#Received 19 February/Responded 20 February 2024
Note
Cait #17. Personally, I think that outfit and look should score higher as well as a few others which are way better than the first 10. Still, she made the list which is good to see.
93 Of The Best Oscars Dresses Of All Time
https://www.elle.com/uk/fashion/celebrity-style/g26388237/best-oscar-dresses-ever/
Thanks for the message, Anon. 😃 I loved her 2020 ensemble… whilst never losing sight of fashion sense’s subjectivity (a sentiment that really hits home this London Fashion Week 😖).
Here’s Number 17:
Designer: Valentino / Year: 2020
Numbers 1 through 5 are under Elle’s text. Numbers 6 through 16, and 18 through 93, live in the link.
93 Of The Best Oscars Dresses Of All Time
From Barbra Streisand's exquisite Arnold Scassi pantsuit to Halle Berry in Elie Saab, we've collected the best Oscars dresses of all time.
For many, the Oscars awards ceremony is hotly anticipated for its choice of winners. Cinephiles discuss intently if Brendan Fraser's comeback role in The Whale will nab him Best Actor In A Leading Role, or if Paul Mescal will pip him to the post. Others tune in for the meme-making cultural moments, be it a slap heard around the world, or a calamitous misreading of 'Moonlight' as 'La La Land' (it could happen to anyone, right?).
But for us, and we suspect you too, it's the sport of red carpet dressing that keeps us coming back for more. Having the ability to promote (or demote) a near-unknown to a leading lady in the blink of a ballgown, the power of a stellar styled look cannot be understated. Be it Audrey Hepburn in Givenchy in 1954, Michelle Williams in Vera Wang in 2006, or Lupita Nyong'o in Prada there have been some truly marvellous -dare we say history-making - gowns worn by the best actors in the world on the night of the Academy Awards.
So devoted are we to the best dressed stars of the red carpet, ahead of the 96th Academy Awards (taking place on March 10 2024) we've gone through each and every one of them to find the 93 best Oscar dresses ever worn. You're welcome!
Designers: Jason Wu and Messika / Year: 2023
Designer: Alaïa / Year: 2023
Designer: Moschino / Year: 2023
Designer: Rodarte / Year: 2023
Designer: Jean Paul Gaultier Couture / Year: 2022
Elle
Photo: FarFarAwaySite
Remember… Irish actress Caitriona Balfe looked stunning — as per usual — on the red carpet at the 2020 Oscars in Valentino Haute Couture! The 40-year-old newlywed wore a unique outfit that involved a dress and a blouse when she walked the carpet at her first Academy Awards. She stunned in the black, fishtail-style gown which fell straight down her body in an extremely flattering style. But the strapless dress wasn’t the star of the show: it was the sheer pink blouse she wore over the top! The high-neck blouse was made of a very light material, and fell down to her hips. It also featured a gorgeous, oversized bow which she wore to the left of her neck. Stunning! The model-turned-actress accessorized with silver stud earrings and a matching silver ring and bracelet. Caitriona slicked her beautiful brunette tresses back into a tight bun near the nape of her neck, and polished her look with a bold red lipstick, and red nail polish. What a star! — Hollywood Life
#Tait rhymes with hat#Good times#Inbox#Anonymous#Elle#19 February 2024#Top 93 Oscars dresses#Received 19 February/Responded 20 February 2024
37 notes
·
View notes
Text
DCRT 2023 - 2024 Schedule🥂
September 10, 2023 | Sign Ups Open - All Participants
Sign ups are open for all participants ages 18+. After reading the rules and familiarizing yourself with the schedule, you will be invited to join the Discord server via email.
December 1, 2023 | Sign Ups Close - Authors
There will be no exceptions or late entries after this date.
December 20, 2023 | First Check-In - Authors
Nothing is due at this point, but we want to make sure you are on track to finish the required amount by claims. The check in form will be emailed on December 15, 2023.
January 8, 2024 | 80% Drafts and Claims Info Due - Authors
Author drafts are due. More information in the Claims Info section found on Tumblr. The form will be open January 1, 2022.
January 8, 2024 | Sign Ups Close - Artists
There will be no exceptions or late entries after this date, though you may still participate in the second round of claims if applicable.
January 8, 2024 | Final Drop Out Day - Authors
This is the final day for authors to drop out without penalty. Please contact the mods via email if you would like to drop out. Dropping out after this date may disqualify you from future rounds.
January 17, 2024 | FIRST ROUND OF CLAIMS - Artists
Open to Registered users only and lasts 24 hours. Mods will be sending out emails to artists indicating which fic they have claimed with or without author contact info (depending on author preference.)
January 18, 2024 | SECOND ROUND OF CLAIMS - Artists
Open to the public and able to claim second fic until all fics are claimed. Mods will be sending out emails to artists indicating which pic they have claimed with or without author contact info (depending on author preference.)
January 19, 2024 | Introductory Emails - All Participants
Teams will receive emails with contact info.
January 21, 2024 | Team Check-In - All Participants
Teams will be expected to contact each other and share current drafts within 48 hours of the end of claims. If your partner does not respond, contact a mod immediately.
January 21, 2024 | Posting Availability Due - All Teams
Availability forms will be sent out four days before they are due. Only one form per team needs to be sent in, so it is important to be in contact with your partner so that you are on the same page in terms of availability. Form opens January 19, 2024.
January 22, 2024 | Posting Schedule Released - All Participants
Posting schedule will be sent out to all participants. Contact the mods if there are any issues. Note that posting will only take place Monday-Friday.
February 19, 2024 | Check-In and Rough Drafts Due - Artists
This check in is to make sure our artists are on track to finish their art by posting. Line art, rough sketches, and first drafts will need to be submitted. The check in form will be available five days before the due date. Form open January 12, 2024.
February 19, 2024 | Pinch-Hit Emails
Mods will be sending out requests to pinch hit artists as required.
March 7, 2024 | Final Check-In - All Teams
Final polished art/fic drafts are due. This form will be open for five days before the deadline. Form open March 1, 2022.
March 11, 2024 | Posting Begins
The first teams will start posting, and mods will share posts on social media.
Sometime In March | Posting Ends and Masterpost Goes Live On Tumblr
Posting ends and all stories are compiled into a master post on Tumblr. The collection will be closed.
