LTS

He won't be on the opening roster if they decide to give Reinhart his NHL games before sending him back to Juniors. The other thing to keep in mind is who has to clear waivers and who does not. Grigorenko does not. This provides roster flexibility and that is important. They aren't going to send a guy to Rochester who needs to clear unless they are certain they don't care if he gets picked up. They do have to ice a team in Rochester as well. He'll get his opportunities this year.

It's not really the stores fault. The brewers release the beers using the same rationale as the fashion industry and by the end of the season, when you want that style, it's gone, replaced with something you won't want for another 2-3 months. And yep, that brewery does it right. There are some who get it.

A farce and that writer should be suspended for ignorance and non-factual reporting. Mitchell's hit occurs in every game of every season. It's two players initiating contact on their way to play a puck. Nothing is ever called and Mitchell did nothing wrong to warrant a penalty. Franson, from the appearance, did not have himself braced for contact. Mitchell hits his hip area and Franson loses his balance.

The actual "blackout" jersey was revealed today. It's nice. Really nice. Great use of the blue to bring an electric tinge to the uniform. http://video.lightning.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=634016

I'd highly recommend Copper Legend from Jack's Abbey Brewing. Great Oktoberfest. By and large every one of their beers are fantastic.

Lightning unveil their third jersey... or not. http://video.lightning.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=633714 Well done!

Do we need more cod or sole in here?

Yes, I am being somewhat ridiculous in that that last point. I also don't want to argue they have no place, but to argue that a coach is screwed because he ignores them is also troublesome. They can, but they extrapolate that data across all zone entries. So, as a coach you better know that Team X actually excels at standing up players at the blue line and that Team Y excels at the dump and chase. It's how you apply the knowledge that matters. Of course, if you watch game film on another team (or someone else does) and provides the visual analytics without the statistical breakdown you'll probably still know that Team Y sucks at standing up at the blue line. Do you really need analytics to show that the Sabres D have given up the blue line easily over the past few seasons? They've been called out on it repeatedly. :) It doesn't mean Roy even was aware of the stats right? He could have just said, hell no one will expect this. I'm not saying analytics are not important, I think they are. However, they have to be used properly and no one should ever give them more credit than they deserve. An intelligent person makes use of all available information, applies their own values to each and then makes a decision. The result is what matters. Ultimately it can become game theory. You make a change in an algorithm to impact results and you have to change your mind set when someone else makes a change (or did they?) Does it account for when the stick breaks when taking the shot?

Humanity is on this kick to explain everything and in order to do so they need to build a model. Ultimately, all the data scientists in the world will finally model the universe. Until then, everything will be imperfect. A model is only as good as its data. The data is influenced by various factors and those factors are determined by the data scientist. The sum collection of data may be incomplete, may be misinterpreted, may be subject to bias. What is possession? One would imagine it is the amount of time a team remains in control, so how is that measured? Does a team lose possession when puck glances off an opponent stick during a pass? Why not? Is that a failing point of your model? What if I did count that and made it a category of "grade A possession / grade B possession". Ultimately you can get bogged down in it and end up basically determining what a good coach can see because he's with these players day in and day out. His entire basis of experience is more than anything any data scientist has put into a model. Think about it. He sees the game a certain way and up to this point a data model has never included or tracked that factor. Coach has 20 years of experience seeing this factor day in and day out. The model either has to be manually updated to include this factor from every game over that same time period or else the data scientist has to say from here on this is important but it lacks the context. I'm not a stats genius but I do firmly believe that relying solely (soully? :)) on data is also a mistake. Until the model can factor all aspects of life it will be fallible. Yuri had a great point. I've watched guys playing hockey who can barely skate continually frustrate the hell out of a great skater who normally dominates. Why? Because the great skater has been taught that other great players will attempt to play a certain way. The less skilled player doesn't know this and he's doing whatever he thinks is good. I think you can use stats to compare players over the long term. I think Ted Nolan knows which players play better defense, score more, take better faceoffs, etc. He's not consulting his analytics book during the game to see what instructions to bark out to Ennis while he enters a 1 on 1 with Subban.

