shrader

And if you watch that penalty from a different angle, it only happens because Larkin (I believe that's who it was) trips over Bogosian's leg, which causes all of the contact.

Fighting has definitely dropped to near non-existent numbers at this point. I don't question that. Still, I feel like I've seen a few different times this year where punches were exchanged but only matching roughing minors were assessed. It makes me wonder.

After the Shero firing, I found myself thinking that a game against New Jersey right now would do a lot right now for my game viewing enjoyment. I guess Detroit doesn't hurt either (even with the poor 2nd period). The older you get, he stays the same age?

I think there may be an argument for the first hit, but I can't see the second one qualifying as a charge. He moves in quickly, but he kills a lot of his momentum with that pivot, or at least changes the direction of that momentum. At that point, it's more Kassian running into him than anything. And if it's true that Kassian did not get a fighting major for that, it's all the evidence I need to know that the NHL is trying to suppress fighting numbers.That many huge haymakers thrown? He's fighting. But hey, if they want to say fights are so rare now, it's easier to back that up by not calling the penalty.

After the Indy fiasco I don't know why anyone would want to hire him.

I'm willing to bet that call stands (or gets corrected to a safety) if the play happened in Orchard Park.

But I hear that there are scouts from 23 different teams present at the game.

And you know it's only a matter of time now before a teams uses that signal to fake out the coverage team. But hey, common sense now cancels that out. I can't wait until they add that phrase to the rule book.

The rule also includes "making no effort to advance". He was walking forward as he tossed the ball, so that potential defense is killed. An interesting thought comes to mind after reading that one though. Those plays where a player is about to score but instead parallels the goal line in order to run off clock... shouldn't that technically count as giving yourself up? Sure the player does still have the intention of advancing eventually, but there's too much subjectivity in the current rule. They really should require that the player goes to the ground.

Right, but they did have to give up more than just Carrier. A minor detail but they were also one of the teams freely handing away draft picks, granted a low value 6th rounder. But on that note, I'm still of the thought that they were conned out of that pick. Vegas was never taking Ullmark. McPhee was able to pull that same con job on several teams. We'll have to wait and see the quality of Ron Francis' poker face.

Minor nitpick: They gave a 6th round pick to Vegas in exchange for them taking Carrier.

I'm forever biased on this one, but I'd love to see Bonino is a Sabre jersey.

Sending him down is as much of a mental move as it is a performance based one. Hopefully that side of the move is starting to work. People set the bar way too high, but hopefully they can salvage him as a middle 6 player.

I can't count the number of times I've heard this complaint. Oh wait, yes I can.

Seattle Team is one of those dark horse candidate names that I could get behind. Just for fun, I'd make the logo a giant "I".

And Asplud getting time on the top line tells you a lot of what they think of him and the way he's playing. He's a guy who projects out to a bottom 6 role, so I do thing he will be moved back into that slot and Lazar gets returned to Rochester first. Thompson should be a pretty obvious choice to go back to Rochester, at least initially. I can't see how he wouldn't need that rehab stint with the amount of time he's been out.

And to give the vast majority of the league some much needed down time.

That seriously beaten up action figure where the arm routinely falls off?

I was wondering the same thing. I'd imagine that we may get Skinner back with Eichel at least until Olofsson is back. Then if that clicks, you really get to a big "what do you do" moment when Olofsson is back.

I'm sure they had their reasons, but that looks like an awkward definition for a blindside block. I feel like we've seen plenty of RBs back in pass protection make blocks that would violate this rule. I know the exact type of block they're trying to eliminate, but unless there's extra verbiage in there that you left out, I don't see how that rule does it. I can also dream up a few more completely realistic scenarios that while completely clean, would violate that rule as written. And on that note, I can only find an angle of the block from behind Ford, so it's tough to know for sure. It looks like he's leading with his hands as opposed to forearm or shoulder. But then again, it doesn't say "leading with" the helmet/forearm/shoulder, so that may not even matter. I think they'll be re-visiting the wording of that rule at some point.

Pittsburgh tanked for Lemieux. Most don't tend to think about that one since it was 35 years ago. Different era, different system, blah blah blah, but yeah, they have a tank on their record.

When you have as many picks as they did that year, I'd hope for a mix of the two strategies. Safe pick here, swing for the fences there. I'm sure this is quite the over-simplification of the process, but it does feel like a good position to diversify a bit. That said, looking at the 2nd and 3rd round of that draft, I'm not so sure the type of return you suggest was readily available.

Suddenly I'm reminded of a specific game from his time there. Tampa played that ridiculously boring, refuse to forecheck and clog the neutral zone game. So LaPurple had his defensemen just sit behind the net with the puck and burn a ton of clock. That's one thing I'll applaud him for.

I want to isolate on this portion of the comment. Take a look at that draft. There's a giant black hole of talent that begins in the second round. Granted the book is not completely written yet, but there's maybe a handful of solid players from that draft. Now I know some might want to say Brayden Point, but the entire league, Tampa included, swung and missed on that one multiple times. If 165 out of 180 picks turn into garbage, it doesn't matter all that much how many picks you have. The garbage return is expected. I really wonder, for the teams that do find that gem here and there, how much of it is luck as opposed to talent evaluation. Lately I've been leaning towards the former. Also, how much of that falls onto your organizations ability to develop talent? That's my other big sticking point and I have big questions about that part of the organization over the last 10 or so years.