nfreeman

I'm not advocating that they dump him. I'm simply saying that, notwithstanding respectable assist production, he had a crappy pre-xmas part of the season, which is when the season was lost. I want more than that from the guy who was supposed to be the next Drury. I suspect he'd say the same thing.

I agree that 8 pts in 12 or 13 games doesn't by itself establish corpsehood. I was just responding to MOM's 14 pts in 15 games assertion. In any case, I think corpsehood was established by the eye test, as well as by the 2 goals in 21 games.

You should definitely shop around for mortgages. Some banks will cover the closing costs, which can otherwise get pretty pricey. There are a bunch of online mortgage shopping tools, but they won't give you the final quote. If you think you're going to stay in the house for a while, then you should get a 30-year fixed mortgage. Rates have increased a bit but are still very low. You should also pay zero points (which are just upfront fees that the bank charges on some mortgages -- often the tradeoff is a slightly lower rate if you pay points). As for a home inspector, that is a very good call. I would suggest Angie's list (which is also great for plumbers & similar services). Finally, I would suggest buying a lesser house in a better neighborhood as opposed to the other way around. One of the key factors in determining whether a neighborhood is "good" in terms of holding & gaining resale value is the quality of the public schools. I would also suggest accepting a lesser house with a bigger yard and a quieter location, as those are also important factors in resale value. Of course, it goes without saying that there needs to be room for a man-cave.

Don't forget McCabe! Disappointing season this year, but I think still a potentially solid 2nd-pair guy.

ROR in October -- 4 goals, 8 pts in 12 games, minus-9 ROR in November -- 3 goals, 8 pts in 13 games, minus-8 ROR in December -- 2 goals, 8 pts in 12 games, plus-2 There was also a stretch from mid-Nov. to early Jan in which he had 2 goals in 21 games. I stand by my corpse assertion.

I too am mightily concerned about the speed issue with those 3 in the Sabres' top 6. At the same time, I am expecting all 3 back next year based on JBott's recent comments, plus ROR's and KO's contracts and Reino's depressed value. I think a potential remedy is to increase the speed on D. If Guhle is indeed in Buffalo next year, that will help. Another fast, skilled defenseman for the top 4 would be a great addition.

Great breakdown GA. One question: why do the Sabres need to sign Asplund now? As a 2016 draftee, the Sabres wouldn't lose his rights yet, innit? I'd also have DOR and CJ at #4, but that's just an optimistic guess.

ROR played like an utter corpse for the first 30-odd games of the season, which is the period when the season was lost. I agree that he has looked like a good-to-very-good player quite often during his tenure here, but he also deserves plenty of criticism for this season.

Good man. I'm not putting much value into their recent garbage time surge, but I wholeheartedly appreciate the optimism. AND, as I posted in another thread, I do think they can be greatly improved next year if they get better goaltending plus a number of other things, each of which is quite possible.

This.

Another name in this category: Tim Schaller, who costs less and is having a better season than both Larsson and Zemgus.

I think, more than the episodes you mentioned, it's: - major locker room issues in Winnipeg - 2 legal scrapes involving allegations of assaulting women - skipping/being late for practice - allegedly last-on-first-off for practice - allegedly not well liked in locker room in Buffalo And now I think we've beaten this one to death.

I noticed that #hammymath took a shot in his column at "an irresponsible blogger" who reported that Lehner had asked for a trade. Pretty rich coming from Hammy.

Now you're splitting hairs. He was handcuffed on a sidewalk in front of cameras and everyone knew it was for allegedly choking a woman in a bar. And everyone also knew the other scrape was for alleged sexual assault. (I will note again for the record that it's quite likely he was innocent in both cases. It still reflected badly on him and on the team.) As for the timing, in the real world it matters. It played out in front of the entire league and its media, and at a moment when the organization wanted to put its best foot forward. No company would want one of its employees to cause a problem like that at a moment like that. And again "should have been coveted" depends on facts we don't know, and "but for the rep" assumes that those unknown facts are irrelevant, and only the rep -- i.e. the Vegas photos and the skin color -- matter. That is an unsupportable assumption. I would agree with saying "a player whose on-ice production would lead us to think that most teams would covet him, but other factors have depressed his value" -- but not the assumption that those other factors include racism. That's an assumption about other people that I don't think anyone should make without evidence.

Well, it's very much in the Sabres' interests for Kane to play well, as this would increase the likelihood of him re-signing with SJ. Yes, it's disputable, and precisely because we have no idea what exactly constitutes "comparable." We have no idea how liked or disliked Kane was by his teammates and/or coaches in Buffalo -- although there's a fair amount of evidence to suggest he was disliked by his teammates in Winnipeg. It's also quite possible that his coaches in Buffalo didn't love him in light of the skipping practice incident plus reported last-on-first-off habits. Do we know whether a white player with pre-existing baggage has gotten arrested for assaulting a woman the day before his team, with a relatively new owner, hosted the NHL draft in their expensive new downtown development? And then followed it up with a 2nd similar legal scrape a few months later? And then sought a huge new contract the following year? This is what I meant about jumping to the racism conclusion. These facts, and what we know and don't know, matter critically.

Good thread! I think he's gonna be good.

Awesome.

I sure hope so. It takes more than talent and temper tantrums after losses though -- you need a guy who burns to win, who busts his butt whenever he's on the ice and who knows that it only works by taking practice, preparation and fitness very seriously.

I completely agree with the bolded. ROR was supposed to provide this and it's now clear IMHO that he just isn't that guy. I'm not sure who on the roster might fit the bill.

Interesting, and quite possible. OTOH, it also seems quite possible to me that they were good and PO'd about Kane getting arrested right before the Sabres hosted the draft -- thus casting a pall on and overshadowing their organization, new harborside, etc. -- which was compounded by his 2nd similar legal scrape later that summer. Maybe they told JBott "you can unload him whenever you think we can get the best return, but there is NFW that we are giving him a $30MM+ extension." Or maybe, as JBott said yesterday, they stayed out of it completely. I haven't seen any reports suggesting they were involved in any way.

Very nice. I too wish him well.

The point is that those items do affect winning and losing -- if a guy is a jerk in the locker room, or a bad influence on other players, or causing distractions due to off-ice matters -- there can be a very real effect on team performance. Well, I suppose it can be, but why do we have to assume that it is? My issue on all of these matters is that I think it's profoundly destructive to just assume that people act in a racist manner. I think the default assumption should be that people act in good faith unless there's a specific reason to think otherwise. As you say, it's difficult to know when racism has occurred -- but if the default assumption is that it has occurred, all that happens is that everyone suspects each other all the time, people throw the accusation around like it's a nickel, the accused resent it, and things get worse, not better.

But the point is that there is zero evidence. Do you think the outcome itself is evidence?

So because some d-bag fans yelled a slur at a black player, that means that 30 NHL GMs decided that black players are worth less in trade than white players? Really? Again: these GMs are paid to win, and get canned when they don't. Black players are traded for high yields, and are signed to fat contracts, quite frequently. THIS black player has had multiple issues with multiple teams, as well as multiple legal scrapes involving assaults on women, and we are now in the middle of a major societal upheaval centered around that very issue. The starting point should be that race is irrelevant unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Ah yes. The old "I didn't say 'speculate that' -- I said 'speculate whether'" compounding. It really takes the original trolling up a notch.