#destiel fanfiction#Destiel#DESTIEL FANART#Cas loves Dean#DEANCAS#DCRT 2024#Dean/Cas Roaring Twenties Bang
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Social Security Reform Splits Young Americans and Boomers
— February 28, 2024 | Newsweek
A majority of Americans agree that Social Security needs reforming, but they disagree on how it should be changed. Photo Illustration By Newsweek/Getty
Younger generations in the U.S. are more likely to support cutting Social Security benefits for retirees to ensure the future sustainability of the program than older generations, according to a recent survey commissioned by Newsweek.
The poll, conducted by Redfield & Wilton Strategies on behalf of Newsweek between February 18 and 19, found that a 66 percent majority of Americans across all generations agreed that the Social Security program needs reforming, though they disagree on how to do it.
The Social Security program is facing a financing shortfall that has led experts to warn that the fund's reserves might become depleted in 2034, with recipients possibly receiving only 78 percent of their full benefits.
"The hard facts are that the system's revenues are insufficient to pay the full amount of scheduled benefits, starting in 2033," Gal Wettstein of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College told Newsweek. "At that time, ongoing revenues are projected to be sufficient to cover roughly three-quarters of scheduled benefits. The only levers we can pull are revenue increases, benefit cuts, or some redistribution of benefits from one group to another."
A majority of 69 percent of respondents across all age groups opposed cutting benefits to those on Social Security, while 52 percent were against raising the retirement age and 44 percent opposed raising taxes on workers' income. The poll was run among a sample of 1,500 eligible voters in the U.S.
Baby boomers—those born between 1946 and 1964—and members of the Silent Generation–born between 1928 and 1945—were much more likely to oppose cutting benefits for recipients than the younger generations. Only 3 percent of boomers supported such reform against 11 percent of Gen Xers—born between 1965 and 1980— 20 percent of millennials—born between 1981 and 1996—and 30 percent of Gen Zers—born between 1997 and 2013.
The generations were more aligned in their opposition to raising the retirement age (opposed by 41 percent of Gen Zers, 53 percent of millennials, 46 percent of Gen Xers and 53 percent of baby boomers and members of the Silent Generation) and increasing taxes on workers (opposed by 36 percent of Gen Zers, 48 percent of millennials, 55 percent of Gen Xers and 38 percent of baby boomers and members of the Silent Generation).
Significantly, younger respondents to the poll were less likely to say Social Security will be important for them when they retire, with respectively 51, 44 and 32 percent of Gen Zers, millennials and Gen Xers saying that the program will be able to support them in their retirement against 52 percent of boomers and the Silent Generation. Across all generations, 44 percent of respondents agreed that Social Security benefits will support them in their retirement.
"Many young professionals think of Social Security as this ambiguous thing and aren't sure how it will affect their future," Northwestern Mutual Financial Advisor Kendall Bregenzer told Newsweek.
"They feel discouraged and have lost faith in the program because it's projected to run out of money," Bregenzer said. "The outcome is unknown, and this scares young professionals as they start to plan for retirement. However, working with a financial advisor can provide some grounded perspective and help people prepare for factors that are out of their control, such as changes to Social Security."
Northwestern Mutual recently published its own study, which found that more than four in 10 Americans (42 percent) can imagine a time when Social Security no longer exists, especially young people.
"When it comes to younger generations, Gen Z and millennials anticipate Social Security delivering significantly less in terms of overall retirement funding compared to boomers," Bregenzer said. "People crave stability with their finances, and the lack of clarity around Social Security is generating financial anxiety. However, younger generations have time to adjust and plan ahead, which could minimize Social Security's impact on their retirement income."
Wettstein told Newsweek that younger generations are generally overly pessimistic about the Social Security System.
"Many polls show that large segments of young adults believe that they will receive no Social Security benefits whatsoever, which is highly implausible," he said. "Again, even if no policy action is taken, revenues are projected to be sufficient to cover roughly three-quarters of scheduled benefits."
For Wettstein, one reason for this pessimism "may be a concern that policymakers might hold older, current beneficiaries harmless even as they shift the burden to younger, current workers," he said, adding that a large part of the shortfall in Social Security is attributable to debts incurred by early cohorts of recipients who are mostly dead by now.
"The early cohorts received benefits far in excess of their contributions and we are burdened by this legacy debt to this day," Wettstein said, adding that younger generations should beware of the impact that cutting benefits could have on them.
"It is important to understand what the alternatives to Social Security are: If individuals will save more to compensate themselves for benefit cuts, this may benefit their heirs when some inevitably die without exhausting their assets [although those benefits would likely tilt towards the children of the wealthy more than the current system]," Wettstein said.
"But, if people end up not saving enough to sustain themselves with lower Social Security benefits, that could in turn place an even greater burden on their children to care for them financially. As is often the case, it is not straightforward to understand who the winners and losers of a complex policy change will be."
#Social Security#Reform#Splits#Young Americans | Baby Boomers#Gen Zers | Gen Xers#Millennials#Baby Boomers | Silent Generation#Pessimistic#Social Security System#Newsweek
0 notes
Text
The only true paradigm
How did Simon insult the Spirit in Acts 8:19? It is not obvious why you would think he did, so it is not easy to respond directly. Nevertheless, while we are on this passage, we should correct a common distortion. Philip had preached Jesus Christ to the people, and those who believed were saved. Then Peter came to the people to impart the Holy Spirit to them, so that they would receive power as Jesus promised. Simon did not ask to buy the Holy Spirit. He offered money to Peter, not to influence the Spirit, but to influence Peter to confer the ability or the ministry of the laying on of hands to impart the baptism of the Holy Spirit. He said, “Give me this power.” What power? He did not say, “That I may receive the Holy Spirit,” but he said, “That anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit” (v. 19). To use healing as an illustration, Simon would not be offering to buy a miracle of healing to heal himself, but to buy a ministry of healing to heal others. The “gift of God” (v. 20) that Peter said he could not buy was not the Holy Spirit, but the ministry to impart the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Certainly Simon was wrong. But in his perverted way, he admired the Holy Spirit and the ministry of imparting the Spirit. In fact, he was much closer to a proper attitude than the cessationists.
