IKnowPhysics

I guess one downside of Drew fighting Hartnell, is that Ruff didn't have a good reason to send out Scott to murder him.

That game ###### rocked. Notes: Vanek's now on pace for 96 goals and 240 points in 48 games. I think he might have been to blame for the ###### change that left him out there too long and cost us that goal. Then either he was given a break because of the double shift or he was benched, because Hecht played the next shift with Hodgon and Pominville. That gave him time to mentally un###### himself and rebound very strongly. Hodgson and Vanek were dangerous for the rest of the game- they finished with 16 shots on net between the two of them. Hodgson led all forwards in ice time. Leo skated well, but didn't make a lot of plays he needed to. Needs improvement or he's trade bait and it'll be Brennan's turn. Ennis skated well in all areas of the ice, but looked fatigued through the 3rd. He also happened to kill it in the faceoff circle, going 11-6. Ott might be my new favorite Sabre. He played with urgency and physicality in all areas of the ice, and really brought a lot of energy. He busted ass and sacrificed to make not only a couple of great plays, but every play that was necessary. Good to see Drew step up. He put his pretty boy face on the line against an angry mongoloid in the name of all that is holy. I knew he had it in him (see Neil/Drury brawl and Umberger years ago), but we haven't seen it in a long damn time. Pominville quietly gathered three assists. He's doing it right. Ellis and Scott both saw less than 4 minutes. I get why that was the case: the other lines were going gangbusters. But in a compressed season, we'll need all four lines.

I was sleeping until now. West coast time. The correlation times are dependent upon spectral density functions that are Fourier transforms of the detected signals. In other words, you do an FT to get the signal in frequency space (a spectrum) from the signal that's measured in the time domain. In any FT, if the length of a time-dependent signal is short (ie, pulsed quickly), the frequency spectrum of that signal is broad, contains high frequency components, and is low amplitude for any given part of the spectrum (because it's broad). If the signal is long and coherent, the FT gives a spectrum in frequency space that is sharp with high amplitude, highly peaked, and not broad at all. FT fun fact: If two signals have the same total energy, but one is a fast pulse and the other is a slow pulse, the integral of the signal in the frequency domain will be equal for both- that's why the amplitude is lower for the broader signal. Now, the plots you describe for the dependencies of T1 (spin-lattice) and T2 (spin-spin) sound like the could be vs temperature or Tc (they're inversely related). Tc can, in simplest terms, be considered to be opposite of temperature: high temp=low Tc, low temp=high Tc. In either case, it's all about how easy it is for the group of particles to fall from the excited state to the lower state. For a given T or Tc, the magnetized and unmagnetized energy states have a given energy gap. When a particle crosses that energy gap from high to low, it gives off energy. To cross that gap from low to high, it requires energy. In the spin-spin case, it's pretty simple: the magnet's switched off, and particles begin to fall from the high energy state to the low energy state. If the group of particles is cold, many particles will jump down and stay down, not many particles at all will be able to jump back up to the higher state randomly. If the group of particles is hot, particles will jump down, but many will have enough energy to randomly jump back up- so it takes a longer time to relax. The spin-lattice case is more complex. Here, we have to think about how easy it is for the relaxing particles to give their energy to the surrounding particles. At low temperature, there's not many vibrational and rotational energy states that the lattice particles can access, so the probability that the relaxing particles can put energy into one of those states is low. That makes for a long T1 time. As temperature increases, more rotational and vibrational states become available, making it more likely that the energy can be transferred. T1 time is decreased. But if the relaxing particles go to extremely high temperatures, the energy gap of the relaxation is too big for most of the vibrational and rotational states in the lattice, and the probability of energy transfer is decreased. That makes T1 large again. Dipole-dipole interactions are short range, but energy transfer is also dependent upon the temp/Tc of the of the particles, so both proximity and frequency are important. Imagine you were looking at a stoplight through a green piece of glass, and you wanted to see a lot of light- you'd have to be close enough to the light to see it (not miles away) AND the light would have to be green for you to see it (not red). In this analogy, how far you are from the light is the proximity of particles, what piece of glass (filter) you use represents the energy states available in the other particle or lattice, and the color the of the light represents the frequency emitted by the relaxation. To get low T1 times, you need to be close, and you need to emit energy at a frequency that can be absorbed by the other particle. Hope this helps, I haven't had breakfast yet. Edit: Yep, that's right.

He's gotta fight, for his right.

I've been a littleanxious about the ability of Hodgson and Ennis to perform in their expanded roles. Some tonic: Roy scored 44 points in 80 games and averaged 19:19 of ice time per game. Hodgson scored 41 points in 83 games, but averaged only 13:49 of ice time per game. Ennis scored 34 points and averaged 16:09, but only played 48 games. If they played 82 games and had Roy's ice time: Hodgson projects to 57 points, good for 3rd on the team in scoring last year. Ennis projects to 69 points, good for 2nd on the team. While we traded away Roy's 44 points, we stand to gain 51 points just by having those two stay healthy and play big minutes. And this doesn't count gaining back the 39 points that Ott put up in Dallas. Let's see what the kids can do. Fun facts aside using this idea: Gerbe would project to 45 points, close to Roy. Because of his ridiculous run, Foligno would project to an eyepopping 93 points.

Can't wait to see how Hodgie and Enzo handle the big opportunity and responsibility.

At the end of last season, Weber had 5 points, -19 in 51 games. Sulzer put up 8 points, +2 in 15 games.

As long as Otter shreds some Flyers D in the corners, I'll call it even after game one.

