nfreeman

Let’s chill out a bit in here please.

Well, I thought he made a jump too, but only to "bottom 10 NHL starter" status. I will say though that he has improved every year and it's not impossible that he makes as big a jump this coming season as he did last season, and if he does, he will be in "good enough to be the starter on a real NHL playoff team" status.

I think you guys are probably right, and that this isn't a change in the deal reached in the MOU. The TSN article was a bit misleading: But that next 10%/diluted 8% is just a deferral, right? It's not escrow and thus not subject to forfeiture? I think this is right, which is why I am surprised that the owners agreed to reduce escrow to 10% in year 2 from now and 6% thereafter, and haven't insisted on reopening those #s.

Something else I found interesting from the TSN article: I'm interpreting this to mean that the owners got a major economic concession from the players -- i.e. effectively a 20% across-the-board pay cut to get the split for the 2019-20 season back to 50/50. It's not clear from the TSN article, but I would guess that the 72% is before escrow -- i.e. that 20% of the 72% will go into escrow to preserve the 50/50 split for 2020-21.

Here's TSN today: https://www.tsn.ca/nhl-nhlpa-reach-tentative-deal-on-new-season-but-big-hurdle-remains-1.1566391 So I think this means AZ can keep 3 goalies on their 23-man roster, but if they want to put one of them on the taxi squad, that one needs to clear waivers -- which means AZ will likely want to trade one of them. Am I missing something?

Speedy recovery, @GASabresIUFAN, and thanks for telling us about your experience.

Do the taxi squad players have to clear waivers? I.e. does AZ have to expose a goalie?

This should probably go in the random thread: I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that they couldn't attend something "because I'm flying back from Albania that day." Well done, @Wyldnwoody44.

If you want to get into a discussion of perceived government incompetence/dishonesty/corruption, as well as each side's excuses/narratives -- that's what the politics club is for.

Except that if you scroll up on this very page, you'll see 2 posts providing specifics as to what the posters think the government's response should've included. Again: if anyone wants to debate the pros and cons of specific methods of combating the virus -- e.g. "closing schools works/doesn't work and here is data supporting that approach" -- that is fine. If you can't converse on this without including "and the president/governor/prime minister/others who don't agree with me are idiots/corrupt/liars" -- take it to the politics club.

We're at over a foot and counting in upstate NY. It's still coming down.

@inkman-- now that is an interesting ethical question. You are not being asked to leave a positive review, right? Just to delete the negative review and stay silent? Assuming it's to delete your negative review and stay silent, and assuming that you can ensure that you get the $50 (which, as @Eleven points out, is pretty uncertain, as a seller that would make that offer is the kind of person who wouldn't honor the deal) -- you are still being asked to help a sleazy seller sell crappy merchandise to an unsuspecting public. It's only a few clicks, so it's kinda quick and painless, but that is nevertheless what is going on here. Inevitably, part of the way most people would think about this is the matter of how badly you need the cash. Could you maybe decline the offer, skip booze for a week or something else that costs $50 and end up financially even and feeling glad to have done the right thing?

Great win.

Good question. I suppose one major factor is whether the owners think that the economic and operational upheaval should effectively give the teams the right to protect assets that they would've been required to expose in an ordinary-course season -- AND whether the players agree, since giving this point to the owners would mean less player freedom. I can definitely see the owners trying to get this, and the players refusing, or negotiating it away in exchange for an economic concession.

Yes -- the next 3 years, while Eichel is at his peak, Dahlin is approaching his, either Hall or Reino is here and contributing a lot, and Cozens and hopefully at least 2 of Quinn, TT, Ruotsy and Mitts (and maybe Peterka) are cheap but valuable contributors, probably comprise the window in which they have the best chance to become a real contender. Holy mackerel I hope the goaltending doesn't pull them down.

Plus another 1st rounder and a high 2nd-rounder also playing in the tournament in Ryan Johnson and JJ Peterka.

Is it confirmed that the government is buying all of the doses? I know it prepaid for a certain number of doses, but I assumed pharmacies, hospitals and other non-government intermediaries would buy once the government’s pre-order was filled. But I haven’t looked into it.

There isn't enough speed if the top 3 is Diggs, Davis and Beasley.

I agree with all of this except that I am skeptical that Davis will be better than Brown at that point. I think a healthy Brown is much better than Davis and I am optimistic that he will be healthy next year and hopefully in time for the playoffs this year.

Are you seriously asking this question? Is it not crystal clear to you that the last sentence is a political jab?

While I agree that Brown and Beasley aren't "elite" in a vacuum, I think Brown is elite or borderline elite as a #2 WR, Beasley is similarly elite/borderline as a #3 and the 1-2-3 combo of Diggs, Brown and Beasley is an elite top 3.

Diggs and Beasley were both outstanding last night. And I agree that the 2 of them, plus Brown, have played a major role in JA's success this year. But I also think all of the elite QBs have elite receivers.

And I see you still can't help yourself.

Allen is having a terrific game.

Why? The NBA is starting on Dec. 22 and will have a 72-game season.