IKnowPhysics

Captain Kidd's in Redondo Beach is the ######. You can order a variety of dinners at the kitchen counter or you can go over the the fresh/live case and pick out which cuts/animals you want them to cook up any way you like. Pay the fresh price by the pound, with a meager fee (<$5) for cooking and big helpings of sides. Decent beer on tap as well. Fish comes in fresh daily, and among all of the restaurants in the neighborhood (many seafood places), they get first pick, even over fancy-pants seafood restaurants. Best seafood -specifically cooked fish- in this half of Los Angeles. That's useless to you, Dark, so here's a repost of the Fish Fry Map: http://archive.wgrz.com/news/databases/fishfry/

More than 10 weeks until D-Day. Let's not get our ###### in a knot.

If by that, you mean "why does everyone not like Corsi?" I have no idea, I don't really get that impression. If by that, you mean "why is everyone disliking Corsi's removal?" I think it's probably because people liked him. He was a former goalie and math teacher. He worked well to develop and maintain some stellar goaltending. Also codified one of the more useful statistics in the game, providing a foundation for much of the advanced statistics work.

Those issues are directly related.

Surprisingly absent from the announcement... Doug McKenney?

Baww. They should hold a retirement party for him.

NAILED IT!

I think to even consider playoffs is borderline lunacy. So, I agree with "most likely not." The lowest wild card spot this year recorded 39 more points than us this season, equating to 20 more wins (95% more wins). The lowest goals for by a wildcard spot was 50 more goals (31% more) but that team allowed 42 fewer goals than us (17% fewer). If we allowed the same number of goals again, we'd need something like 82 more goals (52%more) to make a wildcard spot. So if we don't improve or defensively or in net, we'd need to add at least three 25 goal scorers in the off season. Should the GM take steps to ensure the development of the kids? YES. Should the GM get the roster in a place where we can support the kids when they're ready to play in the NHL? YES. Should the GM get the roster in a place where the team fails to make the playoffs next year? Doesn't matter, it's pretty much inevitable next year. Should the GM get the roster in a place where the draft assets we sacrificed for are weakened by not finishing bottom-five? HELL NAW.

I think that's nice. Nice assignment.

What looks like a tank, moves like a tank, and sounds like a tank? VS. The players won't play to lose, the coaches won't coach to lose, and the general manager won't call it a tank on the record. The roster has been stripped of the veteran, talented players required to win games in the NHL. A team that was already last place in the NHL traded its leading scorer (twice if you count Moulson), its captain,and its starting goalie among others. So, roughly speaking, in order to become competitive again, you need to either see an unprecedented growth/influx of talent from our prospects OR the GM needs to bring in enough veteran talent by trades and free agency to make up for those lost players. I'm not sure that the the pressure should or would be placed on the kids, so that might leave it to the GM. But Tim's said he's only looking at two veteran free agents. Which means even if he's successful in free agency, he would have to bring in a some amount of talent via trades... ...and that seems like a reversal of what he just accomplished. The management is still touting the number of 1st and 2nds in these three years. Murray may trade some of those into more NHL-ready prospects, but probably not ones that will make an immediate game-changing impact. My point is that Tim Murray can claim that there's no intentional tank, and you can choose to believe or not believe him, but you'd better believe the residual tank ability of this team is extremely high. We're gonna lose. And with two extremely talented selections available next year, the prospect of finishing last to guarantee selecting one of them is not just something we should be cognizant of, it's something we should be striving for. Even if we can't or shouldn't admit it.

If we tank next year, we'll have a 25% chance of winning the lottery. But in that case, the chance of us not winning the lottery 2013, 2014, and 2015 would have only been 54.2%. So if you don't know how stats work, you can fool yourself into believing that we almost have a 45.8% chance if we tank next year.

Yeah, the conversation isn't about dropping out of the top five (top three even) into a tank-screwing mid-draft position, it's about maximizing assets. If you can drop a spot or two, get the guy you want, and get a free pick that nets a JT Compher-like player, or potentially more/other assets, it's worth consideration.

Plus, you already know the names of the only two Sabres as high or higher than 2nd in a (non-supplemental) draft. Whomever we pick will be a household name in WNY and, with any success, league-wide. Atlanta. That is all. He had a lot of draft hype, but ended up on a ###### team and never mastered the level of conditioning necessary to operate as a big-guy goalie, hence the groin issues.

My ###### just got a ######. edit: haaaa. Play madlibs with that one. Hint: They're the same word.

That's true, but have hope. If the competition didn't already do that once, we wouldn't even have that pick.

So when is a tank not a tank? When it's a container! CONTAINER ON!

I think if Florida doesn't take Ekblad, this is a very real scenario. Especially if Florida takes a player that's not our #1. That move would net us the player we want and possibly some decent draft swag (2nd round pick in 2015? STL has EDM's 2014 2nd round). Edmonton may be that desperate, seeing as they'd get the #1 defensemen and possibly the best player in a draft that doesn't have any other defensemen in the top 8 to 10. I guess it's all wishy washy until D-Day, but I'm hoping that if Tim Murray sees an opportunity that will help us, he will extort the ###### out of some ###### GM.

#2's: 2013: Aleksander Barkov (FLA) 2012: Ryan Murray (CLB) 2011: Gabriel Landeskog (COL) 2010: Tyler Seguin (BOS from TOR) 2009: Victor Hedman (TBL) 2008: Drew Doughty (LAK) 2007: James van Riemsdyk (PHI) 2006: Jordan Staal (PIT) 2005: Bobby Ryan (ANA) 2004: Evgeni Malkin (PIT) 2003: Eric Staal (CAR) 2002: Kari Lehtonen (ATL) 2001: Jason Spezza (OTT from NYI) 2000: Dan Heatley (ATL)

We'll be fine. Ekblad, Reinhart, and Bennett are all good players. I wanted #1 for the prestige and the opportunity for the organization to take ANY player they wanted, but both are unnecessary, especially at #2. They may still get the player(s) they wanted. I wouldn't mind any of those. The two Sams or the Sam we want and one of the elite wingers? Sure.

Yeah. Nah.

I'm 77.96% sure that one of the bottom five teams will win it.

Sucks that you can only have one bracket for multiple leagues, but whatevs.

Murray said he's looking for two good veteran free agents this summer. Guys that are likely 3rd line guys or higher that can lead by example and provide support for the kids. Is anyone thinking that Steve Ott isn't one of them? Murray's said in the past how much he loves him.

Haha, I haven't watched yet, but if his tone is "###### that idiot," that's a big +1 for Tim.