nobody Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Damn it to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Arizona is not relying on the Sabres to do anything. In the process of losing out, Arizona hands Buffalo 4 points. Okay, I understand that. What I am saying is that if Buffalo loses out they win. For that statement to be true, Arizona can't lose out. Either way Arizona and Edmonton need Buffalo to gain 3 points in the last 12 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsb Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 This must be the season of a psycho-analyst's delight. Bipolar symptoms everywhere. The HIGHS.... We beat the Bruins in Boston...... The LOWS..... We beat the Bruins in Boston, WTF??? Please don't make the Season of the Tank be for naught. That it's strange, so strange.You've got to pick up every stitch,Mm, must be the season of the witch (tank), yeah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 If we lose the next 12 games, we win the shart. Yotes can't claim that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 ... I get that. I understand. I am saying if the Sabres get all the loser points left, they will win. Coyotes still rely on us to lose/win the 2 games against them. We are still in the lead on this thing. In your scenario you are saying if the coyotes lose out they win or if the sabres lose out they win. I am saying if the sabres lose out they win, Phoenix and Edmonton still are relying on us to win at least 3 points out of the last 24 possible. Wrong. Arizona is not relying on the Sabres to do anything. In the process of losing out, Arizona hands Buffalo 4 points. Correct. The Dogs don't need the Sabres to find 3 points, the Dogs can TAKE 4 from the Sabres. They can finish in a tie for 1st via their own actions. They needn't rely on anyone else. The Eulers need the Sabres to find 4 points (3 leaves Sabres w/ the tiebreak) and therefore do not control their own destiny; the DD's can show those Easter eggs to the Sabres on their own, so they do hold at least a tie for 1st in their own hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 We are still precluding the idea that Buffalo can lose those two games against Arizona. Wrong. Correct.The Dogs don't need the Sabres to find 3 points, the Dogs can TAKE 4 from the Sabres. They can finish in a tie for 1st via their own actions. They needn't rely on anyone else.The Eulers need the Sabres to find 4 points (3 leaves Sabres w/ the tiebreak) and therefore do not control their own destiny; the DD's can show those Easter eggs to the Sabres on their own, so they do hold at least a tie for 1st in their own hands. Wrong. The are relying on the Sabres to beat them twice in 4 days. Which means the Sabres are still in control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 We are still precluding the idea that Buffalo can lose those two games against Arizona. :huh: As those 2 games have yet to be played, each squad can take home from 0-4 points out of those 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 What if the Sabres, idk, suck for the last 12 games and lose them all. They can't score now so what if they don't win another game the rest of the season? They could even deliberately lose to the Yotes. :huh:As those 2 games have yet to be played, each squad can take home from 0-4 points out of those 2. Agreed but since Buffalo is still leading the shart by 3 points, they control on this thing ends. They lose every game left, they win the shart. If they lose every game it means Arizona won 2 of their remaining 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Wrong. Correct. The Dogs don't need the Sabres to find 3 points, the Dogs can TAKE 4 from the Sabres. They can finish in a tie for 1st via their own actions. They needn't rely on anyone else. The Eulers need the Sabres to find 4 points (3 leaves Sabres w/ the tiebreak) and therefore do not control their own destiny; the DD's can show those Easter eggs to the Sabres on their own, so they do hold at least a tie for 1st in their own hands. I can't respond to Liger because he's making my brain hurt, but this is an important clarification for others (I know you get it) that I think is getting muddled: There are no ties for the Shart. There can be only 1. The Dogs do not control their destiny for the Shart yet, they need the Oilers to take 1 more point in order for that to be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Chickens are dumb, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 I give up trying to explain it. The Sabres get the maximum or all the shart/carrion points left they will win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 What if the Sabres, idk, suck for the last 12 games and lose them all. They can't score now so what if they don't win another game the rest of the season? They could even deliberately lose to the Yotes. That doesn't change the fact that the DD's could take all 4 from the Sabres and thus relegate the Sabres to looking for help elsewhere. I expect I am done discussing this with you. Work that should be getting done isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 I give up trying to explain it. The Sabres get the maximum or all the shart/carrion points left they will win. NO ONE IS CLAIMING THAT THE SABRES DON'T ALSO CONTROL THEIR OWN DESTINY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 NO ONE IS CLAIMING THAT THE SABRES DON'T ALSO CONTROL THEIR OWN DESTINY!Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 I give up trying to explain it. The Sabres get the maximum or all the shart/carrion points left they will win. No one is arguing that with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 I give up trying to explain it. The Sabres get the maximum or all the shart/carrion points left they will win. True, and the coyotes can say the same thing as long as edmonton gets a point, which they will. So between Buff and Arizona, the same statement is true for both, which contradicts the first thing you said that set off the argument in the first place. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 That doesn't change the fact that the DD's could take all 4 from the Sabres and thus relegate the Sabres to looking for help elsewhere. I expect I am done discussing this with you. Work that should be getting done isn't. Can you please re-read what I said. If the Buffalo Sabres do not win another game this year, they will win the shart. I am saying if the Sabres lose both games to the DD's in this scenario they don't need help. The Dogs still need help from the Sabres, because the Sabres would still need to beat the Dogs twice, in regulation. Phoenix does not control their own destiny. They are relying at the very least on the Sabres winning both games against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) Can you please re-read what I said. If the Buffalo Sabres do not win another game this year, they will win the shart. I am saying if the Sabres lose both games to the DD's in this scenario they don't need help. The Dogs still need help from the Sabres, because the Sabres would still need to beat the Dogs twice, in regulation. Liger, read this a few times. Edited March 18, 2015 by Randall Flagg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 If youre going to define "help" that way, dont the Sabres need "help" from Arizona to lose those head to head games also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 This argument is how civilizations collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Can we just hug it out? I mean, I think we still finish 30th regardless of last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 There are no ties for the Shart. There can be only 1. Yes Highlander, THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrestrike Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Arturs Irbe is our LVP at this point, no? I sincerely hope he can work his magic again in 5 or 6 years when the Sabres are contending. For now, I'd like him to cease application of his dark arts and return Anders Lindback to the worthless goalie he was in Dallas. McEichel depends on it. If the Sabres put in the effort that they put in last night (they will), and Lindback plays well (not even as well as he did last night, just well), then I give us very little chance of finishing below Arizona. Those guys just don't score. It's basically Smith v. Lindback for the Shart. (I expect Edmonton to get on a little roll right now.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 I think I've had enough of this Arturs Irbe "goaltender whisperer" talk. He's batting 50% at best: Lindback and Neuvirth above career average, Enroth below and Hackett still sucks. Add in sample size mumbo jumbo and that Lindback has had a couple similar stretches before, and I give a big shrug of the shoulders to it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted March 18, 2015 Report Share Posted March 18, 2015 Wrong. Correct. The Dogs don't need the Sabres to find 3 points, the Dogs can TAKE 4 from the Sabres. They can finish in a tie for 1st via their own actions. They needn't rely on anyone else. The Eulers need the Sabres to find 4 points (3 leaves Sabres w/ the tiebreak) and therefore do not control their own destiny; the DD's can show those Easter eggs to the Sabres on their own, so they do hold at least a tie for 1st in their own hands. You guys are nuts I say, just nuts... Really both are saying the same thing, like a bunch of Dems and Republicans... neither side wanting the other side to get credit for something that is so obvious... Please spare me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts