Taro T

Really need to discuss this sort of stuff with the boss when you're feeling fine to fully understand not just the company's policies but also his/her philosophy on sick day usage. Because, if you have a boss that wants you in at work every day you aren't dead or on vacation you will set yourself up for poor reviews by taking a couple of days off here or there. Conversely, if your boss WILL take it out on you for being the (perceived) reason he/she got sick, try to work from home when the allergies heat up (many hypochondriacs can't discern between hayfever & Covid) or you will set yourself up for poor reviews by NOT taking sick days. And if the boss changes, have the same discussion w/ the new one. Because the new one might not agree with the old one's policy.

Yes, teams can pull players up from a lower league for their own playoffs provided they have the rights to tishat player by way of him having a contract w/ that club or the parent club on tje NHL Trade Deadline and not having been rostered to a league higher tjan the one in question or by signing an ATO. But there are rules on player movement which sometimes allow a player to play for a club in the regular season but not in the playoffs.e.g., a FA signed on January can't play for his NHL club in the playoffs that season and a player traded after the trade deadline can play for the new club in the regular season but not in the playoffs. And though it makes sense that a draft pick that hasn't been playing in the NHL SHOULD be able to play for the AHL affiliate once his Junior team is done for the year; the NHL and many other leagues don't always do things that make sense. As mentioned in a previous post, couldn't find anything on the NHL's website, the AHL's, or the Sabres or Amerks websites stating that draft choices could be added onto the playoff roster of the AHL affiliate if they already had an NHL contract & weren't on the AHL affiliate's playoff roster. Turns out they can be, but simply reading what is actually posted implies they can't.

Did some digging, and this info is NOT on the AHL nor the Amerks website btw, but it looks like the list of eligible players to play in the AHL playoffs can come from 3 separate sources: 1. Those players on the AHL roster on the day of the trade deadline. 2. Those players on an AHL ATO with the particular squad. AND 3. Signed draft choices. Until today had never seen that 3rd category listed in any official sources. (Technically, still haven't seen that 3rd category listed in any official sources.) So, with that 3rd category included as a source of players then both Savoie and the other guy assigned to Ra-cha-cha can play for them in the playoffs if Appert and the other powers that be want them to play. Kept being very confused about how they would be allowed to play in the playoffs for Ra-cha-cha as they didn't meet the criteria to be on either of the 1st 2 lists. They are on that 3rd list. Expect that Johnson would be on that list as well were he to have signed a deal with the Sabres before the regular season ended but then didn't play for them this season, but don't know that for certain (again, haven't seen that 3rd category of playoff eligible players listed in any formal source). (And realize you know this next part, it isn't directed at your post, but is merely here for completeness.) Savoie became eligible to play in the AHL as soon as his Winnipeg Ice got eliminated from the WHL playoffs. He will not be eligible to play for the Amerks next season unless Winnipeg allows him to play for Rochester rather than the Ice (they won't do that) or until the Ice have completed their regular season and are no longer eligible to continue playing in the playoffs/Memorial Cup. Apologies for helping to perpetuate the confusion about this question about CHL players playing in the AHL playoffs.

That's what the rules seem to indicate. IF he does play for Ra-cha-cha this post season, really hope that 1 of the media guys asks either Appert or Karmanos how he was allowed to play. Because it seems he shouldn't be able to sign an ATO as he is already on an ELC with the Sabres and he was not on the Amerks roster on trade deadline day.

Sabres would've most likely been out in the 1st round because they wouldn't have caught the B's. They'd've been the 7 seed and would've played the team that kicked the snot out of them twice when that team was invested in the outcome of the game and they snuck past them in the 3rd game when that opponent wasn't particularly invested in the game. If the Sabres would've won 1 game in that potential 1st round matchup it would've been a lot. You say they didn't match up well with the B's. They matched up way worse against the Canes.

Not Delaware North, but the Sabres did have a Taste of the Rink, or some other similarly named event, that STHers could attend to sample various items available in the rink (and IIRC that they were considering to be offering in the future). Did not attend it. Wasn't going to spend $20+ in gas to get free rink grub.

Thought he was referring to the one in the middle, not on the end. 😉

Thought they did that one 2 seasons.

Ab-so-frig-gin'-lute-ly. He'd look great running black and gold west. Much better than Karmanos or Ventura.

Probably not a huge one. But it probably cost Golisano some money as the Sabres run the barn even though the County owns it. Could them leaving have cost the Sabres an extra player or 2 when the team had an internal cap significantly lower than that of the rest of the league (both before and after the league brought in a salary cap)? But losing the Braves and the threats to lose the Bills and the Sabres sure did have impact. And it stinks when fanbases lose their teams regardless as to whether it's for a novelty sport or an established one or whether its a factor of economics or because a small person decides to be petty.

