Taro T

Exactly.

Eastern Conference: (1) Buffalo vs (8) NY Islanders: 4-1 (2) New Jersey vs (7) Tampa Bay: 4-3 (3) Atlanta vs (6) NY Rangers: 2-4 (4) Ottawa vs (5) Pittsburgh: 3-4 Western Conference: (1) Detroit vs (8) Calgary: 4-3 (2) Anaheim vs (7) Minnesota: 4-2 (3) Vancouver vs (6) Dallas: 3-4 (4) Nashville vs (5) San Jose: 2-4 Eastern Conference: (1) Buffalo vs (6) NY Rangers: 4-2 (2) New Jersey vs (5) Pittsburgh: 4-3 Western Conference: (1) Detroit vs (6) Dallas: 3-4 (2) Anaheim vs (5) San Jose: 4-2 Eastern Conference: (1) Buffalo vs (2) New Jersey: 4-2 Western Conference: (2) Anaheim vs (6) Dallas: 4-3 Finals: (1) Buffalo vs (2) Anaheim: 4-2

With that being the case, I'd have concerns that your system would allow many criminals to go free (unprosecuted) because of reluctance of prosecutors to prosecute any non "open and shut" case. Heck, even some of those, if the defendant has enough resources like OJ did, probably won't get prosecuted because there is too much risk to the municipality to try the suspect. I definitely don't want prosecutors trying to railroad people like in this case, but I would like to believe cases like this one are the exception and not the rule. I am also hopeful that the DA is going to find out that there are worse things in this world than not getting reelected. I think there already are wrongful prosecution statutes on the books in most municipalities. (I could be mistaken about that though.) I'd be interested in seeing how this all finally ends up before wanting to add new laws that bring some significant unintended consequences.

I'd have no problem with the players' legal fees after the 1st week or 2, when it appears the DA had enough evidence to know he'd never get a conviction, being paid for. I have a feeling that their legal fees and much more will end up getting paid for after their wrongful prosecution and other suits work through the system. Question. Would you allow OJ to have his legal fees paid for as his was a not guilty verdict?

I don't believe the final result of this "situation" will be Imus being fired, but who knows (and more importantly, who cares). The reason these two clowns keep getting put in front of the cameras is it's easy to do, I'm sure all the media outlets have their cell phone #'s and vica versa, and the media knows these 2 (especially Al) will say something outrageous and boost their ratings. Has ANY of this whole affair not been something used to boost ratings of an aging radio shock jock and the self-importance of 2 self appointed "civl rights leaders"? I don't think it's so much a case of the community choosing to be represented by him, I think it's simply a case of those that he doesn't represent realizing that it's not worth the effort to point out that he doesn't represent them. Heck, even the few that might think he represents them don't seem to solicit his involvement. The guy just shows up without anyone asking him to be there and is a media whore. If someone did step up and say Sharpton doesn't represent them, they will likely either give Sharpton more of the publicity he desperately craves or get ignored by the "main stream media" because they don't want their easy ratings boost taken away. Either way, it seems that it would be an awful lot of effort to make someone that isn't actually important be identified as not being important, and probably has about as much a chance of succeeding as trying to get Paris Hilton to go away.

Can't say I disagree with anything you posted. I'm hoping that the refs actually call penalties in the playoffs, Frasier being gone and McCreary and Devorski still reffing means it's possible. Marouelli and Koharski still reffing is not a good sign. If the refs DO call the game with the "new" interpretations, the Sabres will be extremely hard to beat if they stay healthy; it won't hurt your boys any either. Last year, it seemed the league would bump the refs that let the most stuff go in each round from the rest of the tourney. Obviously, I am hoping that is what they do again this year. With a couple of fortuitous upsets in the early rounds, the Sabres could have very good matchups through the 1st 2-3 rounds. The West will be a dogfight and whoever comes out of the East should be healthier.

Should it happen they will have earned it. No doubt about it. The only problem with that scenario is it almost has to assume Joe Thornton doesn't play like the playoff Joe Thornton; which until it actually happens makes me expect to see SJ win somewhere between 2-6 games this Spring.

I could see calling him liberal if you were comparing him to a fascist, but ... Oh, nevermind.

