Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
I was surprised to find that were only about 25 Russians playing in the NHL last season, I figured there were a lot more. I bet a couple of these KHL dudes will be pretty impressive.
|
LeRinkRat | 5 |
|
|
I think it makes sense to invite young guys like Duchene and Eberle even though they have virtually no chance of making the team, but Kunitz and Sharp over Spezza is pretty bad.
|
brockLesnar21 | 23 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by brockLesnar21: Mike Richards. Yes I think Brad Marchand will also get a good look. You guys think Joe Thornton Makes the team? I did notice that all the position players on this team are under 30. It would be good to have one or two solid veteran guys, but I don't know about Thornton. Maybe you get Martin St.Louis in there to play with Stamkos..
|
brockLesnar21 | 23 |
|
|
Is that Mike or Brad Richards? I don't know that either one should be on the team. Getzlaf should be in a more prominent role and playing with Perry. I would go with Marchand over Benn.
Defence looks good. I think Crawford has to be in over Fleury at this point. Luongo is the logical number 1.
|
brockLesnar21 | 23 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by nashman: Sucks. It's not NHL 94 hd. It's the main game with no penaltys offside no icing. No online play no season mode. Yeah, its just a skin. You could already set the options to turn off the rules and use the old school control scheme if you wanted to. You're basically just getting the '94 music and sound effects plastered onto the main game. It's also funny that they emphasize the fighting when NHL '94 was the only game in the series to *not* have fighting.
|
Efini | 5 |
|
|
If you want to keep him out based on a 'character' argument that's fine, but I think that he should definitely be in based on performance.
If a guy is the best player is his sport at some point, and in the top 3 for a reasonable stretch of time (Lindros was up there over a solid 6 year period), I think they should be in regardless of their counting stats. Even then, his total numbers compare well with recent inductees like Neely and Bure. |
johnnyfry | 27 |
|
|
replied to
Great article regarding the Leafs, Canucks and listed cup odds of the two.
in NHL Betting
I'm somewhat of a Leafs fan and I didn't find anything in the article to be overly critical.
If you ask most Leafs fans, I think they'll tell you that the team should finish somewhere between 3rd and 9th in the East next season. Ranking them 3rd to begin with seems a bit generous to me, but it's not all that crazy. There really isn't a huge difference in talent between 3 and 9 these days, it usually comes down to intangibles.
|
Polar_Bear | 14 |
|
|
The atrocities that the Japanese inflicted on neighboring countries during World War 2 have to rank as the most messed up stuff in the history of mankind. A lot of people are unaware of exactly how horrific it was.
|
hotdamn85 | 7 |
|
|
They'll finish over .500. The starting pitching will end up being solid - Buehrle, Dickey and Johnson have a long enough track record that you can expect a regression to their typical numbers. Morrow is a bit more of a question mark, but he should get it together too.
The main problem with this team is that they have *zero* positional depth. When anybody significant is out of the lineup (Lawrie, Bautista, Reyes), there's a massive drop off both offensively and defensively. It's so bad that Mark DeRosa was DHing the other day.
|
clepto | 46 |
|
|
If you find that you can't stand the taste of greens, the best way to add them to your diet is to throw them in a smoothie with a bit of fruit. Mix a banana, a cup of spinach and some water/milk/ice in a powerful blender and you're set.
|
slikstiks99 | 27 |
|
|
replied to
Did anyone see Sergei Kotzsteitson go to bench allowing a 2 on 1 and shorthanded goal???
in NHL Betting Quote Originally Posted by BooBunny: I don't think I am going out of bounds here by saying these Russians tend to be laaaaazzzy on the defensive end. Just last season...the Preds had that loser Alexander Radulov who would never backcheck and we all know Ovie with all his talent often throws in the towel on the way back. This of course...is just my opinion.
Except that the two best defensive forwards over the past 20 years are named Fedorov and Datsyuk.
|
BooBunny | 12 |
|
|
It's been years since a Smackdown title match was considered a "main event", it's on par with the Intercontinental belt these days. I don't know that winning it would really do much for Ziggler.
The Swagger stuff was obviously just intended to get some mainstream attention so that he could appear on Fox News after he won the title at Wrestlemania.
|
LawsonJames | 4 |
|
|
replied to
My friend said last night that there are some people that believe they don't want to find a cure for cancer.
