...

On a second line, Samson could play clean up to Olofsson's shot. Get them a center. Eichel and Skinner need, as someone mentioned, a big bodied winger to clear space in front of the net. Mitts, Erod, and Nylander for a spunky third line. Sheary, KO, and Angry Larry round out the bottom. Don't know about defensive pairs, but Risto will have to go to buy one of the above mentioned 2C or 1R. So, hmm, let's say: Dahlin and Bogo Mountour and McCabe Pilut and Borgen Goalies. Well, we're stuck.

Once RJ stops broadcasting, the countdown to replacing Dunleavy begins, thankfully.

I have to tell you, that it wasn't until I saw that Sam could not only get violent, but has a legitimate "Beast Mode" in the offensive zone that I thought we'd be better off trading him. With those characteristics now showing in his game, which I think started showing in February or so, I think he is an ideal second line winger for the Sabres. He just needs a better center.

This is an interesting debate, indeed. I definitely do not believe the difference between the AHL and time is just semantics. The first thing is that we'd have to qualify time. Time in the NHL makes the most sense contextually. So, the thesis would be: time in the AHL isn't as important (or isn't any more advantageous) as time in the NHL for developing hockey players for the NHL. Right? Even a control group is going to overlook outliers, which perhaps with the subject are more important (relatively, of course), and more prevalent, than outliers in more common human control groups. But I'm getting ahead of myself. What makes a hockey player good enough to play in the NHL? Skills, speed, conditioning. What else quantifiable? Can we put on paper targets every player must meet to be considered "good enough"? Stats. Certain metrics in their game. Like? How does the player achieve those metrics? "Skills, speed, conditioning" aren't enough to answer that, IMHO. Are there psychological factors? I think so, but one person's desire is another person's obsession. If we're going to test the thesis, we need to identify all parts of the player that put them over a certain threshold - the threshold being, again, "good enough" to play in the NHL. I'm struck by Nylander's story. We could say his experience with O'Reilly, schlepping it on buses, the lower expectations were what he needed to get to the level he's at. Clearly if he started in the NHL with a less, uh, warm and cozy handler, being carted around in a much higher standard, with higher expectations, that is a different experience yielding a different result, no? Would he have lasted past the first season if he started in the NHL? Would Pominville have lasted more than a season in the NHL if that was his first and only destination option? No way. Anyway, I do believe time, unqualified, is a major factor, but the AHL experience might be just he sauce one player needs for a while. That is, at least, until the league has expanded so much that even the players who would have otherwise (in the olde skool tradition) been subject to the AHL must play in the NHL to keep the latter functioning.

Seeing that, alone, would be worth a trip to Florida for me. Alas, but not my kids.

Of course one guy doesn't make a team, but acquiring the talent that makes up the team is the main challenge. When you can pick the talent that makes your team, it matters quite a bit.

I didn't say whether I think he'd be a good coach, did I?

3, 6, 6, 6, 4, 5, 7, 5, 6, 6 Boo on that.

The hard part is the launch. The schedules aren't tight. Honestly, when we do universal, we stay at one of the Universal resorts. So much easier and you completely and utterly are able to get into the "vacation" mindset. Forget driving an hour to the beach, just do one of the three night Universal packages and thank me later.

If you have money to burn, see if you can score some playoff tickets for either Nashville or Raleigh, North Carolina and go to the city that you can get the tickets for. See the playoff game at night, watch some good triple A baseball during the day. I think either city has triple A baseball.

https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/launches-and-events/events-calendar?pageindex=1&categories=Rocket Launches

You can never get all of DC in during a single visit. So much to do. Even the train ride in is fun. If history/war/museums and stuff are your kid's bag, DC is a great trip. I would not recommend Gettysburg to a 12 year old unless they are total Civil War buffs. I think Gettysburg makes a great adult get-away, but my kids were pretty bored even though they dig history.

Universal Florida.

Thanks, that was interesting. Sounds like the only guy he anticipates being moved is Risto. Obviously he didn't say that specifically, but what he said was notable.

Bring him back as a coach.

Poor Pommers. These are stupid questions. He sounds like a guy who has already decided to hang it up.

I find Duff and his amused-with-himself-demeanor annoying. Who's with me?

He'll be DEAD!!

I didn't like him, either. Thought it was out of place. But I prefer just the organ as entertainment...and the hockey, of course. Even against the Senators Sheary sucks.

Look at that. At the end of the line, old faces show up. Something something mortality...

Yeah, you never know, he may wind up being good.

Long time no see. I think.

I'm not talking audio, although I did reference it for the sake of educating the others reading this. Audio is easy, they've had digital delays with ramping for audio since the late 80's. Digital video delay is relatively new (that article I linked to was from 2015). It takes a lot of horse-power to delay HD signals. But, like I said, it's become too affordable not to implement. When was the last time you were inside a truck? Not at all doubting your experience, but it doesn't align with what I know, so I find it compelling (in a geeky/business sense). If it's been a "million years" things may have changed - we are, after all, still going through a "digital transformation". I would be curious to know if you asked around about video delays what responses you'd get.

If memory serves you are in the broadcasting business. I don't remember what part, but not everyone here knows what happens behind the curtains so it's in their best interest to be somewhat thorough. Also, you're saying one thing and I'm saying something else. I don't wish to step on toes, but I think you're wrong that there is no (intentional) video delay. There is "operational delay", which is satellite hops and also today with all of the digital equipment each unit or step adds its own processing latency. They most certainly add intentional delay to live events for various reasons. https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/01/if-you-re-streaming-the-super-bowl-over-the-internet-stay-off-facebook-and-twitter/index.htm Radio these days use 20 second delays (I have direct knowledge of this). The business I'm in deals in digital broadcast technology. In fact I will be at NAB next week looking at some of this very stuff. Older analog technology would literally be on a tape loop that gave them 7 second max. I doubt hockey games were delayed by analog equipment but I'm willing to bet lots of money they have intentional delay in our digital era. The equipment is cheap and the utility of it far outweighs not having it there. These are only 20 second delays, but there are a variety of others: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?ci=5721&fct=fct_delay-range-max_2941|20-seconds&N=4028759659 You can thank internet streaming for another reason to add intentional delay to video - one of the solutions to matching internet stream latency to broadcast latency is to delay (further) the broadcast stream.

I turned it off at the final horn, did he really say that?