mjd1001

I do and I hate it. A lot of people say "let them play"....and my favorite "don't let the officials decide the game" by calling a penalty late in a playoff game. Don't let them decide it? The argument works the other way around also...but NOT calling a penalty on something that might deserve it..the officials ARE helping to decide the game in the other direction by allowing a player to do something illegal to 'change the play' and get away with it. Not calling a 'close' penalty in OT or a close game vs calling that penalty and causing a powerplay....either one is the officials helping to decide the game just as much.

I'm not sure just how much the Sabres need Skinner. Are they are better team with him next year than without him? Yes. But this team isn't likely contending for a cup next year. 2-3 years down the road..or more...where/how does he fit in? I love watching him play and I love goals, but you don't need a 40 goal scorer to be a great team. Its nice to have one..but you better not overpay for it. I really want a top goal scorer on this team...but he has to fit in in 'other ways' if you are going to pay that much. I hope they sign him but not for 8 years at $65 million or more. I'll honestly pass on him if that is the price.

There are always exceptions, but for the most part with forward drafted high that start in the NHL early in their career....it seems that sometime between the age of 21 - 24 is when you really get to know what their true NHL production is/will be.

In the big picture, taking into account the stability of the team, viability long term, impact on the city of Buffalo.....I would say no. However, if the question were worded differently, relating to how good of 'owners' they are for the success of the team...they yes. Maybe they are getting better, but it seems pretty apparent they weren't ready at all (even close) to run a competitive sports team. Questionable hires in key positions (coaches, GMs, upper managment), a lot of turnover, more than doubling the longest playoff drought in team history...etc. It kinda reminds me of when Dan Snyder bought the Redskins.....different personalities of course...but this level of success is what you can get when someone buys a team primarily because they are/were huge fans of the team and doesn't have the ability to take the 'step back' and let it be run by others in the business for the first few years UNTIL you are exposed to the inner workings of it.

I agree with a lot of this on Bogo. In an ideal world, I'd want the d-corp to be structured where you have one good skating, good moving, good passing offensive D-man paired with a stay-at-home type D-man. I like Bogo as the stay-at-home type (I think he does a decent job at that). It is a bonus he has the ABILITY (but not the mindset) to be the offensive guy too. When healthy, I really like his as the #2 pairing stay-at-home guy. Get him about 20 minutes of ice time per game...not to mention he is probably the best/most reliable penalty killing D-man on the roster right now.

I feel the same way. When the games/team is this bad, the ticket could be free and I wouldn't go..because of the extra cost...driving, parking, a drink, a snack...etc. Maybe, MAYBE if I lived 1/2 mile or less from the Arena and could walk there, but that would be the only way I'd go.

This whole 'watching sports thing'....its supposed to be fun, right? At some point it has to be fun for more than 2 weeks.....over a 8 year period?

In the history of the franchise...ONE other time they went on a 3 year playoff drought. Other than that..never more than 2 years before Pegula bought the team. But now they are on 8 years. Sure, in the past a higher percentage of teams made the playoffs than now...but if you look at their record, their point percentage...there is no doubt the worst 8 year stretch of the Franchise started with Pegula's first full season as owner.

Almost everything we watch on TV is streaming now...except for the Sabres. 2 or 3 weeks ago I had enough and dropped the cable package. I'll wait until well into next season (maybe after Jan 1, 2020) to decide on whether or not to get cable back for the Sabres. I'm reading the forum and watching the highlights (low-lights) online, but I'm done watching and have been for a couple weeks.

I don't know if Risto is good or not...I"m not that skilled in evaluating talent. What I DO know is he is on the ice for a TON of goals...and a lot of times I do see him looking the other way when he is near the eventual goal scorer. Even if he is better than I think, I'm frustrated with him and want him gone. With that said...I'd like to see the D-unit kept pretty simple. Pairings should be 1 young, fast skating, puck moving D-man paired with one stay-at-home type veteran guy. I'd be happy next year with Bogo and McCabe (if re-signed) being 2 of those 3 in the 'stay at home' role.

Even if they did 'lose out', it would help their position (likely) but probably not that much. I'm pretty sure the Rangers are going to finish ahead of the Sabres anyway (they are tied in points and games now) Vancouver and Anaheim would likely pass the Sabres if they 'lost out', but I don't think they drop any more than those 2 spots. NJ, LA, and/or Detroit would have to get 10-12 points in their last 10-12 games to catch a Sabres team at 69 points..and while possible, none of those teams are playing even close to that level now.