in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by SteelCash: I'll give you this much... I don't know much about cancer in other countries. However, I don't understand how the U.S. government since 1974 has known that Cannabis has anti cancer properties, and yet research by many institutions gets denied federal funding because it's a schedule I drug. It's antiproliferative (it prevents the spread of cancer), it's proapoptotic (it destroys cells that are dying before they can become mutant or cancerous), and it kills cancer cells while leaving the healrhy cells untouched. Doctors all over the world know this to be fact. The cannabanoids CBD and THC are largely responsible for these characteristics. Yet we have millions of people dying of cancer every year worldwide. Why can't we the people grow a plant and use it for medicine? It's a natural plant that has never killed anyone in the history of mankind. It's never once caused cancer or any disease. There is no record of it ever happening. It has no side effects. None. Yet the chemo drugs can cost up to $30,000 for eight weeks of treatment, and the drugs kill everything in the human body. They often give people cancer, the exact illness they're trying to fight. Why isn't Cannabis being used as medicine everywhere in the world? What's the hold up? How many more millions have to die? This is genocide in every sense of the word. Maybe it's because anybody can grow it anywhere. And how do you sell that and make billions? I agree that it's ridiculous that clinical trials of cannabinoids as a direct cancer treatment are being held up, but this post is a bit misleading. It's not as simple as growing your own plant and smoking a joint. For it to be effective, the cannabinoids would have to extracted and injected as a concentrated dose. They would also have to be used in conjunction with chemotherapy drugs, so you can't really praise cannabinoids while railing against the evils of chemo. Also, there are currently on-going clinical trials that are looking into using cannabis to treat the side-effects of cancer, so it seems like a good bet that this will eventually get the green-light as well. If anybody's curious, you can read more here: https://www.cpmc.org/professionals/research/programs/science/cannabidiolarticles.html#Clinical trials with cannabinoids
|
SteelCash | 113 |
|
|
replied to
Anyone know how teams typically do the next game after the coach gets fired?
in NHL Betting
I was looking for some stats about this and came across this article:
https://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/innovation/he-shoots-he-misses-fire-the-bum#.USXLMaVwoy4 The most interesting part is that they found that the strongest indicator that an NHL coach will get fired is poor performance over a 15 game stretch. Buffalo started this season 2-0-0, then went 4-10-1 over their last 15.
|
Bruins455 | 5 |
|
|
According to models, the meteor would have to be over 300 m across before the damage caused by a tsunami from an ocean impact would be greater than a direct land impact. The last major impactor (Tunguska) was about 50 m, and objects that size hit Earth about once every 100 years. A 300 m plus sized meteor would be a lot more rare, so 99.9% of the time you'd want it to land in the ocean.
|
SteelCash | 27 |
|
|
replied to
My friend said last night that there are some people that believe they don't want to find a cure for cancer.
in General Discussion
SteelCash, I appreciate that you're being rational.
I'm familiar with Burzynski, and I've seen a large chunk of his movie. I have a parent who's stage IV, so I'm always open to potential new methods of treatment, but I like for it to have some scientific backing and critical review. As an example, after reading this paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378874110006434), I think that it wouldn't be such a bad idea for anybody with cancer to drink a cup of dandelion root tea every day. Burzynski's work just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I recommend reading through the following link: https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stanislaw-burzynski-bad-medicine-a-bad-movie/ For the record, I'm not a fan of chemotherapy and I'm well aware that money heavily influences health and funding decisions. I think that you can make a case that financial considerations and corporate influences make it more difficult to discover a cure, but nobody's going to be able to prevent an established, proven cure from being implemented.
|
SteelCash | 113 |
|
|
replied to
My friend said last night that there are some people that believe they don't want to find a cure for cancer.
in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by SteelCash: Spitfire... thanks for the link. However, we are most certainly not getting better at treating cancer. The American Cancer Society was founded in 1913 (I mistakenly said 1944 earlier). Since then, a cancer patient has the same chance of dying today that he did in 1913. In other words, we have made NO progress.
I'm not sure what this means. Cancer survival rates have improved dramatically over the past decade let alone the past century. 30 years ago, the average person diagnosed with colon cancer (all stages), lived for less than year. Today the average is over a decade. There are lots of people who have early stage cancer treated (usually with a combination of surgery and drugs), live many healthy years, and eventually die of something completely unrelated. In 1910 they would have been gone within a year. |
SteelCash | 113 |
|
|
replied to
My friend said last night that there are some people that believe they don't want to find a cure for cancer.
in General Discussion Quote Originally Posted by SteelCash: I do have to disagree with the last and final sentence there. There are many things on the internet that people don't know about because the majority of the population is too busy watching American Idol. Ask your friends and relatives if they've heard of Dr. Burzynski. All he's done is develop a natural medicine, with no side effects, that has a 25% success rate on people with inoperable brain tumors. These are people that were told that death was inevitable and that there's nothing more that can be done. I just don't think it would ever see the light of day but that's JMO. I have no idea if Burzynski's methods work or not. The problem is that outside of anecdotal stories, nobody else does either. This is because he's never submitted any of his research to high impact journals so that it can be peer reviewed by other experts in his field (which is what any respectable scientist does). At best, he's performing clinical trials using an unproven drug, which may or may not work, and charging people outrages prices for it. Some really sketchy stuff.
|
SteelCash | 113 |
|
|
As somebody who's watched Hill play for years: 1) I'm surprised he turned things around, but glad he did. He always seemed like a good guy and a hard-worker. 2) I would only give him this contract if I was comfortable with the fact that at least one of his next three years will be completely abysmal. |
Absolutxedge22 | 6 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by JEFFMARKETCAP:
In November I think there will be a huge comet that will be visible by everyone. SHould be cool. That one will potentially appear brighter than a full moon. |
lennon65 | 5 |
|
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.