Marvin

To quote the old "Bugs Bunny - Road Runner Hour": Daffy Duck: Last week, you said I could host next week. Bugs Bunny: Right. But this isn't 'next week'. Daffy Duck: Your dog gone tooth it isn't. This is 'this week' and 'next week' is uh, is, uh, hmm. (Daffy heads off the stage.) This week was 'next week' last week, so that makes 'this week' 'last week' next week...

Where would you get that idea? Honestly, I find that broad generalisation very hurtful. Just because I am not Christian does not mean I am anti-Christian.

Cascading @LGR4GM's original and @PerreaultForever's response. Waitaminnit, waitaminnit, waitaminnit. If you are arguing that the teams is built wrong as a response to Dahlin being neutered by Kruger, are you arguing some variation that Dahlin is part of the improper building? It sure looks that way.

For those with more information, is it possible that both the Sabres and Jack Eichel have a change of heart if his neck is actually healing slowly, but not fast enough for him, and the Sabres get a coach that he's excited about? Or is it already bust? It looks like they both considered this last year, so I imagine it is already beyond repair. Oddly, with no one in the arenas most of the year, last off-season was the prime time to trade Jack Eichel because it would not have affected attendance.

I did a bit of this when I was trying to form an opinion on whom to protect with the defencemen. That's why I would expose Ristolainen: virtually every available defenceman of his calibre will be cheaper and everyone in his price range who could be available is better. There literally is no good reason for Seattle to take him.

I have seen a lot of this over the years, in particular with actors. More infamously, depending on duration and severity, this could be Penn State all over again.

I am also going to check some important people I remember: Joe Crozier, Frank Christie, Jim Pizzutelli, Pat Hannigan, etc. Mods, can we have this pinned? I think it is important that we remember these people from years gone by. Younger fans can learn a bit about them and we older fans can reminisce. Anyone else remember Hannu Virta?

Research mathematician. A paradoxical reaction to Paxil nixed that.

I was asked the same thing when I interviewed for my current job. "You have done literally everything in the tech stack multiple times for multiple years in multiple types of infrastructure. Why aren't you a manager?" "I liked what I was already doing at the time better." Seems obvious to me.

The natural question to ask, then, is why did they do that?

I will start at some point. I am curious as to who is around. We also would need to keep up each season.

Jean Guy Talbot is 88

This one?

I have one from my Dad's village that was used against the Mughals after the martyrdom of Guru Arjun in 1606.

Oh, boy! Geekdom! Actually, the multiverse model of Max Tegmark and Brian Greene is that it is theoretically possible that every possible outcome leads to its own reality. For those who are interested, the levels of multiverse are: 1. Our universe is extended to other copies with different Hubble Volumes. A quick look-up says this comes from the assumption that the universe is uniform and isotropic in its properties. In this case, imagine a large volume with little bubble universes inside of it. 2. Other universes exist with different physical constants (speed of light, Maxwell-Boltzman constant, the universal gravitational constant, etc.). So an alternate reality has light travelling faster and you weigh less with the same mass. 3. The many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. This takes the idea of randomness at the quantum level and says that the different universes above arise from the different variations of what this randomness does. So in all realities, No Goal happens, but in some, Jay McKee never gets the staph infection and the Sabres win the Cup in 2006. 4. What @pi2000 cited is called "the ultimate ensemble." We then can go into the question of whether there are countably infinite or uncountably infinite universes. (IMHO, if we have that every choice leads to a new reality, then the number has to be uncountably infinite by a Cantor diagonalisation argument.)

Just wondering: Considering that teams were asking about Eichel before the season, shouldn't GMKA already have had a feel for what the minimum people would offer for Eichel from a rookie GM they were trying to fleece? And if someone made a genuine offer, then he would have a standard against which to measure offers now, right? The reason I ask is that I don't think that GMKA asking for a half dozen pieces with a lot of high-end prospects came out of nowhere. Someone probably offered a roster player, a couple of decent but long-range prospects, a cap dump, and a couple of picks last off-season. Probably one or two teams offered a top prospect as well. I imagine a team offered two very good, but not top, prospects. He probably stitched all that together, threw out the chaff, turned the quality up to 11, and made that his starting point.

