mjd1001

I like to not think of myself as THAT old (in my 40's) but I agree with you on the above. To 2nd that, the first round series are too long. When the playoffs started, I was all ready to watch as many games as possible, sit back without much of a rooting interest and enjoy some hockey. And overall a lot of the games have been good. BUT, I'm already at the point of 'move this along' and 'I'm ready for the 2nd round'. First round series should be 5 games, not 7....2nd round I could go either way. Games every other day with no exception. Lets find a way to not drag this out until possibly the middle of June.

I think its probably close to this. Writers need stuff to write about, and as we are learning over the past couple decades, but mostly over the last few years....the majority of people don't 'read' or 'watch' news for actual News, but they read/watch to see what they WANT to beleive presented to them as news. If an overseas reporter is read by people who would like to think NHL prospects will come back to Europe, that is what they will be given. On a slightly off topic note, the overall quality of articles/reporting is getting really bad. I don't just mean the partisan stuff, but actually what passes for a news article. I read this morning an article about a US based car company that the write 'projected' to have a new model coming out. Halfway through the article he gave reasons as to why it would be avaiable very shortly, but then ended the article saying why it might not even be produced. How do people get stuff like that published, even on a web site?

Where is/was the niagara dragstrip located? My sporting interests are close to yours. I will watch Nascar but only the road courses. I haven't watched a full baseball or basketball game in years even though I liked them growing up. I guess I'm a Blue Jays fan but I hardly have seen them pay so oh well. Football/NFL/The Bills is the one thing changing for me. I was the 'never miss a game for any reason' person from the time I was a kid up until 5 years ago. Mostly the Bills, but the entire NFL. Something is going on though, where my interest in football/the NFL and even the Bills is fading quickly.

Tennis courts yes. Clubhouse to hold meetings but no pool.

The HOA comment brought back some bad memories although they were just from 2 weeks ago. We visited my laws in Florida and my wife's father was talking about what happens to the house that he lives in when he passes along. It looks like hes leaving it to us but he really really is putting the full court press on having us leave Western New York and move back to Florida because he doesn't understand why we want to live here when Florida is such a wonderful place. The thing is, their HOA doesn't do anything except for cut the lawn. They obviously don't plow in the Winter, they don't provide any other services, they don't even trim hedges or anything but it's almost $300 a month for an HOA fee. The HOA board walks around the community together every 2 weeks with a list of who they want to find for even the smallest things, a little bit mold on your roof? Fine. Not taking care of your trees or your shrubs? That's a fine. If the paint on your mailbox is fading you get one warning and if you don't take care of it within a couple of weeks, you get fined for that also. When he moved there a little more than 10 years ago, his property taxes were a bit over $3000yr. Last year he paid almost $9000, and homeowners insurance 10 years ago was about $1200 a month and now hes up closing in on to 6000/year. There's a variety of reasons we wouldn't move down there, but after he showed us the bills and talked about it, Florida's actually gone from a cheaper place to live to very expensive, at least in the community where he is.

Taking everything into consideration, I guess its better if the local media has reporters following the team around, but if they didn't, it really wouldn't bother me. Locker room interviews after the game dont' really bring much information, not much more than we can already get by watching what is broadcast online. And for me, I 'follow' the team mostly through this message board and 'twitter', occasionally listening to talk radio and actually watching the game. Basically, that is 99% of what I need for myself. If a source of info about the team goes away or a source of 'quotes' disappears, I guess I don't even think of it and just get info form someplace else or just focus on the info that IS available.

It is still early, I think the division will 'shake out' a bit and if Toronto keeps playing well they will be fine. On a seperate note....The Blue Jays have always been the team I wanted to follow, but for years and years, we got the Mets, Cubs, Braves, Yankees on our local cable package but you could not get the Blue Jay games. Eventuall I just stopped caring about those other teams and not being able to watch the Blue Jays games.....well...over time that is pretty much the reason I stopped following baseball. We live in Northern Niagara county....when you drive down the hill toward the village of Lewiston you can actually SEE the dome in Toronto across the lake with your own eyes. For years we have been the farm club of that team...yet for years we couldn't get the games on a local cable package yet we could see 4 other teams that are located hundred of miles away. stupid.

Toews, Kane, Wood.....I guess any of them may or may not bring something to the Sabres, but the reason I don't want any of them? I'd rather have what is here now than to get any of them for what you are going to pay them. I know there are some people here who legit think they make this team a lot better. I'm not one of them. They may or may not make this team any better, so to bring them in, in my view, is change for the sake of change. I know as fans that is what we like to talk about, but i'm not really interested myself.

