Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

gotchabari

Members
  • Content Count

    2,619
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

Everything posted by gotchabari

  1. We'll likely be where we were before. We'll also likely have to accept the 30-40k per year US deaths level fo the flu(s) for COVID, too. We just need to get it down to that level. It's not whether there are vaccines or ot, it's the Rt number. When it easily gets over 1 combined with a decent mortality rate, you take action. It's just that easy. It's not a head scratcher as to where we go in the future with normal diseases where we have already established an acceptable amount of death. We have not with COVID. The reason "the flu vaccine is 40%-60% effective" is because "the flu" is over 150 virsues, and the vaccine is a guess as to which ones will be hot this season. So if we can keep COVID down to 10 or so variants and don't let it get too far out of hand, we can have a vaccine and booster that is effective enough to keep us at that flu death count level. And this is where we are right now, the "don't let it get too far out of hand" zone. Much like war rationing that was said to become permanent by some, it didn't happen. There's no value in it.
  2. As has been pointed out, we have. And this time we've been quarantining those potentially exposed, so we can't call them healthy. It's Schroedinger's cat. Antibody levels for formerly ill for a short period, then drop off precipitously. That's why there were early studies saying having it was stronger, only to be updated later once they tested again. It's also very specific to whatever strain the person had. All that being said, who is keeping healthy people out of the arena? They're letting people in who provide proof that they're very likely healthy via one of two methods. We may be crossing reality with hypotheticals at this point.
  3. If the data showed that getting a vaccine or wearing a mask somehow created a danger to others, then yes. Restrictions like that have been in place for decades for schools, military, and even during prior pandemics. It's not a new thing, so whichever way it goes, I'm fine with it. I disagree. One of them is going to be backed by public health departments and one won't. The one that is should keep their freedom to go places. The ones who have made the conscious decision to do otherwise are the ones who have to wade through consequences and inconveniences, just like always. Again, this is not new. Luckily, they are setting up guidelines where neither has to stay home, at least for now. But in the end, my main input is for the safety of the staff. If they involve the staff in having to deteremine if someone is supposed to wear a mask or not, you open them up for confrontation. I think it is in the best interests to require vaccines or test results, but once past the door, simplify the rule to just keep everyone masked. Especially considering that us vaxxed folks can still spread (albeit a mlower risk to do so), might as well be safer than not until we are at a number we can handle and live with.
  4. Yup. That's the benefit of everyone being required ot mask. You don't have to question whether they are vaxxed, wristbanded, whatever. That can lead to potential confrontation. When the rule is clear and is everyone, there is no question and they can afford ot be aggressive, no questions asked. Once you split it, there are potential questions. That's when you see videos of assaulting retail workers or cashiers, etc. That's my main concern. The safety of the staff is more in question when you start introducing "maybe" into the scenario. If there is no maybe, then they are more empowered to enforce with lower risk.
  5. Oh, wow! He's from Landshut, which is a small town outside of Munich, but one that was home to a press manufacturer I used to represent. Funny to think this kid was probably running around at 5 years old when I took my trip there.
  6. Yep, that's one way to do it. I guess I just don't exepct that from them, as anyone unvaxxed could complain about being outed.
  7. Neither sell out as it is, so not sure it would change. There are more Kings sweaters, sure, but I tend to think we have a more true fans within our clump of sweaters.
  8. Seems like it will be a nightmare as it is. EIther have a mask requirement or don't. Us vaccinated can still spread, so in such a large venuw without spacing, I'm perfectly fine with it. But if it's 50/50, you basically have no requirement unless you're asking the workers to continue to ask for status.
  9. Given all that, Ducks attendance average isn't that far below Kings.
  10. The link says that they are only requiring masks for unvaccinated. I have no idea how they plan to enforce the separation once all are in the building. Someone can be unvaxxed, show a test result, and then simply take off their mask once they get to their seat. Seems much easier just to say everyone has to mask up.
  11. Yes, most of the studies have it as equal like this nature article. Either way, the initial belief that it was less is no longer accurate.
  12. The latter half is not factually accurate. Viral load data has evidenced same and sometimes even more than adults since roughly this time last year. Here is just one of many. https://www.massgeneral.org/news/press-release/Massachusetts-general-hospital-researchers-show-children-are-silent-spreaders-of-virus-that-causes-covid-19?ftag=MSF0951a18
  13. True, but that's different than "deciding to do nothing" which is referenced by many in many threads... daily.
  14. Cool. I have a new ticket guy (Scottish dude) and after I transacted the partial season ticket plan, I haven't heard a peep. He didn't even confirm that my purchase went through or thanked me for it. I finally saw my first payment charge, and that's how I knew it worked out okay.
  15. Yes, they're trying to trade for a top center without giving up the farm.
  16. Yeah, the market doesn't agree with your assessment. https://www.thefourthperiod.com/no-trade-clauses
  17. They're pretty common, so if we want players ar certain skill or age levels, we're going to need to use NTC.
  18. Yes, but not a very long indication of it. In the nest to last season, 76% on this team is fantastic. In the last season, he was injured, which calculates into it (slightly). 6 of 8 over 75% is nice.
  19. Yes, thanks Gorby for posting one. There have been no less than 10 posted throughout the various discussions on Eichel here, also. But yes, it is a part of just about every article discussing the trade possibility.
  20. I haven't heard he makes teammates uncomfortable. I've actually heard the opposite. As for clashing with a GM that wasn't following up on promises to build around him, okay. Good for him. He got a second and third opinion on a very dicey health decision. I would hope anyone would do that. His agent has been doing some weird things to try to force the situation. I'd have left him, too. He has not been ALLOWED to take care of his neck, contractually, for 5 months. His TEAM has refused to let him take care of it. What you hear about the artificial replacement goes against every single piece of news I've seen on the topic, and is the exact opposite. His method has a fairly short recovery period vs. all season for the team's approach.
  21. Probably. Regular season Montreal wasn't that much better than LAK. A few more wins and 16 more goals.
  22. If their analysis is correct, then what they're making is billions of dollars.
  23. Or, if we get rid of Lindholm, we'll need TWO more top pairing guys. That's my concern.
  24. Rico, Silf, maybe Rakell. Not all 3 at once, but 2 of those three if they get an okay return. Definitely more flexibility on the Offense than Defense.
  25. So, Lindholm wouldn't contribute? Where else would we find someone of that level right away?
×
×
  • Create New...