Taro T

It's possible Adams is wrong about that being the core of a contender and personally hope (obviously) that he's right and expect he's more right than wrong. But it is 100% fair to say that Adams sees that as the core of a contender which is why all the moves he made this off-season were made to support that core. Heck, even bringing in 1 more top 6W (which he's been rumored often enough as trying to do that it likely is a legit still remaining TO DO item) would be supporting that core rather than supplanting it.

Presuming the suit is successful, and in light of the ability of college players to get paid to a certain extent through the NIL framework; would expect at least 1 and possibly 2 things to change in the NHL - Junior/College agreements. 1. As players could go interchangably from CHL - NCAA, would expect that in some way the NHL would sign a hybrid agreement with the NCAA so that players can sign with an NHL team (perhaps receiving deferred money as a signing bonus) when they're drafted similarly to what Junior players can currently do. IF that happens, would expect 2. that NHL teams would only have 2 years to sign an NCAA player before he goes back into the draft. Expect that it might force the CHL to drop its demand that if an underager doesn't make an NHL squad that they automatically get the right of 1st refusal because the player would now presumably be able to skip to the NCAA (or even Canadian College but that seems like it would be a significant step down in quality of play) with no repercussions. Would also expect that this will significantly hurt the USHL as college bound kids could presumably play in the better CHL if they're good enough to do so. Wonder how (if at all appreciably) this would effect the lower European national leagues that on occassion lucked into players like Matthews going that route. If the suit is successful, this could be almost as major as Kenny Linesman's legal wrangling that lowered the draft age to 18. Am sure it will affect things in ways we aren't even contemplating at this particular moment.

Probably the same way it worked with Thornton and Marleau in SJ.

On and on, they just keep on tryin' ...

Luce and Ramsay had a 50 goal scorer on their line. Ramsay had the unfortunate timing of having been by far the best defensive forward in the league not named Bob Gainey otherwise he'd likely be a HoFer as HE'd been the guy that won all the Selkes when that trophy started to get awarded. By quality they were top 6, not 3rd liners.

Who's making excuses? There was no editorializing on Adams' not having obtained a 2W this off-season.

Well, if ownership changed, everything could've changed.

But in your day job, are you locked in to working with someone for an ENTIRE year in a MISSION CRITICAL position if you accept that person for a day, or month, or whatever. In the NHL, when you decide to not buy someone out, you are accepting that unless you can find a trade partner AND in this particular case a team that the player is willing to move to (because he has a full NMC), you are stuck with that player (for good or bad) for the entire season. 3 things. 1. We know Adams has tried to bring in a 2W this off-season. That he hasn't succeeded, doesn't change the apparent fact that he's tried to do so and had he been able to pull off that move it almost certainly would've eaten into a fair to a substantial portion of those "Skinner savings." and 2. Buying in on him a few weeks ago is keeping him for a full year unless they can find a trade partner as the regular course buyout window is only open for a short time. 3. In order to get a deal worked out with another team for that 2W they were looking for; it now might have to look very different than it would without Skinner on the roster because now there isn't much cap space to work with. And what might've just been taking Krebs, a pick, and a prospect away now maybe it takes somebody that Adams and Ruff were planning on being in Buffalo and they've just created another (albeit smaller) hole to fill. In a world where there isn't a limited buyout window and Skinner doesn't have a full NMC; maybe Ruff does try to see how things work out with Jeff. But with those 2 considerations and the obviousness that the team wants to go in another direction it isn't all that surprising (at least IMHO) that he was bought out.

Whether you agree with it or not, there IS an "apparent reason" for Skinner to not be in Buffalo this season. Ruff didn't want him. (Personally, would have kept him this year and looked at unloading him next off-season, but it sure does seem that the coach wanted nothing to do with him. And, he has past history of punting a highly paid offensive player with significant gaps in his game with (according to many, though by no means all, observers) no heir apparent in sight to pick up the slack; and having the O actually significantly open up after said punting. So, pretty sure the coach had no qualms whatsoever in punting him. Am as frustrated as many others here that cap space gets wasted. But, this move screams that the coach didn't want him. (And if the coach didn't want him, the owner didn't want to pay him his full salary.)