I agree with you. I was a kid in the 1980's and there were no message boards back then, but the number of people who want to run a "one dimensional" goal scorer who brings nothing to the team other than Power play goals.....reminds me quite a bit of how people talked about Dave Andreychuck when he was here. I'm not saying VO is as good as Andreychuck, but the similarities are there in how people talk about him. I'm somewhat indifferent on him being here or not being here, but you don't make this team better by replacing him with the 'rookie of choice' of the forum. He is a streaky scorer, even more so than most, and he isn't a physical player or a Defensive specialist. But, his goals matter. Every goal he scored wasn't meaning at the end of a game or an empty netter with 3 seconds left. And as much as he doesn't backcheck, he isn't DIRECTLY responsible for goals against often by being a turnover machine in his own end. So, can he be replaced? Sure. If he is gone and I upset? No, but I think he matters more to this team than people think. His plus-minus was bad, but scoring goals is a very hard thing to do for 75%+ of the players in the league, and he is pretty good at that.

As a fan I agree with you, he has been one of their better players. But without knowing the true extent of the injury, I'm OK with him not playing. I mean, If he could play and there was no chance of him making the injury worse I'd say let him play, but only him and the staff of the team really know that so...I guess I'm on the side of trusting them.

I'm not sure why, but I don't seem to have a hatred of the Bruins that most others do. I want them to be worse than the Sabres. I want them to take that step back (or 5 steps back) and miss the playoffs. I HATE their Broadcast/play by play guys. There is a lot to not like. But If they win, it doesn't bother me (other than if I have to listen to Jack Edwards). For the most part, it isnt' the players on a team that make me like or dislike them, it is often the fanbase. And are Boston Fans Spoiled overall? Sure, but in hockey, I have been to a couple Bruins games in Boston over the years and it wasn't awful. I'd still prefer the Bruins over the Leafs because I think Leaf fans are the most intolerable in hockey by far. How can as fanbase like Toronto be SO arrogant when they hardly ever win anything of consequence?

Its hard to not go Boston/Colorado as they appear to be the 2 safe choices. However, the Rangers are looking good and if someone else makes it out of the east besides Boston, The Rangers just might be it. The West is just so wide open, 6 teams can legit make it. But in the East, its hard to not think either Boston or the Rangers, and everyone else to me is 2 steps behind them.

If it was possible to do that I agree with you. There are just a lot of things we don't know about this situation though., One possibility is he wasn't/insn't going to sign with Buffalo and he knows the team he will sign with (and that may be somewhat common knowledge around the league.). If you are ANY team other than the one he is likely to sign with, you won't give up anything because odds are he won't sign with you. If you are the team he does want to sign with, again, you won't give up anything because once the Summer gets here, you get him for free.

I love Wilson as a hockey player. Think he can make any team that has him a lot better, including the Sabres. I don't really like or condone how he gets that done though. Would love to have him on my team, but I think the NHL is better overall if guys like him weren't around.

I think it falls under the category of a 'development year' again. They Sabres did NOT try to do bad intentionally on the PK all year, but they did put guys out there to try them out or give them PK experience who may not have been the best. Girgensons has traditionally been this teams best PK forward, but this year, at times during the season, Greenway, Mitts, Quinn, Asplund (when he was still here) Thompson, Cozens, Jost, Tuch, Okposo, and Krebs all got looks at it. I'm not talking a minute here or a minute there. At the very least there were 5-10 game stretches where those guys were tried out as regular PKers. For some (Like Mitts), after his 'trial' on the PK was done he didn't really get another chance on it......but it still shows that the coaching staff didn't simply identify the best 2-4 forwards and stick with them, instead they put a bunch of guys out there to 'try them out' to see how they would do. On the back end, I think losing Fitzgerald hurt. Was he a great overally D-man? No, but he was good on the PK and when he was here he was getting almost as much time as any other guy on the backend. Their 2nd most used guy back there? Samuelsson, who also missed a good portion of the season. So the back end didn't go through the 'trying out' as much as the forwards, but the 2 guys they 'trusted' the most back there, one is no longer with the team and the other missed a lot of time. Thompson wasn't that bad on the PK, but honestly I don't want him used there. I think he was good because of his reach and he doesn't chase the puck much. But going forward, Tuch, Girgensons, probably Jost, and find one other forward to focus your PK on. Samuelsson should get the most PK time on the back end, and find one other of your 'new' guys to pair with him. I always thought Hinestroza might have been the best Penalty killer on this team, even better than Girgensons, but whethere he is back with this team or not, or if he was him likely not playing much hurts that option. Besides goaltending the best way to fix the PK is to get the following: -Guys who maintain their position and know how to cover for their teamates and not chase the puck (why Cozens has some issues on the PK) -Forwards who are very fast and D-men who are tall and have reach.

And as far as telling me to "go off" if I need to....I think the above by you illustrates you should really take a good, long look in the mirror at yourself before you cast that remark on anyone else. Don't take offense to what I say then and tell me to "by all means, go off" when you are doing the same yourself.

Its basically what you did. You don't say things like "Radio Silence" or use words to describe what others are talking about as 'ham handed' (or whatever it was exactly that you said) without expecint to get a response. Then you tell the person you are talking to about it that their facts are 'all wrong' just because they aren't good for your argument? I guess you need to get the last word in even when you are wrong....because I am just responding the the juvenile way that you talk to/respond to other people's posts.