Peter told him to repent, but you must read the text you use. Peter told him to repent so that “if possible” or “perhaps” he might be forgiven (v. 22). When you speak carelessly about the Holy Spirit, you are treading on dangerous grounds. Of course there would be no room for repentance if a statement amounts to blasphemy against the Spirit. Even when it is unclear to us, it is always clear to God. However, when it is uncertain to us that a statement amounts to blasphemy against the Spirit, even an apostle could only say it might be “possible” for the person to be forgiven. Simon did not call the manifestations the work of demons. He did not say Philip or Peter preached false doctrine. He did not say the manifestation was “strange fire.” He did not say that what Jesus promised about the Spirit had ceased. He did not make accusations of counterfeit or fanaticism. Cessationists have said all these things and more, but Simon did not say these things. He did not utter any criticism at all about what was happening. He acknowledged the reality of God’s power and wanted to participate. He had only praise and desire for it, but his perverted attitude was enough to earn a rebuke, with enough room for only a “possible” forgiveness. Consider what this means for the cessationists.
Simon was arguably in a better place both theologically and spiritually than the cessationists. He grasped the distinction between receiving the Christ (Acts 8:12-13) and receiving the Spirit (Acts 8:14-16). He also grasped the distinction between receiving the Spirit (Acts 8:17) and imparting the Spirit (Acts 8:18). Theologically, this makes him superior to almost every Christian tradition and scholar in the past two thousand years. The fact that he understood both of these distinctions establishes him as not only incrementally superior, but paradigmatically superior, to almost every single Christian tradition and scholar in all of church history. Nevertheless, this was the basic gospel that the early converts everywhere learned on the first day (Acts 2:38, 19:2, 5-6). He was also spiritually and ethically superior. Although his attitude and motive were surely defective to the point of sin, at least he was — wickedly, selfishly — stumbling toward the direction of endorsement and participation of the work of God, rather than making it a matter of creed and policy to resist the Spirit!
Published by Vincent Cheung, February 2, 2024
0 notes
Text
Half of the more than 1,000 adults in Finland surveyed in a poll commissioned by the daily Helsingin Sanomat agreed that the nation must prepare for war within the next few years.
Only 13 percent of respondents were of the opinion that Finland does not need to prepare for war in the near future. Twenty-six percent neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement, and about 10 percent answered that they were unable to say.
Reporting on the poll, Helsingin Sanomat noted that the views expressed were quite similar regardless of age or gender.
Worries about war were also found to cut across party lines. Only supporters of the Left Alliance stood out, with only about a third agreeing that Finland should prepare for war. The highest rate of agreement with the statement, 59 percent, was among supporters of the National Coalition Party.
Although half of the respondents said that it is necessary to prepare for war, based on the survey, few (about one-fifth) have personally taken concrete measures to be ready in the event of war or a state of emergency.
The HS poll also examined views on the war in Ukraine.
Based on the survey, the Finnish public does not widely support the idea that the West should start persuading Ukraine to make peace, if it means that Ukraine would not be able to get back all the territories taken by Russia.
A fifth of respondents did say they would back such a move. More than twice as many, 43 percent disagreed.
However, a majority of those polled, 53 percent, said they fear that if the war in Ukraine ends with Russia in possession of at least part of the territories it has seized from Ukraine, there is a risk that Russia will attack a Nato country within the next few years. Only 16 percent said they disagreed it could happen.
The Helsingin Sanomat survey was carried out by the pollster Verian (formerly Kantar Public) which interviewed 1,047 individuals representative of the adult population of mainland Finland during 15-20 December 2023.
Election by the numbers
Turun Sanomat reports that candidates in the race for the Finnish presidency on Thursday were randomly assigned the numbers that voters will use on the ballot to cast votes for their choice.
Li Andersson of the Left Alliance is candidate number two. Candidate number three is OIli Rehn, who is running for the Centre Party and with the backing of a voters' association. Harry Harkimo of Movement Now is candidate number four.
Finns Party candidate Jussi Halla-aho will appear on the ballot as candidate five and the Social Democratic Party's Jutta Urpilainen is number six. The independent Mika Aaltola was assigned number seven and the National Coalition Party's Alexander Stubb is candidate number eight.
The Christian Democrats' Sari Essayah is now running for president as number nine. Pekka Haavisto, a Green Party MP backed by a voters' association, is number 10 on the list.
Election day is Sunday, 28 January. If none of the candidates receives more than half of the votes then, a second round will be held on 11 February. The top two candidates who make it into a second round will run with the same ballot numbers.
Advance voting in the first round will take place from 17 to 23 January 2024, and abroad 17 to 20 January 2024.
Winter solstice
Savon Sanomat is among the papers reminding us that today, Friday, is the winter solstice with the day at its shortest of the year in the northern hemisphere.
The Ursa Astronomical Association points out that in southern and central Finland, the arc of the sun across the sky is at its lowest point, while north of Sodankylä, Arctic night continues with the sun staying below the horizon.
Friday's period of darkness in southern Finland lasts 14 hours 19 minutes, in Oulu 15 hours 5 minutes.
The sun is above the horizon Friday in southern Finland for about 6 hours and in Oulu for a good 3.5 hours.
But, as the paper points out, daylight hours will now slowly start to grow again.
White Christmas, slippery roads
An Uutissuomalainen news group report carried by Uusimaa tells readers that the good news for those celebrating the holiday is that the latest snow storm means that Christmas will be white even in southern parts of Finland.
In southern Finland, daytime temperatures will be around zero on Friday, colder as one moves north.
The Finnish Meteorological Institute forecasts subzero temperatures during the weekend, with cloudy skies Christmas Eve across most of Finland, and the thermometer at minus 1C-7C.
However, this was already creating very bad conditions for motorists in southern Finland on Friday morning and for holiday traffic in general as far north as North Ostrobothnia and Kainuu.
According to the road transport authorities, the the heaviest holiday traffic is likely to be seen on Saturday.
In addition, the paper warns pedestrians that pavements in the southern parts of the country are extremely slippery.
1 note
·
View note
Link
Russian President Vladimir Putin eased the nationwide lockdown imposed on March 30 to stem the spread of the coronavirus, even as Russia becomes Europe’s new hotspot for the infection. With more than 250,000 cases as of May 15, Russia now has the second-highest number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in the world.
In a televised address to the nation on May 11, Putin said that some sectors would return to work from the following day, though restrictions on large public events across the country would stay in place. Everyone is required to wear face masks and gloves in shops and on public transport. Still closed in Moscow are car dealers, non-food stores, hairdressers and most other service sector businesses. But some of those businesses have been allowed to reopen in Russia’s other provinces.
Residents still should not leave their home unless to shop, work or walk the dog, and must have a digital permit to travel. Individual regions, he said, would be left to decide whether to keep rules in place and that it would be a cautious “step-by-step” exit. “We have a long and difficult process ahead of us with no room for mistakes,” he said.
