nfreeman

Of course they’re real. The Sabres committed the two most grievous offenses possible, on Black Sunday and then the tank, and for those sins were sentenced, correctly, to a generation in the wilderness. If we are very lucky, Cozens and RK will prove to be the ones sent by the hockey gods to lead us into the promised land, having decided that we’ve suffered enough. But we need to trust the process and not screw it up again.

Pulled the trigger too early you hoser.

I have watched the last couple of games in this series and was thinking the same thing. His line (with Nylander and Caggiula) was terrible. I guess I'd still bring Strome in if the price was cheap and if a better option isn't available, but I would not be confident about substantial improvement in the 2nd line.

I wouldn't say so, but I'm also not the first one to pick up on that kind of thing (or many other kinds of things, for that matter). I'm sure it will get hot again soon though. Just enjoying it while it's here -- it was a pretty hot July here.

First, that is an excellent website you linked to -- thanks. You are right that the UK has a lower death rate currently, but the difference is pretty low in absolute numbers -- about 2 deaths per million. Also, I think rolling 30-day average is probably a bit more accurate than rolling 7-day. In any case, my point was about the states, which are the bodies (along with localities) that set school-opening policy, not the fed. Again, many states have lower death rates, including current death rates, than the UK, and those states are taking a substantially different approach from the UK's. I'm not saying that one is right and the other is wrong, but I find it interesting that credible parties are taking different approaches on a major issue here.

Overall, the per capita death rate in the US is substantially lower than that of the UK. As for current trends, the numbers are more unstable, but certainly there are plenty of US states with lower current cases and death rates than the UK.

Here's something I just learned and found interesting: schools are going to be open in the UK this fall, with no online component, no masks, no social distancing -- essentially business as usual. Meanwhile, it seems like the percentage of US schools that are going to be partially or entirely online this fall is pretty high.

Bumpity bump. Here's a bit of good news on a Friday: it has been much cooler in upstate NY the last couple of mornings, which makes a morning run much more pleasant, which in turn creates a good mood for the rest of the day and facilitates a good night's sleep.

Good. I will say though that I think a decision by an NFL player to opt out would be more justifiable and logical, in terms of virus risk, than a similar decision by an NBA player or an NHL player. I think the NBA and NHL bubbles are safer than living at home, while playing in the NFL, which is going without a bubble, is riskier than living at home.

Well, hopefully Cozens is the Prince who was Promised, and takes over 2C in 2021-22. If Strome can be had for a cheapo price in trade and then a bridge contract (he is RFA after this season), I'd be pretty happy to plug him in as 2C for next season, drop him to 3C the following year, and then decide whether he's worth a long-term deal. It seems fairly likely that Strome will be in more or less the top 3 centers that change teams this offseason. If the Sabres can get someone better? By all means, I hope they do so. But if not, I'd much rather they pick up Strome under the parameters described above than take the JB "hope for the best" approach and waste another year of Eichel's prime.

Minor complaint, but my daughter went to the dentist today for the first time in a while and she has TEN cavities!

So...Reino, Montour, #8 and Samuelsson for Monahan and Gaudreau? I would do that in a second, so I don't think the Sabres are paying enough. I also don't think Calgary will trade Gaudreau. But if they get knocked out in the play-in or in the 1st round, they might panic and trade Monahan.

I can see Strome as the Sabres’ target and I can see Chicago being interested in trading him, but Saad seems too expensive, too short-term and he’s a LW.

Also Venice.

Couple of other thoughts: - If it is Calgary and Monahan, Reino makes sense as the biggest piece going the other way. He's a good player with good numbers and I can see Treliving and his management team wanting him. From KA's perspective, Reino is an RFA who will need a fat new contract, probably at around the same cost as Monahan's deal ($6.375MM per year for 3 more years) or higher, and he isn't as good as Monahan. - The point made upthread about Kahun, VO and Ullmark also being RFAs is interesting. I think VO and Kahun will definitely be back, but I'm not sure about Ullmark. KA has to understand that they need to improve their goaltending. If they keep Ullmark, I don't think they can give him a contract that isn't a #1 goalie contract -- and under current team and league economic circumstances, I can easily see them deciding that Ullmark isn't worth that kind of deal.

This is an interesting question, to be sure. But it's certainly possible that the other side might be willing to pull the trigger now if the Sabres were offering up, say, #8 and some combination of Joker, Mittlestadt, Borgen, Samuelsson and/or Johnson, on the theory that if they don't act now, the Sabres might find a better deal elsewhere -- and the Sabres might feel the same way. If it's, say, Calgary, and they lose to Winnipeg and decide to blow things up and trade Monahan -- I'd kinda like KA to jump on that before Calgary finds a deal they like better elsewhere. Of course, it all depends on the specifics.

Jeez. Can't we just enjoy something for a minute? It was indeed @sabresparaavidawho had the JB firing. As for the timing of a deal: if it's a team that loses the play-in round, couldn't it happen this week?

Again: I mentioned the sides and drinks at BK in response to someone else's post about 2 whoppers for $5. Not sure what the problem is here. Would you say that complaining for months about a deleted post that I offered to restore is pointless? The link you posted in no way refutes my assertion. It's just more PO'd free association of the type that surfaces easily among people who are so inclined who want to turn every discussion into a political argument.

The Rockies in Colorado Pacific coast highway Grand Canyon Lake Tahoe Ralph Wilson Stadium Paris Monte Carlo Swiss Alps Ring of Kerry in Ireland

Dude. I said that if you're at BK, go ahead and get the 2 whoppers, but don't get the jumbo fries and jumbo sugary soda -- and with the money you save, get a salad and water instead, which costs less than the fries and soda in the case of the cheaper salad and a bit more in the case of the fancy salad. It's still true if you're feeding 2 people -- get the 2 whoppers, 2 salads and 2 waters instead of 2 whoppers, 2 fries and 2 sugary sodas. I did NOT say skip the whoppers and spend 2.5x as much. I think it's important to stay away from wild mis-characterizations and putting words in people's mouths if meaningful conversations are to be had. I mentioned drinks and sides early in this conversation because I think those are major contributing factors to diabetes and obesity, which are 2 major health issues in the country, both as regards Covid and otherwise. BTW, most of the people who need to take this advice don't live in inner cities and don't live in food deserts either.

I agree with I think @DarthEbriate -- didn't look intentional, can't be sure, and Tkachuk has forfeited the benefit of the doubt with numerous prior dirty plays.

Burger King menu prices: garden side salad — $1.99 Caesar salad w grilled chicken— $6.19 Large fries — 2.39 Large soda — $2.39 https://www.menuswithprice.com/burger-king-menu/ I submit the notion that 2 whoppers for $5, with a salad and water instead of large fries and large soda, is plenty of food, while also costing less $$ or slightly more and being obviously much better for you. Even better if you skip part of the rolls per @Eleven’s advice.

It's not the whoppers that result in diabetes and obesity. It's the super size fries and super size sugary soda. And no one is forcing anyone to eat that crap.

Was the baseline of 21 the # of picks bequeathed to him by Darcy? Or just the average # of picks a team would normally have (i.e. 7 picks x 3 years)? Not to nitpick, but I think the former is the correct starting point for an analysis of whether TM frittered away picks.

I believe in this, and it's been tested by research.