That Aud Smell

Not an entirely accurate thing for me to say. I effing LOVE stingers.

I wonder if it was a stinger or something similar? Also, I do not KNOW what a stinger is. I just know football players get them sometimes (shoulders?), that they often look terrible, but then the player often comes back in during the same game. (Paging the board's physicians. There are a few. The one who pops to mind is @Wyldnwoody44.)

thanks. the science of the study i was referring to was fascinatingly nuanced on this subject. and it wasn't just mercury they were testing for - there was some other bad stuff that i can't recall (study participants gave periodic blood samples). i just found the paradox compelling: the scientists went into the study fully expecting the data to overwhelmingly advise against people eating certain fish out of certain great lakes and related waterways ... but the science wound up being more mixed than they'd expected. and they followed that science.

Thanks. I don't think those studies are directed to the question that I have, though. My question has the modern trend of year-round, over-use, and specialization in youth sports had an effect on the health of pro athletes during their careers? Are pro athletes healthier now than they were, say, 30 years ago? It's tricky. Because there's a lot to control for. The year-round specialization is presumably bad, but there are lots of other things happening around that behaviour that is probably good for an athlete's health (overall fitness and strength training, nutrition, as examples). It calls to mind a study that a friend of mine worked on: The consumption of fish that have high mercury levels in them. Mercury - very bad for your health! Fish - very good for your health! How's that shake out?

Right. Like, where are the Steve Nashes of the world nowadays? More and more, I believe that youth sports in America have trended toward year-round specialization not for the benefit and advancement of the athletes, but rather for the benefit and support of the industrial complexes that youth sports have created (coaches, administrators, facilities, etc.). Is it more true or more false to say: If your kid is destined to be an elite [insert sport] player, then they would find their way to a top flight professional team without the assistance of the current youth sports industrial complex. Yet again on the other hand, it's also true that the major soccer clubs of England Europe (Man U, Barcelona, Real Madrid, and literally hundreds of others) have "academies" where kids join (after having been invited) and train year-round with their academy team (peers). I think that's been going on for some time (Messi left Argentina for Barcelona at age 13) -- and that's without the influence of the pay-to-play dynamic we see in U.S. youth sports. I've confused myself. Sounded imminent last time I read something on Twitter. Maybe even this weekend?

This is a good site for assessing NHL teams' 23-man rosters. https://puckpedia.com/lineups/buffalo-sabres If my math is mathing, UPL on a conditioning loan to Roch would give the Sabres 23 players on their NHL roster.

Fwiw, this blog seems to imply that, having assigned UPL to Roch for conditioning, the Sabres are already carrying 3 goalies on their roster? https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/understanding-conditioning-stints-toronto-maple-leafs-roster-loopholes-that-arent/ Conditioning Loan The standard form of the loan lasts for 14 consecutive days. The player is sent to the AHL, plays in whatever games he’s assigned and then returns to the NHL at the end. His salary is paid as if he’s in the NHL, and the player counts against the salary cap and the 23-man roster limit. A team has to have the kind of cap situation that allows for enough players as extras to make this possible. The Commissioner has the right to investigate the circumstances of any loan, so teams cannot use the loan to evade waivers or the salary cap. Players must consent to conditioning loans as well.

Sure. My point being: Lyon is and will remain on the team's NHL roster. It's an open question whether he's the team's 1, 1A/1B, or 2. So there's no further need to evaluate him in connection with (making a roster spot for) UPL's return. It's Ellis that may create a roster conundrum if he repeats the performance he had last night. Shenanigans are always possible, I suppose. Anyone know what the league's rules say about this sort of thing?

Others said upthread that conditioning stints have fixed timelines. I don't think there's as much flexibility as you imply. I don't think the Sabres want or need to further evaluate Lyon - he's a known commodity at this point.

We need data and science to get on this. We're far along enough in the modern era of youth sports where pro players bodies may also be worse for wear from a childhood spent focused on one sport, year-round.

ah, phew. i mean i think "phew." i'm more worried about zucker still? can rosen supply some of what will be missing when zucker misses time?

damn. do you have a link?

Who's a solid/scoring winger in Rochester? ... Rosen? oh ya, for sure. wtf, boys. why are you always getting injured.