Across Europe, countries have gradually lifted restrictions following a decline in the number of recorded infections and virus-related deaths. However, Putin’s announcement about ending lockdown came as Russia registered a record 11,000 new infections on May 11.
How many cases does Russia have?
The first locally transmitted infections—cases not brought in by Russians returning from abroad—were confirmed on March 15. Since then, the numbers have soared, reaching 252,245 cases and 2,305 deaths as of May 14, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. Russia now has the second highest number of recorded infections in the world after the U.S. “The country has not yet reached its peak,” says Christopher Gerry, Director of Russian and East European Studies at the School of Global and Area Studies at Oxford University.
But Russia’s unusually low case fatality rate of 0.9%, compared to 6% in the U.S. and 14.4% in the U.K. has been questioned by experts.
According to analysis published by the Financial Times on May 11, the national death toll could be more than 70% higher than the official data show. Analysis of all-cause mortality — death resulting from disease or a harmful exposure — in Moscow and Russia’s second largest city, St. Petersburg, found that there were 2,074 more deaths in April compared to the historical average over the past five years. However, official COVID-19 deaths in the two cities accounted for just 629 in the same period, leaving 1,444 deaths unaccounted for. If this figure was included in the national coronavirus death toll as of May 11, it would lead to a 72% increase in the number of fatalities.
Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin admitted on May 7 that the real number of infections in the capital city was at least three times higher than the official figure. Moscow—the country’s capital city and major transport hub—is the epicenter of Russia’s outbreak, accounting for more than half the country’s official confirmed cases and deaths. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov are among those in hospital with the virus.
Anastasia Vasilieva, the head of Russia’s Alliance of Doctors, claims the virus has spread much further than official figures indicate. “Some hospitals don’t test patients with pneumonia for coronavirus, and those that do don’t always include a positive diagnosis in the statistics. They’re afraid of having to report it,” she says. “The real picture is hidden from the population,” she adds. In January 2020, pneumonia cases in Moscow surged 37 % year-on-year, an increase which Vasilieva believes to have been caused by coronavirus.
On April 2, Vasilieva and her colleagues were detained by the police for a night while delivering protective gear to a hospital outside of Moscow, accused of violating self-isolation rules. “It is staggering that the Russian authorities appear to fear criticism more than the deadly COVID-19 pandemic,” said Natalia Zviagina, Amnesty International’s Russia Director.
“They want to silence me and stop my activities. The government don’t want me to become a hero” Vasilieva says.
Keep up to date on the growing threat to global health by signing up for our daily coronavirus newsletter.
How has Putin and his government responded?
Russia was initially quick to respond to the coronavirus outbreak in China. The Kremlin closed its 2,500 mile-long border with China on January 30 and set up a quarantine facility in Siberia in early February for Russian nationals evacuated from Wuhan, the hotspot of China’s COVID-19 outbreak. The recorded number of coronavirus cases remained under 120 until March 17, when Putin said “the situation is generally under control.” Between the end of January and the end of March, “very little was done to tackle the pandemic,” says Gerry.
“In the beginning of March I wrote to the government to tell them we need to prepare, we need supply medical staff with PPE, otherwise they will die. A lot of doctors understood what was coming — we watched what was happening in Italy. We had time to prepare,” Vasilieva says.
Even as the number of infections has soared, Putin has repeatedly insisted that the situation is “under control.” Experts say he seems to be taking a backseat in managing the pandemic, an unusual move in Russia’s centralized political system, where power is concentrated in the president. He retreated to his country residence outside of Moscow in March, leaving local governors to decide on what restrictions to introduce.
Read More: Where’s Putin? Russia’s President Stays Out of Sight as Coronavirus Hits Economy
“There has been a genuine decentralization of command that has left responsibility and the margin of error to local authorities and not to the Kremlin, and definitely not to Putin,” says Mathieu Boulegue, a research fellow at the Russia and Eurasia Program at London think-tank Chatham House.
Putin postponed on March 25 the nationwide vote on the country’s constitutional amendments that had been planned for April 22, citing safety concerns. Since the beginning of the year parliament has been working on a series of amendments that would allow Putin to remain in power beyond the end of his current term in 2024.
The Russian president’s approval ratings hit a historic low of 59% in April, according to a survey published May 6 by the independent polling agency, the Levada Center, down from 69% in February. Levada also said in April that more Russian respondents approved of local officials’ measures against coronavirus than they did of Putin’s.
Putin has been very “worried about his approval ratings” ahead of the postponed public vote on the constitutional amendments that could keep him in power beyond the end of his current term in 2024, says Boulegue. “He is trying to create a buffer zone around him for any criticism and public discontent. It’s too early to tell how the epidemic will affect Putin’s popularity in the long-run, but it is unlikely to get out of the pandemic unscathed.”
In the meantime, Moscow Mayor Sobyanin has emerged as a leading figure in the fight against the virus. He placed restrictions on the city on March 30, stricter than those in New York City, closing all parks and non essential restaurants and stores. Following Sobyanin’s lead, leaders of about 20 regions so far have made it mandatory for residents to stay at home.
Andrey Rudakov —Bloomberg via Getty ImagesCustomers wear protective face masks inside a cafe as a television screen displays Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, delivering a national address, in Moscow, Russia, on Wednesday, March 25, 2020.
Why are cases continuing to rise?
The lockdown was introduced too late, experts say. By the time it was brought in, “the virus had already taken hold in Moscow, similar to the U.K. in a way,” Gerry says.
Poor testing early on blinded the authorities in tracking how far the virus had spread, Gerry says. In February and March, the testing regime was “inadequate,” he says. “There was a very convoluted, three stage testing regime that involved sending tests to Western Siberia and waiting a few days for the results. People could have been carrying the virus for a week or more without knowing the test results,” Gerry says.
Compliance with the lockdown has also been “relatively low,” partly because of the mixed messaging that the Russian public are receiving, says Gerry. “It was certainly much lower than was required to stop the virus from taking hold,” he adds. More than 70,000 people from Moscow and St. Petersburg were booked to visit other regions by planes and trains around the country during the long May holidays (April 14 to May 12) despite the stay-at-home orders. While international flights were grounded with a few exceptions on March 27, domestic flights have continued to operate (though demand has sharply fallen).