This season (and team) have truly become a joke. For the first time ever, I don't come to these forums after games for any in-depth hockey talk. It's more like I have become an old person who can't stop reading the obituary page in the paper each day. I have never had that feeling with any team I follow...ever with the Bills or Sabres until now.

By quite a bit. Sure, it was easier to make the playoffs in the 70's and 80's...but I found this and posted it in another thread: -The Sabres are now going on 8 full seasons without the playoffs. -Before this streak, they only 1 time in their history had more than a 2 year playoff drought..and that one time was a 3 year drought. -Before this streak, they only missed the playoffs a total of 11 times in 40 seasons. This will be 8 times in 8 seasons. -And for those who say it was easier to make the playoffs in the past..how about this....During this streak, 3 times in 8 years they finished the season with less than 40% of available points. They only did that 1 time in the entire history of the team before that (their 2nd season they existed.)

I follow the teams by watching the Bills on TV (most games), don't attend anymore. Sabres, I used to watch most games on TV, but we just got rid of cable so not anymore. I follow the team by watching the condensed games online and following these forums and news on Twitter and talk radio. That is it. I used to be a Bills Season ticket holder and went to 10-15 Sabres games per year (over a decade ago). No more. Its not just the team losing. Its the lack of scoring (I don't appreciate a 'good defensive battle' like others, I just want scoring.) Its also sports in general...there really is very little I see that I haven't seen before. If the Bills and Sabres were better and more exciting I wouldn't' be fading as fast, but I'm just not as into sports now as I used to be.

Or ownership? The Sabres only made the playoffs the year he bought them (in the middle of the season.) As owners of the team for complete seasons, this will be 8 seasons. 0 playoffs. In the 8 previous seasons that were started with him not the owner, they made the playoffs 4 times. In the 8 previous seasons before THAT, they made the playoffs 6 out of 8 years. Before Pegula bought the team, their longest streak of no playoffs was 3 seasons. We are going to be 8 now and counting.

I'm not sure why you are 'sighing' and making a point of 'this line of thinking'. All I said is I didn't want them to 'overpower' her character just because she is a female character. Disney has been criticized for doing this before (Rey in the new Star Wars), the actress who stars in this movie made a point of saying something like less men should be reviewing the movie and more women should (I'm paraphrasing, something like that), and they did decide to make the 'official' release of this movie on 'International Womens Day'. I didn't dig up those facts, in casual browsing around the internet I read those things over and over. Don't project something saying "this line of thinking" in response to my post when all I said is I hope they don't "overpower" her character because of the above topics. There are a lot of males out there on forums and social media saying they won't see this movie and putting up negative reviews (giving it one star ratings to push down the overall raking) on read sites...and they are doing that simply because it is a superhero movie staring a female lead. That is not what I am doing or saying at all.

We are going to see it today. I'm going to keep an open mind, and there is hardly EVER a movie that I dislike (Nothing but trouble, an early 1990's movie, is really the only movie I actually hated). So I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy it. I am a bit worried about how they are going to portray her character though. I do not think they have to stick to the comic book version of the character all the time, but I am a little concerned about the 'most powerful character in the Marvel cinematic universe' aspect of it. Am I just against a female character being powerful? No. But, from what I have read/heard, Captain marvel is typically not as powerful as the hulk...a lot less powerful overall than most versions of Thor...and not even close to someone like Odin or Thanos with the gauntlet. If the story is good I'll be happy with the character and looking forward to seeing her character in future movies...I just don't want it to look like they intentionally 'overpowered' her character because it is the politically correct thing to do with female characters right now.

So here is the question(s)...if Skinner Demands 8 years at 70 million (8.75 per year) or 7 years at 63 million (9 million per year), do you walk away and let him sign with another team with nothing in return?

I agree. Plus-Minus isn't a great stat, but it also shouldn't be totally discounted. And as for the argument he isn't personally responsible for the goals he is on the ice for? I have an issue with that. I only have started watching Risto closely for the last month or so, but for alot (most) of the goals he is on the ice for (and there are a LOT of them) he is out of position or looking the other way when the shot is being taken. One might say his 'minus' number is due to luck or due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time...but when I watch with my own eyes...its more than that. He has the skill of a much better player, but it doesn't translate to a total package as much as we want.

