LTS

There is a chance that something happened, something was found, etc. that has changed the situation. It certainly happens. Why do we need to nitpick the situation? He's not on the ice. He has a significant injury history. If he's injured, he's injured. It won't be a surprise to anyone and it won't really matter to the team since they've mostly been playing without him for the entirety of his contract. He clearly was on the ice, playing, during the summer. If nothing else, he was able to do that. So, whatever the reason is, it is. There's no need to begin trashing the guy.

This is a great deal. I am not worried about 2 years from now. Assuming Reinhart plays so well he commands $8M in a contract, it only matters if Mittlestadt and Dahlin also demand top money. If that happens, one of them (Reinhart) is going to get a good return in younger players or picks to help restock the prospect pool. If not, they find a way to sign all the players. If Reinhart doesn't play to $8M then the story changes. However, for the moment, it's a great deal.

Lidstrom was known for doing little things like that. Wonder where the kid might have seen it before... ?

Can't imagine why...

Deslauriers is signed for 2 more seasons for $950k. He's getting paid either way. And, if he's injured, he won't be sent down. So, it seems like it might actually be a good way to make the roster.

Bring. It. On. I'm ready for this tonight.

You can. MLS allows this as well.

Thanks! I hate not having televised pre-season. Laaaaazy. We want hockey!

Can't tell if there's TV coverage or not... none of the games on sabres.com list MSG under ANY of the pre-season. They list SportsNet for the Leafs games and they list NBCSN. However, if you look at the MSG GO site it lists tomorrow night's game against Pittsburgh at 7pm. Any TV tonight? I'm dying to watch some hockey.

I am reading that now. The first reports implied if the Sharks traded him to an Eastern Conference team. Much better then.

#agenda #narrative Wait.. is pi Cal O'Reilly?

First, I don't think just because of what they do they should be subjected to any different standard. Treat them the same as you would the barista getting your coffee. Why is there a reason to treat them differently? One makes saves, one makes coffee. Both might be very good at what they do or not. Is it because they make "millions of dollars" so they can take it? Money can afford a lot of treatment but it never prevents the cause. It can't cure mental health issues, it can't cure alcoholism, and it can't stop bullets. So, why treat an athlete any differently than your local bartender? Let me summarize my feelings this way. There's a world of difference in saying "You're a POS goaltender." and "You're a POS."

Certainly, but it's okay to trade him in the Western Conference... or trade him in the Western Conference to a team that moves him to the Eastern conference. Were I the GM in Ottawa I would have written that if Karlsson ends up in the Eastern conference this year we get a better pick. Or, I would have simply said, if you trade him at all. I don't suspect there's any way Karlsson gets traded (unless the Sharks have a massive collapse or significant injury epidemic). But... the possibility is there.

I just love the "You can't trade him back to the Eastern conference without giving us more." condition. Credit to Dorion for learning on his last trade with the Sharks? ?

Because it's a human thing to do? Why we feel the need to tear others down for their faults is beyond me. As a society we've become addicted to trying to tear everyone else down. If you misspell a word someone is there to make you feel stupid. If you make a typo in an otherwise incredibly insightful take someone is there to invalidate you as a person. We mock, we criticize, and then we stand back and say "Just kidding bro". What we don't take into account is that other people don't find it funny. What we don't take into account is what the other person is going through. We act like it's no big deal. But we never ask whose standard are we supposed to use to determine that? Keeping my statements strictly to hockey, we all know this is a game. We are all fans. We all agree that we are not going to live or die at the end of the day based on the results of our team, even if we are the most fanatical. If we know this, why do we want to attack people to the point of moving beyond their performance on the ice and bringing personal insults into the mix? If Robin Lehner had killed himself and left a note that said what he had said in this article and perhaps expanded more upon how his feelings of inadequacy were magnified because as his play on the ice went downhill he couldn't stand enduring the things he heard while playing, or on a talk show, or in comments sections. How would you feel if you were one of those people who had been insulting him as a person? Calling him worthless, etc. We talk about how professionals should avoid these things. They're professionals after all. I'm a professional too. I get paid to do a job. We're all professionals and yet many of us spend each day browsing social media and reading websites. We log in here and we see some discussions in here that attack others on here. But we're professionals, so we should avoid those or learn how to ignore them right? We know trolling is a thing, it works. But people are professionals, they should ignore it right? Well, the truth is, we are not professionals at ignoring people. Robin Lehner's skill is his hockey ability. He may be able to withstand 100mph slapshots but that does not mean he can withstand insults. Let's say, in this case, Robin Lehner had committed suicide. If your response to that is "Well, my insult didn't kill him.", you'd probably be right. It would be incredibly hard to quantify which component of the overall bad situation was the "straw". What can also be said is that your comment certainly didn't improve the situation. It certainly didn't work against it. Perhaps he never heard it and as such you say to yourself, well, if he never heard it then it could not have impacted him. I'd go along with that argument, unless you consider that your insulting statements might spark others to repeat them or add to them. Perhaps it helps build the overall negative atmosphere that contributes to the end result. There's no way of knowing that it does, but there's 100% certainty that by NOT saying anything you will not contribute. Even better, why not work against those who can't see how their insults can hurt those who are already hurting. Why not try and improve the situation? Why not lobby for more understanding? Certainly it's much easier to simply look at a goaltender who can't stop a shootout attempt and label him as a worthless piece of crap. He's a performing poorly as an NHL goaltender, there's no doubt. He's not a worthless piece of crap. As we've found out, he already thought he was worthless and inadequate. Despite wanting to be a great husband and father, he felt inadequate. In the moments when he needs all his energy to battle his own mind he now has to battle a sea of voices calling him a worthless piece of crap. If someone were struggling to breathe you wouldn't sit on their chest to add to their pain. But the problem with mental illness is that you can't see the struggle. It may not be there, but there's no need to add to the pain. At best you are only adding an insult, at worst you are reinforcing the already immense struggles the person is going through to not end their life. For what? Was it so you could make yourself feel better about a game where you've already acknowledged that you are not going to live or die by the outcome? You might not live or die by the outcome, but Lehner might.