I didn't see it posted through out the thread and it's late but the game was on the radio on 1520 in Buffalo. I picked up parts of it while driving around Rochester yesterday.

Look.. as far as I am concerned, if you can score goals by dropping the puck in goalie's sweater you're a rock star. Pysyk is so good he gets goalies to score for him.

Absolutely. Now, I know I'm not an NHL coach nor a revered strategist, but I'd like to think that if on your breakout play your winger is only going to go to the center of the ice then that defenseman on the other team is still going to be a problem. Therefore, the breakout fails. Therefore, Phil does not get the puck. Therefore, Phil does not score. Perhaps he swung his purse at the coach? I think the Leafs should trade for John Scott.

Hooray, real hockey! So, I think any player that can be sent to Rochester without waivers will be there to start the season unless there is irrefutable evidence as to why they should be in Buffalo. I expect the Sabres to maintain roster flexibility. In addition, they'll need to clear roster spots over the first 9 games for a few junior players (Reinhart, Zadarov). On the bright side I see we have MacKinnon in camp this year. ;)

Pysyk, the Unsung. He's the kind of guy, who at the end of his career, you'll say. "He did all that."?

Cassidy said that Zadarov would be back in the next game right after the game he was benched. Yea, at least now those who make the roster will understand what to expect for the season. And for the prospects who don't, they have no delusions about being greater than they are.

Giving a letter to a player who doesn't deserve it isn't going to win any favors from the players. At best people will tacitly accept it and you'll have no real leadership. At worst you'll create resentment and begin breaking down the locker room. Giving everyone an "A" is like a participation award. Clearly the Montreal brass is trying to play to 3 people in that group and keep them happy. Either that or none of them are really worthy of being the "C" in which case.. they have a problem.

Any coach of any value can tell when a player isn't trying hard. It happens and it should be a concern. This isn't about talent or skill, it's about attitude. If I'm playing in that game and I see a player not busting his ass and my team is getting beat I'm going to be in his face. I'd be concerned. No player should ever be benched for not trying. There will be off games. There are games when the puck just avoids you. Even then a player can still be giving his all. He's had an attitude all along that he can play in the NHL. It's a good attitude to have. However, if it brings him to the point where he won't try because it's not the NHL then he'll never make it.

They hadn't won any cups when the Ducks were installed though. You can't use now to discuss then. That said, the Kings drew pretty well at the time. However, they had Gretzky at the time and went to the Cup finals in 92-93. The Ducks showed up the following year. They had to pay the Kings directly for taking some of their market. However, both now seem to be doing rather well and possibly are pushing each other to succeed. This could happen in Toronto as well. Still, I think the expansion of today would be more calculated and more business like. A lot has changed since 1993.

Essentially the defender now has to make "clean" contact with the puck. If he misses entirely and trips the player it's a penalty shot. If he hits the puck first but also pulls the player down through contact with the legs or shoulder, etc. it will be a 2 minute penalty. I'm down with that. Spin-o-rama? Whatever. Trapezoid? Whatever. Face-off delay? Excellent. I like that basically unless the attacking team intentionally shoots the puck out of play the face-off stays in the offensive zone. I like that the hash marks are being spread out (even if just for pre-season). I think it will free up wingers to reposition quicker.

Been monitoring this thread. So, curious. The NHL put a team in Anaheim when there was a team in LA. These two arenas are less than 36 miles from each other. Both teams appear to be doing quite well and are in a warm weather city. That said, I think the league will seek the opportunity to attract a FULL viewing market over a partial viewing market when they choose to expand/relocate a franchise.

Canadian pull-ups?

Would you say they are generational or clutch players?

I only meant if he actually gets signed. :)

it doesn't seem to let me have access. No biggie.

No worries. I understand what you are saying. It's hard to say. I might be more along these lines. That said, I'm not arguing that drugs altered their state of being and allowed them to create differently. We just don't know if they would have been able to do it without drugs. There artists who kick the drugs and generally I think people say it usually ruins their talent. I'm not sure if that's the case. It might be different, but not necessarily bad. For example, Aerosmith. They are straight, people like to say they suck now compared to when they were on drugs. They don't suck now, it's just different than it was then.