SueNJ97

Don, there is no way that Senator Obama is actually the most 'Liberal' Senator in the US and in any case, the meaning of Liberal doesn't necessarily line up with what you would recognize as socialist. It's used to scare people in this country as believeing the Marxists are coming. However, right now, two Senators who are considered very liberal, Dodd and Feingold, are actually aligned with the Libertarians (who aren't exactly known as a bastion of Socialist thought) to prevent further erosion of 4th Amendment liberties. Obama (as is McCain) is currently slated to vote against Dodd and Feingold but assures us that he will still safeguard our liberties when he has these powers (in other words, it's OK, really, for a Democrat to have an 'Imperial Presidency', just not a Republican, I wonder what Obama will think of his vote if McCain actually wins, but I digress). Essentially, the same people look at the Democratic primaries every 4 years and dub the potential nominee the most liberal. In the traditional Socialist sense, Bernie Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats but is actually elected as an Independent Socialist from Vermont, is actually much farther to the left. I'm not enamored of either candidate...then again, I'm an independent and used to not being actually represented by candidates for office.

He did really enjoy playing for Omsk and, in fact, tried to see if he could stay there after the lockout ended but his NHL contract took precedence over anything else. I believe the way the schedule works and the fact that it is closer means he can get home more often during the season. BTW, Kladno may be home but, he owns a sports bar in Prague and does spend some time there during the summer.

I got into a discussion, well, an argument on a Ranger board where I sometimes post about the fact that this was a BOG decision and, by taking it to court and challenging the charter they were essentially challenging the BOG's and the league's right to make decisions under the charter. I asked if they could just ignore the ones they didn't like (although I did say I understood exactly why they didn't like it the standardized content the league allows is kind of lame and they felt they did a better job of marketing and communicating to their fan base before this decision) then did they feel that other decisions like, I don't know, the goalie trapezoid could just be arbetraily ignored if a team felt like it because, apparently, the Rangers have not only sued but are ignoring the BOG's decision. I expected and then got a comment about the Devils' ignoring and violating the salary cap. I pointed out that they did neither, they asked for and received rulings on what parts of the CBA meant and abided by the decisions of the league, in fact, in one of those decisions, they were told that they could not remove Malakhov from the cap via suspension, no matter what they felt the CBA meant, in the second year of his contract and they had to find another way to do it. They did, via trade - the fact that Ranger fans believe the league caved does not change the fact that NJ never went outside the league to seek another way to resolve it, never said the league didn't have a right to enforce it's own CBA and, in fact, never said they were going to unilaterally ignore the CBA and go beyond it witthout a ruling from the league. They didn't say the league couldn't vote on a CBA or enforce it. They just asked what some of the clauses meant in certain situations. If they were doing something similar to the Rangers in this situation they would have told the NHL to f*ck itself with regard to the cap, not waited for a ruling and dared them to take them to court.

Here's what I want to see - McCabe strap on the pads and play goal. Now, that would be interesting. And, right in line with the theme here.

Well, he was already a rich man. If you think about it, it's not that much of an average annual increase, it's a 'lifetime' committment. Nice, for both sides if he continues to deliver for the whole contract. He already doesn't keep all his money (and I don't just mean the federal taxes he pays). He pledged several million dollars to a new pediactric cancer facility that is under construction in FL and they are putting his name on the place. You can't ever really tell from people's public personae but he seems like a decent enough human being.

The worst uniforms were pretty much correct, although, they were missing the Isles' 'Fishsticks" jersey and some of those really horrendous 3rd jerseys. Like the mustard-colored Boston one with the bear cub on it. I don't appreciate his mouth or his claim to be a fashion icon when he wears velvet, but, umm, well, he was right about the unis.

Is he...what...an Islanders fan? If he's lurking, that ought to bring him out of the woodwork!!! I'm just surprised nobody noticed Mark Crawford got canned this afternoon. Or, did I miss the post?