I am, but this discussion's all for ###### anyway, because the consideration of years past has apparently been made irrelevant by the current owner. If you take that at face value, and look at the roster difference since the purchase: Starting Lineup, October 2010: Vanek - Connolly - Pominville Ennis - Roy - Stafford Hecht - Niedermayer - Grier Gaustad - McCormick - Kaleta Morrisonn - Myers Leopold - Montador Sekera - Rivet Miller Starting Lineup, January 2013: Vanek - Hodgson - Pominville Foligno - Ennis - Stafford Leino - Grigorenko - Ott Scott - Hecht - Kaleta Regehr - Myers Ehrhoff - Sulzer Sekera - Leopold Miller (Gerbe, McCormick on IR) I think the roster has improved and I hope this group of players lives up to that expectation. The quality of talent in the pipeline also makes for an intriguing future.

No worries. I do like Gerbe, mostly because I got a good look at him in NCAA. I think he's a hardworking guy whose heart is bigger than that of the tallest NHLer. I also think that he has the potential to develop into a great third line player, so I'm patient to see how he comes back from injury and moves forward.

Bergeron is listed on NHL.com as only one inch taller than St Louis and recorded 24 points and +6 in 43 games from the blue line.

With a new owner with deep pockets and a commitment to winning, I'll ignore that you counted a lockout year in a hockey statistic just to be an ######. and agree with you- that is exactly the risk we cannot afford to take.

By that logic, Tyler Ennis is just going to ###### suck balls, isn't he. Marty St who?

Same flavor of laziness/incompetence: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2011/06/fox-news-mistakenly-uses-tina-fey-as-palin-in-palin-bus-story.html

I'm happy with it. DR drafts very well and fleeces teams in trades more than most. Many of his shortcomings concerning personnel decisions had a financial component that I don't believe present a restriction anymore. But even when he was subject to those restrictions, he was considered by some to be one of the top 5 GMs in the league, partly because he built a team that went to the conference finals with a payroll that was 17% less than the league average. He makes decisions that don't give rise to question of his sanity or ego- he's not a trainwreck GM. He runs a hockey department that has only produced one sub-.500 season in 14 seasons, and accordingly, he continues to employ Lindy Ruff, a head coach that I have argued is not only NOT the reason we haven't won a cup, but is at least among the top 15 active/top 30 all-time NHL coaches and could be considered top 5 active/top 20 all-time. I don't expect others to agree with with everything Regier and Ruff do, but the difficulty of trying to successfully replace a GM and coach of their caliber cannot be ignored.

It's all here: http://www.jewelsfromthecrown.com/2013/1/14/3874196/injury-report-willie-mitchell-knee-surgery-setback-kopitar-skates-2013-kings Mitchell, LA's 2nd best Dman that played more than 25 minutes/game in the playoffs, could be out indefinitely, spurring speculation of replacement by trade. Kings aren't deep at D at all either.

Yep, and there goes Redden. Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie Well, there it is. Wade Redden a STL Blue. Hearing 1 year deal, $800K base salary with GP bonuses that could make it $1M total.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie LAK were another Western team interested in Redden as well. You could say that cools the market a little when you have D to sell, but I think this is better news for a potential move. 1) The D we have to offer in trade are better than Redden. 2) The "stronger" rumor is that Redden is on his way to StL: Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie Eastern Conference team interested in UFA Wade Redden was told he's going to West. All the speculation is on STL. Decision expected soon. 3) It all but confirms LA's interest in acquiring D.

If people haven't put it together yet, he's Paul Gaustad with about 50% more offensive production and 50% more grit (if we're counting hits, he's 13th in hits in the league). Seeing how he now makes the same salary as Gaustad, he might bring a little more for the money. IF the Kings could spend less than $1.5M on Gomez, it might be worth it for them to move Stoll. Their D line could use a bolster after the top few guys- Sekera would be an immediate upgrade over Alec Martinez. FWIW, the Kings fans like Stoll, but they're fickle about stardom. This is defintely not a case where the fans hated on Jack Johnson so much the team put him in Columbus.

###### the $120k Pegula donated to the city last year, we want free hats!

January 17, 2013

Better than a hat for Bob Geoffrion. Imagine how that guys feels.

Vanek and Pominville are the only two established top six players in our top six. Losing one of them without a suitable replacement would be a step backwards, espcially since we need more players that qualify in this regard.

Even with Byron in there, most felt we fleeced Calgary. He put up decent points in juniors and in the A, but hasn't gotten a good shot to stick with a big club yet. Calgary wants to make room, but it's possible someone claims him. Edit: And I haven't really looked the Regehr trade in a while... To Buffalo: Robyn Regehr, Ales Kotalik (bought out), 2nd round pick (Jake McCabe, captain at Wisconsin and Team USA in WJC) To Calgary: Chris Butler, Paul Byron (waived) Assuming Jake McCabe is as good or better than Butler, we bought Regehr for the price of buying out Kotalik and giving Calgary a player they would stick in the AHL. Jinkies.

I disagree with your interpretation of his performance last season. Did he produce fewer points last season than any season since his rookie season and put up his worst +/- since his sophomore season? Of course, but he wasn't playing big minutes on the offensive side of the puck (he only took 51 shots, 2 more than offensive powerhouse Mike Weber, who had played 25 fewer games). Instead, he played the hard defensive minutes, as indicated by the player usage charts (http://bit.ly/W2Okem), seeing the hardest quality of competition on the team by far and seeing the highest percentage of defensive zone starts on the team (behind only Kaleta and Ellis). He was brought in to be the veteran stay-at-home defenseman and compliment the younger offensive and two-way Dmen, and that's exactly how Ruff used him. He got the toughest assignments, and I think he played well in them. One of the analysts that worked on the usage charts puts it best: At the end of the day, he isn't unmovable, but with team full of young offensive defensemen and more coming the pipeline, I think a veteran stay-at-home presence could be critical. And now I realize that this post is 10 days old.