All Activity

On the one hand, I see it as you do that Levi isn't a guaranteed #1 NHL goalie. But that shouldn't be a surprise because just about every goalie prospect needs extended grooming before moving up the ranks. Maybe the GM has belatedly come to the realization that rushing prospects because of a team need not only hurts the development of the prospect but also doesn't help the big club? In general, I agree with the GM's not rushing the young goalie. Especially with goalies, getting game experience in the lower leagues is beneficial to the player being prepared when he is brought up on a more permanent basis.

I think tribute bands still qualify as a 'concert', right? Came across this band (Start Making Sense) while attending the OC Fair in Costa Mesa last weekend. I love the Talking Heads, but obviously, they never tour, so it seemed like a great alternative. They were fantastic. I know David Byrne is touring in 2025, but he is playing the Dolby Theatre out here in Hollywood, which has tickets running ~ $600 for Orchestra and $200 for Mezzanine. And with that, you are probably only going to get 8 or 9 Talking Head songs in the set list. These cats are from Pennsylvania and do a bunch of shows near Buffalo. I think one is in Rochester around Thanksgiving. For $25.00, it's well worth the cost of a ticket. https://www.startmakingsenseband.com/new-events

Again, your argument is with the SCOTUS and Congress. And again, Whether CO2 is a pollutant or not is irrelevant to my concern that the current EPA, under this administration, is seeking to reverse established environmental protections and that is not limited to CO2 emissions.

In the original 1990 CAAA, CO is a listed pollutant. In the IRA, where there is a listing of pollutants, CO2 replaces CO in that context. And, the EPA in 2007 was correct. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. And as CO2 is not a pollutant, there is no "important environmental protection(s)" to be gained by regulating its emissions. IMHO, and apparently in that of the current EPA, the EPA's 2009 endangerment finding was in fact erroneous.

So are you saying you are done with Levi?

I'll give you $100 if you find me saying this was a "genius" marketing move. I said it was a proper event for your largest sponsor. You know you lost an argument when you resort to making up stuff.

Said it upthread. Provided things go to plan, he probably nets out more money long run by signing a 2 year 1 way deal than he would've having this year's deal be a 2 way deal. On a 2 way deal, he'd probably get $250-300k as an Amerk. And if he spends 90%+ of the year in Ra-cha-cha he'd end up with ~$325-$350k total as a gross. So, he's getting better than $400 more than he would've signing a 2 way deal this year and then a deal for about the same money on a 1 way deal next year as he signed this time. He'd need to get over $1.2MM next year to be ahead of where he'll be now and if he suffers some sort of catastrophic accident he would get almost none of that without already having a contract and if he doesn't play at all in the NHL this year he'd have a tough time negotiating a deal to that for next year. He had 0 leverage. This works for both sides as he doesn't count against the salary cap at all while in Ra-cha-cha and next year the deal will be bumped up to $850k because that is the league minimum salary for next season, but the cap hit will be less than $850 because the contract is for 2 years and it'll be the average of both years nominal salary.

You asked what statute applied and I cited where the ruling on CO2 came from so your argument is with the SCOTUS and Congress because I’m not the one proclaiming CO2 as a pollutant, just that two things happened to have it classified as such: the 2007 SCOTUS ruling which said that CO2 and other greenhouse gases are considered pollutants under the Clean Air Act and the further clarification on CO2 contained in the IRA. Since CO was already classified as a pollutant in the CAA, there was no need for further clarification in the IRA. Nobody suddenly dismissed CO as an actual pollutant. Ironically, it was the EPA’s argument in that 2007 SCOTUS case that CO2 and other greenhouse gases were NOT pollutants under the CAA. Again, my main concern isn’t who classified what as a pollutant or when, it’s the fact that this administration seeks to undo important environmental protections, regardless.

Probably the trade off for the one-way deal.

You mean, other than eight hundred thousand dollars?

I’m a little surprised that he signed for more than one year. I have a hard time seeing what that extra year earns from his point of view.

I thought he played QB for the Jets.