That is interesting and not how things worked during last year's post-season nor this year's regular season. Games 1 & 4 of the Otter series were on OLN and not shown on MSG. Assuming Pergament is correct, I wonder if the RJ and JL broadcast will only be available in WNY. It doesn't make any sense for Versus to show 5 Sabres games if they know the bulk of their audience will be watching the games on another network. EDIT: Thanks to Sullim for the correction. OLN and MSG did both show Games 1 & 4 of the Filly series last year. Those in WNY got the RJ/JL feed, those elsewhere got OLN. But, last year, MSG did not broadcast 2nd round games that OLN covered. I will assume the Pergament article is correct and MSG will show Versus games in the 2nd round this year for those of us in WNY and not cut off our RJ fix after the 1st round.

All that comment does is prove you didn't watch those games either. But I am impressed with your ability to ignore a direct question.

Duuude, you still haven't explained how you expect your beloved swamp beasts to beat the Sabres when Furlatt ISN'T reffing. Heck, even Marouelli couldn't get you guys a W. It isn't an anti-Buffalo bias I'm worried about, it's an anti-head up one's butt bias that you should be worried about. Which isn't terribly surprising that you don't know the difference between. AND, you STILL haven't answered the question. Your boys got spanked twice. You don't seem to have an answer for how that happened, nor more importantly what Lou "Rules Committee" Lamiorello is going to do about it.

Nice deflection. Too bad the puck is on Vanek's stick. Claire, answer the question. It's a simple question. ...

Wow, so much for hearing Rick and Jim. IF the series goes 6 or 7 games, FIVE Vs. games.

Again, Mr Bandwagon, which of those 2 defeats should Sabre fans worry about? The one where the Sabres were outplaying them until the 3rd and your team was awarded a goal by the refs and then immediately followed it up with a fluke goal, or the one where they were running out of gas with the AHL team up on the roster? Might you want to worry about either of the 2 where the Sabres dominated play, or the one the Sabres were dominating prior to the fluke goal? Be afraid. Be very afraid.

The Phlyers probably beat them to it.

How does where you live effect whether you're a bandwagonner or not? I can't honestly say that either of the 2 Devils wins makes me worry. They got a gimme goal from the refs and a fluke goal a few seconds later in one game and caught the Sabres toward the end of their injury streak in the other. The Sabres dominating play in the other 2 games and the gimme goal game up to that point should have you worried. It probably doesn't because IF you were watching any of the games, I'd be surprised if as soon as the Devs fell behind you didn't turn the TV off and turn on some really great music. Throw in the fact that the lousy refs should be gone by the time the Sabres play the Devs (if NJ gets that far), I'm not overly concerned about playing in the swamplands.

Heck of a way for BC to lose. (Had that game PiP during the Habs/Leafs game.)

They've gotta know they will sell a ton more merchandise if they offer at least the B logo or (even better) the "3rd" crest besides the abominable snot smear. The good stuff would go quick.

Welcome aboard. There's plenty of room for all on the bandwagon.

If the Habs had Huet I would be very nervous playing them (they worry me the most of any of the Eastern Conference teams). The Sabres have more talent, but Moe-ray-all has speed and that great powerplay. Having played so many close games with the Sabres and coming out with 4 wins, they will have confidence against the Sabres. Minus Huet, the Sabres should take them, but the games will be closer than we'd like. I'm not terribly worried about losing to TO (I like the idea of playing against Raycraft 5 or 6 times), but am not looking forward to losing a couple of skaters due to injury. I know some people have expressed concerns with people selling off tickets to TML fans, but with almost no STH's getting extras and no tix on sale to the general public, I don't expect more than a couple 1,000 Loaf fans in the Mmarena (2-4,000 is all they had in the building in '99; and it was a LOT easier to get tix that year even in the semifinals). The team I'd worry about the least is the Isles. Neither DiPietro (if healthy) nor Dubielewicz strike me as money goalies. Yashin perpetually disappears in the playoffs and the defense is fairly slow. Blake scares me, but not much else on that team. The Sabres have pretty much dominated play when they've played the Isles this year, I like the matchups. The only game the Isles were in at all was the 3rd game, and that was primarily because Miller was still in his "Post-All-Star Game Depression". Plus, if the Sabres were to finally get their names etched on Lord Stanley's Chalice it would be pretty cool to have beaten the Isles along the way as the Isles killed Sabre playoff runs a generation ago. Whether the Isles would pick up their play for Nolan is debatable, but for the most part they didn't against the Sabres this year; I don't know why that would change simply because the calendar had. So, as of today, I'd not like to see Montreal, TO, then the Isles in that order.

