SDS

If you’re talking about Twitter algorithms then you’re doing it wrong (although they announce some changes this week). My feed consists of only those people I follow, and it is displayed in chronological order. Other than the ads they put, what does this mystery algorithm have to do with what I’m seeing? It’s not like I get done reading a tweet and they’re suggesting a new one for me to read like watching a YouTube video.

My unvaccinated sister brought home Covid to her unvaccinated husband and he died on Monday. BIG former guy supporter. Connoisseur of disinformation. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. (condolences are unnecessary. I never met the guy and i’m not super close with this sibling from a previous marriage.)

https://deadspin.com/the-lightning-won-the-cup-but-we-all-won-because-ther-1847250782

Another way of saying this is that salary cap is a huge ***** asset. Yes. Holy *****! can you believe it??? It’s absolutely insane!!!

It's opportunity cost. Assuming Sam would ever sign here again and a salary around $6M, that's $15M in cap space for two. Can the Sabres do better with $15M than Sam/Jeff?

The salary cap is a valuable asset.

Is it? I would assume most NHL players could do that. Including defensemen.

Both my kids play/played soccer and are late late birthdays. US Soccer changed their age groups to birth years about 5 years ago and it immediately put them behind most of their teammates. Ever since, their teams have been constructed of 85% birthdays in the first half of the year and 15% in the second half.

I read it simply as this, in youth sports, older players are generally seen as better players in their age group. They are likely to continually make top teams even though much of their talent advantage is due to age difference. However, if you’re young and you still manage to outplay your age group cohorts, you’re more likely to be more talented than the older kids are in the first place.

How far away is Wallstedt?

What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.

This is where the Ventura hire should pay dividends.

So if there is some causation there, it’s basically saying you can do it but it will be harder without that strong link.

At least in this analysis, that seems to be true outside of the top three. I would suggest going to the second link that I posted that goes into more detail. Clearly this wasn’t meant to be a recipe for success. In fact the data seems to be diffuse enough to show that even if there’s a correlation, outcomes are widely varying. honestly, I was more intrigued about the thought of upgrading your weakest link in soccer being better for the team than getting the best player. They fully admit hockey is sort of in between a sport like soccer and a sport like basketball.

This isn’t what the article is talking about. Completely different definition of link.

https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/03/14/strong-and-weak-links-talent-distribution-within-teams/ The latter part is exactly what Dan Granato has said/done. Personally, although this seems to be the case in the regular season I almost believe the opposite is true in the playoffs.

Maybe Jeff Skinner and Barry Bonds should get together and discuss career revitalization secrets?

“Basically, there are two types of sports, strong and weak link. In a strong link game, star power drives success, while in a weak link game, teams with superior depth are better off. To answer the question, what kind of game is hockey?” https://www.google.com/amp/s/lastwordonsports.com/hockey/2018/05/30/draft-pick-value-charts/amp/

That’s three Stanley cups.

It’s distressing how much better Tampa Bay is than Montreal and yet that only meant I one goal difference in the series clinching game.

Honestly, what are the choices? every team wants the same thing. No one says they don’t wanna be too fast. No one says they want to be unskilled. No one says they want to be soft. Every team wants the same things, but some teams make do with what they have - even if they don’t want to.

Your gut is telling you this? Are you sure it’s not the tacos?

Rossi is an interesting piece because it trades uncertainty for uncertainty.

You sound well-informed.