As long as they can get to it in the month you need it, wouldn't punt them if that's the only issue you've had with them. Our mechanic usually has a long lead time to get in, but if there's an emergency they'll work with us to get the car in sooner. (A perk of using the same shop for a long time.)

Yep. Wouldn't be surprised if they bring in 1 more top 6 W. But would be mildly surprised if it happens more than a week or 2 before TC opens in September. And like you, personally believe Adams wants to make that deal, but has a max price he's willing to pay to make it happen and if it somebody's floor of what they're willing to accept doesn't drop from where it's at, then no deal will happen this summer barring a Quinn-esque training injury. Do expect that after watching what happened last year due to not replacing that key piece that he knew would be out ~3 months, he'd increase what he's willing to spend for that guy if a situation like that happened again.

He might end up w/ a callup. Hoping that he doesn't. Am actually looking forward to the Sabres only having 1 or 3 pregame solo skates this year rather than the 10-12 that we seemingly see every year.

5/1000ths. 1/2 of 1% of a second. Found it interesting that Lyles and some of the other competitors were wearing jewelry during the race. When literally 1/2 of 1% of a second is all that separates the winner from the runner up am surprised that they don't get themselves as light and as streamlined as possible. Realize that a lot of the runners do it, so apparently it isn't seen as much of an issue and thankfully it worked out for him, but just found it interesting. Also, realize that athletes in many other sports wear jewelry during competition; (e.g., Josh Allen definitely wears arm bands and IIRC a neckchain as well and pretty sure a lot of hockey, football, and baseball players wear neckchains) but in most other sports we aren't talking that small a margin between victory and defeat. Swimmers tend to do everything that is deemed legal for the competition to streamline themselves. And, again, good for him, and happy the American won gold.

Thanks for that. But 2 items stand out from that story. The reporter states the boxer failed "unspecified eligibility tests." But the IBA states that DNA tests of the boxer showed the boxer has a Y chromosome which would make that boxer male genetically and ineligible to compete in women's events. The article also states "Khelif declined to answer when asked whether she had undergone tests other than doping tests, saying she didn’t want to talk about it." If the boxer has undergone other tests that do clear her name, why not publicly clear her name?

Jim Fixx endorses this message. 😉

These don't seem to be from the Russian boxing federation. The IBA is the organization that banned Kehlif for the XY chromosome issue. (Not sure why the links aren't embedding. Sorry.) It appears you are considering the IBA to be a/the Russian boxing federation due to the head of it's ties to Russia and Gazprom; but personally consider that to be a bit of a misrepresentation as it includes approximately 200 national boxing federations under it's umbrella. https://reduxx.info/international-olympic-committee-was-warned-about-male-boxers-world-boxing-organization-vice-president-says/ https://www.newsweek.com/olympic-boxer-lin-yu-ting-win-imane-khelif-1933862 Tried to find out what the IOC testing is to determine if an athlete qualifies as female. Have not been able to track that down. The IOC's boxing rules for the Paris Olympics says they're pretty much going with the rules from the "2020" Tokyo Olympics. Looking at the boxing medical procedures, it states that the medical team "In the pre-Bout Medical Examinations: – Boxer identifies himself/herself – the doctor checks the Boxer’s Record Book name and photo with the Boxer’s face and accreditation card." That is the closest that this kid could find for how gender is assessed in the "Qualification System" document, the "Event Regulations" document, and the "Boxing Unit Medical Rules" document. There is nothing in any of that which states how gender is assessed for the games. It seems that the Olympics do not perform a DNA level test to assess whether a competitor should be in the male or female bracket. The IBA apparently did use that level of testing. Interestingly, and tangential to this discussion, there is no international boxing federation recognized to run the Olympic boxing program at present. The WBO is trying to get accredited and if they don't succeed soon, boxing will be removed from the Olympics for 2028. Presumably so they can avoid this sort of controversy and the general corruption controversies so often associated with boxing.

