JJFIVEOH

Why are you guys spending so much time trying to convince me otherwise?

Teams have been dominant throughout the years without having to tank. Teams have picked up superstars without having to tank. Teams have been successful without having a generational (how a team can even think about planning ahead based on a player that is still a child, I don't know) superstar. I don't have a losing attitude, I don't like losing, I don't like watching my teams purposely doing so. I follow sports for the entertainment, anything less than my favorite team doing what it takes to win is unacceptable. 'Tanking' and professional sports should NEVER be two terms that are even mentioned in the same book much less the same sentence. Looking over the list of #1 overall picks, the odds of one turning out to be a 'game-changer' is far from absolute.

'Great', as in one step down from 'elite'. Very good? Well above average? Suppposedly it is a stacked draft class, the Sabres can get three __________ players in the first round to make them a great all-around team. Of course they do. And I'm not going to cry if my Geo Metro gets T-boned as opposed to my Bentley. Actually, a first round pick isn't a Geo Metro......... but you get my point.

I just don't like the risk. What if he turns out to be a bust? What if he busts his leg early in the first year? What if he get a couple concussions early on in his career and never recovers? I just think there is way too much risk involved in tanking, blowing another year when it might not work out in the first place. I don't think there is a correlation between teams with a legitimate elite superstar, and teams that have several great players. With the draft the Sabres have had over the last 3 years I would be happy to compliment them with three great 1st rounders (two of those are bound to be quality players) than one potential superstar and all the media hype that goes with it. But, that's just my opinion. For what it's worth, I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Spurs demolish the Heat in the finals. Haha, I've got no problem with teams doing what the Sabres did the past year. I've got a problem purposely doing it again. B-) "How about a series of fines for good play? Maybe a $30,000 bonus to the guy voted Least Valuable Player" :lol:

Right, I've complained about teams that abuse the system, I'm certainly not going to be a hypocrite and support the Sabres doing it.

I really like your posts in this thread. I don't like putting all my eggs into one basket. I'd almost rather have multiple 1st round picks in 2015 rather than the one 1st overall. I'd rather not have all the hype that goes along with McDavid either.

Bucky is a fool with absolutely no journalistic integrity. He will write as long as he keeps getting attention. Ignore his tripe and he won't have any more fuel.

Exactly. #1 overall picks haven't necessarily brought tremendous success. Kane and Crosby...... the only two I consider game changers and only one team in the last fourteen years has been an annual contender for a Cup. No, I don't consider Pittsburgh in there. I've said this before, the Sabres are going to find it much tougher to lose games this year than they think. It's easy to tank and finish dead last when you spend all year trading away your team for draft picks. But when you have to fill those spots during the offseason to reach the floor it's not as easy to lose. I know some will say that the Sabres finished so far out last year that even if they won seven more games they still would have finished last...... so they can be better and still finish dead last. Well, you also need to throw in Darcy and Rolston getting fired. That caused some distractions. Then you need to throw in the goaltending fiasco at the end of the year when they were down to the 6th stringer. Add up Rolston's games and the remaining games after Enroth/Neuvirth got hurt and you have a 6-25-3 record. Get rid of all that and the Sabres would have won seven more games last year. Now throw in a revamped roster.................. it's not going to be that easy to suck.

Not trying to make light of anything that's been talked about here, or the situation at hand, but to put a realistic spin on the discussion (based on the data in matter2003's link) the chances of a male coming down with an HPV related cancer is about 1:13,000 in men 18 and older.

Thanks

Radio or TV? If TV, you must have a provider that lets you sign in to stream.

Who are you all listening to, or watching besides WGR?

He's too small to play in the NHL. :lol:

It just seems to me that this forum hasn't hit the point where it needs a babysitter. Most forums get that way after a while. This one has yet to do so, surprisingly.

Who is this Freeman guy?

Not at all. I just don't see the issues being on the scale some think they're on. That's just my opinion, results may vary. ;)

I'm going to stand by what I said and opine that there really isn't any pressing issues with this forum. Sure there are times when threads get off-topic, on the rare occasion a dispute might pop up. But overall it all adds to the entertainment factor yet doesn't overwhelm the place. I think if we all start commenting to those that don't follow these unwritten rules it will just become more of a distraction. I like the tweets because I don't follow everybody related to hockey. I like the occasional off-topic posts, it can lighten the mod a little. With the risk of sounding repetitive I say we just let it be. If it ain't broke.......

I agree with the move the way the new CBA stands now. I don't agree that the Sabres were put in this situation in the first place because a pre-CBA contract SHOULD NOT have to abide by new rules put into play after said contract was signed. Especially considering the NHL approved the contract. I also do not agree that Ehrhoff mailed it in. He has been one of the most consistent and professional players we've had the last three years. He's had to play with the worst roster in the NHL, be the whipping boy for all things bad defensively, not to mention his game suffering because he was on the worst offensive team in 75 years. Did he mail it in right at the end? Sure.......... so did the rest of the team.

I agree, there's too much talk about fixing things that aren't even broke in the first place. Anybody who is on any internet forum knows that it is the natural flow of internet discussion. You will never, NEVER get people to fall in line 100% with the original topic no matter what you do. It will never happen. This board is one of the better ones I'm on that actually say close to the original topic. You're not going to fix it, you're not going to make it any better. Even if we have threads for each individual player, it's not going to prevent anybody from talking about that player in another thread no matter how much you want to police it. I'll say it again, this forum is much better than most out there............ there is nothing to fix. More general topics? Sure, it would be nice to have. But it's going to come down to posters telling others to take their opinion to the proper player thread at the first mention of the name in another thread. It will cause more friction.

I never thought it was fair to hold pre-2013 contracts liable for new salary rules.

Wasn't it announced yesterday that Murray most likely wasn't going to offer contracts to his RFA's including Ruhwedel, McBain and Conacher?

Thank you.

Pardon my ignorance, but can somebody explain the $10 mil cap hit at the end? According to Capgeek if Ebrboff retires early the hit would only be $3 mil a year at the end.

Murray Is taking this way too far. Like somebody mentioned, he's going to be in big trouble when everybody on the team who is 18-21 years old and in 5-6 years they're all going to be ready for their first big contract. This move just leaves one more position available to fill with another kid defenseman.