1. Eichel is a star and the Sabres best player now, but I want to see him finish in the top 10 in the league in scoring consistently (and probably be threat for top-5) before I label him a bona-fid Superstar. He does seem to still be improving though. 2. Reinhart. As much as he is productive on that first line, I want to see him for a LONG STRETCH on a 2nd line...see if he can generate offense without Eichel. That is likely what this team needs long term. 3 and 4. Dahlin and Moutonr. No problems there. Lets see if they can get a longer term deal down with Montour. 5. I like McCabe, but don't love him. I'd rather have him re-signed, but I don't think he's a make-or-break type player at all for this team. 6. E-Rod. See above. Like McCabe, I like him, but don't love him. Want to see him around long term but can he put up 15 goals per season consistently? 7. Prospects. I don't know much about them, but I don't see any of those guys as being better than what many other teams have in their system. I'm not overly impressed by what id down on the farm. 8. If its a top 5 pick, great. Top 10? Better than in the 20's but I don't expect much from a guy picked in the 6-12 range...at least not right away. 9. No cap trouble, but the situation could be better. STOP signing guys to long term contracts that take them to their early to mid 30's. Skinner? I love his season and want him here for sure..but this team has shown they can lose almost as well with him as they can without him. He can be a 'game changer', but he isn't a 'team changer'. I don't think you'd even have Skinner on this team if ROR was still around...and I enjoy watching Skinner better. 10. Trades are fun, but who do you want to move that other teams want? I was always a Risto supporter, but I'm falling off his bandwagon quickly. Will he be moved though, and who can you get for him?

Ok, every so often there is a thread on some forum asking people to confess what they were wrong about. The #1 biggest thing for me is the Bruins. For the last 3-4 years, I have thought they would be worse each year after year..and likely one of those teams what would have a hard time even staying in the playoff race. In 2015-2016 they missed the playoffs...their top 4 or 5 scorers were all in their late 20's or approaching 30 (not 'over the hill', but certainly no longer getting better offensively)...and Chara was the best player on that team in recent years and he just turned 38.

I agree. I also think Housley should get more time, even if this collapse continues the rest of the year, although I would not be terribly upset if they did make a coaching change. I am really becoming less and less interested in this team though. For the last few months, they have been brutal to watch. The only reason we have Cable TV is to get the Sabres games on MSG...just about everything else we watch would be over the air or streaming. I really think at the end of this season we are going to drop cable again. If this team can catch my interest enough in the future then maybe I'll get it back, but they are going to have to be a very good team in a very good spot in the standings pretty late in the year for that to happen.

I wouldn't be upset if Pominville was traded for a late round pick, but I wouldn't go out of my way to do that unless he really wanted to move someplace for another shot in the playoffs. Late round picks are bordering on useless...and Pominville is still somewhat productive (4th on the team in goals..only 1 behind Reinhart with less games played), plus hes a good guy and popular. That doesn't mean much, but to me it may mean more than a late round pick.

I'm not too worried about the character or the toughness of this team. Tampa doesn't play with a ton of toughness and they are doing pretty well this season (as goes for a lot of the top teams). Give me scoring. I'm not saying you want a Sabres team as soft as the one they had when Miller was run by Lucic...you DO want to have some guys to finish checks and clear out the front of the net....but I think other teams find the Sabres "harder to play against" if they had a couple more blazing fast forward who can fill the net with the puck rather than a couple more guys who are going to finish every check.

I don't like most of the 'rental players' added. To bring a brand new guy onto the team who is a slight to moderate improvement may not help much. On the other hand, if you have a GAPING hole or flaw on your team, then I'm all for it. A contending team with one of the leagues worst powerplays? Get a guy who is a power-play specialist. Have one of the worst penalty kills? Get a guy who excels at that. For those situations, it is easy to get a veteran up to speed. Other than that, I agree most 'rentals' don't work out. On the other hand, maybe the rentals make the team better...but that team wasn't going to get that far in the playoffs with or without them? If I'm the Sabres, no way I get a 'rental', especially if you are going to give up anyting more than a late round pick. On the Sabres, a rental probably doesn't get them into the playoff to begin with..and even if they did....they aren't likely to get too far with the #8 seed playing Tampa in a 7 game series.