That Aud Smell

Let's go, Buffalo!

The charts below depict, in some part, what the Buffalo skaters are doing at 5v5. As I understand it, this metric is intended to express what you can expect out of a skater and various combinations when it comes to shots (on goal, I presume) over the course of 60 minutes of TOI play (as distinct from game-play time). It's interesting to see just how good the LOG line and its parts have been. It's also interesting to see that Eichel -- with his top-flight quality of competition -- is just getting by in terms of 5v5 shots expected.

well, they're certainly not getting protected usage when they're out there. they have a defensive zone start % of about 65%.

This is in line with what I’m seeing. They’re not winning with smoke and mirrors like they did last fall, but they have been rather fortunate. They’re improved. And maybe they’re good.

While we're at it, I'd give away two of my three whammy weenies to anyone who could find an internet-accessible copy of the Chef's commercial that featured the French Connection singing "That's Amore". I have tried and tried. @PASabreFan- you are probably my only hope.

Lord help us. Please someone dig up his atrocious "... the euro train is in the station! Clang Clang!"

That was a dark time. That said, didn't he have a few claims to fame? Did he coin "the Dominator" for Hasek?

Good post. Holy sh-t was Lorentz great on the broadcast. It’s not just that he was smart and insightful, it was how quickly, timely the content came on an in game basis.

Puck luck has been with the new #90, for sure. Olofsson can probably shoot a very high % over time, given his role and skill. Eichel’s shooting a bit better than in the past, I believe.

Okposo. where @darksabre at.

Let’s go, Buffalo!! Fingers crossed for a strong effort throughout. Additional fingers crossed for Mittlestadt to get on the score sheet at ES.

Very interesting.

Yep. There was a point in time last night that the Larsson line seemed like the "second line."

Right. Didn't that happen in Wizard of Oz?! Or is that just the witch who's green.

there's the rub, though. if, in the aftermath, there's a significant portion of the PSU community that defends, say, paterno to the hilt on his mishandling of the ongoing abuse, then that'd present those who abhor everything about the despicable circumstances (including paterno's blind eye) with a very tricky situation relative to their own ongoing devotion, support, etc. innit? it would for me. (my thoughts turn to the roman catholic church and its abuse scandal. i'll refrain.)

That implication was there, and it was a mistake on my part. Like I said, I was just reaching for another odd dichotomy.

i'm not endorsing posts that call for the "salted ground" and such. i was simply responding to a defence of the institution that said there are "those" (some?) who stand against what Sandusky did (obvi) and, moreover, what Paterno et al. did not do. as in: there are apparently "those" there who do not stand against some or all of that? how. i was being a bit rhetorical and flourishy with the "very fine people" comparison. i was borrowing another odd dichotomous paradigm in order to make a point. and, again, my point remains, as indicated above in response to @shrader. your statement necessarily implied that some at/of PSU stand against all that awfulness, and ... some don't. which struck (strikes) me as enormously strange. if i were a PSU alum/backer, it would disturb me to no end that there is some identifiable portion of the community that didn't stand against all of that.

I'll have to go back and look. That sounds like he got beat. The plays I have in mind are the ones where you're just left wondering "WHAT are you DOING, man?!"

Except he's not on the 4th line.

He seems to be playing more within himself than in the past. I don't notice nearly as many (and sometimes no) low hockey IQ gaffes. The proverbial "he was trying to do too much" may apply.

Quite to the contrary. You said that which necessarily implies there are those who do not stand against it. It came off as "very fine people on both sides of the issue," if you will. Probably not what was intended. But it's what was conveyed.

Weird take, imo. We're all keenly aware that he has a terrible contract. But it seems like a clear and obvious cause for celebration if he returns to being a useful NHL player. I had presumed he'd be dead weight. Instead, he looks like he will be a positive contributor. That's big for this team, as constructed.

eloquence wasn't really the point there. nor was it needed.

ALSO. (Sorry.) Skinner was just everywhere last night. Terrific game.