LTS

As I predicted, I was too busy eating and drinking to pay attention to the game. I'm glad about that. Next.

So Eichel is out a few games to demonstrate that Skinner can't produce without Eichel centering him? ?

One thing is for certain... I will be too busy with other things tonight to pay too much attention to the game. I regret finally being able to watch the Sabres v Bruins... Let's Go Buffalo.

It is... it's just so awesome.

I hate not having NHL Network.. right about now.

I have one of the Reds.. it was the best of that time period. I would bet the 3rd's next year will be a royal design that they will then transition into as the regular for the 50th anniversary season. During the 50th they will have a different 3rd to wear as well. They can reverse the colors and go all gold with a little blue.. ?

Even companies with a good HR department. It's happened to me numerous times. Literally just stopped responding, to anything. The hiring manager, HR, anyone I spoke with and had contact information, all of them just stopped responding. This has happened at least 5-6 times for me and most of those were after second interviews no less. My summation is that I don't want to work for a company that conducts its business like that.

I'll miss it tonight. Watching Varsity hockey again... Although, if we end up in the bar at the rink I will glance up at the screen here or there. Let's Go Buffalo!

Reading the article in the BN about him.. his quotes...those are vintage RJ. "Still Kickin" "bolted to my lazy boy". It's never about him. In his mind he's just a guy who talks a lot. He's great.

I'm glad I've never seen the movie.. because I found that pretty damn funny.

I'm with you there. Sure, but we know he has a heart issue. He's come back after beating cancer. I'm not going further than that. RJ is making the decisions he thinks are best. The man has given so much to the Sabres fan base for so long that I can only support anything he decides.

Well, I mean that's just my read on it. But I've been told I was wrong before. Hell I think Donald Trump told me that a day or two ago on here. DISCLAIMER: This is not a political post. Literally someone used a Donald Trump to tell me I was WRONG.

That's open ended, so I don't know how to respond. Let's just say, I assume it would depend on which you'd rather be doing at the time.. announcing the game or sitting in your house. But the point, to address pi, is whether broadcasting is causing any additional stress to increase the risk to his health. I don't know if that can be answered. I don't want to speculate with relation to RJ. But there's stress in doing something and there's stress in no longer doing something as well. It really depends on what it means to that person.

The question is... would he have been wheeled out of his home on a gurney just the same?

It's kind of amazing (and in some ways not) the amount of Twitter traffic related to RJ. Naturally it runs the gamut.. but to have him trending on Twitter in the US is indicative of something. I'm basically still up tonight hoping for some word on his condition... and naturally I want it to be good news, for him.

I read Oshie's comment as basically saying.. Berglund recognizes that he was traded because of his own mistake and he's willing to walk away from the money in order to control where he plays next. He wanted to be in St. Louis but messed up that situation. If he ends up back there I would raise an eyebrow as I am not sure how you sign a contract with a guy who forced you into this situation. Sometimes it's really not about the money.

Didn't watch too much of last nights game... once I heard the Caps announcers I couldn't stomach listening to the game. NBCSN is dead to me for this. Will miss part of tonight's game.. (yep, kid has a game). Oh well, spending time with family is more important anyway. Let's Go Buffalo. Time for a win.

Looks like I will watch this one... despite it being NBCSN... sigh.

No comment. ??

So perhaps he ends up as a Sabres scout in Sweden where he gets paid a decent amount that doesn't count against the Cap? I can understand this viewpoint and especially that taking into account the Jeremy White tweet shared above too.

Ahhhhhhh..... yup. I want to see this kid's Dad.. because I'm curious where he learned all those mannerisms from.

Or you clearly define "best". The best team of the regular season is. The best team of the playoffs is. The best man in ThunderDome is...

So, at best you are left with an inconclusive result. No best team.

The NFL playoff format rewards the best team with a bye. This is inherently different than the NHL which does not. Objectively, all you can say is the team has to play one less game. It doesn't mean their last two aren't harder than another team's three. And it doesn't matter, you either win or you do not. If you do not, you weren't the best. You were successful, but not successful enough. As for why I am in the conversation? Because this is an open forum and the conversation was on playoff formats. Sorry, if my viewpoint doesn't meet your needs here, but that does not mean I was not supposed to not comment. The playoff formats, to me, are going to be directed largely at maximizing revenue and I have no problem with that. Because in the end, you have to win the games you are given to win it all. No excuses. The test gets run once and the variables are reset. This isn't a lab where you can reproduce results. The variables are constantly changing. See below. Also, injecting a meme into this would have cheapened the intellectual nature of the conversation, I am glad it did not work. I agree with you. The best team, as defined by the regular season, is the one who finished with the most points. Even then, people will argue, if it weren't for this or that happening another team might be considered the best. It's all speculation of course, because you define the best as the team that gets the most points (best record, whatever). How are you then arguing against my statement that the best team in a series or in a game is defined by the team that wins. It seems that now people who want to argue that are saying if it wasn't for this or that, etc. An objective measure is not open to interpretation. Winning is objective. It either happens or it does not. Losing because "I played bad" or "the refs screwed up" or "I forgot my helmet" or any other excuse is one of a myriad of variables that could have influenced the outcome. No one handed the Patriots the Super Bowl trophy because they hadn't lost until the last game. How many Patriots are walking around bragging about how they were the best team of that year? I am guessing none of them, because they didn't win the Super Bowl.

So you are subjectively defining the "best team". My argument is that objectively, the "best team" is the one who wins. Everything else is an excuse as to why it didn't happen.