shrader

Anytime there's a twitter post on here with the tiny thumbnail picture of John Vogl, all I see is a Kim Jong Un haircut.

It's amazing the insanity that surfaces around deaths in the family. I'd rant right now, but it's not worth raising the blood pressure. Just know that the only way you are unique in all of this is if you're from the family that has no issues whatsoever.

I'm good with the brute force stuff. Those projects that involve precision and planning, they don't end well.

I wish I had the slightest clue how to do anything like that. Even the most basic of building skills escape me. Oh, and you can tell where my mind is today when I was chuckling a bit since ogre's post mentioned both vertical members and stiffening.

I'd say the shark was jumped with the shootout. It's a plague against humanity that I would gladly be rid of. Is it obvious enough that i hate shootouts?

I just saw this story on TSN where Columbus' GM proposed one minute penalties in OT. I'd sign up for that one. I've always felt like things should be scaled to the shortened length of time in OT. You'd probably see a few more calls made since the refs might not feel like they're deciding the game themselves by making a call. I'd pair it with extending the OT to 10 minutes. One other OT thing that I'd love to see and seems like a natural is that if you are in the penalty box at the end of OT, you should not be eligible for the shootout. Particularly in the final seconds of OT, you are pretty much free to mug someone in your own end with essentially no punishment.

They're only similar in that the head was the primary point of contact. The human missile aspect of that ASU hit takes it to a whole new level. Go back and watch the Campbell hit, he stays on the same exact plane throughout the whole hit. The results of Campbell/Umberger were unfortunate, but I have a hard time lumping that one in with something blatantly illegal like this one. I'm not so sure that, even today, that hit would get a penalty in the NHL. I may need to re-educate myself on the NHL definition of blindside, but Campbell comes in parallel to the direction Umberger is skating. It's used too often, but there are cases where the skater does need to be aware of his surroundings. And as for college, the Campbell hit would have been a penalty back then. They've had strict contact to the head rules for a long time now. I forget when they started up on it (you know, due to the haziness of being in my mid-20s when that hit happened), but I'm pretty sure those rules pre-date that hit. But anyway, anytime a the hitter goes flying like this kid did, it's a huge red flag. That is not in any way natural.

Paging @inkman. You have a call on the white courtesy phone. Inkman, call on the white courtesy phone.

Looking back on the thread, this post is pretty funny today.?

Ref kind of trolled the crowd a bit with the way he announced it. Funny.

There's a very large following within the college hockey community that typically buys these tickets up right away. Those tickets then get bounced around in the secondary market depending on who makes the field. Ultimately, I'd say there are two main factors for the final attendance, once of which is an immediate loss for the games in Buffalo. 1. Are there any local teams in the field? 2. Is North Dakota in it? You might think I'm joking on #2, but I'm dead serious. Their showing is like nothing else I've ever seen.

Isn't the essentially the plan of every single team if you swap out the names? So you pretty much nailed it when saying that the team building process only works if: So that takes it right back to what I originally said was my whole issue with the "what if" scenario. These things only work if the talent evaluation is accurate. Now you've also added in the idea that the talent development also has to work out and I'm completely on board with that. We don't yet know whether or not Boterill's "plan" is working, but it does seem pretty clear with Murray that it was lacking in both of these aspects. I'm not quite sure if we can pin the lack of development on him given the short tenure, but we at least say that his guys have not developed properly so far.

Was he wearing the neck roll?

It's a bit of a weird topic in general though. Imagine the defense forcing a turnover and handing you the ball on the five yard line, then the offense punches it in. Now technically that is the offense putting up the points, but I'm mostly crediting that one to the defense. The 5 yard line's a bit extreme for obvious reasons, but where is that line where you'd start to give most of the credit to the offense? I'd like to see the exact quote that True* referenced. That word "threat" is what's making me wonder. If there's more to the comment, like maybe being a threat to put up 21 from your side of the field, I might be willing to mention. *Have we ever created a shorthand name for TrueBlueGED. I wanted to say Blue, but that's reserved for LabattBlue even though he's gone. I don't dare you call you TB because I don't want to associate you with that jackass QB.

And I bet you watched a couple hockey games in there too.

No I completely understand that. But the point is that every single team can put together lists like this. When everyone is making the same decision, it starts to point you towards realizing just how unlikely it was to actually make that so called correct pick. And you know what's even more unlikely than hitting on a very low probability event? Hitting on 2 or 3 of them. I always hate the what if game for this reason, but the article misses on one very big factor in why they are where they are today. It ignores who they actually brought in, who they actually drafted. My example above is the perfect one. They passed on Point several other times even without factoring in the traded away pick. So is it really the trades themselves that are the issue or is it the evaluation of talent?

Every single team in the league could use the same exact what if scenario. especially when you get past the first round picks. The Braydon Point inclusion is the ultimate in hindsight. The Sabres still had two more picks within that unusually large 19 pick window that the author offered, drafting Jonas Johansson and Brycen Martin. It's probably a safe bet that they weren't taking Point and it's not the trade that caused that. And you know who else passed on Point in that draft (3 times)? Tampa.

That's the typo you choose? I'm more worried about the practice of shaving players that they apparently have in Edmonton and Colorado.?

My favorite part of the what if game is that it ignores the people they actually did draft. Those aren't looking so great either, so that doesn't exactly suggest to me that if they had more picks they would have gotten those right. Also, of the actual players they traded away, Compher's really the only one that leaves me wondering.

I’m shocked to see that he’s actually younger than me. It feels like he was here at least 15 years ago. And now as I look up his stats, oops, he was.

Sounds like we’re due for another great board crash of whatever year it was. I can’t wait for all the posts complaining that their post count isn’t high enough. It’s the board upgrade that keeps on giving! Maybe their will be some quirks and a few more gems with a Moosehead name in caps and exclamation points will fall through the cracks.

When the Sabres are in the crapper, we get posts about the definition of the crapper. It always comes down to semantics on/in this place, doesn't it?

You somehow get into the toilet with your tablet?

Come this time next year, he'll be a Montour de force.

Is there any indication of who goes into the lineup after the Guhle trade? Is it just Pilut or has he already been there long enough for a game or two? I really have no idea where that team is in terms of available bodies and injuries.