Hoss

The confiscation of his vehicle seems to go a step beyond a search, though. Although I have seen him driving it for some time so it's safe to assume it was brief. Also the current DA is in the middle of a fight to go from "acting DA" to actual DA. His party just endorsed another candidate. He may be holding off for election reasons.

Spoiler alert: they got the car out.

Drink to peace. ;)

Now THIS is good. Appreciate the insight. I think many can tell the team isnt as fond of him as many fans are. Moving him would still be a decent surprise.

I don't understand where you're coming from here. I was settling on a point and saying I appreciated how you handled this, not anything near calling you a dick. The conversation was mostly civil considering our level of disagreement. We disagree. It happens. It doesn't mean you're being a dick. Or even that I am (I know I was as I believe you were on Twitter). I was certainly being unfair in the "mediocre" comment. I apologize for that. Uncalled for and untrue. If either of us is mediocre it's me but I haven't approached that level yet.

This is certainly true. But being a journalist is far from the hardest craft and far from the least rewarding, according to those I know who have enjoyed success in this era. If she's passionate about it I'm sure she'll be great at it. It's a tough business, as they say, but it's not rocket science or medical practice.

I know plenty who have zero trouble being journalists in this era. Almost every one of them I'm thinking of thrives in it because they actively engage in reporting on social media without engaging with the masses of doofuses who try to ruin it. (The doofus here is the one tweeting idiotic things at journalists, not the journalists responding to them) JW - we disagree. Clearly pretty strongly. I've made my thoughts clear both at you and to you now. That's fine. I'm glad you joined the discussion and got an opportunity to explain yourself while giving me the opportunity to do the same. It was an enjoyable exercise and I respect you for keeping it mostly civil as I hope I did, as well. You're a good journalist. Respect to you and yours and I look forward to your reporting in the future. If you've got any other thoughts or questions about my thoughts or questions then feel free to continue either here or in a direct message.

Why is it such a crime against humanity for people to take extensive time and effort to explain why they disagree with other poster? What do you want this place to be that it isn't when that happens? Good grief.

:D Oops.

I'm probably the most anti-corporate person here and I still find the whining to be unbelievably gross. #BellLetsTalk is one of the best things to happen to the fight for mental health in my memory.

Well, that's strange. I've clearly been responding to you and presenting my thoughts with many details. You do have the right to defend yourself which is why I'm here talking to you and not doing whatever else it is I would be.

It did. I would agree with you if there weren't many thinking the same. And when I say many I mean legitimately every person I know who read the tweet.

JW --- The "dirty places" comment had nothing to do with ethics. It was more about your willingness to go out and get a story as opposed to fingering a phone all day. I know of multiple times you've been where others weren't and, because of it, you got a story others didn't.

Exactly. The argument seems to be that he adds value simply because of who he is and the content he brings is completely irrelevant.

THIS is what your report should be, then. What you reported reads as if your source was indicating that Bob McKenzie had sources indicating to him that Stamkos is considering those ideas in a possible jump to Buffalo. Your actual report is more that the team will consider chasing him and what McKenzie laid out is what Buffalo will use to engage him. There's a difference in what a team thinks for a player and what a player thinks for himself, and I think your report indicates more information about the player than the team despite your source indicating information about the team and not so much the player.

JW PLEASE READ THIS POST AS IT IS MEANT AS CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM AS YOUR ROLE HERE AS A POSTER I do not feel JW has added any value to this community. He isn't going to sneak in any good sourced insights that he hasn't already shared publicly or at least hasn't as far as I have seen. He spent most of his recent visit to this board attacking and battling GoDD. I'm sure there's areas of the game he understands more than many of us so if he engaged in those discussions in a non-confrontational manner it would be an addition. To this point he hasn't. If I just thanked him for being an AP journalist entering this board without considering the content he has added to this point it'd be a disservice to those who have been run out of here despite more meaningful contributions.

This would be curious. Does Kane have a friend who uses his car? The hospital initiated the investigation based on evidence they found and the evidence led them to Kane and his vehicle.

Many thought it would last year.

I agree with everything you said here. Hopefully my follow up above makes my position more clear instead. Again, agreed. I wasn't really saying you were backing him up. Thanking him for being here is a little fanboyish but you followed up with a legitimate criticism of his actions.I should stop talking like that. I'm an emotional person. It takes time for me to get to a more level-headed speaking arrangement. I purposefully left that in the post because I felt it was important to show the progression of my thoughts while I was making that post. I'm a work in progress as is everybody here. Your edit is certainly spot on. If the ignorance is destructive prior to any further provoking then expose those idiots to the masses. If it's mild and in disagreement then a more personal direct response without "quote tweeting" is more fair (for those that don't know a response to a tweet will ONLY show to people that follow both individuals whereas a QUOTE TWEET will show to everybody who follows the person quote tweeting. A more well-known individual quote tweeting will instantly draw attention to the tweet quoted).I feel as though public figures should just block people more often than they engage in public banter with them. Nobody ends up looking good there.

This just made everything ten times worse. Me responding to you is making a mistake because, due to your mildly well-known name as a reporter, everybody will back you up... But your report makes absolutely no sense. You say McKenzie has a good lay of the land regarding the Sabres/Stamkos discussion. Bob comes back DIRECTLY TO YOU and tells you he isn't saying anything about a Sabres/Stamkos discussion. It was essentially a game show. Based on your brief breakdown of the discussion a more appropriate tweet would've excluded any connection from the Sabres to Stamkos as nothing related to the Sabres was being reported by McKenzie. Your tweet indicates that what he said on TSN was an example of his grasp on the situation surrounding Stamkos AS IT RELATES TO THE SABRES. I'm sure Bob McKenzie has as good a grasp on Stamkos as anybody outside of Stamkos' life and Tampa Bay. Also nobody here said you said it was a done deal. Don't get your Twitter battles mixed up with what's going on here. The person that persistently claimed you did was a fool for doing so and your badgering/quote tweet bullying of him only made him look more foolish. The initial tweet is irrelevant to the discussion because the discussion is specifically about the Bob McKenzie tweet. And you say you only credited Bob because he started the conversation but then the conversation you represented in your post is exclusively about Bob McKenzie. I think you missed on this one. And your long attack on GoDD probably would've gotten a suspension at least for many. But I don't actually think you'd be banned. My comment was about somebody saying my post about you could be ban worthy. Neither of us should be banned for our comments, but if one of us would be the other certainly crossed whatever imaginary line is drawn. I value you as a reporter in Buffalo sports. One of the very select few I think has legitimate sources and is willing to go to the dirty places for a small scoop (I know this to be true). But I think you're just as grumpy as the rest and far too condescending/defensive with those who know far less than you. It's a big world with a lot of people. There are few shared experiences between certain people so shaming them on twitter by making their ignorance public instead of just ignoring it is wrong.

This should be in the awesome thread. So cool.

Rob Scuderi placed on waivers by the Blackhawks. They acquired him in exchange for Trevor Daley not too long ago. Daley was the centerpiece to the Patrick Sharp deal. Rough maneuvering for Chicago there.

This is obnoxious. This is not obnoxious and I agree. As my post indicates, I don't think he does it. I think there's definitely a rationale to it, though, as you say.

I really don't think there are any "flashes." When I hear somebody flashes too-six talent I think it has to be somebody who does it more than two or three times in an 82-game season. Instead of flashes I see them as aberrations.

There could be an interesting debate about whether he'd be better off taking a four-year deal vs the max seven-year deal he can get in free agency. A four-year deal means he'll probably get one more good contract. A seven-hear deal likely is his final top contract. Given injury risk and other risks, though, I probably still go seven.