LTS

#firstworldproblems ... and you know it better than any of us.

You put the what in the who, when? You know what... brag all you want. This is amazing stuff. When you invest everything into something and are filled with doubts it makes it all that much more amazing when you come out on the other side not only successful, but ahead of where you thought you could even be. If that's not something you can brag about I don't know what is... Well done sir.

I think the league is subtly moving that way. Players realize the precarious balance of their heads. The hits are still there but they tend to me lessening in frequency (eye test). There are still some huge hits as well. That said, it's a game that allows contact and there is going to be contact and at times it will be violent and unavoidable. If you play a game at a high enough pace at some point you are going to find yourself in an unavoidable collision. I don't really like fighting, but I don't like players being disrespectful turd-blossoms either. Even in the leagues I play in, non-checking, I've taken some big hits. It's a matter of two people needing to be in the same place at the same time. Incidental contact and boom. It's definitely not the same as laying a hip into someone or running a player along the boards though.

Not at all... but it fits your narrative. And this is why... for as bad as Buffalo was.. no one wanted Antipin in trade and he wasn't cracking the lineup. Antipin might have promise, but that mentality is why he's never going to be a winner. He's basically saying he'd prefer to go back to a lower level and win than play at the highest level and lose. I can go into a 3rd grade gym glass and kick the crap out of them in dodge ball. Am I winner? Sure, I won the game. But I'm a loser at life. Antipin is trending in the wrong direction on this one.

A likable goaltender isn't going to overcome a lack of talent. As I said, all things being equal... a goaltender who is respected will get better effort from a team than one who is not. If you don't trust your goaltender, odds are good you don't respect him. I've played on teams too, I've seen it. I've coached it. It's human nature and it's not just applicable in sports. This might be something to buy into, if it were ONLY the Buffalo Sabres who had an opinion on Housley. But it isn't. There was a lot of praise being thrown on Phil from all over hockey circles. There's no fan emotion in that praise. Last year's team may have had talent but it had no cohesion. The assertion that talent trumps teamwork is absurd. Just doesn't happen... they are related, not independent from each other.

Yes, I acknowledged that Fleury tended to suck it up in the playoffs. In addition, in 2017, if i recall correctly, Murray was injured and Fleury got them through the first few rounds of the playoffs. As for the point about other players being respected, I think it's very different. If there's going to be a shot on net and a player isn't inspired as much to get in the way or change the angle of the shot, it makes the goaltender's job harder. If there's a need to bust butt back up the ice to backcheck to prevent a shot on net or even hassle the shooter so the shot isn't as high quality it's less likely a player is going to do it because when the goaltender says something about it in the locker room, no one is going to care. If the goaltender isn't supported then that potentially they don't try as hard either... and goal goes in net. Apply that to any other player and the goal doesn't necessarily go in the net. It might be 1 player out of 18 skaters that doesn't get a pass, but if they aren't trying hard they might get benched or they might have a bad year, the puck doesn't go in the net. The same holds true in football. If the RB or QB aren't respected by the O-Line, what's the different in effort they put into blocking? It's not the same as a WR not being respected... then the QB might not throw him the ball.

If it had not been gourmet steak would it have been okay?

Yeah. It's not always so much about the news outlets while a story is in the news. It's about any source that follows up on a story so that you could get a start to finish on what happened. I know it's a long shot since most people don't care enough to want to know what happens. This is why it's bad to be accused of a crime and arrested even if you aren't guilty of it (and especially if someone else is). The public labels you immediately and then moves on. No need for facts or reality.

You don't? https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/2018-nhl-playoffs-five-reasons-the-pittsburgh-penguins-were-eliminated-by-the-washington-capitals/ The Penguins are an exceptionally talented team. There were a few things that went wrong in that series. Washington also was an exceptional team. However, Murray's play was less than exceptional. Perhaps Fleury doesn't fare any better, there's no real way to tell. However, he was gone and players certainly talked about how his presence in the locker room would be missed. Simultaneously, the team he went to continually pointed to Fleury as being a huge reason why they were winning. There's no way to definitively prove that example, one way or another. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that Fleury has an impact on the team he plays for and that players want to play just a bit harder for him. All of that aside, the point was about a goaltender who has respect in the locker room will carry a team further than one who doesn't, all things being equal.

