Doohicksie

A half page of Peca and two and a half pages of off topic Sabres asst coaching complaints. Nice, Sabrespace. Nice.

The trade rumor moving Eich to Calgary, reported by Weekes, likely fed to him by his buddy Kevyn, which prodded the VGK to pull the trigger before Eich got away.

If it's Sabres/Amerks branded, it might prove popular.

Rivet was always an anti-vaxxer. I know there are some on this forum that don't mind that, but I do. And having Roenick on regularly was another I stopped listening.

You mean asst coaches

Sam was my favorite Sabre of that era, I have is jersey. But Jack... when we had him I thought.... he's an ass but he's *our* ass! Now he's just an ass.

Moscow Mule sounds like an apt description for Novikov. (Sounds like a style similar to Muel.)

He's a tool. And not in a good way. I never felt any empathy for him the way I feel for Tage, Mitts, Cozens, Tuch, Skinner, Okie,... I know charisma doesn't win championships but I just never liked Eich.

As long as he and Josh are on the same page by the first game of regular season I don't give a damn.

Agree on Power, but Power may prefer a bridge deal to get a better deal in a few years. I think 3 years is the minimum I want to see with Mitts, with probalby 5 as the max. If they can get him at a good AAV he will be much more valuable to the team in three years if he still has two left on his contract, and I mean that whether they want to keep him or trade him at that point. (I would hope the current Amerks stars are contributing at a level similar to Mitts in probably 2-3 years.)

This is a key point and why I wouldn't hesitate with a healthy contract for Mitts. Perhaps based on his stats he doesn't quite command $5.5 million (or whatever). But in terms of being able to step up when called upon? Priceless. The team needs players like that and I would say the two players that stepped up into the breech big time the last couple years have been Tage and Mitts, ironically each filling in when the other was injured.

But really, isn't that exactly what the Buffalo Bills did in Orchard Park? NY Giants & Jets in the Meadowlands? The Cowboys in Arlington? Is there something fundamentally different about the NFL compared to the NHL that favors suburban stadiums? I thought for a moment of number of games played (every NFL game is "an event") but the Texas Rangers baseball team has a stadium in Arlington next to the Cowboys stadium, and they play twice as many games as an NHL team.

Bear in mind: I didn't suggest relegation. I'm thinking of something to alleviate the status quo of underperforming teams (taking years to rebuild and living with previous bad contracts) that would be similar to, but not quite the same, as hitting a reset button and giving the team an opportunity to build similar to the way expansion teams are built. So every year there would be some sort of veteran "auction" where vets from the reconstitution team are dispersed to the rest of teams, and a "reconstitution draft" that would be similar to an expansion draft, where the reconstituting team gets to pick players from the other teams, and those teams have an opportunity to protect key players the way they do for the expansion draft. I think it would have to have a penalty involved, perhaps financial. Not a full franchise fee, but maybe an owner that wants to reconstitute needs to pay a reconstitution fee of, say, $100 million, plus pay the salary differences between their existing contracts and what they sign for with other teams in the "dispersal auction," (which assumes that the reconstituting team has several toxic contracts). Unlike a buyout, though, delta contract payouts would not count against the reconstituted team's cap. I agree that there would be resistance probably from both the teams and the NHLPA. It's really just a thought experiment. I think the current expansion formula is good for the expansion teams; they are relevant and don't have to play several years knowing they're going to be losers. I'm just trying to think of a way to move the perennial bottom feeders up to relevancy too.

You know, I wonder if, rather than tanking, the last place team (or possibly lottery winner to try to prevent a race to the bottom; or maybe if there is a sustained period of futility over several seasons) could be given the option of a team "reset" that would essentially be a liquidation and reconstitution of the team. Possibly have a "fire sale" of player contracts, with adjustment to AAV to account for underperforming players and possibly the league makes up the rest or something. The team gets to franchise tag a small number of their players and keep them (2? 3?) and the rest are dispersed throughout the league. Then they get to build a team back up similar to the expansion rules. In Europe for some leagues there's relegation. I see this as something the NHL would do in place of that. Yes, I know it's not very feasible or likely. Just kind of thinking out loud.

It's a money maker. You have a bunch of groceries. You need a bag. They sell you a reusable one for $1? $2? $5? ...depending on whether it's just a heavier version of a standard plastic bag or a fabric tote bag.

I bet one of those is about me, innit?

Storytime????

If Kevyn can get Casey on a team friendly deal now, go for it. Even if he's not sure he wants to keep him. If he's on a good contract, he'll make a good trading chip. My gut feel is that he will play whatever role he is given, and has the talent to play up and down the lineup, which will make him very valuable to Kevyn's system. Why move him? In two or three years if Savoie or Kulich is crowding him out, then yeah, move him. But even then I don't think they will be bringing what Casey brings.

In the end, we're not that far apart. I'm not saying pay Casey $10 million for 8 years. I'd like to see him get a 4-5 year extension. How much? I don't know. Whatever Kevyn can talk his agent into. $5.5 million has been tossed around; I think that is the max he might get. You could pay him $5 million per year and it would be 2X his previous contract. I wouldn't mind a raise like that.

One measure of consistency is deviation. The standard deviation Points per Game of Tage's 3 pre-contract seasons was 3.5 times that of Mitts. The management gave Tage the big contract based on 1 single big year, with basically only that year with any production at all, really. I'm saying ignore your hangup on Casey's "last 50 games". Count the whole season. Count his last 3 seasons. He's been more consistent than Tage.

That's under Ralph Krueger the first year, dealing with injuries the second year, and finally playing a full season in a decent system with a good coach the third year. Even with the ***** circumstances of the first two years, he's managed to average 50 points per 82 game season over the 3-season run. You're saying the this came out of the blue. I'm saying even under terrible circumstances he produced at a reasonable rate. It's NOT just a 50 stretch which is your contention. He's produced at a more consistent pace over the last three seasons than Tage did in the three seasons leading up to his big extension.

Last three seasons combined: 22 + 19 + 59 = 100 points 41 + 40 + 82 = 163 games 100 points / 163 games = 0.613 PPG 0.613 points/game x 82 games/season = 50.31 points/82 game season Over the last three seasons he's been playing at a 50 points/82 game season pace overall.

Dave Portnoy is a comedy act. I swear he's purposely doing self-parody.

Don't I know it.