thesportsbuff

I don't really have any answers but a little bit of input that may or may not be useful. I have ice skates (4-5 years old now) that seem to fit perfectly and are actually very comfortable for me to move around in. But my feet still get sore after 10-15 minutes of skating in them. I'm not sure if this is a sizing issue or simply because I only play once a week for a 2 month period every year. It always seems worse the first few sessions, and less painful towards the later weeks of the season. Also, once they start hurting my feet, I force myself to power through it and usually by 10-15 min after the pain sets in, it is gone. Not an ideal solution but just from personal experience, the pain may just be more of your feet not being used to it more-so than a sizing issue. I have tried a size lower and size larger and both are very uncomfortable--either way too tight, or way too loose. So I don't think it's a sizing issue for me. As for roller blades, I have a pair of Missions that I use for roller hockey. I don't play competitively, usually just pick-up games with some friends, so all I wear for padding is soccer-style shin pads under a pair of soccer socks. Being soccer shin pads, they are small enough that it doesn't slow you down or cause any discomfort, but still useful for some protection from slashes/blocked shots on your shins without needing to bring your whole bag of equipment, tape, etc. Tucking them into the skate can help to stabilize the boot and prevent blisters on the side of your ankles. However, that said, I do still have pain some times in my feet, even with my roller blades. As with my ice skates, I just keep moving until the pain fades. I wear my skates as tight as possible and I experience very little skate movement. They are secure and basically just an extension of my foot. One other tip which I'm sure you've probably heard or thought of, wear two pairs of socks. Adds a little extra girth to your feet if you feel they are sliding around within the skate.

Key word: should. A lot of people also thought Bernier should be worth a lot more. Based on some twitter reaction it sounds like there are plenty of Kings fans (and others around the league) surprised at the lack of value they got for him. I don't think that bodes well for us getting a high return on Miller. Certainly Miller is already an established, top-end goaltender in the league, and that has to count for something. But I guess after Darcy's presser last week and the value LA got for Bernier, I've tempered my expectations substantially.

It might increase the interest, simply because it's another goalie off the list of available goalies. But does it also set the bar? If probably the most hyped goalie-prospect in the league is traded for Frattin, Scrivens and a 2nd, what will a 32 goalie with a much larger cap hit fetch?

I know some Leafs fans who are pissed about losing Frattin. I wouldn't call it an overpayment by any means, but I thought Reimer played well enough last season that the Leafs' perceived need for a goalie was a little exaggerated.

More and more boring?! Whatever do you mean? You must not have noticed the player numbers on the lower-right of the front of the jersey -- talk about pioneering a hip new fashion trend in the NHL! But in all seriousness DStebb is, imo, correct on the issue. People see teams like Detroit and Toronto get rave reviews for their "classic and simplistic" designs and try to aim for the same look. I did like the Sabres 40th anniversary, and I liked the Dallas Stars most recent jerseys far more than the new ones. Not really diggin the St. Louis one.

You're getting way too greedy. The only reason Sylvester does the radio show is b/c he's already been replaced by Duff with all things broadcast-related. Now you want Duff to take his radio job too!?

I would take Briere back, but I doubt there's a scenario where the 35-year old would choose playing for a rebuilding Buffalo team over say, Montreal. Maybe if Vanek and Miller stay, there's a possibility he'd consider us, but I'm sure he'd prefer another crack at the Cup. Averaging a point-per-game in over 100 NHL playoff games is reason enough for many teams to be interested.

The having an elite player with (hopefully) multiple stanley cups to his name on the team part. I don't understand the negativity around the idea, but it does not surprise me that Sabres fans would automatically assume that adding one of the best players in the league to the team would result in disaster. I don't think it will ever happen, unless maybe when he's 34-35 and looking to latch on to a team for one more season, but I would welcome Kane here.

Lidstrom and Chara are excellent defenseman... Karlsson and Subban? Please. Even Duncan Keith was chosen more on his point production than his actual defensive play, but he's good enough that I can respect the decision.