I can't see it. I know someone suggested that Jagr would like it for the anonymity, but, Jagr wanted to go to NY. He had anonymity in DC. He hated it - it wasn't just that the team was bad. He wanted someplace where he wasn't anonymous if he was going to stay in the NHL. Also, especially now that Nylander is gone and neither Gomez or Drury clicked at center w/him, Jagr hasn't been thrilled playing Renney's system which, whatever the Rangers like to say, is pretty much the same as the NJ system. He's done it because they win. I can't imagine he'd come to NJ for less $$$ than he could get in Russia (and it's still no closer to home), less exposure than he could get in NY and plus, let's face it, the last several times a coach tried acting the way Sutter does with his players around Jagr, that coach got fired. Something just doesn't seem right about this picture....

Hi guys, thanks - I actually celebrated last weekend since the birthday fell on a Monday and work has been insane lately. I sit down at the computer at around 7am and finish around 9pm...so, I haven't been around much. 44 doesn't feel any different than 43. I'm still tired.

The original poster. Not you. He was the one who, in his second post, was claiming that anyone else who did that would be on death row or would have been executed by now. And, however much I think Kennedy should have been prosecuted, it doesn't seem to fit the facts of the case.

You don't get put on death row for vehicular manslaughter. If you did, Craig MacTavish wouldn't be coaching in Edmonton today. As I recall, he served a year for it. Since Ted Kennedy had vehicular manslaughter and either failure to report or obstuction of justice, it would/could/should have been more than that. But you don't wind up on death row for it. Not even if you aren't a Kennedy. So, although I dislike him, please, don't exaggerate. Besides, MA didn't have the death penalty at the time (or, in fact, now), and it happened in MA. No matter how you try to tell the story, he wasn't ending up on death row. If people really were executed for every vehicular manslaughter charge (and if they went by the book and prosecuted every single car crash where someone killed someone else with a car as at least vehicular manslaughter) then Dany Heatley would be on death row and, well, Laura Bush wouldn't be First Lady. So, let's dial it back a little.

Here's something from the Wall Street Journal that just made me want to heave. It's from late last week so you should be able to access it as free content now, before, you would have needed a paying account. Let me know if you still need sign-on info. However, basically they are saying they've aceived the current results by forgetting about growing and concentrating on the 53 million people who currently define themselves as hockey fans. OK, I agree, they haven't moved into new markets. However, as far as I'm concerned, quite a bit of what they have done is a big "f*ck you" to those of us who have been watching for a long time and a continual attempt to get the 'causal', non-hockey fan to watch the game. And they don't. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1211504523...html?mod=sports

I don't like him, for the very reason that has been brought up. However, although he'll probably get better medical care than most of us would ever get, because of who he is, it's very, very rare that anyone with this survives more than 5 years and most are gone w/in a year. I don't appreciate the fawning that has been going on in the media, but, really, I would think HER family might be the only one that would truly have any right to dance on his grave.

Someone is going to give Roszival close to the same $$$ as Campbell and he's not as good. Although, the Rangers are probably going to try and re-sign him, he likes NY, but may not like his relationship with the fans, who were on him about his turnovers and penalties only slightly less than they were on Malik. I think the question will be, does Jagr re-sign w/NY or does he get an astronomical amount to play in Omsk...in which case Roszival probably won't be inclined to take less money to stay in NY. I was interested to see that apparently in the Russian league you can go outside their salary cap rules to sign a player who has been offered an NHL contract, so they can offer Jagr (and others) anything they want.

You know, I am not happy with the choices I have left. Think about this: West: Rooting for the Wings is like rooting for a yacht and also, there's Hasek to consider, and Chelios. The rest of them I don't mind, and Rafalski, of course, it would be nice for him to win, but still. Just can't get into it. I actually don't object to the Stars, overall, the players on the ice, that is, although Ribiero is still an annoying little SOB, but I don't want any team with Brett Hull as the GM to win. Sigh. Even if it would be a really nice thing for Marty Turco after all those horrible playoff disasters. East: Well, the Flyers are the Flyers. I believe the best I can say about them is (a) they aren't the Rangers and (b) their fans absolutely stuck with them as the ship went under last year. However, that doesn't mean I am going to root for the team now. But, now that the Pens have beaten the hated Rangers, I can go back to hoping that the ever annoying Sid Crosby somehow trips over his own skates (with nobody within twelve feet of him, because the player, even if it is on his own team, would be hauled off and executed by Colin Campbell), spears himself in the ass and disappears for the rest of the playoffs. The rest of the team doesn't really bother me, I like Malkin very much, although you don't want an actual picture of the goalie with his helmet off. I think you turn to stone if you view it. Ummm...so...can we have new teams????

