saying "we want our money" and PJ being a good guy and accepting responsibility going along with it). But he and Boyens did a very good job of editing LOTR into three films --- ending Two Towers with Helm's Deep on the one plotline (as opposed to Saruman, in the book) and with a contrived but consistent-toned "battle" at Osgiliath and then Gollum's deception, rather than just Sam trapped outside... but with the Ring. That narrative structure wasn't in Hobbit.... the climax to 2 made no sense (Smaug... chases...?) and then Smaug dies before the opening title card of Hobbit 3. And then the added Necromancer plotline also resolves in the first act of the Hobbit 3. It became a very disjointed story by going from two to three films. (I'm more machine now than man)

Wow. This one goes there, that one goes there. Right? There goes our excellent goal differential.

All wings report in. ? done.

As Tale of the Tape will tell you, the Leafs never had a chance against the Sabres '99 squad. But also, the Leafs would have been roadkill against Dallas (and probably Detroit and Colorado, too, had they gotten through --- just as we were). The '99 Sabres team was really solid, but those Western teams at the end of the century were absolutely stacked. Edit: I also need to point out that the Sabres were in the ECF the year before with a worse roster -- so they got Juneau, and got Barnes, and got Warrener. They were a darn good team and were much improved for the follow-up in '99. But, again --- look at Dallas, Detroit, and Colorado those years... we could've won, but we were going to be underdogs+Hasek, regardless. You underestimate the power of the fifty. Unlimited anniversary!

This tickled me. Would the Hasek-era Sabres be as fun today? All of the metrics and stats tell you... eek, they're not very good. But they just keep winning. Every game is excruciatingly fun to watch, but during the down time... a message board (even as grand as this one)... would not be as forgiving as I am.

I like it. It's vibrant, the colors are excellently desert-y without the sand, and the coyote is playing hockey with its stick (unlike the Panthers who were breaking their sticks in half). And the border/edging detail is slick. It's one of the busier kits, but it ties the room together.

Scandellous! (in Prince falsetto!) yes.

He wasn't running away. He was trying to find Rey so she didn't follow the beacon back to the fleet and die. Rose thought he was trying to desert, as others had done, but he was solely focused on Rey (not himself). Then, they team up later and he learns there's more to fight for than just he and Rey. And he attempts a sacrifice as a result. I don't know anything about pre-LOTR Peter Jackson beyond that he was a horror-flick guy and I've seen that one famous clip of the guy starting up the lawnmower and using it against a zombie horde. So... Jackson was definitely OK with over-the-top. So, it makes sense for their team to go big/operatic (and I think logically pull from Wagner because of the ties between LOTR and Der Ring des Nibelungen). But yeah, intense operatic (visually and aurally) is definitely a "your mileage may vary" style.

Looks like we started this one by discussing the taxation on trade routes instead of a running an Imperial blockade....

And this wouldn't surprise me in the least. If (as it's been established) he made one "vergence" he could make another, better, perfected one. Except people have a habit of breaking free of shackles like that. It makes for a good story. (Life... finds a way.) Sorry about commandeering this thread, y'all. I'll shut up now.