That's fantastic.

All of this... honestly. We ride guys and insult them and call them names on here and many of them are dealing with real demons. They are real people with real problems and yet people come on here and degrade, belittle, insult them to such magnitudes all with the shrug of "They're professionals." Yet, when we read a story about a player and his demons we hope for the best. Perhaps we start out with a bit more understanding. Kane's problems happened in view of the public and he socialized them. There's a pretty big difference. If Lehner was out showing himself shotgunning a case of beer and acting out then I think he'd face the same criticism. Facing thoughts of suicide over your inadequacy in life are hard enough when they are only in your head. I can't imagine how much harder it makes life when you are in the public eye and have to hear people shouting at you on the ice, calling into radio shows, writing on comment sections and forums, all questioning whether you are worth it or not. I'm glad he's getting help. I hope that he stays strong and if means leaving hockey I hope he does that. As he said, he has a family. A wife who is clearly there for him and not his money and children who look up to him. They are more important than a game.

That's like blaming a manager for not getting more out of the CEO's pot smoking kid he was forced to take onto his team. Eichel doesn't pick the players he gets to play with. If he can turn crap into gold he might want to set up shop in a cow pasture.

I didn't watch it... I got to the point where they spelled Mark Borowiecki as Mark Borowiccki and stopped. Sweet lord, if you can't even spell your player's name right.. why bother?

So let me start over from the first post real quick. I think I can summarize my position. I am not uncomfortable with the honoring. I do think it gets to be too much. I have no problem thanking a service person when the situation arises. I don't go make it a point to stick my nose into a service persons business just to thank them either. As was stated, there is a clear marketing aspect to all of this and that's where I have a bit of a problem with it. It's different than any other marketing event in that if you don't stand up and applaud you're going to get some kind of public opinion backlash coming at you. This doesn't happen when you tune out the 3rd Bud Light commercial. But, in the end, I don't attend so many events where this gets to be annoying for me, so ultimately I don't care. What, in your original statement, do you define as uncomfortable? What is it, that makes that person an inferior man? As near as I can tell you have defined it as "those who form a negative opinion" about honoring those who've served. Are you referring to people who have a problem with EVER honoring them or are you referring to those who get tired of the events being tracked out over and over again?

There's a lot here.... probably too much for me to adequately share my thoughts. Both from what Nike has done as well as where the world is going. Good food for thought... gonna chew on it a bit.

So you agree with me that, we all have our own thoughts on what a man is and what a man should be. As such, I cannot be flat out wrong as you indicate. If I were flat out wrong then we clearly cannot have different thoughts and we clearly do. Your thoughts demonstrate a complete unwillingness to accept people for who they are and what they may feel. It shows a lack of desire to accept that their upbringing, family, environment, education, or personal experience might have shaped their thoughts and ideas and that because it they demonstrate personal traits you find so abhorrent. If you are going to ask us to accept your viewpoints because of the 5 criteria you suggested, how can you not accept alternate viewpoints based on those same 5 criteria? If you reject it, flat out, as you are indicating by saying "flat out wrong" then you invalidate your viewpoint. If you accept it, then you accept that your viewpoints may indeed be open for alteration. Unless you'd like to take a step back and retract your statement that you do believe that we all have our own thoughts and ideas of what a man is and what a man should be. If that's the case then we get to "This is the world according to Hank. No discussion needed."

Just stop... ? The only problem with that house is that I would have to wear sunglasses inside! That's a beautiful place.

Those noises you hear are Bills fans everywhere crashing back down to Earth from the ridiculous euphoria that enveloped them. They sucked last year. They still suck. They are probably even worse than last year. I can't even imagine getting mad about anything related to this team. The argument over which QB would suck less is entertaining but to be calling names like that over it? Let's be real... Tom Brady could start for the Bills and the end result might be 10 points instead of 3 today and they'd probably still go 0-16. Accept it now and save yourself the grief.

What I wouldn't give for a good quality stream though... Terrible quality coming out of HarborCenter. Shouldn't be that hard to get a good quality video feed.