It's very possible to have a team that can get a decent number of points in the regular season that never makes it out of the first round. They had a tough year against certain playoff teams (Habs, Rangers, sometimes the Pens although they tended to win more games against the Pens and then get their doors blown off in others). But, they did well against others, like the Flyers (could almost always get well against them) and, the Bruins. However, the team was pretty inconsistent. But I think it's fair to say that from the game against the Habs where they blew the two-goal lead in the third it was hard to tell exactly what team was going to show up on the ice, from game-to game and from period to period and that's the sign of a team that isn't whole yet, either offensively or defensively. And one that isn't going to go far in the playoffs. I'm not surprised by what happened. I'm just surprised so many people expected more. I expected pretty much what happened, though, when he didn't upgrade the offense I said at the time that the team had been getting by on one of Marty's 'years' and people were probably thinking that if Lou had done something, anything for the offense, maybe Marty would have one of those playoff runs. However, the team just isn't there. I want you to think back to the Rangers in 1997, when they beat NJ in the second round and went to the ECF, losing to the Flyers in 5. Management thought the Rangers were one round away from the Finals, and even though they let Messier go, they brought in free agents, re-tooled around Gretzky, sure that that run wasn't a mirage, it was a sign that they were going places, had a real shot at the Cup Finals. Sometimes, deep runs are just a mirage. I believe that's all one would have this year for NJ, if it had happened.

EZT, just a question, were you one of the people complaining about Briere earlier in the season? That he was a waste of $$ and they should never have signed a guy named Danny/Daniele (I saw the posts on Flyerphans, but can't recall if you were among the among the complainers). BTW, I wouldn't have wanted to face the Caps in the first round - the were completely untested, but, extremely enthusiastic with some significant talent. It can be a tough matchup. However, I think by the time you got the Habs Price had run out of gas.

I believe, although I could be wrong, that Philadelphia got 'healthy' (except for poor Gange) in the weeks leading up to the deadline and towards the end of the season. The team that was stumbling was not necessarily the team that wound up in the playoffs. They had one deadline deal that I recall, they did pick up some offense, Vinnie Prospal for D Alexandre Picard and a conditional pick. I admit, I can't judge whether Lou could have sold Tampa on one of our D-men for Prospal, but I do remember that Prospal was discussed on the board and people weren't thrilled, they seemed to believe he was allergic to back-checking. The surprise to me was that Biron has been as good as he has been. Or, is it that Price simply ran out of gas?

I'm not sure Salvador was a 'ninth' defenseman. Unfortunately, he was injured after the trade, but sorry, I though he was better at least a few on our team before the trade. If you are complaining that they kept all the d-men here, well, that's another question, but he wasn't the ninth defenseman. I know, you wanted offense. You didn't get it. But we didn't get a 'ninth' defenseman. We improved a defense that wasn't that great - sorry, really, it wasn't - and from what I saw, in terms of what was traded in terms of offense, what Lou missed out on at the deadline might have been Fedorov, and there is no guarantee that he wakes up and performs in NJ even at the level he performed at in DC. Most teams were either asking the earth or weren't trading, if you see what moved at the deadline. I guess what you are arguing is that we should have held on to Janssen who no longer had a place on the team rather than trade for a rental defenseman who was actually an upgrade before he was injured - because there were no offensive trades available.

