Eleven

I don't get it...

I'm headed to a surgical supply store in a few minutes; not sure what they'll have left, but I want some latex gloves. Can I pick up anything for you?

Well, this particular WaPo article is definitely behind a paywall for me. In fact, the redirect is so fast that I can't even link to the actual webpage!

So here's the thing. The Sabs have this "best defenseman since Denis Potvin" hanging around, but they also have a LOT of needs. Lindros was traded for Forsberg, Ricci, Hextall, Duchene, and Kerry Huffman, as well as $15M in cash. The Sabres don't need the cash, so let's pretend that $15M becomes another player or a prospect or something.

Should be towards the top of reddit.com/r/buffalo....wait, here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Buffalo/comments/fsq12c/buffalo_braces_to_become_a_coronavirus/

The league might be the problem. I saw this today; I don't think it's an April Fool's Day gag, but maybe it is:

Please keep comments about Craig Smith to the free agent threads, thank you. Ok, seriously: I wish that certain media sites would lift their paywall restrictions for COVID coverage. The Buffalo News doesn't get much right, but it got that right. I'm pretty sure that WSJ can afford to make that article available. A similarly restricted Washington Post article today suggests that Buffalo is about to get hit HARD. The entire article is about Buffalo, but we can't read it. (It is copy/pasted on reddit for anyone who wants to look.) Meanwhile, ABC reports that 1400 NYPD have tested positive, which reflects Dr. Smith's comment that 15% of NYC first responders are hit. I read somewhere--don't remember where; it was two days ago--that NYC is peaking and I hope that's right. "Let Me Clear My Throat" would indicate one example.

No it hasn't. Players wanted to come here in 2007.

Really? This one?

Today I learned and wished I hadn't, even if it is purely mythological.

This wouldn't surprise me one bit. As soon as this thing hit I called my parents and asked them to check with me before making any big changes like putting all of their portfolio into gold or something like that. You just know people are going to prey upon the elderly.

I guess he didn't look quite as bad to me as he did to you two!

I think that's bad news on Larsson but I also think you're right. Would you not want Simmonds at the price GA suggested? $2.5 for a vet presence isn't bad.

Google search for "NYSE" (I wanted to see how the market in general did, not just DJIA or S&P) gave me visiting hours and peak visiting times. Umm, I don't think so.

New England fans are sooooooo soft: https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/patriots-fans-roasted-espn-over-first-take-poll-omitting-tom-brady And they even have a special "Tom Brady" tab at the top for a guy who isn't even their QB anymore!

I'd do that.

What do you think Simmonds will sign for?

I like a lot of this thinking. I'd rather keep Girgensons and Larsson together though. I don't know what Simmonds will cost, but if it's anything near $5M, I don't want to pay that to replace Okposo on the checking line.

The treatment was touted in "the media" piece that nfreeman posted--the one that started this very discussion! I've read hopeful articles about what the French are doing on numerous different sites for a week now. That is "the media." The fact is, you can't point to any "active campaign" by "the media" (whatever you mean by that) to prevent the treatment from being widespread, and you can't point to any data that "the media" (again) receives 1/2 of its revenue from pharmaceutical sales, either. You're inventing a conspiracy theory where there is no support for that theory. Do you not see that this is dangerous disinformation?

In The Athletic today, Joe Yerdon sets forth his case for the Sabres to do the following: 1. Keep Larsson and Vesey. 2. Let go Girgensons, Frolik, Simmonds, Wilson, and Sobotka. 3. Pursue FAs Craig Smith, Maroon, and Toffoli. What do we think?

I did read the article, and it does not factually support any assertion that "the media is in an active campaign to prevent this $20/person treatment from being widespread." Do you have data showing that "half the ads shown are pharma?" Or even 40%? I don't think you can factually support any of those three statements that you presented as fact.

"They" removed a post and suspended him; that is correct. So he has not been banned from twitter, which is what you wrote. Now, onto the other two, do you have factual support for either of these? 1. But the media is in an active campaign to prevent this $20/person treatment from being widespread. 2. The media who makes 1/2 of their revenue from pharmaceutical ads.

Can you back up any of these three statements? Giuliani remains active on twitter, so I know that one is wrong. How about the other two?

Just realized it was in the Southern District and not here; I'm not going to know the person anyway.

Who was the trustee?