Russia has recently scaled up coronavirus testing, with Putin saying on May 11 that 170,000 tests are being conducted daily. However, questions over the reliability of the tests remain. Moscow’s Department of Health released a statement on May 7 saying that tests being used across the country have been wrongly showing that people in the late stage of coronavirus are disease free.
At the start of the outbreak, there was “misplaced hubris and arrogance that the pandemic wouldn’t hit Russia seriously,” says Judy Twigg, a Professor of Political Science at Virginia Commonwealth University. As infection numbers in Russia reached over 27,000 on April 1, the Kremlin sold protective gear and ventilators to the U.S., prompting criticism at home. “We raise money all over the country to buy protection for doctors, and our authorities sell personal protective equipment to the U.S. What a mockery,” the Doctors’ Alliance, an independent trade union linked to opposition figure Alexei Navalny, tweeted on April 2. Less than two weeks earlier, the Kremlin sent 122 military doctors, personal protective equipment (PPE), ventilators and mobile disinfection machines on cargo planes to assist Italy.
Meanwhile, Vasilieva says that even in Moscow, there’s not enough PPE. “Some doctors have to wear the same mask for the whole day when they should change it every two or three hours. And of course they’re taking public transport to get home. They’re fighting fire without protection,” she says.
Shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) equipment have led to a high transmission rate within hospitals among patients, doctors, nurses and healthcare workers. An advocacy group of Russian doctors recently launched an online “in memoriam” list of the health workers who have died from coronavirus. The list names 190 people as of May 14, the youngest person being 26 years old. “That’s tragic. And it didn’t have to be that way,” Twigg says.
Regional authorities, suddenly given an unprecedented level of responsibility, have also been ill-equipped to manage the crisis. “They are not used to being handed such duties. They’re unclear about the resources they can use when health systems are short of supply. PPE hasn’t been delivered to the hospitals that really need them.” Gerry says.
Healthcare systems in some areas outside of Moscow have been struggling to cope with the rise in cases, says Gerry. Although Russia has a higher rate of hospital beds per capita than Western Europe, much of the medical equipment is out of date, he says. “Even where there are intensive care facilities, it’s questionable whether they have the workforce to manage those,” says Gerry.
“In some areas that have emerged as hot spots, there is a lack of specialists, placing healthcare workers under enormous pressure” Twigg says. She says hospitals have made pleas on social media for help from anesthesiologists, respiratory therapists and others. “They are very much in demand in some places to the point where the system is desperate for them,” she adds.
Twigg points to the cases of three doctors who fell out of hospital windows in Russia within the space of two weeks in April and May as an indication of the intense pressure that healthcare workers have been facing.“These doctors probably committed suicide from all the strain and stress,” she says.
Why does Putin want Russia to begin easing its lockdown?
The main motivation for taking the decision to reopening public life was economic, analysts say. Two thirds of Russians have no financial savings, according to a May 2019 survey by Levada, making it more urgent to get people back to work.
“Russia is in dire economic straits,” says Boulegue. In a country where the energy sector makes up two-thirds of exports, the drop in prices of oil and natural gas has posed a real threat to people’s livelihoods. Experts are now predicting the worst recession in a generation. Putin himself conceded on April 24 that Russia now faces a bigger economic crisis than the 2009 global recession. As he announced an easing of restrictions, Putin said that unemployment has already doubled to 1.4 million. As many as eight million people could be left without a job, according to the former Finance Minister, Alexei Kudrin.
Russians who have already found themselves out of work have had little recourse to financial support from the government. Unlike most European countries, Russia has not unveiled a major package to support people who are out of work. The government’s first two economic rescue packages amount to 2.8% of GDP, whereas in the U.S. it comes to about 10% of GDP. Russia is now preparing a third package and Minister of Finance Anton Siluanov has argued that the actual amount of state support is at 6.5% of GDP.
What’s next for Russia?
Significant challenges lie ahead, not least for the public health system, which is under increasing strain.
Twigg is mostly worried about the regions outside of Moscow, including some big cities and towns and rural areas. “They’re under funded, under staffed, and under equipped. That’s a story that’s still evolving,” says Twigg. But the absence of a lockdown will be “a major obstacle to saving lives in the end,” Gerry adds.
For Boulegue, the pandemic has revealed the paradox of Putin’s 20-years’ consolidation of power. “Russia is a fragile power that has neither the economic means nor ability to enforce a strict lockdown. The pandemic is the ultimate stress test.”
Please send tips, leads, and stories from the frontlines to [email protected]
0 notes
Link
According to state-run exit polls and early returns, Vladimir Putin has won another term as Russia’s president. He faced no genuine opposition during his presidential campaign, and used all of the tools of his government’s well-oiled propaganda machine to ensure he received a huge percentage of the vote.
Putin’s win, which cements him as one of the most powerful leaders in modern Russian history, means he will remain in office until at least 2024. He has spent years using brute force to reestablish Russia’s prominence as a world power, and his aggressive approach included invading and annexing part of eastern Ukraine, and helping Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad retain his hold on power despite years of brutal fighting.
Putin has also benefitted from the election of Donald Trump, who is arguably the most pro-Russian US president in modern history. The American intelligence community unanimously believes that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election to sway its result towards Trump, but the president has both angrily dismissed those assertions and shied away from seriously punishing Russia for its meddling. Trump has not yet weighed in on Sunday’s election.
Still, there are some signs that President Trump may finally be willing to confront Putin for at least some of his misdeeds. On Thursday, March 15, Trump joined the UK and other European allies in accusing Moscow of using a deadly nerve agent to poison a former Russian spy and his daughter not far from their home in the British town of Salisbury.
That same day, the US Treasury Department announced long-awaited sanctions to punish Russia for meddling in the 2016 presidential elections. The measures targeted more than 20 Russian individuals and organizations, including the Internet Research Agency, a Kremlin-linked troll farm that sought to interfere in the election, and Yevgeny Prigozhin, known as “Putin’s chef,” for his role in bankrolling Russian hackers.
This means that Putin’s latest victory may not be as sweeping as the numbers would suggest. Putin won at the ballot box, but whether he’ll keep winning in his confrontations with the US, the UK, and other Western countries remains to be seen.
It’s not exactly surprising that Putin won
Heading into Sunday’s election, there was little doubt that Putin would win — the question was, largely, by how much.