The way this league is trending, there are only a handful of players who are worth the long term deal at 28/29 (at least at the range Karlsson is going to get) There are far more players worth the long-term deal that gets them to 28/29. You keep Reinhart... Karlsson is someone else's bad investment. If you sign Reinhart to 6 years at his price tag he'll probably still be movable if he's not where you want him to be. If you sign Karlsson you'll have to make one of those salary cap adjustment trades that can be pulled off but usually at the expense of one of your younger potential stars.

The Hutton play shouldn't be underestimated and you are doing that if you base your evaluation solely upon his stats. Show me a team that has a goaltender the locker room likes, that is a pillar for the team, and you'll see a team with confidence and one that can achieve. Fleury was a crucial component of the Penguins runs, even when he was also being hammered for his poor playoff performance. The team genuinely missed him last year and it showed. The Panthers play better because Luongo is a rock for the team. He doesn't have to be spectacular. Players simply want to succeed to help him succeed. Players are judged by their stats and a goaltender can have a higher GAA and lower SV% but if the W column is working, it won't matter. No other player gets that pass on the team. The Sabres didn't have a goaltender that the locker room cared for last year. I think they will this year and I think it will show, regardless of the stats.

You only torture yourself by living in the past. ? It would appear Taro is very, very tortured.

This is borderline politics, but I have a feeling it will get political so I am putting this in here. Bear with me, this is not conspiracy theories run amok but rather an attempt to accept the possibilities that certain events are orchestrated to manipulate public opinion and to identify resources that may help debunk such theories due to their exhaustive coverage and investigation. I thought about this last year when the shooting in Las Vegas occurred. I am reminded more about it today after reading about Mollie Tibbets. In short, the people behind these events seem to have mental issues, seem to have a questionable background, etc. Certainly this makes them potentially more prone to commit violent acts, but at the same time doesn't also leave them more prone to being manipulated into committing them? Let's hypothesize about the Mollie Tibbets situation. The kidnap and killing of a person, who by all accounts, was a good social icon. A person who would pull at the heartstrings of America and increase the debate against undocumented immigrants. The material certainly writes itself and as the news came out yesterday politicians were shouting it far and wide. Now granted, there are some interesting aspects of the case. Such as he apparently passed the governments E-Verify database that employers (in this case a farmer related to a prominent Republican) use to determine eligibility. Over the coming days more and more information will come out. Some of it will be potentially fake news. Some of it might be outlandish and be considered fake news, but it could be real news. Some of it will be the basic facts and coverage of events. However, almost universally, all of it will be gone from the public view within a few weeks. This is where I am asking... are there news outlets or investigative resources that continue to collect and review information regarding high profile events such as this? I'd like to know more about the Las Vegas shooter and other related information that was thrown around and further investigated. The problem is, news media isn't covering it anymore. I suspect the same will hold true for Mollie Tibbets. It's not about trying to prove a conspiracy theory so much as trying to understand the possibility that such manipulation could be occurring through these events. Bottom line, it doesn't take too much mental stretching for me to see how this undocumented immigrant could have been approached by a special interest group and trained to commit an act when needed. People in high security positions are compromised all the time, it can't be harder to compromise a regular citizen or even an undocumented immigrant. What if, in the next few years, members of his family are given citizenship as part of the deal? Money paid to families in his home country. There are a lot of options that could be used to encourage a person to commit a crime in the interest of swaying public opinion. I started attempting to do research on the Las Vegas shooter, but the trails end quickly. It's all articles from around that time and then nothing else. The puff pieces, suggestions, innuendo, facts.. and then archived and put away. Anyone aware of any resources that might be good to connect into to continue understanding what is learned as people inevitably dig through the information and trails that are left behind? THANKS!

