Marvin

Awesome! Thanks, PA.

The NHLPA is considering a day or two off as well.

I never have. My stoner friends told me that I didn't need to -- I normally could think in ways they associated with altered states of mind. I still haven't figured out if that was flattery, befuddlement, or something else...

Greg Klyma is a folk musician who grew up in Buffalo and now lives in Boston. His YouTube video last night has a tribute to Rick Jenneret at 5:38. He has the same feelings towards RJ that I had when I lived out of town.

Why not target Tierney or someone similar as well? I could stand Eichel-Danault-Tierney as my top 9 spine. You could plan on Cozens being in Rochester; if he forces himself on the roster, then so much the better.

Roger. Wilco. Out.

Weave a safety net for Weave.

I was pondering that last night. It seemed to me that the easiest thing would be to rotate divisions. for inter-divisional play. The teams play 8 games in 16 days, have a few days of travel, and then repeat. You could also have multiple bubbles and get all the inter-conference games out of the way early to cut down on travel.

You mean the 1998-9 Sabres with more talent? Yup.

I hope your are right. I just can't see it with the perception of us being on thin ice with Eichel.

IMHO, any trade to get a current, real, #2C with some term will require #8 and one of Olofsson, Reinhart, or Cozens just to keep them from hanging up the phone. We have such an obvious sense of urgency not to piss off Eichel any more that other GMs would be derelict in their duties not to ask for three high-end assets to start things off.

I expect #8 and either Reinhart or Olofsson are a bare minimum opening offer. No one except Buffalo gives up #2C's for a smattering of picks, depth, and garbage. One other thing: if you are a cap-strapped team, are you selling your #2 Centres or #2 Wingers? I expect the Sabres to be able to pick up some decent wingers on the cheap: Move and RD and I could have about $18M to deal with (I personally would move Risto and then rebalance the toughness and smarts with everything else.)

We can talk about Paul Reinhart...?

This is where I am, so let's do a thought experiment. For argument's sake, let us assume the price was really steep and we overpaid: Monahan for #8, Reinhart, and Olofsson. I will fill the resultant holes internally and not use Larsson, Girgensons, or Vesey (our top-performing bottom-6 players) to see what our baseline is. I will round all salaries upward to millions and a decimal place to get an over-estimate of the projected salaries. These preconditions lead to the following beginning roster: Skinner (9.0) - Eichel (10.0) - Ruotsalainen (1.0) Johansson (4.5) - Monahan (6.5) - Kahun (1.0) Mittlestadt (1.0) - Cozens (1.0) - Thompson (1.0) Asplund (1.0) - Lazar (1.0) - Okposo (6.0) 12 F -> 43.0 Dahlin (1.0) - Jokiharu (1.0) McCabe (2.9) - Miller (3.9) Montour (3.4) - Ristolainen (5.4) 6 D -> 17.6 Ullmark (projecting 5.0) Hutton (2.8) 2 G -> 7.8 Total: 68.4 + adjustments Here's what I see: We have over $10M in cap room before we even get off the ground. At least 1 of Montour, Ristolainen, and Miller is gone, so there should be money to upgrade somewhere aside from the cap space. The top line should score a bunch. The 2nd line isn't horrible. The 3rd line should get favourable match-ups. I am not reliant on the 4th line, so we are not going to have long stretches of multiple consecutive games of them being the 2nd best line we have. IMHO, that heavy price is worth it. We still would have enough room to do one or more of: Add a good goaltender Get better wingers (I think teams are more likely to dump wingers for the next couple of years, so I think the resulting holes are easier to fill.) Rebalance the type of defencemen we have Improve the bottom of the roster (either adding on top or at the bottom) As painful as my proposal is, I think it is worth doing. I doubt anyone else will cough up that much; the only question is who offers and immediate replacement in a hockey trade of centres.

They should have removed him long before for abject incompetence.

Thanks. It makes sense - it looks like a dragon from a Chinese New Year.

It depends on the kind of retooling they want to do. With the perceived failures of their current core, they might want to swap out big pieces for different big pieces.

Is #8 acceptable in a package for Monahan? Any other potential C's from rebuilds whom you would be willing to move #8 for?

Toronto and New York nixed our entry in 1967. The first two years were fun only because they were new. They were better than the tank teams, albeit barely. But they played hard, Perreault was just so much fun to watch, and we had a lot of fun with a lot of hope. Tim Horton died in year 1974. The league repudiated the rules to accommodate the Flyers and then many other teams to level effects of talent even though the Habs overwhelmed it. IMHO, you can't really appreciate the good times without some bad times, even if they were brief. What happens if they miss the playoffs for a few consecutive years? Does attendance drop through the ice? That happened to the Islanders, Florida, St. Louis, etc. -- never had early lean years off the bat, so their attendance fell harder with bad times.

IMHO, the intensity was high, but the play was sloppy for most games until late this round.

Yup. The same hockey people who thought that the Sabres' last two GMs were the cream of the crop.

One thing that still baffles me is how the **** Botterill came to the conclusion that ROR was part of the problem. Remember that he was trying to trade ROR before the TDL.

That's why I'm Marvin, the Paranoid Android.

If memory serves, the Sabres have the NHL record for worst goal differential in a series they won. In 1975, they were outscored 29-21 by Montreal while winning the series in 6 games: 6-5 (OT), 4-2, 0-7, 2-8, 5-4 (OT), 4-3. Games 3 and 4 were as lopsided as the score. The Sabres had not lost to the Habs all year and did not realise that the Canadiens might not fold up and die.