Wow, there is something wrong with how you are reading or thinking. You judge a trade based on the players impact on the team, is that team better or worse since the trade was made. Vegas was a better team before the trade overall, so Eichel's impact wasn't going to change that. I have no idea if you just dont' get that or are trying to use an argument that doesn't make sense because it is the only way to make your point. Let me try to make this REAL SIMPLE: -In the season before the trade, and the partial season before Eichel got there, Vegas was 68w-36l. SINCE they got Eichel, They have been 66w-50l. The team has been WORSE overall since they got Eichel. -Buffalo, on the other hand, has been BETTER since Eichel left and they got Tuch. If you want to argue something non-sensical then go ahead. My point all along was that Buffalo so far has one the trade because what they got for Eichel has had a GREAT positive impact on the team than trading him away, and Vegas (so far) is LESS successful with Eichel than they were Before the trade. That is all I have been saying all along and those are the facts. And please, please tell me what facts I have that are 'all wrong'. If I made a mistake in calculations, It is likely a very small one. But I really want to know what facts I present that are "All wrong"?

It does matter that they were significantly better than the Sabres this year if their team STARTED from a better place than the Sabres were at before the trade. Wow, your argument is bad. Since the trade, the Sabres have gotten BETTER without Eichel and with Tuch, and the Golden nights have performed WORSE with Eichel in their lineup in the time he has been there comared to the time befor he was there. They were a better team before Eichel was there, his presense has not added Anything to their sucess, while the Sabres have gotten better.

The post you make is laughable. You think I am proving your point? Everything I said in my post is true. He is not what he was billed to be by many when he was here with the Sabres and he is not that in Vegas either. Along for the ride? he is closer to that than he is to being the reason for the team making the playoffs. Once again, The season and a half before he was there they were a LOT better overall than the season and a half since he has been there. Since he got there, OVERALL (not cherry picking) the team has less success. And since he left here,OVERALL in the same time period the Sabres have had more success. Again, let me repeat that, since Jack got there, they have been not as good. Since he left here, the Sabres have been better. Cherry pick all you want to make your argument, that is how I ultimately judge a trade. The fact that what the Sabres got for him is outscoring/outpacing him just adds to the above point. And, just because you stayed out of the discussion, why did you feel the need to put in your post the words "radio silence". Just becaue your eyes are closed, its not like everyone else is. The fact that you decided to say that to make your post sound a bit more 'cute' just goes that you are the one who has the 'ham handed, one sided skewed argument'.

Radio Silence? I'm not sure where you were, but there hasn't been radio silence all year long as you said here. There has been a LOT of discussion about Eichel on here. About how he is 68th in the league in points per game since the trade. About how since he has been there, Vegas has a MUCH worse point percentage/winning percentage in the year and a half he has been there than they did in the year and a half before he got there. About how the Sabres have been much better since he left than they were when he was playing here, and that the piece the sabres got in return has been much more productive here than Eichel has been in Vegas. Hes a good player. I'm not saying that he isn't. But your above comment is just not true. He did not "Guide" a team to the playoffs when in the year or two before he was there they were a better team than they have been since he got there. And no one crawled out of the woodwark just now after one playoff game. And the Rent free comment? lol, That is one of the most over-used things to say when you don't have much else to go at someone with. Discussing how players that USED to be on your team is part of being a fan. Teams make moves and evaluating how well a player/team is doing after the move vs what the other team/player(s) are doing is part of the evaluation process fans go though. The fact that it can be fun is just an added bonus for some.

Maybe. Or maybe he is just someone struggling with a decision. I put myself in his spot and try to look at it....he may very well like Buffalo and the guys he has met along the way, but on the other hand, at this point what is the downside of him not signing here right away and having the ability to look at ANY situation and see what ANY team has to offer him (including the Sabres at a later date)?

"Wanting to be here" vs "getting the best players at any cost" are 2 schools of thought. Which one is correct may very well depend on where a team is in its development cycle. I have always been of the 'get guys who want to be here', even when the team was bad a few years ago, I wanted someone who wasn't here just to collect a paycheck. I'd rather have a slightly 'worse' player but someone I can root for instead of a mercenary type who would be slightly better. I guess that is why I really would like to see them move on from Okposo, but wont' be upset if he comes back.

I'm of the opposite view. I like the team as it is for the most part, and think they will continue to get better. That doesn't mean SOME moves don't need to be made. I want 2 D-men added to this roster. One who is a legit, very good 2nd pair guy, and one that is good enough to be a 2nd pair guy but can be slotted in for a 3rd pair role on this team. If that is what you mean by big moves then yes, Big moves are needed. But I don't need much more than that and to me those are more 'moderate' moves.

I do agree with that. Right now the Thompson, Tuch, Skinner line looks good and was very productive this season. But things change. You could keep them together next year but it shouldn't be written in stone. Maybe in camp and preseason you just try other combinations (that is when you try those things) and how knows if something else clicks even better. Its ok to pencil in the lines for next year, but that is the idea, you use pencil, so if something works better (or doesn't work as good as it did last year) you can make those changes.