That Aud Smell

Perhaps because he presents as more ... entertaining (?) quarry.

Now, now. They do illuminate. They don't tell the whole story, of course. For sure. And of late they've been trending closer to good. Not sure where it's been discussed, but the TOR faithful have apparently been brutal to Gardiner (sp?). So says Twitter, anyway. Carolina would agree with that. OTOH, someone posted the top-12 (or so) Corsi teams the other day -- all but one (Carolina) was in a playoff position. It's his shtick.

Lol. I love Tierney's charts. So pretty! They often confuse me, though. Tierney's Corsi graphs plot the Sabres right between "Dull" and "Bad." I struggle with how to translate that into normal hockey/sports-speak. Like - what does it mean to be betwixt and between being dull and bad? Also, I have often found that characterization (dull/bad) would not really square with my experience in watching the team. I dunno.

I feel like sometimes the purported prohibition on stereotyping people can be weaponized in order to deny or dispute that a certain demographic has a shared experience and culture. Anyway, rather than being stupid, I found Chris Rock's joke hilarious. Here's a quote of it from a review of the special Bring the Pain: "You know what I like about Clinton? He's got real problems. He don't got president problems, he's got real problems like you and me. He's runnin' out of money. His wife's a pain. . . . All his friends are goin' to jail. I know Bill Clinton. I am Bill Clinton."

Re Dahlin. I saw some of Sean Tierney's charts this week that reflected that, of late specifically, Dahlin is already playing like one of the league's best d-men. I forget the metric at issue, but Dahlin was an outlier in the company of Karlsson and a couple others.

White privilege always has room for some token Uncle Tom's. Clarence Thomas is among the whitest motherpluckers out there. Which brings to mind one of my favourite Chappelle [edit: trying to recall who did the joke about Bill Clinton] bits: It's Chris Rock I was thinking of. I can't find the clip. It's the one where he talks about Clinton being black. I think Toni Morrison more famously called Clinton the first black president.

Thanks. When I drop in and drop out over the course of days, I lose the thread sometimes. Like: "Wait, what are we talking about?"

The slurring of the white male. So tragic. I shouldn't poke fun, actually. That exact sort of feeling wound up having a truly surprising effect in November 2016.

Leave who alone to do what?

Fwiw: p.s. I submit that without really understanding what it means other than blue looks "good" and red looks "bad." I know nothing about the two players. And this, in fact, is a reason that #fancystats can be helpful. I can have some understanding of the players without knowing much about their play.

Let’s go, Buffalo!! Whither @rickshaw?

I’m not sure I’m an analytic folk, but I distinctly recall such a conversation after a loss to the Rangers early on this season. I think this happens regularly when the Sabres lose, but deserved better. Not for nothing: That hasn’t happened too much this season. I look forward to digging up and replying anew to this post while sitting in a self-driven Uber. Shoot. They’re back online in Pittsburgh, yes? (Only for testing?)

“White men are inherently privileged and powerful in America.” Please allow me a modest LOL.

Something something about the mind that can simultaneously hold two contrary thoughts. This is routinely how I experience things: I enjoy the game in the moment (or I don't enjoy it ...) and then I peruse stats during off-hours.

Sir! Sir! Please do not burden me with such metaphysics. I am still working on @X. Benedict's demand to know how many hockey-pirouettes a young Phil Housley could have fit on Bill Hajt's head. It's an interesting question, on a lot of levels. I'll venture this: It would present a different analysis. A different set of solutions for a path forward. From the young lady's point of view, I don't know that it would matter all that much what her harasser's race was/is. I'm getting there.

I don't want to descend into the weeds on this. You and I have very different viewpoints on whether and to what extent being white and being male give rise, singly and jointly, to certain inherent and certain acquired privileges and powers in modern America. A black or Latino boss would not, like his white counterpart, hail from an historically advantaged, privileged race in America. So his race probably would not factor into my perspective in the same way a white boss's race would. White men in America have a specific and unique place in our society -- they (we) are, as a cohort, ensconced atop the social pecking order. I trust and expect that you would disagree with, dissent from that perspective.

Ideally, Jack would have a running count of how many times he's missed from a low-percentage spot on the ice before taking another shot from that spot.

This was my initial response. Preach. I made a funny sound trying to suppress a laugh at this one. Some of this was from me, earlier today. I'm not telling you how to feel. I'm telling you my view of the world: That last night's win means less to me than a win where the team had the better of play. Please, it's: Your an idiot. Take off. This is a curious confluence of debate. That goal was, to borrow a term, RIDICULOUS. Filthy. Somewhat insane. In part was it also lucky?** Sure. But that's sport. ** Skinner scored one the other night - against the Devils? - that was similarly crazy. He shot that thing through a keyhole (h/t to Bucky Gleason for providing me with that phrase when he was talking about Paddy Kane). That's not just meaninglessly lucky. That was also amazing.

I don't think that's a fair reading of my rejoinder. And I meant it sincerely. Let's consider the situation as it may reasonably be understood (inferentially): Gibby is a 50-something mid-career executive who wasn't abusing his privilege or his power. He's just a galoot who's recently divorced (that is a total guess on my part, btw (but a reasoned one)), he was feeling frisky, he's decades separated from the dating scene, and he came on too strong with a foxy young lady after he'd had a lot to drink. Ignorant behaviour, that's all. But what precisely was he ignorant of? Current social mores? Sure, maybe. But might he also have been operating in ignorance of how his position and status (which, I submit, bestow on him certain privileges and power) inevitably made his encounter with that young woman inappropriate and upsetting? I think maybe so.

I'm genuinely uncertain as to what your point is. Sure as shinola it does. I say that as someone who firmly believes that it starts with me. #CuetheMichaelJacksonSong More seriously, I think about this spoken-word song a lot. The whole yarn is terrific. The relevant part of the homily starts at around 3:50. The struggle is real. Ignorance of one's privilege and/or power, maybe.

Yes, let's get middle-aged white dudes to act better as a cohort without addressing how they deal with positions of privilege and power. Yes, let's.

Best I could do for a faux amazement, no s**t, Sherlock sort of reaction. (Btw: In your scenario, the offender lacks power over the person being harassed.)

It strikes me as utterly non-controversial to say that there's a fairly pervasive and persistent problem in the country with white male executives harassing female colleagues and subordinates. A tale as old as time, maybe. But Time's Up, motherpluckers.