carpandean

Welcome back to 2013-14!

The real interesting thing about the Charts right now, is that although it's clear we are a longshot for the playoffs, there's also pretty much no way we're getting back in the tank race against Edmonton and Carolina. In fact we could very easily play ourselves right off the tank chart. So 9th place here we come, right? Probably not, but we were 6/7 points below Edmonton and Carolina only 12 games ago, so you never know. The Sabres went from an 0.44 points/GP over the first 18 games to 1.50 points/GP over the last 12. Carolina has averaged 0.4 point/GP over their last 15 and Edmonton has averaged 0.45 points/GP over their last 22. Those paces put teams in the 30's over the course of the season, so it's unlikely that they will maintain them. Pretty much no way, eh? :P

I'll get right on that. :flirt:

End-of-year update. A tiny bit of life on the tank chart over the last three games, but still 7 points above Edmonton.

I don't know Eleven ... er, Santa Claus ... that playoffs chart isn't getting any better. Still 10 back and only 1 point in the two games where 8th is not yet determined.

OC, QB, O linemen. That's my Christmas list.

Probably not, but we were 6/7 points below Edmonton and Carolina only 12 games ago, so you never know. The Sabres went from an 0.44 points/GP over the first 18 games to 1.50 points/GP over the last 12. Carolina has averaged 0.4 point/GP over their last 15 and Edmonton has averaged 0.45 points/GP over their last 22. Those paces put teams in the 30's over the course of the season, so it's unlikely that they will maintain them.

OK, OK. It's there. But as I said, the Rangers and Panthers need to play more games. Through 28 GP, we can say that the Sabres were 10 points out. Depending on how the Rangers' and Panthers' 29th and 30th games go (and Capitals' 30th), they will be 6-10 points out through 30 GP. If either team picks up just one point in the two games (playing fast and loose with statistics, I'd say about a 97.5% chance), they will be no closer to the playoffs than they are to the bottom (they are 7 out of the bottom through 30 GP.)

It might be time, but the Rangers and Panthers need to play more game. Right now, 8th place is only settled through 27 games.

OK. And seven teams to jump.

The Panthers aren't even riding the short bus this season. They're tied for 15th in P/GP. Dead-middle of the league. They don't even make the cut for the Tank Chart.

(NSFW)

No agenda. I just find that reporters key in on parts of reports and twist them to make the story sound better. For example, keying in on the term "homicide" when it doesn't really mean much in terms of fault/guilt and saying things like "died of neck compression." You don't die of neck compression; you die of ____ cause by neck compression. An ME rep would know and say that, but it doesn't sound as good for the story. Google "Eric Garner heat attack" and you will find numerous sources saying that he ultimately died of a heat attack, which is something that people actually do die of and something that can be triggered by and/or contributed to by, among other things, any restriction of air flow (e.g., from a headlock or choke hold.) As weave points out, his positioning after the takedown, which was also listed (in quotes), also would have contributed to it, as well as his health issues. I don't doubt that they were all factors; I simply have doubts that the ME rep said so specifically that neck compression from a choke hold was the main/primary cause. Again, I agree that the tactics used were beyond what the crime justified. However, if the departments procedures were followed, then I can understand why he was not indicted. The procedures, themselves, would need to be addressed.

http://bigstory.ap.o...-ruled-homicide I have a problem with this sort of quoting (or not). Here's the whole section: The "killed by neck compressions from the chokehold" is not a quote, so the author has put is in his own words, which often (not necessarily here) means he put his own spin on it. He then quotes the part about chest compression and prone positioning in the same sentence. However, he separates out the medical factors to another line. This places emphasis on the first part, especially with the "killed by" part. Numerous sources state that he ultimately died of a heart attack. Perhaps, what she said was, "Mr. Garner died of heart attack brought on by the reduced flow of oxygen due to the compression of his neck, the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police, and contributed to by his asthma, heart disease and obesity." It would basically fit what they reported, but wouldn't be quite as damning. That's why I was hoping there was actually a complete quote.

Do you have a reference with that quoted from the ME's report. What I saw were (1) articles "saying" (not quoting) that the ME ruled that the choke hold killed him, and (2) articles actually quoting that pressure on the neck was one of several contributing factors to his death (they also indicated that the windpipe and neck did not show any damage.) I'm not saying that the ME didn't conclude that, but I would like to see it actually quoted.

Ask any cop, 90% of people in handcuffs say that they can't breath. I definitely question why they did not start CPR, though. It probably should have gone to trial, but if he were found not-guilty there, would the response be any different? Here, perhaps, but not on the streets.

I don't disagree that the situation did not need to be escalated like that. They tried several times to grab a wrist to handcuff him and each time he pushed them away. I would assume that their procedures, at that point, say to forcibly apprehend him for resisting arrest. If they have the discretion to step back and say, "listen, we are arresting you either way; we can do it forcibly and you'll add on another charge that is much worse, or you can comply and then argue your case," then they probably should have. However, my point was about whether he could legally have been charged. If he followed procedure and the suspect died, then I would say that he can't be. You can address the procedures themselves, but I would think that he could not be charged/convicted.

I'm not sure that "homicide" has the same meaning in a coroner's report as you might think. The officer could have used allowable techniques, which contributed to his death, and it would be ruled a homicide. The coroner ruled that it (pressure to the neck) was one of many contributing factors, including also his position, his obesity, his asthma, etc. However, a legal head lock can cause pressure to the neck, which would not "choke out" a suspect, but which could contribute to has death by partially limiting airflow. The legal question is what are the prohibited techniques and did he use one. He and the PBA have said that he used a take down technique that he learned in the academy. Someone who knows the difference could better judge if he crossed the line, but it certainly was not ruled by the coroner that he killed Garner with an illegal choke hold. I do believe that they escalated the situation more than it needed to be. However, while he was being placed under arrested for selling untaxed cigarettes, he was physically subdued for another crime: resisting arrest.

One thing that was stated, which I admittedly have not had a chance to verify, is that while choke holds are against NYPD policy, head locks (control the body, but do not cut off blood or air flow) are not. It was suggested that the officer had him in a head lock and not a choke hold. Again, take it with a grain of salt, but it could be a possible explanation, since the grand jury would have been told this.

Sorry 11, not ready to bust out the playoff chart quite yet. But, that tank chart is getting awfully crowded. If Philly ends up with McDavid, I will go nuts.

Yup. The Tank Chart went from "as planned" to depressing very quickly.

Back by d4rk request. Sabres Historical: Atlantic Division: Eastern Conference: Playoffs: Tank: Tank2: New! Countdown: All charts are net of 93-point pace, except Playoffs, which is net of 8th place, and Tank, which is net of 65-point pace. Tank 2 is net of dead f**king last. Updated: 4/11

I've been entering the games, but haven't had a chance to post up the charts. I'll see if I can get them up today.

Are you saying that he took it a little fuhrer than the rest?

Yup, yup and yup. It's funny, but if you take out Jar Jar (and maybe half of the pod racing)*, Episode 1 would easily have been the best of the prequel trilogy. The Qui-Gon Jinn/young Obi Wan Kenobi relationship was much better than the Obi Wan/Anakin relationship. Plus, Darth Maul, despite the silly name, made for some great fight scenes ("actor" was really just a martial artist, if I remember correctly.) * There was an attempt at this called the "Phantom Edit" that was better, but obviously a post edit.