Taro T

Passes the eye test. There are times that Byram and Timmons play well together, and it's even a significant portion of the time they're out there; but when they go bad they're Messy-Balls bad and unfortunately those times are significant portions of time too. For the most part, am ok (not good, but ok) with those 2 together when they're at home and they can more or less control which lines they're deployed against. But really don't like them on the road. Still would rather they had a more defensive defenseman up as an option, especially on the road, so they could break up Timmins and Byram, keep from putting Byram and Power together (who are even worse overall than Byram-Timmins via the eye test) and still give Byram somebody defensively responsible to help him out when they can't control matchups.

Ironically, the same reasons that the PK is working well - guys that are outnumbered getting into passing lanes and using active sticks to intercept or at least deflect passes rather than manning up on someone and trying to take the body are likely the same reasons that overall they seem to be giving up more goals 5v5 to date. When you're outmanned, taking the body on someone gives the other team an even more substantial edge. 5v4 becomes 4v3 or 3v2 when guys play an individual man. Getting in the passing lanes, especially when you have really big bodies (most of the PKers) or reeally high hockey IQ guys (like Benson), tends to limit scoring chances when you're down a man or 2. Throw in better goaltending than you've gotten in the past, and the PK ends up fairly effective. But at 5v5, taking space away from a guy or actually manhandling him will be more disruptive than simply trying to take away a passing lane. Still would prefer Wilford gone, but if they could limit his duties to ONLY running the PK, might not hate him sticking around. And, that he doesn't seem to understand, or at minimum he can't convince his troops (aka coaching them), that different situations require different tactics to be successful is a fairly damning reason to get rid of him. And personally expect having Wilford as a coach limits how much physical play Power will add to his game. He plays the way Wilford seems to want him to play. Tough to learn to add other tools to your toolbox when those aren't taught/emphasized.

Saw an article that said that's always been his middle name. Expect that in Namibia it's about as big a deal as having a last name of Satan in the republics making up the former Czechoslovakia.

Bowman didn't care unless it was the night before a game and they were out past curfew. That's a big part of why McKegney became a Nordique.

OK, sorry, misunderstood why you'd posted that. And with the caption to the photos/videos being "this is the accountablility the Buffalo Sabres organization holds their players up too [sic]" thought you were echoing that tweet's view that somehow players must pay a penance for having the audacity to lose a hockey game. 100% want Lyon between the pipes tonight. Expect Ellis will be his backup, pretty sure he hasn't even dressed for the last 3.

Are we seriously getting upset at a player going to a bar AFTER a game? Especially one where he is not likely to get the following start and very likely won't be the backup that night either? There are a lot of things to be critical of UPL's play this year and the past one; but really can't see giving him flack for relaxing after work, especially on one of the "biggest" nights for people going to bars that there is.

One additional point, if the play was SO close to being legitimately onsides that ALL of that went wrong in the evaluation of it; then the offensive team did NOT gain the type of advantage from having had the puckcarrier over the line early that the offside rule was put in place to eliminate. Again, personally am ok with carrying the puck into the zone after you have already entered the zone presuming the puck carrier is in control of the puck.

Again, you are looking to take away a rarely seen play because of the POSSIBILITY of questions POTENTIALLY arising from a significantly even rarer play. That doesn't make sense IMHO. Clearly YMVs. As to your 1st group of Qs. No, the play is not onsides because the puck was NOT carried into the zone by a player in possession of it before at least 1 offensive player was inside the zone. It's pretty clear / cut and dried. And then to your 2nd group of Qs. No, it is not ruled a good goal should the linesman have missed the offside and there is a challenge of the goal. In order to get to the point of the Sabres (per your example) getting screwed by that goal being deemed to have been legit, you need the linesman to miss the offside and you need those reviewing the play to miss the offside as well. Considering how rare that play is when it's cleanly played in a game, am ok with the risk that not only the puckcarrier will lose the puck before it fully crosses the blue line, the linesman is so mesmerized by the move that he doesn't realize the puckcarrier lost the puck, a goal is scored before the defending team has gotten the puck out of the zone or there was a stoppage in play, the coach and his team don't recognize that the puck was lost before it crossed into their zone OR they do recognize it but somehow none of the 4 officials nor anyone in TO reviewing the play manage to notice that it was offside. That is a LOT of things to go wrong in the evaluation of a single very unique play, any single ONE of which going RIGHT will result in no goal being scored. Am ok with those odds. My 2 cents.

How many empty netters did they give up to this point last year? They've given up 9 so far this year. Almost an extra 0.4 GA/game to this point. How many OTL's last year? 4 this year. Not nearly bumping up the GAA like the ENs are, but still, they didn't lose many in OT the past few seasons.

He IS figuring it out. But whether he fully gets it remains to be seen. And whether he does or doesn't will make his contract either be a slight overpay or a huge bargain. And don't expect he'll ever ragdoll people. That was beaten out of him at a very young age.

Not completely, you can't. But, they could get him to be effective in his own end. He will, at times, use his body to keep players from getting past him along the boards. This is something he pretty much didn't do at all in prior years. He isn't looking as lost in front of the net as he has in the past. How much better he can get at these is the critical question? When he came into the league, he would only shoot if he got the puck in the slot; now he will actually shoot from the point when there is a screen. He still looks to pass 1st, but he doesn't automatically pass. Expect that is a function of him finally feeling "storng." Expect the improvements in the D-zone are also because he's more comfortable that he won't bounce off the opponent should he decide to engage. At his age, he'll still get stronger. In theory, he'll be more comfortable using his body for positioning. He's never going to be a hitter. But, if he gets in people's way AND he continues to get better with his stick, he can be effective without adding that other tool, which isn't in his nature, into his tool box.

Are players that weren't invited to their camp even eligible?

Heck, icing is a judgement call. They intentionally haven't gone to full no-touch icing which would remove that need for linesmen to exercise their judgement. What you seem to be arguing is that a rare play that could lead to additional offense should not be allowed because a significantly rarer play might require a linesman, who presumably was hired for good judgement, good powers of observation, and an ability to get to where he needs to be when he needs to be there in one of the fastest sports known to man, to demonstrate that good judgement. Is that your point? A lot of items to dislike about the current rules of the game. IMHO, this is not one of them.

Whatevs.

On THANKSGIVING?!?!? Since when is this thread open on Thanksgiving?