nfreeman

Do we know whether it's a 1-way vs 2-way contract? i.e. does the $700K decrease by 90% if he's in Rochester? If it's a 1-way contract, it's further evidence that the "TP is going to be a cheapskate from now on" notion from a couple of months ago is dead and buried.

As @Zamboni points out, I don't think Lehner was elite or close to elite. I think he was solid to good and held up his end on 2 very good teams -- which is much better than he was here, and I'm happy for him that he's established himself as a legit, quality NHL starting goalie. The Sabres were tied for 6th-worst last year. Other than the top line they were terrible at generating offense. ROR probably would've ignited Skinner and given them a credible 2nd line, but I still think the jump from where they were to a top 10 team is a bridge too far. You are right that Hecht was a better defensive center. Connolly was a far superior offensive player and still a very credible defensive player, so I'd go with him as a better "2-way" player, but certainly YMMV. Roy was the classic "empty calories" numbers guy who was not a meaningful contributor once he was needed in the top 6. I do not agree that Mitts has shown he can beat NHL D. He had 9 ES goals in 77 games in the season you mentioned, and has 12 ES goals and 8 ES assists in 114 NHL games. As for the Rochester coaches' quotes -- I think you are inferring affirmation of Casey's work habits out of general coachspeak, but of course YMMV. Now this is 100% correct. This is fair and as I've said previously I am in no hurry to unload Casey. They should keep him until they are required to make a roster or contract decision on him. I am simply objecting in general to the general assertions about his talent level, which I do not believe are borne out by his play, and I firmly believe that the organization should not count on him to becoming a contributing NHL player. Anything they get from him will be a bonus. 1st bolded -- do you think most NHL GMs would rather have Hall or ROR? I think most would prefer Hall. 2nd bolded -- yes indeed. This too.

Chicago is only trading Kane for a rich return -- it would have to be something like Reino, Mitts, Samuelsson and a #1. Kane turns 32 next month, but is still a very productive player. He has a $10.5MM cap hit for 3 more seasons, although the actual cash is $7MM per year. If Reino and Mitts would cost $7.5MM per year in cap hit between them (although I'm not sure what Mitts' cap hit is if he's in Rochester), then it's another $3MM per year in cap hit, and zero in additional cash, to convert Reino to Kane. Kane, a RW, will almost certainly be substantially better than Reino for at least the 1st 2 of those 3 years. A top line of Hall-Eichel-Kane would be freaking amazing. I'm interested.

Whoa. Not Cozens or Taylor Freaking Hall?

This is pretty generous. I think they'd probably be a bubble playoff team but not top 10. First bolded -- this is incorrect. You are right that he was a lousy 2-way player early in his career (although it goes without saying that his plus-minus as a member of 2 terrible teams is pretty much a useless stat), but by the end of his tenure here, TC was the Sabres' best 2-way center and penalty-killing center. 2nd bolded -- the likelihood of this happening is less than 10%. 3rd bolded -- this is a huge assumption that so far looks to be false. Mitts has been utterly unable to adapt his game to NHL speed and talent levels. He has not shown even a hint of being able to beat NHL defensemen by either skating or passing the puck. 4th bolded -- this is not supported by the quotes you posted. Those quotes support him having a good attitude and wanting to be a good player and a leader -- not that he is willing to put the time and work in to get there. I, and I think many others here, would like to see some kind of photo of him working out over the summer and looking ripped, instead of hanging out with his buddies on a boat and drinking beer, as evidence of his determination and work ethic.

No. Connolly had 2 very productive years in juniors before being drafted -- much more so than Mitts -- then joined the NHL in the year he was drafted and was an immediately productive player, with 34 pts in 81 games as a rookie, 41 pts in 82 games in his 2nd year and 45 pts in 82 games in his 3rd year. He was immature, like Mitts, and had concussion issues, both of which, along with the lockout year, prevented him from reaching his potential until he was 24. But he never looked completely lost at the NHL level like Mitts has.