The Central Elections Commission said Putin had won about 76.7 percent of the vote with 99.8 percent of the country’s precincts reporting. In 2012, Putin received just under 65 percent of the vote. His nearest challenger, Communist Party candidate Pavel Grudinin, received 11.8 percent of the vote, and ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky had 5.7 percent.
According to the Associated Press, there were widespread reports of ballot-box stuffing and forced voting on Sunday, and Putin was trying to win by a large margin to ensure his mandate to govern is indisputable. His most visible opponent — anti-corruption campaigner Alexei Navalny — wasn’t even on the ballot. He was barred from running because he was convicted of fraud in a case that was widely considered to be politically motivated.
Ahead of the election, voter turnout was considered to be the main signifier of Putin’s hold on Russia. Independent surveys show that most Russians approve of Putin as president, which might have kept people home as they may have assumed the results were already decided.
The Kremlin was also reportedly aiming to surpass 2012’s 65 percent turnout level. Turnout this year was reportedly about 67 percent.
After casting his ballot in Moscow on Sunday, Putin said he sought a level of turnout that “gives me the right to perform the duty of president,” according to the New York Times. “I am sure I am offering the right program to the country.”
It is also worth noting that the 2012 Russian election arguably laid the groundwork for Putin’s meddling in the American presidential election in 2016. Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton raised questions about the legitimacy of the 2012 Russian race, which Putin took personally and has never forgiven. US intelligence agencies believe that may be why he tried to ensure she lost in 2016.
Putin is facing more pushback on the global stage
Putin’s Sunday victory may give him even more power in Russia, but he is facing increasing pressure from the international community due to a recent nerve agent attack in the UK, and Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential race.
On March 4, Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter, Yulia, were found unconscious on a bench in Salisbury, England. It turned out they had been poisoned with a highly toxic nerve agent.
Eight days later, UK Prime Minister Theresa May said it was “highly likely” that Russia was behind the attack on the Skripals. When asked about the event later that day, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders declined to directly blame Russia but said that “we offer the fullest condemnation” of the attack.
But on Thursday, the White House issued a joint statement with allies to support Britain’s claim, which said: “The United Kingdom thoroughly briefed its allies that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for the attack. We share the United Kingdom’s assessment that there is no plausible alternative explanation.” Moscow denies it had any hand in the attack but has said it will cooperate with a British investigation. Putin on Sunday said the attack was a “tragedy” but dismissed accusations of Russian involvement as “nonsense.”
The sanctions that the US Treasury Department issued on Thursday have a bit more of a backstory.
In January 2017, the US intelligence community assessed that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election, helping Trump win the White House. Last August, Trump reluctantly signed into law the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), which was designed to make old sanctions against Russia permanent, and to pressure Trump to impose new ones.
The legislation forced Trump to impose costs on Putin for interfering in America’s democratic process and for his interventions in Ukraine and Syria. Republican and Democratic lawmakers crafted the bill in response to Trump’s unusual warmth toward Russian President Vladimir Putin and his refusal to blame Russia for election interference; it passed both chambers almost unanimously — 98-2 in the Senate and 419-3 in the House — and it was clear that Congress would override a presidential veto.
But Trump resented Congress’s move to box him in on Russia policy. The president slammed the legislation in a signing statement, calling it “seriously flawed,” and said that he could “make far better deals with foreign countries than Congress.” CAATSA was intended to force Trump to impose sanctions in late January — but he missed the deadline. Instead, the administration released a list of 210 Russian leaders and billionaires with purported ties to Putin in order to show that the administration was watching them.
Then, on March 6, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats announced that new sanctions on Russia were imminent. Mnuchin added that Trump was “fully supportive of the work we’re doing.” On Thursday, March 15, the measures were finally announced. Senior administration officials told reporters that the sanctions were meant to punish Russia for interfering in the 2016 election and for masterminding a global cyberattack, known as NotPetya, that hit large corporations and hospitals in the US and Europe last summer.
“The administration is, arguably for the first time, directly acknowledging and responding to Russia’s intervention in the 2016 campaign,” said Sean Kane, a former sanctions official at the Treasury Department.
The new measures target five Russian organizations and 19 Russian individuals. The big organizational targets include two Russian intelligence agencies, known by their acronyms FSB and GRU, and prominent individuals like Prigozhin. That means people connected to the intelligence agencies, and Prigozhin himself, cannot travel to America or do business with American companies, and will soon see their US assets frozen.
Experts also say the timing of the sanctions was surely meant to show support for London and condemn Moscow after the nerve agent attack.
The question remains, though — does this mean Trump’s attitude toward Russia has changed? Well, it’s complicated.
Is Trump tough on Russia now?
Despite the sanctions, Trump continues to minimize the extent of Russia’s involvement in his election. He thinks Russia didn’t interfere — and that Democrats use the Trump-Russia narrative as an excuse for losing the election. Trump has famously called the investigation into whether his campaign colluded with Russia a “WITCH HUNT!”
Even Trump’s own national security team said he could be tougher on Russia. On February 13, Coats, the intelligence director, told the Senate Intelligence Committee that Russia would continue to interfere in American elections, saying, “Frankly, the United States is under attack.”
Two weeks later, on February 27, Adm. Michael Rogers, who leads US Cyber Command, said during a congressional hearing that Trump had yet to ask him to take measures against Russia’s hackers. “If we don’t change the dynamic here, this is going to continue, and 2016 won’t be viewed as something isolated,” Rogers told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “This is something that will be sustained over time.”
Other military leaders have echoed the admiral’s sentiment, including Army Lt. Gen. Paul Nakasone, Trump’s nominee to replace Rogers after he retires this spring. “I would say right now they do not think much will happen to them,” he said of Russia during one of his confirmation hearings on Thursday, March 1. “They don’t fear us.”
That, in part, is why experts seem skeptical that Trump will suddenly become a Russia hawk. Trump has “a reluctance … to speak clearly about the threat Russia poses to the United States and our allies,” Evelyn Farkas, formerly the Pentagon’s top Russia official, said in an interview.
And lawmakers, many of whom are usually critical of the president, feel he could do more to punish Russia. California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said in a statement on Thursday that if the president believes Thursday’s action “sufficiently addresses the sanctions package Congress sent to respond forcefully to Moscow’s election interference, then he is sorely mistaken.”
Trump likes to boast that he’s much tougher on Russia than his predecessor Barack Obama. But this past week is the first time he really did anything to back up that claim. “By no means will this constitute the end to our ongoing campaign to instruct Mr. Putin to change his behavior,” a senior administration official told reporters on Thursday morning.
