Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 And Lemieux could turn out to be a self-absorbed ass. Growing up changes people. What you see now might not be what you see at 25. 80% of what you were at 18 you are at 25......60% of what you were at 18 you are at 40......not necessarily your political views, or priorities, but your basic core reactions and "instincts". As I have "grown up", I tried to give understanding and benefit of the doubt. It always comes back to the core being however. I'm not saying Reinhart is some bad dude...he seems like a great guy. You better have 2 or 3 guys with talent and switchblades surrounding him though, or else it becomes the same old story. I think Murray understands that...so I'm not too concerned. I just don't think you need to waste the $20 on www.samsonreinhartHHOF.com domain at this point...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I was kind of hoping for a slightly more interesting off-season than this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I was kind of hoping for a slightly more interesting off-season than this. You Embrace the Tank......you sign your own ticket...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) I always thought Carly Simon was slightly creepy. Just as I blame Yoko for breaking up the Beatles. I blame her for James Taylor's work throughout the 80s. I think he did aight. We're going to see him in a couple weeks at the ZFG rink. Scott IE fix please? 80% of what you were at 18 you are at 25......60% of what you were at 18 you are at 40......not necessarily your political views, or priorities, but your basic core reactions and "instincts". As I have "grown up", I tried to give understanding and benefit of the doubt. It always comes back to the core being however. So it seems like I am ###### then approaching 48. Oh well ZFG Baby ZFG! You Embrace the Tank......you sign your own ticket...... Yes! Tankers must be twenty somethings. Curmudgeon's like me want to say take your tank and stick it far up there. Then there are cantankerous older dudes (Eleven?) who believe they wont die until we get one. Ergo, (if that is really even a word) one before I die. Sucker bet! Just win baby. Win NOW! Edited July 12, 2014 by beerme1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I still don't think/see Reinhart on the first line. I'd probably prefer him to stay in Juniors one more year. He will get better by attending Sabres prospect camp, training camp, playing in his 9 regular season games, etc. If he DOES make the Sabres, I am pretty sure TM and TN said they would protect him. Meaning 8-10 minutes a game, maybe some days off on the road (play him at home mostly where you can get the matchups you want), work him into power play time gradually, etc. But personally, I'd rather have him in the Juniors this year and then NEXT year play with the Sabres after 2 full training camps and development camps and 2 full off-seasons of Sabres conditioning/training. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I wouldn't overthink the whole issue of hiding Sam, or whether he should or shouldn't make the team before we see his play on the ice. He'll play if he is one of the top three centres and/or top nine forwards. If not, he will be back in juniors. It's really that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 ....I love Mozart! He was Austrian, you know. But for this kind of work, I find him a little bit light. So I tend to go with the heavier guys. Check out Brahms, he's good too. Did Mozart have a Vanek Face? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Did Mozart have a Vanek Face? Nope. Antonio Salieri did. Nobody had a Vanek face like Salieri. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Nope. Antonio Salieri did. Nobody had a Vanek face like Salieri. In my travels around Europe, I found that most Austrians gave good face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 In my travels around Europe, I found that most Austrians gave good face. No F. Murray Abraham's in Vienna? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I still don't think/see Reinhart on the first line. I'd probably prefer him to stay in Juniors one more year. He will get better by attending Sabres prospect camp, training camp, playing in his 9 regular season games, etc. If he DOES make the Sabres, I am pretty sure TM and TN said they would protect him. Meaning 8-10 minutes a game, maybe some days off on the road (play him at home mostly where you can get the matchups you want), work him into power play time gradually, etc. But personally, I'd rather have him in the Juniors this year and then NEXT year play with the Sabres after 2 full training camps and development camps and 2 full off-seasons of Sabres conditioning/training. I agree with you on how he will be used. I disagree with you on wanting him to go back to juniors. He will gain nothing by going there again other than resentment at having to play at that level again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I wouldn't overthink the whole issue of hiding Sam, or whether he should or shouldn't make the team before we see his play on the ice. He'll play if he is one of the top three centres and/or top nine forwards. If not, he will be back in juniors. It's really that simple. Well, this implies a "what's best for the Sabres in 2013-2014" approach to the decision as opposed to a "what's best for the Sabres and Reinhart in the long term" approach. I kinda think TM is going to lean towards the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 I agree with you on how he will be used. I disagree with you on wanting him to go back to juniors. He will gain nothing by going there again other than resentment at having to play at that level again. I don't get the impression Reinhart does resentment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 I agree with you on how he will be used. I disagree with you on wanting him to go back to juniors. He will gain nothing by going there again other than resentment at having to play at that level again. If only there were a league where a player that's too good for juniors but not quite ready for the NHL, could learn and develop his game. GO SABRES!