Ugh. I think this is the year though. The Pats are pretty vulnerable and the Bills are good enough to beat them at least once. (They're also not so good that they could'nt lose to the Pats twice though.) However, they aren't going to beat Baltimore, Seattle, KC, Pittsburgh or anyone in the playoffs unless JA plays much more like the 1st 4 weeks than like the last 2.

I believe it 100%. Isn't there a town/community little league or something similar for soccer though? i.e. not travel soccer, and less skilled/competitive, but open to everyone and pretty cheap?

Good stuff here boys. I can't say I know anything about Hill other than what I learned by looking at his stats just now, but based on those stats, I would claim him off waivers in a heartbeat and send Hutton to the minors. https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=170947 - 6'6", 202 lbs, age 24, drafted in 2015. - After being drafted, 1 more year in juniors, then 3 seasons in the AHL, then pretty close to a split this year between the AHL and the NHL, with steadily improving numbers. Yes please (if there is no acceptable deal to be had for one of the other goalies available in trade).

I think the reason is that the best US athletes play other sports, because (i) those other sports are more fun to play and to watch and (ii) those other sports are more likely to give rise to college and pro opportunities.

Thanks. No -- it's turned off.

The native iphone/ipad browser -- Safari, I guess?

So, since the upgrade, I have needed to log back in on both phone and ipad every time I open SabreSpace, whereas previously I stayed logged in. Is anyone else having this issue? Does anyone have a solution? Thanks.

No. The GBD is 100% about lockdowns and the cost they exact on society. It says, in the 2nd paragraph: https://gbdeclaration.org/ I should note: you refer a number of times in your posts to wearing masks. The vast majority of those who are anti-lockdown and pro-GBD do not oppose wearing masks. They simply want schools, workplaces and society generally to reopen, with precautionary measures in place to protect the vulnerable, because the costs of continuing as we have been are way too high.

I think your data on children are a bit off. The WSJ has an article today on this: https://www.wsj.com/articles/end-the-school-shutdown-11603235888?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

The reason many people oppose shutdowns is because of the costs -- for example: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8856959/Lockdowns-lethal-toll-NHS-vulnerable-patients-laid-bare.html

It wasn’t a bunch of random people. The 3 authors of the GBD are epidemiologists and scientists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford — ie substantially better credentialed than the authors of the Jon Snow article. I think an important starting point in a discussion like this is to accept that there are reasonable, intelligent and well-intentioned people on both sides, and very limited and often-conflicting data.

To be clear — discussion of lockdowns vs reopening is fine in this thread, but not random shots at political leaders of any affiliation.

Especially because Mitts is 50/50 to wash out and it’s likely that one of Samuelsson or Johnson does the same.

I'm glad you posted this. I think a reasonable discussion about lockdowns vs reopening, and the scientific support for each side, is a good conversation to have. Especially when the Prince who was Promised is involved!

Holy straw man, batman! Good players can have bad games. I don't understand the point of insisting that someone didn't have a bad game when it is manifestly obvious that it happened.

Holding firm on the "JA was fine" position, eh?

Well, I think it was more a matter of him departing from his mechanics and simply missing on a bunch of open throws. It seems like in this year's NFL, you need to score at least 27 to beat the good teams. If you have open receivers on 3rd down and just miss them by 8 feet, you're not going to win.

I don't think the Sabres would, or should, unload 2 good players in order to bring in Kuemper (or any other goalie), and you're right that in my example, it would be tricky for them to figure out how to clear that last $2MM - $3Mm in cap space. I suppose I was thinking of buying out Hutton or giving someone a pick or prospect to take him. BTW, it sure would be nice right now to have that last $1MM of cap space that JB rolled over from last year, innit? (To be fair, we could say the same for the $700K or so that they are overpaying Zemgus.)

Maybe I'm missing something, but what about a simple Montour-for-Kuemper trade, with the Sabres retaining half ($1.9MM) of Montour's cap hit? AZ gets a good player and $2.6MM in savings. The Sabres deal from a position of strength and fill a major need. The Sabres would still need to figure out a way to save $2MM to $3MM in cap somewhere, but this would be a major upgrade on the ice. I suppose it might not be appealing enough from AZ's perspective -- but they seem pretty clearly intent on shedding salary, and there aren't many takers at this point.