ska-T Chitown

OMG - can the Sabres please do another winter classic?? The 'Hawks jerseys are siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick!! 😍 https://shop.nhl.com/chicago-blackhawks/mens-chicago-blackhawks-fanatics-red-2025-nhl-winter-classic-premium-jersey/

Not sure how this is not here yet: https://www.nhl.com/news/capitals-alex-ovechkin-out-4-6-weeks-with-broken-leg Shame, it would be cool watch him break the record.

I was just thinking - it is a really great thing that so many folks a) noticed he was not around anymore and b) cared. Kinda heartwarming. Off to the Big Barn in the Sky!

JFC ... you actually got me to google that like "huh? what team did he play fo ... omg he got me!"

It was a sad and lonely time around here without your snark, wit, and insight while you were off on a walk about (or masquerading as Idemo!!) Because of you, I would lobby pretty hard to allow a single user to react multiple ways to a single post.

Like ... Patrick Ewing? Crossing sports here, eh? I just remember the Knicks as the team Jordan beat all the time, lol.

No science here, but the "loaves do better without Matthews" because they are a more balanced team without him? If their general strategy is "get the puck to 34", they may pass up otherwise good opportunities for themselves? Perhaps, in their enthusiasm for Matthews, they pass up better chances believing his superior skills are more likely to score. Without him, they perhaps take their own shots and cash in at a slightly better rate? It could be that other players are more "locked in" knowing they don't have St. Matthews to carry them? As someone pointed out, he has more goals than assists (Ovie, anyone?) - so perhaps his supreme confidence in his high-end talents cause him to shoot a little more often when he should actually pass, so when he is out of the lineup that pass is made and maybe they are better chances and convert at better rates? I'd be really interested in their GPG/for and GPG/against with him in vs out of the lineup ... but not enough to actually try to google it myself, lol

They might not "believe" in it the way some don't believe [redacted to avoid being accused of political discussions] - but there are actual statistics that show it is is a thing. The absoluteness of which varies a little from year to year. ESPN did a whole thing on it last around "American Thanksgiving". Dreams' point is well taken that if there is a just a blob of teams all within a point or two of that last spot, statistical significance really blurs, but if you are NOT near it, and there is a glob of mediocrity hovering around the last spot, I'd wager your odds of being one of the 2-3 teams that overcomes goes down by quite a bit.

Yeah, some terrible possession and clearing all around on that.

Doth mine eyes deceive me or dist Owen Power just absolutely paste someone into the boards?? Nope - Dahlin ... lol. False alarm.

that ... right there - Zucker telling Kulich what's what ... we need MORE!

That kinda gets at the heart of it for me. I never made it past collegiate level (wrestling ... I barely even played intramural floor hockey for the longest time), so i know it is not a 1:1 - but we were bad for a while and none of us were Chris Drury or anything like that ... but a few guys pulled out some wins and things built from there. I don't think the issue with the Sabres is talent, but a fair amount of the time there seems to be a 'hockey IQ' problem? Like, dumb plays. Careless plays that are too risky (dangles near the blueline when there is no one behind you to back you up?) and frankly not likely to work in the NHL where the talent gap for most players is not that big. So, having the smarts and the maturity to take the safe play - or at least the less risky play - is something that seems to be missing when I watch the "bad" games. I am sure there is a lot of room to argue that the really talented, well-coached (for a longer period of time), or physical teams are throwing the Sabres off and contributing to "dumb" plays, cuz when they are ON, they are ON, ask the Rags.

<SkaTchitown patiently waits for Thornster's rebuttal about how all of that is the exact description of what GM is paid a staggering amount of money to do ...>

This gives me even more pause for all of these arguments that are cast out here. There is no way that a Bruins team that is what - 2 year removed from the best record ever? - that has not had significant roster turnover - can have "a bad culture". Am I supposed to believe that between last year (they made the playoffs easily) and this year that everything they had worked for and built just came crumbling down and now their culture is trash and they are lazy?? C'mon. I have a hard time accepting that when it is tossed out for the Sabres, but the Broons? C'mon. I get that "bad culture" and "lazy country club locker room" are really just euphemisms for "no one is really pushing that extra little bit so they can start to reach the next level", but it is so condescending (not directing this at you, PF, if that is not clear), ill-informed, and dismissive.

Don't forget, since TP owns a stake in the stadium, he gets the depreciation tax-writeoffs. Not entirely sure how it works, since an NFL stadium, other than the land, is essentially worthless if you don't have an NFL team. Fair market value and other things might be tricky.