Except in this case, yes it is. Apparently Kehlif was born XY but with female genitalia. Which, while extremely rare, sometimes happens.

Watching a little bit of the Columbia - Spain women's soccer QF. What's interesting, at least IMHO, is the stadium isn't even 1/4 full. (The lower bowl is ~1/4 (MAYBE 1/3) full and there isn't anyone at all in the upper decks.) Spain is literally right next to France and hardly anyone made the trip on a Saturday. Would've expected more in attendance.

What's interesting IMHO is that Adams had said, perhaps indirectly (don't recall his exact words), that he brought Byram in to be Dahlin's partner. But he just chooses the players Ruff has to work with. Ruff actually deploys them. And, as this could be the year that Power really comes into his own, there is something to be said for using him and Dahlin the way the Ducks used Pronger and Niedermayer. Keep them separated most of the game so the opponent has to deal with one or the other for 45-50 minutes and then pair them up come crunch time. And IF Power does come into his own, maybe he and Byram could work together leaving Samuelsson in his familiar old spot and Clifton teaming with either Jokiharju or the guy they brought in to add more muscle to the D. If Power and Byram could work, it pretty much lets the other pairings make sense IMHO.

For whatever it's worth, Ruff mentioned a couple months back that Dahlin would be playing with multiple partners and the 2 he specifically mentioned were Samuelsson and Power.

Can see the logic to it, and it is sound. Who becomes your odd man out if they bring in a legit 2W should Greenway not end up part of the package going back. If they did trade for Zegras (or similar primarily offensive W) and somehow the return didn't include Greenway as part of the package going back then either Greenway or Benson would seem to be the odd man out (at least until an injury gets them both back into the lineup). REALLY like Benson, and don't want to take him out of the lineup, but would expect either Zegras or Zucker to take that spot you have Benson pencilled into and the other taking the spot Zucker is pencilled into. So, either Benny or Greenway slides out as Benny doesn't have the size Ruff seems to want on L4 and Greenway doesn't have the speed he seems to want there. Does he keep Greenway in to make that L3 more "balanced" or does keep Benny in to give it a bit more offensive punch?

Assuming all stay healthy (which won't happen) agree with most of it, but personally would flip Tuch and Thompson ice time wise. Tuch will be getting more ice time when nursing a lead than Tommer will IMHO and expect they'll be pretty much glued to each other's hip when trying to score late. (Would be willing to relook at that should they get another top 6W who might take some of Alex's PP time away.)

The difference in the 2 situations being that with Quinn hurt, Benson had to beat out Olofsson to earn a roster spot as both were vying for top 9W. Barring injury, Helenius needs to beat out at least 3 of Thompson, Cozens, McLeod, Lafferty, and Krebs and Kulich. As those are the other guys vying for a spot in the C spine. They've said, and Helenius says that he's a C. A lot fewer jobs available and he'd have to beat out not just Krebs & Kulich but also a guy who's name is written in pen on the lineup sheet. It could happen, but wouldn't even want to have a buck on that while getting odds.

Why? IF things are working in Buffalo (a big if, yet to be determined) then why force these guys into NHL roles? We are officially out of "development mode" and in "win mode." And if things AREN'T working in Buffalo, there's a real good chance that you get your wish. They'll get some opportunity simply due to injuries. But how much more than a game or 2 they get will be determined by how the team is doing w/ w/out them in the lineup and whether they manage to force Adams into an uncomfortable decision where he has to choose what to do with the vet that lost his job. If the team is rolling in a playoff slot, these kids will have to really amaze to supplant somebody else that's contributing.

That stinks. But, yes, if the BS associated with the job has become too much, it is definitely time to look into other options. (Every job has BS associated with it; if you can no longer live with the BS there, move on. Life is too durn short not to.) Hopefully while you are looking for a better situation you'll be able to remember what it is you love about your current job and try to focus on that/those aspects of the job when you can. (Presumably there was something you loved about it; you took the job.) It'll help make the whole thing more tolerable.