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sloth Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 If only there were a league where a player that's too good for juniors but not quite ready for the NHL, could learn and develop his game. GO SABRES!!! It'd be interesting if teams were allowed to put 1 or 2 players under 20 in the AHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 It'd be interesting if teams were allowed to put 1 or 2 players under 20 in the AHL. Agreed. I'm on record as thinking this agreement between the NHL and CHL is a bad rule and actually hurts some of the players it purports to protect. GO SABRES!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 Agreed. I'm on record as thinking this agreement between the NHL and CHL is a bad rule and actually hurts some of the players it purports to protect. GO SABRES!!! It's not about protecting the players, it's about protecting the CHL. If all the 18 and 19-year-old prospects that show promise moved to the AHL, the CHL's quality goes down. Personally, I could care less about the CHL's quality, but I understand where they're coming from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 It's not about protecting the players, it's about protecting the CHL. If all the 18 and 19-year-old prospects that show promise moved to the AHL, the CHL's quality goes down. Personally, I could care less about the CHL's quality, but I understand where they're coming from. Ed Zachary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 (edited) It's not about protecting the players, it's about protecting the CHL. If all the 18 and 19-year-old prospects that show promise moved to the AHL, the CHL's quality goes down. Personally, I could care less about the CHL's quality, but I understand where they're coming from. So it's more about the league and less about the developmental best interest of that handful of players that are legitimately TOO good for that level of play. It does nothing to serve them in terms of development. The vast majority of kids that need to return to juniors could still do so. But there are a few that need to go where their games can flourish. I could even argue that the competitive level of the CHL actually goes down by having players far superior for that level of play. Teams should get at least 1 or 2 exceptions to designate for AHL assignment. GO SABRES!!! Edited July 14, 2014 by K-9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted July 14, 2014 Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 So it's more about the league and less about the developmental best interest of that handful of players that are legitimately TOO good for that level of play. It does nothing to serve them in terms of development. The vast majority of kids that need to return to juniors could still do so. But there are a few that need to go where their games can flourish. I could even argue that the competitive level of the CHL actually goes down by having players far superior for that level of play. Teams should get at least 1 or 2 exceptions to designate for AHL assignment. GO SABRES!!! I'm not disagreeing, just pointing out that the CHL owners are trying to sell seats and merchandise (and TV ads? I don't know if they have TV contracts) just like any other team. They're not going to let the 60 best players (cause really, what team isn't going to move their two best prospects into the AHL?) walk away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 I'm not disagreeing, just pointing out that the CHL owners are trying to sell seats and merchandise (and TV ads? I don't know if they have TV contracts) just like any other team. They're not going to let the 60 best players (cause really, what team isn't going to move their two best prospects into the AHL?) walk away. Of course you are 100% spot on here. Dollar trumps what's best for the prospect, unfortunately. GO SABRES!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 Of course you are 100% spot on here. Dollar trumps what's best for the prospect, unfortunately. GO SABRES!!! Ehhh, the CHL's prosperity IS good for the prospects. And the AHL and NHL. Just because fans may be itching to have person A here or there, doesn't mean the fact that league relationships may prevent such moves is a bad thing in the grand narrative. Fans just don't like it because they're impatient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sloth Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) What if it was more like you have a right to put one player in the AHL? Catch would be you could only use this option once every 2 years. So if the Sabres sent Reinhart to the AHL, they couldn't send another player to Rochester until the 16-17 season. This would still apply even if Renihart only played 1/2 of a season in the AHL. This would make NHL teams a bit more selective and not as quick to pull the trigger. Unless a team has a player they feel is too far above the CHL level, they wouldn't send a anyone to the AHL. Edited July 15, 2014 by thanes16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) I think any player who has played three years of major junior should be eligible for the AHL. Player has likely got what he needed from the CHL and the CHL has got its money's worth from the player/ Edited July 15, 2014 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 Ehhh, the CHL's prosperity IS good for the prospects. And the AHL and NHL. Just because fans may be itching to have person A here or there, doesn't mean the fact that league relationships may prevent such moves is a bad thing in the grand narrative. Fans just don't like it because they're impatient. It's good for the CHL, which is good for the general development of all prospects. A strong CHL drives up the development of all the prospects in general. But it hurts individual prospects, like Grigorenko. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.