It’s a synonym of covfefe

I’m starting to think that Promo is either Kevyn or he needs to be on the payroll for all the work he does here defending this dumpster fire of an organization 😜😁

On #1 - Agree. I think Quinn is probably due for a breakout year. Healthy, and we saw snippets of elite play last year. But if you assume you are moving a contract like his and Kadri would replace him in the starting 12 - it's more probable than not, Kadri in the short term delivers better results. If you remove Quinn from your CAP number and add Kadri, there is still $1.5M in space, assuming there is no retention. #2 - Beat the drum. More vet experience is a good thing for "one of the youngest" rosters in the league. #3 - The Only issue I see would be next year, assuming Tuch signs for $9M. If you have $27.6M in space in '26 (23.4 + Quinn or equivalent 3.3), and you subtract $9M for Tuch and $7M for Kadri, you have $11.7 to bridge Kesselring/Doan/Benson. A 'real' GM would be able to navigate this challenge by moving Mr. Glass, or another high-priced asset like Byram/Power if there was a desire to lock up Kesselring for a higher AAV. But we don't have that luxury....yet.

To the bolded, why not? There were 21 teams and only 5 didn't make the playoffs. Except for the Norris, which conveniently was typically the worst division by far so it was only fitting that they got the extra squad that missed the playoffs, only the worst team in each division missed the playoffs. They Sabres have not been the worst, nor even 2nd worst at best, team in the division for 14 straight years. A 14 year playoff drought would not have happened then. Rarely does this kid say things as being unequivocably true when we can't observe them, but that fact is unequivocably true. Now, would it have been a disgracefully bad run? Yes. Would they have ever made it to the 2nd round? No data. But there have been a few versions of this team that personally would take over the 70's era Wings, the Hal Ballard Loafs, any squad (other than the post-mid-90's Sharks) owned by the Gunds except that one miracle squad that merged with Minny to end Moe-ray-all's dynasty because Denis Herron was a horrible puck handler, or the 70's versions of the Caps or Scouts (which in fairness to them were expansion teams in an era when the other teams had no incentive whatsoever to help them overcome being brand new). In only a handful of years were they in that same category of historically bad squads. Several times they've been the NHL equivalent of the pre-Allen 21st century Bills - a bad to mediocre team with no chance whatsoever of winning the championship but not often the slow motion trainwreck that the team was during the tank portion of this extended stay in purgatory.

No, the Clean Air Act does NOT list CO2 as a pollutant. Carbon MONOXIDE is a pollutant per that law, not CO2. And, as CO is a killer, it is appropriate to be regulated. And perusing the IRA, yes, in it they do substitute CO2 for CO. CO is not listed anywhere in the IRA. So, apparently we no longer care about limiting actual pollutants. And, no, CO2 should not be considered a pollutant. It, along with water, is the natural byproduct of complete oxidation of hydrocarbons.

The role we want him to fill is the role he failed to accomplish with the Flames, while in his early 30’s. There would have to be salary retention for me to accept this. That being said, his experience and skillset is needed.

The most important thing about the Levi contract is he is RFA (arbitration eligible) at the end of the term. If he's on the best potential path, threr's still a chance to lock him up long-term (if he wants to be here, obviously). If Adams is still GM in 2027 (which frankly, even I find hard to believe and I love suspending my disbelief), it's a chance to trade Levi for another AHL-level goalie with 1 year of term before going RFA.

1) The Sabres have no problem overpaying younger players that can’t and haven’t produced an impact on the ice, Kadri is a known commodity 2) long term benefits of having this type of vet on your roster is to support the development of one of the youngest teams in the NHL for multiple years in a row. This is not only about what he can do on the ice as a 3rd/4th line center in the last 2 years of his contract 3) Cap is projected to keep going up and his trade protections run out after next year making him easier to deal to get his salary off the books

Kadri has 4 years left on his contract. If things continue as projected, by year 4 the cap will be around $120 million. I don’t think his contract is even viewed as bad.

Get a goaltender that is worth a damn, the 2 we have are backups. If Levi is ready get him in there but it didn’t look like it last season.

The “Sabresy” thing about this, is that 2 years ago Levi was gifted the starting spot. At that time if you had told fans that his next contract would be 2x$812k, and that he would headed to a 3rd year in the AHL, most would have laughed. There is, almost always, a “Sabresy” angle. Don’t limit yourself to contract term or AAV in your search.