The US president has yet to weigh in on the latest Russian election results, and it’s anyone’s guess how he’ll respond. One thing’s for sure, though — Putin is not going away anytime soon.
via The Trump Debacle
0 notes
Text
Cage Match: David Pastrnak vs. Patrik Laine
Could David Pastrnak be a better fantasy option than Patrik Laine?
Whatever the opposite of choosing between the lesser of two evils is, that’s what’s in store with a battle between David Pastrnak and Patrik Laine. Although both seem poised to be keeper cornerstones and one-year league studs for the next decade plus, here it’s all about picking a winner, so that’s the tough task in store when these two step into the cage!
Career Path and Contract Status
Pastrnak, now 21, was drafted 25th overall in 2014 and earmarked for the AHL, where, despite being just 18, he excelled (28 points in 25 games). With Boston for the rest of 2014-15 he posted 27 points in 46 games, igniting hopes of him being another draft steal with early success, ala Patrice Bergeron. But he stalled as a sophomore, with only 26 points in 51 contests in an injury-shortened campaign. Since then, however, he’s been spectacular, with 70 points in 75 contests in 2016-17 and producing at a similar rate this season.
Laine, 19, was selected second overall in 2016 after a standout season for Liiga, and immediately thrust into a prominent role with the Jets. To say he succeeded would be a vast understatement, as he posted 36 goals (64 points) in only 73 games, for the highest goals per game rate of any 70+ game, 60+ point rookie since Alexander Ovechkin more than a decade earlier. This season, however, his scoring and goals rates are down somewhat.
Pasta’s cap hit is $6.66M, and he’s signed through 2024. Laine’s ELC runs through 2018-19 but he’ll likely be extended beforehand and have a cap hit at least as high as Pastrnak’s for 2019-20 and beyond.
Ice Time
All stats in this table and the others are through February 18th, and SH Ice Time is omitted because neither averaged more than 0:02 of SH duty per game in any season.
Season
Total Ice Time per game
(rank among team’s forwards)
PP Ice Time per game
(rank among team’s forwards)
2017-18
17:50 (D.P) – 3rd
16:42 (P.L.) – 5th
3:06 (D.P) – 1st
3:16 (P.L.) – 3rd
2016-17
17:58 (D.P) – 4th
17:54 (P.L.) – 3rd
2:37 (D.P) – 3rd (tied)
2:43 (P.L.) – 3rd
2015-16
13:56 (D.P) – 8th
0:28 (D.P) – 9th
2014-15
13:58 (D.P) – 10th
1:41 (D.P) – 9th
Seeing Pastrnak’s meager average ice times in his first two seasons, it’s a wonder he managed 53 points in 97 games. In doing so, however, he posted the 61st best points per 60 minutes rate among forwards over that time frame, besting the likes of Brayden Schenn, Aleksander Barkov, James van Riemsdyk, and even teammate Brad Marchand. Since then, Pastrnak has made the most of his added ice time, as over the past two seasons his 3.09 points per 60 minutes is seventh-best among NHL forwards who’ve played 120+ games.
The issue is Pasta might already be at his realistic ice time ceiling, since although Patrice Bergeron and Marchand are averaging, respectively 19:26 and 19:31 per game, nearly 2:00 of that is SH duty, meaning Pasta already skates more non-SH minutes than both. If Pasta isn’t likely to receive more minutes in coming seasons, and he’s already scoring at one of the best P/60 rates in the NHL, his scoring cap might be close to what he’s producing now, or perhaps even less if his luck metrics are unreasonable.
As for player comparables, only four other forwards have ever played under 2800 minutes in their first three seasons while taking the ice for 170+ games and posting 120+ points. One (Jarome Iginla) became a star, a second (Sergei Berezin) fizzled, and a third had solid seasons then faded (Sergei Samsonov). Berezin was 25 as a rookie, so it’s easier to distinguish Pasta from him. Yet Pasta isn’t easy to liken to Iginla, who was a power forward. And Samsonov never scored even 55 points in any of those first three seasons. Pasta’s closest comparison might be the fourth to meet the criteria – Evgeni Kuznetsov, who, although a center rather than a winger, like Pasta had one big season among his first three.
After such a strong rookie campaign, it’s odd to see Laine’s minutes down, although there’s consolation in that his PP time is up, as is his PP usage percentage (51.0% to 58.7%). It turns out every Jets top-six forward other than Mark Scheifele and Blake Wheeler has seen his ice time decrease from 2016-17 to 2017-18. Call it the Kyle Connor effect, as Connor’s ice time has risen from 12:13 per game last season to nearly 16:44 now. As a result, Laine, plus Bryan Little, Nikolaj Ehlers and Mathieu Perreault, have all seen their Y2Y ice times drop by a combined amount that roughly matches Connor’s gains.
If Laine continues his goals pace, he’ll join five NHLers who’ve scored 70+ in their first two seasons as teens. Three became superstars (Sidney Crosby, Steven Stamkos, Dale Hawerchuk). But they were centers; the two wingers (Jimmy Carson, Brian Bellows) went on to have success, but were by no means major stars. What does this mean for Laine? Maybe nothing, or maybe his early sniping success could suggest peaking early. If nothing else, it’s food for thought ala the Pasta’s comparables.
Secondary Categories
Season
PIMs
(per game)
Hits
(per game)
Blocked Shots (per game)
Shots
(per game)
PP Points
(per game)
2017-18
0.35 (D.P)
0.34 (P.L.)
0.76 (D.P)
0.84 (P.L.)
0.37 (D.P)
0.49 (P.L.)
2.66 (D.P)
2.86 (P.L.)
0.30 (D.P)
0.39 (P.L.)
2016-17
0.46 (D.P)
0.35 (P.L.)
0.94 (D.P)
1.09 (P.L.)
0.42 (D.P)
0.45 (P.L.)
3.48 (D.P)
2.79 (P.L.)
0.32 (D.P)
0.19 (P.L.)
2015-16
0.39 (D.P)
1.02 (D.P)
0.29 (D.P)
2.11 (D.P)
0.02 (D.P)
2014-15
0.17 (D.P)
0.43 (D.P)
0.24 (D.P)
2.04 (D.P)
0.06 (D.P)
Despite shedding ice time, Laine is shooting more, which is seemingly a great sign. Even still, we’ll check whether his ASD has increased and/or his personal shooting percentage has dropped, since in both cases that could signify more might not mean better. Laine also is responding to his added PP time by more than doubling his PP scoring rate.
