mjd1001

I get your point. But "we were outworked" can also sometimes be nothing more than "we aren't as good as them".

I get that it might be better to be taller/bigger to cover more net. But in the past 5 years or so...Shesterkin and Saros have been pretty darn good goalies at right about 6 feet tall also.

I hope so, but I need to see it. Quinn will be one of the players I watch/follow the most in the first few games. 1 major thing to look for: Is he going to the front of the net and getting shots off, or is he staying as probably the most 'perimeter' forward in the league.

To show the difference between sports....

A quick search with results from sportrac claims McDavid makes/made $6m per year in endorsements, Matthews $5m

I wonder if he makes more or less than Matthews, with Matthews probably getting a lot more 'local money' being in Toronto vs Edmonton...with Toronto's metro population and wealth/GDP being...maybe 4 or 5 times what Edmonton is?

Unless you consider Terry Pegula as a 'fan'. In his first few years of ownership, to me he was certainly acting more like a typical 'fan' than a rational owner/member of management.

I think that deal is great for Edmonton. You get the remainder of "Prime McDavid", for 3 more seasons. At that point, your team is getting really old, McDavid will be entering his age 31-32 season. You COULD try to re-sign him, but at the current contract, you are getting the very best he has left in his career while your team window is open at a value price.

I just posted it elsewhere, but I would LOVE that deal for Tuch. If I were the Sabres, I'd throw a party if he signed for a 2 year extension (You'd have him for 3 more years through the season he turns 32, 2027-28, someone else can pay him beyond that)

I'd take the exact same deal for Tuch. Not going to happen but give him a ton of money but limit it to 2 years, sign me up.

It looks like only $12.5m per year. If that is true, he is doing EDM a HUGE favor

2 years at $12.5 m per year for McDavid is what is floating out there.

it will be interesting to see. If I were McDavid, I'd try to figure out how long I'll be considered the top (or at least top 5 player in the league). If I think I will be a top 5 player for at least 4 more years, I might just sign for as much as I can for 4 years. Thinking there will still be a big market for me after those 4 years are up. And if he hasn't won a cup by then, its going to be harder and harder in Edmonton beyond that, that gives him the flexibility to shop to other contenders after a few more shots in EDM.

Posted in the last few minutes just before 12:30 pm today...

The largetst part of being a fan for me is the social aspect of it. If a team played, but there was no one to talk to about the game, no sports radio, no pre and post game show. No highlights. No stadium or arena to be part of the cheering crows. If it was just the game and nothing else, not even a message board like this, then that would reduce the fun of being a fan for many of us. With that said, it is the REACTION(s) of all those other people in the social aspect that impacts my enjoyment of rooting for a particular team that was the genesis of my prior post.

I've heard the term before, but I don't think it's out there that much. And honestly... I never use it because like you, I'm not sure exactly what the difference is. In general, I've never been a fan of the evolving nature of the language. We speak. New terms. New expressions. I'm in my late '40s now and I am not now... But I never was even thinking back to when I was a kid and a teenager.

Last night's game is a pretty good microcosm of one of the big reasons I'm not a fan of the bills as much as I used to be. Almost anything other than a blowout victory is a disappointment. A loss to a team you were favored by as much as you were last night... Especially at home.. is a major, major downer for most fans and the community. I have always thought for a long time there are two ways to enjoy any season as a fan of any sport... To win the championship... Or to exceed expectations. Expectations are so high with this football team, for the season and week by week... That most games are going to lead to some kind of disappointment. It's just not as fun as seeing a lesser team work its way up the ladder. For me, the best years as a fan are those years where the bad team starts to show signs of Life.... Rather than when you have a top five team in the league, just bumping its head against the ceiling. I realize everyone doesn't view it the same way, but for me.. That's a large part of it.

Personally, I think the truth is someplace in between. When I watch Montreal, yes, they play fast, but they seem to not have much of a 'half court' game in the offensive zone. Whether on the PP, or just setting up in the offensive zone, their skill doesn't seem to be that high in terms of cycling the puck and generating good scoring chances. Off the rush they are OK, but their entire forward group just doesn't mesh in terms of playmaking once they establish the offensive zone.

Sincere apologies to any Quinn fans out there (I'm being serious, I am rooting for him and hope he plays better) but I'm not sure having Quinn on the wing with a young guy who played very well at times last year is best for Kulich: -In a very limited, and preseason, of them playing together: Most of their metrics were close, meaning Kulich with Quinn vs Kulich without Quinn. The only one big difference is even strength, Kulich and Quinn together didn't score any goals. When Kulich was out there WITHOUT Quinn, there were 2 goals for, 0 allowed. But going back to last year: -They played a pretty good number of minutes together. 161 minutes. When Kulich played with Quinn vs without him, Quinn brought down Kulich's Corsi (slightly), brought down his Fenwick % (52 to 47), brought down his shots for by a LOT (54% to 43%), brought down his expected goals % by a lot (52 to 44), and ES Kulich was a positive player without Quinn (+6) and a negative player with him (-4). As far as scoring, combine the very few minutes of the preseason with last year and you get this: -The team scored 40 goals in 618 minutes with Kulich on the ice WITHOUT Quinn (1 goal every 15.45 minutes) even strength. -The team scored 3 goals in 182 minutes with Kulich on the ice WITH Quinn (1 goal every 60+ minutes) And yes, those goals without Quinn were in large part to being WITH Tage, which helps the numbers. But even without Tage or Quinn (with Kulich having a variety collection of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th line wingers with him), the scoring is 1 goal every 25 minutes. I guess all of the above is my long way of saying I don't like the looks of putting Quinn with Kulich right now...but I understand Quinn has to play with someone, I just am hoping he steps up his play quite a bit from what he did the last 2 seasons.

I'm not sure the point you are making relative to what you responded to. I said he's looking better than cozens so that is an improvement. Full stop. I never said he was or wasn't going to be 'slightly better' We'll see if he is slightly better, or a lot better. I'm sure we are both hoping he is a lot better. My comment was nothing more than he looks 'better' and for now, until we consider the extent of it...that is a good thing to start with.

It makes perfect sense to me. If Dylan Cozens on the ice made "X" number of mistakes in a given game, and the guy 'replacing' him makes less, then yes, your team is better for it.

Him being here prevents Cozens from being here and actually hurting the team. Any production above and beyond that is just great. As others have said, the key is to stay healthy. Its going to be hard for me to have any concrete opinion at all with hjm, or the team for that matter, until minimum 10 games are played.

I think if Greenway is in the lineup, its not on the 4th line. If Geersten is, it is on the 4th line. Big difference in minutes played. Any 'greenway' replacement for usage will be someone else.

The question is, would he be better served getting something like 20 minutes in Seattle? Or 16 in Rochester?