I think most will agree with you. I can't really speak for Suter b/c I mean how many minnesota wild games did I watch this season? But it seems like the trophy is awarded to the highest point getting defenseman which frankly isn't what playing defense is all about.

I'll let you know at or after the draft. In my opinion, if they trade Miller and Vanek, then there's no reason to trade Myers. He's still young enough to build around, and although the Miller/Vanek situation has no effect on his actual value, it does have an effect on the risk-vs-reward of the move. I still believe Myers can be the key piece in a trade for a Top 6 forward, but if you're selling off assets and rebuilding, I'm not sure it's worth the risk. Your options are more limited (no point in trading for a guy older than 26 or 27 if it's looking like a 3+ year rebuild) and the threat of Myers developing into an elite defenseman is always lurking. The worst case scenario would be to trade Myers and have him become a perennial all-star by the time the Sabres are ready to be a serious contender. On the other hand, if the team hangs on to Miller and Vanek, then by all means -- take a risk and trade Myers for a Top 6 forward who can make an impact right away. We still have our first rounders to build for the future (or present if we get a "NHL-ready" pick), but by overpaying for a UFA or two in addition to a successful Myers trade, the team could easily compete for a playoff spot next season. Again I stress that despite my long-time stance on trading Myers, I'm not "giving up" on him. But the Luke Schenn for JVR trade is all I need to see to convince me it's worth it. Toronto was the laughing stock of the league, but made a bold trade for JVR who went on to score 18g/14a in a shortened season and helped lead the Leafs to within minutes of knocking off the Eastern Conference Champs in Round 1.

Nathan Horton Tyler Bozak Matt Cullen Nik Antropov Dustin Penner Toni Lydman Stephen Weiss Those are the guys I would target assuming any/some of them make it to free agency. Also Shawn Horcoff, though not a UFA, will likely be traded. He's got a pretty hefty contract at 5.5 mil for two more seasons, and he'll be 35 in September. But I've always liked him, and if we trade Vanek/Miller the salary shouldn't play an issue.

That's so annoying. I had a class with a kid in Buffalo who was an American citizen and a self-proclaimed Sabres fan. Sometime around the 2010 olympics, he shows up wearing a Brodeur jersey and said he's rooting for Team Canada because "they appreciate hockey" or some BS, and because "Brodeur is better than Miller." I just don't understand.

The way Detroit is playing, I would say they and Pittsburgh are the most talented teams left in the playoffs (assuming Chicago loses, then they replace Detroit). I bet LA and Boston meet in the finals. Seems like grit/size always outways pure skill in the playoffs... Penguins have more skill but if Boston roughs them up, it's gonna be a loong series.

This may have been discussed elsewhere (in fact I'd be surprised if it wasn't) but I've been told that the Sabres can allow a team to hash out an extension with Vanek/Miller prior to accepting a trade. I thought that sounded ridiculous and I can't remember seeing it in recent years. Can anyone clear up whether or not this is legal and exactly what stipulations apply? Just to be clear I'm not talking about Buffalo extending the players to utilize the maximum contract length, which would not be able to happen until after the draft. I'm talking Buffalo letting teams come to a verbal agreement with either player regarding an extension prior to the draft/free agency.

So this was not true, I'm guessing?

No on the captain, but yes on the A... I disagree with this though. I think Weber could easily be considered a Top 4 D-man on most teams. I also think he plays far more physical than Montador ever did in Buffalo. At least he hits more -- granted there's more to being physical than just body checking, but I think Weber is noticeably more physical. It's been a few years now but the most physical thing I remember Montador doing is tripping over & getting entangled with Patrick Lalime :lol: (Just kidding about that part but do you guys remember that disaster?)