Many places according to one person I know who works in the business... it's a lot more difficult (and expensive) to buy the cream, sugar, eggs, cook the base, and then make ice cream. It takes more equipment. Much easier to buy the pre-made base and then add your flavors, items, etc. churn it, then freeze it.

Wings have pretty much become a commodity that anyone can do decent and very few do well. The big names are no longer really all that exceptional. Do they use fresh wings? (Huge difference here) Do they cook them long enough? (although asking for extra crispy should help that) What is the sauce? (the biggest variant, but not always) As for the sauce, so many places use Frank's that it no longer makes the wings stand out. It's the places that have elevated Frank's or have made other sauces that are better that really stand out. There is a sense, I think, of how close a place can hit what many of us remember as being THE "Buffalo Wing" but in reality that wing just isn't that awesome anymore. I've gone back to Anchor and Duff's and I find neither of them all that spectacular. Meanwhile we have a few local places that have started firing up their own sauces or augmenting a standard base (like Frank's) and are turning it into something better. I look at it like ice cream. So much "homemade" ice cream is made by adding things to a Perry's Ice Cream base. You can make a lot of variations, but the base remains the same.

A guy I know broke up with his girlfriend this past weekend... he then spent the remainder of Sunday night swiping right for over 800 women in his area on some dating app... Tinder.. who knows.. I don't pay attention to how it all works. I'm pretty sure if were single again I would remain single forever... I don't have time and most assuredly any patience or desire to deal with that kind of garbage. If I were that girl I would have only been interested in those that left. Those that stayed were far too desperate and sure as hell don't value their time enough.

It's consumed by people, therefore it's for people. I believe what you meant to say is, "it's not something i would consider eating." And... we now return you to pizza.

Yeah.. it's like March for me when the only thing anyone talks about is that pathetic sport called basketball or from December 20 - February 8th when it's nothing but football this and that. August is for baseball. It's how it is. I am thinking about recording parents this year at hockey games. I might extend that into next baseball season. The stuff I have heard come from people's mouths about kids is disgusting. The I've heard parents say to their own kids about their teammates or opponents... disgusting.

In theory.. and regardless of your GOP reference.... the list of American presidents doesn't overwhelm me, period. They are people. I'm not saying they should not have security. But the level of security... it's insane. Moreover, for life.... We protect them as though they are irreplaceable, and then replace them. That's my point. Protect them like they are replaceable.. because clearly they are. Certainly not saying that they should not have some level of protection.

Believe it... totally.

The whiskey... not that good. Needs a lot more love and aging. The vodka, made mostly with rye, I like. The gin I like. It's a good place to hang out and if you want a good cocktail, even with the whiskey, it works. Totally understand about the salad. Good to know you are working in my backyard. Cheers! Also, was visiting my parents in Franklinville today.. Rizzo's Pizza. You can order "Buffalo style pepperoni, "cup-n-char". Thought of this thread immediately.

I do mean physical harm. That's my entire point about security. How much money is spent on security for a person who will have a job at most 8 years? I understand that while in office the position has power but we know that person isn't so amazing that we aren't willing to get rid of them in 8 years or less. If the person had some unique abilities that needed to be protected, that would be one thing. There's nothing unique about a president. Just a rant of mine... I understand that no security or less security might invite additional attempts at violence. It could lead to constant turnover as people inflicted harm upon those in that position. I get all of that... I dunno. They are just people.

It's not so much about the term limit as it is that the term limit exists so we recognize that the person isn't that important (or shouldn't be that important for too long) but then we protect them like they cannot be touched. The concept of a term limit only makes sense when you accept that the people who are being ruled are too ignorant to use the already established mechanisms to limit the terms of politicians themselves. Implementing term limits is the ultimate "not my responsibility" move. Moreover, if we actually had politicians who were GOOD at what they do and beneficial it would cause change when change should not occur. The only RIGHT answer is for people to educate themselves and become more intelligent on the people they are electing to lead their governments.

Where.. because.. sashimi... is there any place around Rochester?