10th time this year that they came back from a 2 goal deficit. (For those who weren't able to watch the MSG broadcast.)

Apus, not necessarily disagreeing with you, just answering your question. What Carolina lost from last year to this year: Desire (they weren't hungry this year), Recchi, Ward (Aaron), Weight, Cullen, Gerber, the ability to sneak up on other teams, Stillman for a large part of the season, Kaberle for a large part of the season, a total of over 300 man games to injury and many of those were on D (gee, what playoff team from last year does THAT remind me of ) (they did lose a lot in the regular season last year as well, but they had cap room to make up for it and in the entire playoffs lost exactly 1 player to injury and he was replaced by Cole), and a great big horseshoe that was lodged in Gerber's or Ward's pants. The Sabres lose a TON of leadership if they lose both Drury and Briere. You will get absolutely no argument about that. They absolutely get reduced to darkhorse candidate to win the SC next year if they lose those 2. This team is young and maturing and most of the players will be better next year than this year simply due to maturation and experience. They are approaching their primes. This team won a lot of games without Briere last year, I think they'd still win enough to make the playoffs without him and Chris. They've dealt with much injury adversity during the past 2 seasons, so they likely wouldn't take as much of a downturn because of injuries as the Canes did. And having won once will lower their intensity slightly, but I don't think they play terribly far over their heads now, so I don't think that would have as big an effect on them either. I don't see them missing the playoffs, but I wouldn't say they are a lock (I'd say 95% lock). I will also agree with you that the Sabres primary strenghts are in net and at forward. But to say the defense is a weakness is a bit of an exaggeration, IMHO. I think the Sabres D is one of the top 5 in the league (top 10 minimum). They are fast, move the puck well, have size (although most of them don't use it), kill penalties well (when Hank is in the lineup), and still block a fair amount of shots even without McKee. Unless they can't sign Teppo, I don't see any changes on D next year. There will definitely be changes on forward (it's a question of who); I guess we agree on that as well.

And if they KNOW someone will overpay for them, it becomes in their best interest to hold off on signing unless the Sabres overpay for them now. 1 year out on their deal, they have an entire season of uncertainty that could factor into their willingness to sign an extension. Again, I am very disappointed that the Sabres didn't get something worked out this past off-season. At this point in time, the only uncertainty they have left is the possibility of getting injured. And the odds of getting injured badly enough to affect their next contract at this point are far less than they were in August (in Chris' case) and less than they were in January (in Danny's case). The security of knowing they'll be staying in Buffalo is something that they can experience today, June 25, July 1, or really anytime prior to signing a deal with someone else; just sign with the Sabres and they have their security. I'm not saying they wouldn't sign now (I actually believe a deal could be worked out for 1 or possibly both at this time AND could also be worked out after the playoffs), but am curious, how much of a premium ($'s) do you think that piece of mind is worth to the players today. You've stated that either would only take an offer of $8.8MM/year to stay (I'm assuming that you're assuming they'd want 4 year deals in that scenario, but don't know that for certain) if the offer was received on June 22. What do you think the Sabres need to offer today to get them to sign? I'm not actually certain why we're arguing. We both would like to see both guys signed.

If that is the case, it appears you are saying that each will definitely receive an offer the Sabres can't match or can't come close enough to for the "hometown discount". If that isn't what you mean, please clarify. If that is what you mean, then why would either one sign at this time as they must know, or at least believe, someone else will beat the Sabres offer (should one, hypothetically, get put on the table today)? IF they are automatically gone on 7/1, then they should be as good as gone today, unfortunately. And I don't believe they are good as gone today (definitely not Drury, maybe not Danny).

I don't follow. If you didn't want to get into that, why did you post the original link?