Nothing against the Islanders. Tavares is one of the league's true superstars, and has been for a while (though you wouldn't know it by the way NBCSN drooled over him as if it was the first time any of them saw him play). They played awesome vs the Penguins and delivered a very entertaining series. A few bounces this way or that way and they could have been the ones winning in six games. However! I'm not ready to call them a "model organization" just yet. They lucked into a generational talent at #1 overall -- a can't miss draft pick in Tavares. Without him, the Islanders don't even approach the playoff picture this year. And before we get too carried away calling the Islanders "successful," let's remember that they haven't made the playoffs since 2006-07, barely snuck in to the 8th seed on the heels of Winnipeg/Buffalo/Jersey collapsing in an abbreviated season, and were eliminated in the first round. That's success? Because something tells me if Buffalo qualified as the 8th seed and were eliminated in the first round, everyone here would be calling for (more) heads to roll like always. NYI also has no goaltender (besides DiPietro) under contract next season, and their two best defensemen are 35+ years old and aging by the day. Barring a big splash in free agency, I don't think you can count on the Islanders being back in the post-season after a full, 82-game season next year.

I'm thinking, nation-wide, more people were probably rooting for the Islanders than the Penguins. People always love the under dog. People always hate the favorite.

It is so ridiculous to list things like "didn't find a #1 center to trade for" and "didn't sign so & so" or "didn't trade for so & so" to inflate your list of bad Darcy moves. Other than Philly trading Richards & Carter (for a return we couldn't repeat with, not to mention out west), I can't think of a single "#1 Center" who has been traded in the last 5 or more years. It just doesn't happen. Darcy instead acquired Hodgson, a guy that we hope (and has done a pretty good job so far) can be a #1 center someday... so how is that not targeting a NHL ready center again? "Not signing Zubrus" - Meh. He was a rental that provided some much needed size but overall was not that important. It's easy, in retrospect, to say sure we should have signed him because we need more size, but at the time I had no problem letting him go. Probably had something to do with his 0 goals thru 15 playoff games that year. Losing Tallinder & Lydman... Again, sure based on the state of the team right now, I guess we should have kept them. But at the time, the Sabres had just gotten destroyed by Boston in the first round after missing playoffs two years in a row. Myers looked like a future all-star. "Wasting time with aging Robyn Regehr"-- i guess now is a good time to let you know that Tallinder, Lydman and Zubrus are all older than Regehr. Blaming Grigorekno for the Sabres "not trading up" is just plain stupid. The only real "mistake" Darcy made was letting BOTH Briere and Drury escape to free agency that year, and no one will ever know the 100% factual reasons and chain of events that led to that happening. If Pegula were the owner back then I would bet my bottom dollar that at least one, if not both, would have re-signed. The rest of your list is simply decisions that GMs have to make... some end well, others don't. Not necessarily a "mistake" to let someone walk who was going to demand an inflated contract and didn't play that big of a role on your team.

It was a fun, unique season. Loved the compact schedule and quick turnaround between games, but the season absolutely flew by! Some decisions were rushed, for better or worse. Do you think they fire Lindy after 17 games in a 82-game season? Would Grigorenko have played more than 9 games in a 82-game season? It definitely put an interesting spin on things. I enjoyed it because of the absence of normalcy -- it was kind of chaotic with players hurrying back from overseas, others not necessarily in tip-top shape... a 10 game stretch could be the difference between a good and bad season. But I think if given a vote, I would say to keep the 82-game schedule.

This is very true.

Yeah, this is a joke. Brown got two games for his elbow to Pominville's face. Ference commits the exact same play basically, as a repeat offender, but only gets one game because it's the playoffs. So the precedent has already been set that suspensions in the playoffs won't be as harsh as during the regular season. But then this clean -- we'll call it borderline -- open ice hit where the head isn't the primary point of contact at all, gets two games, implying that this hit was worse than two plays where a player maliciously and intentionally drives an elbow directly into the face of another player. wat?

I would give him 5, but since it's playoffs and he's a Bruin, he'll get 1.

JoshuaCooper ‏@JoshuaCooper8m Poile: "I’ve already had a call today from a general manager asking me what it would take to get to our fourth pick" Bet it was Darcy.