Does someone have a history of the Land of Fa somewhere? I can find little clips on YouTube, but it has a history everyone should know on a Buffalo sports board.

The sky-high asking price might also be a message from GMKA to Eichel: you may want out and I may want you out, but there is no King of the Land of Fa's version of the Queen Elizabeth Way that he will be pressured into a deal by the Eichel camp. I personally figure if he gets 5 or more pieces that at least 1 will be a conditional first based on Eichel's games played and such.

Too specific. You did not hedge with enough claptrap doubletalk.

From 1974-78, the Sabres' biggest weakness was in goal. The other 4 top teams (Montreal, Philadelphia, Boston, New York Islanders) had better goaltending; from 1975-9, they also had better depth because the Sabres' top depth jumped to the WHA. 1978-9 showed that the Sabres needed some changes. So Bowman's evaluation was correct. His cure, though, was worse than the disease. His handling of Rico was unforgivable. His trades of the veterans were a net negative. And, quoting _The Klein and Reif Hockey Compendium_, "he wheedled deft trades for high draft choices -- only to expand them on [Eastern Bloc] players who remain vague rumours and juniors unable to move up from the AHL." And, "he turned an exciting Sabres club at most one player away from being a serious Cup threat and, in seven years, ran them down into a drab, last place submediocrity. So if you wonder why we oldsters are upset with him, now you know.

Even if you mentioned it in the past, it is still worth noting. Every home game was a chance to be dazzled by one of the best players in the game. I encourage everyone to find highlight reels and old games of the 1972-80 Sabres, the 1973-76 Braves, and the 1972-77 Bills. We got to watch that every single game.

I always think about these kinds of decisions from the other point of view. So those who think Eichel will get an super prospect, convince me. IMHO, no GM should offer a top prospect unless he has a cast-iron guarantee that Eichel will 100% recover and return to form AND his owner/franchise is not medically liable for Eichel's life if he is permanently disabled. I think the "6 pieces" thing will include a couple of conditional picks based on how many games Eichel plays over the next few years. Now, for those of you arguing that you can just keep him indefinitely if you are only getting offers I would make, exactly how does that makes the Sabres better? He can't play with that level of pain for long. He's a $10M cap hit which prevents at least 2 maybe 3 players from helping the depth and quality of play. His press conference turned outside players against the Sabres, probably split the locker room, and may be pitting management and ownership against the NHLPA. I do not see the Sabres caving in on the surgery -- especially since that makes them liable if he gets permanently disabled afterward. IMHO, @pi2000 and @Brawndo are correct. If I am the other GM, the most you are getting out of me is my first, a good but not great prospect, my old #2 centre who would now be an overpriced #3 centre, a project (raw, but talented), maybe a cap dump, and maybe a couple of conditional picks. Hey, look -- 7 pieces. I see no reason to believe we will get a better offer. And you need to move him soon.

They would have to wait until Montreal is out before they could interview Richardson. This is rumoured to be the hold up on at least 1 other candidate.

My cardiologist told me that people do not take the warning signs of impending strokes or heart attacks seriously enough. It is easier psychologically to view one or more of indigestion, soreness, heartburn, etc. as an irritant rather than a warning. He recommends learning to tell when your body is telling you about various issues. During illness, exercise, eating, etc., I have learnt when my body is telling me something is really wrong versus just stressed, say, from a Zumba class.

Is anyone else concerned that in the Eichel trade packages, we do not see veteran players in the rumoured wish lists? Or are they presumed to be the "cap dumps" everyone talks about? I personally would like some useful veteran players coming back for our Trade Fodder Trio.