But should we count on Laine’s PP scoring rate continuing, dropping back to what we saw last season, or landing somewhere in between? Digging deeper, it took only until game 50 for the Jets to equal the 48 PPGs they scored in all of 2016-17. Are they really that good with the man advantage? Probably not; however, chances are they’ll stay closer to what we’re seeing this season than last, given their young core plus the seemingly ageless Blake Wheeler. And that bodes well for Laine’s PP scoring.
Laine is also quite solid in hits and blocks, although Pasta is no slouch either. As for PPPts, Pastrnak has stayed consistent from last season to this year, and the B’ are in the same PPG percentage rate vicinity as last season, so that screams sustainable.
Although Pastrnak’s 2.66 SOG rate this season seems solid, it’s down nearly 25% from 2016-17. Moreover, of the 18 instances of wingers who scored 75+ points in one of the past four campaigns, only one (Artemi Panarin in 2015-16) had a SOG rate less Pasta’s current 2.66 per game. And the news isn’t great for Laine either, since if we up that threshold to his 2.86 rate the number who posted 75+ points despite a lower SOG rate only jumps to only five of the 18. If instead we go by the 3.48 per game rate Pasta had in 2016-17, the number climbs to 11 of the 18. So make no mistake – in today’s NHL both will need to shoot more to produce what would be considered top fantasy numbers for wingers.
Luck-Based Metrics
Season
Personal Shooting %
Team Shooting % (5×5)
Individual Points % (IPP)
Offensive Zone Starting % (5×5)
Average Shot Distance
Secondary Assists %
2017-18
14.1% (D.P)
16.0% (P.L.)
10.42% (D.P)
10.11% (P.L.)
68.0% (D.P)
63.9% (P.L.)
62.7% (D.P)
58.9% (P.L.)
29.8 (D.P)
37.3 (P.L.)
46% (D.P)
42% (P.L.)
2016-17
13.2% (D.P)
17.6% (P.L.)
8.33% (D.P)
12.61% (P.L.)
70.0% (D.P)
68.8% (P.L.)
56.2% (D.P)
54.8% (P.L.)
33.6 (D.P)
39.1(P.L.)
39% (D.P)
53% (P.L.)
2015-16
13.9% (D.P)
8.74% (D.P)
78.8% (D.P)
49.8% (D.P)
31.5 (D.P)
45% (D.P)
2014-15
11.7% (D.P)
8.82% (D.P)
77.1% (D.P)
69.2% (D.P)
35.2 (D.P)
47% (D.P)
Pastrnak’s 2017-18 metrics are concerning, especially when his scoring rate is only comparable to last season. In particular, after three seasons of 8.33-8.82% for his team shooting percentage, that number has spiked to 10.42% for this season, and is accompanied by an OZ% of 62%, marking his highest non-rookie figure.
Also, Pasta’s IPP is down for the second straight season, which is understandable due to him playing with two extremely talented linemates. Thus, on one hand that’s a concern because a low IPP means fewer points; however, the fact that it had been higher in the past means it could go up again, in which case suddenly he’s in point per game territory. That also raises an important question – is Pasta being carried by his linemates? One way to try and determine that is by looking at his WOWY (i.e., “with or without you) numbers.
Last season when he and Bergeron skated together, Boston scored 3.25 goals per 60 minutes; when he skated without Bergeron it was 2.55, versus 3.31 when Bergeron took the ice without Pasta. It was a similar story with Marchand, as when Pasta and Marchand skated ice together that rate was 3.77, while Pasta without Marchand translated to a rate of 2.80 and Marchand without Pasta led to a rate of 4.01.
This WOWY data may have been a function of it being his first season playing with talented linemates. But will he keep his coveted role with Bergeron and Marchand? Suddenly that’s less clear, as he was removed from that line at times in the past week, and his ice time cratered. What this seemingly shows is Pasta needs Bergeron and Marchand more than they need him, and his production could be at risk if (when?) coach Cassidy tinkers with lines on a more regular basis. The good news is when separated from Bergeron and Marchand, Pasta was kept on PP1…..at least for the time being.
For Laine, the number that jumps off the page is his team shooting percentage from last season, which, at 12.62%, was far too high to be remotely sustainable, especially when coupled with his high ASD and secondary assists percentage. His numbers for 2017-18 are more reasonable overall, and we need to keep in mind this is coming with very low ice time, which should improve in future seasons. After all, Laine’s points per 60 over the past two seasons was 2.88, also putting him in the top 20 overall among NHL forwards during that period.
Moreover, the fact that Laine is a sniper with a high personal shooting percentage bodes well for his long-term success. He’s poised to finish each of his first two seasons with 30+ goals and a 15%+ personal shooting percentage, which would make him only the second player – after Eric Lindros – since 1990-91 to meet both criteria. And if we lower the shooting percentage threshold to 14%, that would lump in two other players with whom it would be very favorable to be compared, namely Sidney Crosby and Artemi Panarin.
Who Wins?
This match is another illustration of fantasy value being tied as much, if not in some cases more so, to factors beyond a player’s control as to a his pure talent. If Claude Julien is still coaching the B’s, chances are he doesn’t stick with a “super line” and maybe Pasta doesn’t break out like he has. If Winnipeg wasn’t playing as well as they are now, they might be more inclined to have Laine continue to log more minutes, which would help pad his stats due to him having arguably more raw talent than Pasta.
Going into 2017-18, Laine was being picked 15th overall in Yahoo drafts, versus 42nd for Pasta. I think Laine still has more perceived value (and thus higher cost), because of his status as a #2 pick, the still recent memory of what he did as a rookie, and his higher goal totals. To me, even though Pasta was removed from the top line briefly last week, he still wins in all leagues except those which place a premium on goals. Still, if Laine finishes this season well below his rookie totals, his cost might plummet for fear he was overhyped or a flash in the pan. If so, he’d be worth the gamble in hopes he’ll get more ice time soon and the comparisons based on his shooting percentage and goals ending up being more predictive than those based on his age and goals.
from All About Sports https://dobberhockey.com/hockey-home/cage-match/cage-match-david-pastrnak-vs-patrik-laine/
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
hualian
my dream is only you
ghostssweetgirl
ghost's slut [mutt]
back-of-the-class
Back.Of.The.Class
valninja
villain apologist
hrctr
Para todos, todo..