Would the TV networks care about / want to have NFL teams playing in college stadiums enough (read by increasing the $'s to the NFL) to make it worth the while of the teams to tick off their luxury box owners and STHers and reduce the revenues from them with likely a lesser amount of money coming in from the college venue? Especially when a lot of these teams contractually have to have so many games played in their home stadium as part of the agreement to have the tax payers shell out a significant portion of the money that got these palaces built in the 1st place, really doubt it.

Yeah, can't see the NFL getting itself locked into 16 "neutral site" games each year. Could actually see them trying to get to about 20 (10 in London with 4-5 of them being Jags games, 4-5 in Germany, 1-2 random European location, 1-2 in Tokyo/China, & with 2-4 in Mexico) up from the 6 or so they have now; but don't see them ever getting themselves boxed into a precise # of those games. They don't care about competitive balance beyond the lip service they provide by having every team's roster of opponents set by formula. After that, there are teams that play multiple Thursday night games starting this year. They've added a Friday game. They've plans to even make Thursday games flex games (probably starting next season). They are a TV revenue stream league and they've already started making the transition to becoming a streaming TV product. They seem hell bent on killing the golden goose; but protocols to attempt to eliminate concussions might beat them to it out of necessity. So, they could be simply seeing their product being a cash cow that has a (relatively) limited shelf life; rather than a bunch of greedy SOBs looking to bring in as much as they can today, the heck with tomorrow as there's no way it'll ever get stripped of its crown of being the most popular sport in America. (Never happened to boxing, nor baseball either, right?)

Rules for thee, but not for me. 😉

IMHO, they came up with a pretty good solution to the uneven # of games and some teams getting an extra home game and others not getting it. All the teams in 1 conference get the extra home game the 1st year and the next year the extra home game goes to the other conference. So that extra game doesn't give a team an edge on making the playoffs.

He's 240 lbs. He'll be playing a Kelce role (and hopefully as a reasonable facsimile of the original) but he's a TE. Probably won't be able to block worth a darn for a couple of years but he isn't a "slot receiver."

Amerks played very well. But Wohl's head very likely wasn't in it either. Has to be mentally difficult to TRY to bail out a 2nd team in such a short period of time and this time with no room for error while going from plane rides to bus trips (and only being able to stay 1/2 way closer to the rink the game is getting played in than he'd've been staying in his own bed the night before due to the PGA being in town). Works for this kid. Any time a TO hockey time falls flat on it's face another angel gets its wings.

He scores a goal every playoff game whether they need it or not. 😉

Bring on the B'ars. When's the last time the Amerks played in a best of 7? Don't know, but the next time is this coming week. 😉

😎

Was the referendum just for Tempe voters, Tempe and Phoenix voters, or statewide? Stinks that it didn't pass. Hope you guys can get something worked out with the Suns owner. Really hate seeing any fanbase lose its team. Cuts way too close to where we've feared we've been at in Buffalo with the Bills and possibly even the Sabres back at the bankruptcy filing. And even more so with the Braves and Stallions and Destroyers leaving town. (Pretty sure the Stampede and Lizzard were going to go away regardless as both their leagues seemed to be on very precarious ground when they left. NPSL actually did fold when the Lizzard folded, but tried to revive the old MISL before finally giving up the ghost a few years later.) Just hate seeing any fanbase lose its team.

Gee, wonder why Allen didn't look himself the last half of the season playing with an elbow with at least 1 partially torn ligament. If he's healthy, he'll be just as good as he was in '21 and the beginning of '22. Maybe better.

Is this your attempt at a non-visual meme?

F### Yes. He was the greatest goaltender of all time and he dominated in the 3rd best league in the world when he was young. He dominated at every level he played. Not his fault Belfour had one of the best rookie seasons ever right when he was getting into the Blackhawks organization keeping him from getting a true shot at their top job nor his fault that Muckler couldn't look past the playing style and simply look at the results. He played pretty d*mn well in Detroit and in Otterland too.

Well, using your reasoning for #3, the only team of the 4 you can want to not lose would be the team that plays in the land where the Left Turn League rules. They're the only one of the 4 that has WON a Stanley Cup. (Though injuries to their opponents got them through at least 3 of the 4 series. (Not sure anymore if Joisey got hit hard with the injury bug, but the other 3 definitely did.))

History shows #1's getting traded because the team is rebuilding and the guy only has 1 year left before becoming an UFA come cheaper than those that are under contract for a longer term. So the price tag will be less than Saros would cost, but yeah 13 overall and either a young player or a top prospect is the likely price. And if you can re-sign him to a mNMC contract it's probably worth it though giving away Kulich or Savoie would be painful.