I wasn't. I thought, with the right match-up, it was possible that they could win a round but I knew the Rangers weren't a good match-up (despite the rumor that it's actually possible to play well against a team you sucked against during the season, this rarely seems to apply to NJ). Also, we all know, at some point, the offense will simply not function. It was just a question of what round. Or, what game in the first round. And, anyone who thinks it would have been different with a few different players, remember, the offense failed to function in the second round the last few years, before certain people left. Hossa would have cost the earth in assets NJ didn't have although, I have to admit, I was impressed yesterday. I didn't think he had it in him to care in the playoffs the way he actually cared in that game. I still don't know whether he was thinking 'playoff win' or 'UFA contract', but, apparently, he capable of something for self-motivation. I'm just glad that, during the fiasco that was the first round, I was on an Italian vacation paid for by someone else. Ah, Rome, Florence, Modena (Maserati Factory), Milan. I'd go back in a second if I could afford it myself or find someone else to fund it.

Actually, I understand the frustration. I'm not sure firings would do any good. I noticed that one of the complaints was the choice of some Europeans (Russians) who haven't yet panned out, however, when NJ chose them, I seem to remember that most of us were actually somewhat cheered, it was something different and we thought there might be some offensive upside, at last. As for actually favoring the European leagues, although there have been some picks there recently, if NJ loves anything, it is US college players and this, I firmly believe, is a Lamoriello bias and not a Conte bias and Lou, as anyone who knows the team, makes the final call at the drafts. If they took any risk they didn't have to take, on a player who would have been there later, it was Adrian Foster. And that was truly out of character, as he was, well, neither a US college player nor a European. Do I wish the drafts had been better? Yes, especially since, well, with NJ's organizational philosophy, so much depends on it. However, good undrafted UFA signing can help a draft that wasn't what you'd like, and that is actually the job of the scouting staff as well, as you point out.

CB - if you want to fire someone, and their staff one of the first rules if you want to be regarded as reasonable is you have to be able to provide actual suggestions as to their replacements. For example, if you decided that you wanted to fire Brent Sutter, you'd have to recommend a reasonable replacement and provide reasons why that person would be better (and, btw, in this case, you can't pick the head of scouting for another team, we'd owe compensation, and you can't say because they aren't Conte, because that's not a real reason). Either provide reasonable alternatives or, quite frankly, this doesn't amount to anything but "I don't like the results but have no useful solutions", which simply isn't helpful. You'd scrap the entire staff and you don't have a single suggestion as to a replacement. And don't ask me for one, because I didn't suggest they be fired. I just asked you to provide the reasonble, logical end to your argument. And you don't have one.

Whether you agree with CB or not, there was absolutely no mention in his post of who he would replace Conte (and the staff) with. I'm not sure he realizes this, but there would be no turning back, Conte is very highly regarded around the league and would be hired by another team, immediately. Since CB suggested this, and seems very serious about it, I'd like him to please give us replacements for Conte, and the entire scouting staff.

Jimmy, I said I wasn't going to get into it, and I won't. I was simply pointing out the differences between the two countries where the conservative party in Britain isn't going to touch the single payer health system (although one where you can and some people do purchase private insurance on top of it, btw), and here where we are fighting over something that doesn't even come close to single payer and where the biggest objection to it on the left is that it isn't single payer, it leaves it in the hands of the private insurers, and on the right, that it may force people to purchase health insurance (either for themselves or for their children, depending on which Democrat you are talking about). The countries are at very different places in the political spectrum on many, many issues. What passes for a Conservative in Britain is NOT one here and wouldn't be called one. If you can't see it, I really don't know what to tell you.

I know the Pens have thrown games before but it would be really, really stupid to throw a playoff game because, as the Flyers found out in 2000, you never know (not that they threw a game, but they thought they had 3 games to close NJ out and they didn't play all that hard in Game 5 in Philly). It's unlikely that they will blow a 3-0 series lead, but it has happened before. They are guaranteed income from home games in Rd. 3. They just aren't that stupid. Really, they aren't. When they have thrown games before, it has been for reasons other than (directly, immediately) money. Saving the franchise is money, yes, but not as crass as just another home game in a playoff round. That's stupid.