carpandean

I've never been one to buy into the "keep him out as long as the guy that he hit is out" due to the "injury history" portion of how long the guy will be out. However, it should be at least as long as one would reasonably expect a normal player (i.e., without a notable history) to be out due to hit like that. Blasting a guy in the head should reasonably be expected to cause a concussion and I'm sure that there are plenty of statistics for how long those typically take to recover from. I'm pretty sure that it's more than three games.

I agree that it wasn't interference (he just played the puck.) I agree that without the head-shot, it probably wouldn't be suspension-worthy. That said, it was a brutal head shot and, as such, should have been far more that three games. If they really want that out of the game - and they should - then there has to be more of a consequence than that.

Not to rehash the last page, but it's amazing that they could wrap up two colorful characters, Daario Naharis and Strong Belwas, into such a lifeless character/scene (killing the mounted champion.) No bright clothes, no cocky attitudes, no "I let them cut me once to keep count of my kills." Ugh.

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit smoking.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say incredibly overrated, but I would say overrated. Very good in parts, but I can't watch a whole movie all at once.

I read this before I watched the video and was concerned that he was the type to bypass celebrating teammates to get in his "special" celebration. I really hate that (yes, even when Kaleta or any other Sabres player does it.) Fortunately, the last one showed me that he is not that type.

A quick current-Sabres design. (Couldn't figure out who the pants sponsor is.)

There, that makes more sense.

Time to work on a post-slug-era Jackals jersey.

Don't forget that we've lost three straight lotteries (2012, 2013, 2014), so the "we're due" factor bumps that up to like 60%. ;)

Sad, but I'm pretty sure that when it got down to the final two, my heart rate picked up for the first time this season. I can't wait until it does that during games again ... in 2015-16.

I initially misread your bag-head. But, hey, it gave me an excuse to spread some knowledge. :thumbsup:

Yes, the winner moves up to first and every team in between their old spot and the top moves back 1 spot. So, either we win and pick 1st or someone else wins and we pick 2nd.

I don't think they'll have apply too much force to lose. They'll make trades for young guys with long-term potential, not for guys who are peaking now. Putting together the roster with the best that they have and a few others sprinkled in will lose just fine.

Dammit, I always forget the BC to the COC. (There's a dirty joke in there somewhere.)

Yeah, yeah, you know what I meant. "The individual probability of rolling any single value (e.g., 1) is still 1/6." Better?

The further a set of draws has been from the mean, the greater the chance that the next draw (or set of future draws) will have a value (or mean for a set of draws) that will result in the overall sample mean being pulled in the direction of the true underlying mean. This is simply due to the fact that there are more possible outcomes between the current sample mean and the actual population mean. Consider rolling one die. You do it five times and get a sample mean of 4.2 (say, 2,5,6,5,3.) The real mean is 3.5, so 4 of 6 outcomes will pull you toward that population mean (i.e., the sample mean for the six points will be lower than 4.2.) If, instead, your first 5 had a sample mean of 5.2 (say, 3,6,5,6,6.) Then, 5 of 6 outcomes would pull you toward the population mean. Your chance of "regressing to the mean" is 83% instead of 66%, but the probability of rolling a 1 or a 2 or ... has not changed; still 1/6. The draws are independent, so the value of one (or more) cannot affect the probabilities for another.

Speaking of gambler's fallacy. Poor misunderstood regression to the mean.

I thought that the whole "they only have a 25% chance" thing made it pretty obvious, but if you prefer statistical evidence to underlying probabilities ... :P

Fixed that for you. Coyotes had 89 points, one more than Ottawa, New Jersey and Nashville. After adjusting for the NJ re-draw: EFFECTIVE LOTTERY ODDS 1. BUFFALO SABRES - 25.38% 2. FLORIDA PANTHERS - 19.08% 3. EDMONTON OILERS - 14.42% 4. CALGARY FLAMES - 10.86% 5. NEW YORK ISLANDERS - 8.22% 6. VANCOUVER CANUCKS - 6.29% 7. CAROLINA HURRICANES - 4.77% 8. TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS - 3.65% 9. WINNIPEG JETS - 2.74% 10. ANAHEIM DUCKS (VIA OTT) - 2.13% 11. NEW JERSEY DEVILS - 0% (WILL DRAFT 30TH)* 12. NASHVILLE PREDATORS - 0.112% 13. ARIZONA COYOTES - 0.81% 14. WASHINGTON CAPITALS - 0.51% Also, as posted yesterday: Sabres, Islanders, Probability 1, 5, 25.38% 2, 1, 8.22% 2, 5, 44.36% 2, 6, 22.03% (~75% chance that we pick 2nd, ~70% chance that Islanders pick 5th)

I liked Lindy here and I'm happy for him there. That said, the only two things that I didn't like about his firing were: (1) it wasn't done sooner, and (2) Darcy didn't go with him. The organization needed a change, top-to-bottom, but they limped along with status-quo.

Problem is that nobody in this year's draft is truly a "high-end forward prospect." They're 1-5 this year because it's a weak draft class, but would 5-10 or worse in next year's class. I have a very hard time seeing them become playoff competitive next year (and you seem to agree.) Even if they trade away some of their higher-end prospects, they're down to the studs (the wood kind, not the elite player kind) right now, so it's unlikely to have enough effect next season. IMO, waiting to start that process will have little to no effect on their competitiveness in two seasons other than possibly hurting what they could add in next year's draft, so why try and force it next year?

No tank will every be completely voluntary. The players are simply more vested in their own careers than the team's long-term future. Most players change teams these days, so tanking to help the one that they are on now is more likely to hurt their future contracts than it is to help their future team.

Knew it was coming (I'm in book four), but it was still nice to see.

And they are great seats! Hard to imagine any in the arena (boxes, aside) are better.