Pete

Blake should be fired for this. Completely emptying the coffers in terms of talent and cap space for a guy who's previous 2 teams were more than happy to see him go is a massive miscue. Plus he traded Brock Faber for Fiala...just blunders all around.

I want a 3:00 p.m. game so I can go play in my own game that night.

Nah. You know what team is going to show up. That inconsistent shit was a Hallmark of GG. Lavvy has them organized, prepared, and dialed in.

Funny, he said he got aids from you. Between him, and the guy that already gave him aids, they have a sick obsession with me.

Nah. Argument stands up just fine. Your attempt to discredit it just shows you don't actually have a counterpoint. But go on girl, do you.

You don't make the stats, but you create a narrative based on which you think are meaningful for the narrative, while simultaneously ignoring a ton of other metrics. Hence not seeing the forest for the trees. You keep repeating this, and I keep repeating why it's different, and you keep ignoring it and pretending it doesn't mean anything. I know why you do, and it's funny. What you also ignore is that by the time the playoffs started in each of the last 2 years, I've said the same thing I've said this year: Once your in it's a race to 16 wins and it doesn't matter how you get there. You think it's too simple, yet that's what it is. It doesn't need to be complex.

In your view, maybe, because you're not seeing the forest for the trees. They went first place wire to wire. They won a President's Trophy. They are a special teams juggernaut. They are deep. They are well coached. They have the best goalie left in the playoffs. But sure, they don't pass some obscure analytical filter you're setting up.

That's the flaw with the way the data is collected. There's also a flaw with the way it's being utilized as a data point. Using completely made-up numbers, here's an example of smart use: "In their last 5 games, the Rangers went 2-3, but in their losses, they had an xGF% of 52, 55, and 53 percent so it looks like they're playing well, they just got goalied in a few games". Here's an example of bad use: "This season the Rangers xGF% at 5v5 was 49.9% so they have no chance of beating the Canes who were at 52.8% all season". That's not how this shit works.

Of course it makes sense, you just don't like seeing your north star stat crumbled.

Feels like the Rangers penalty kill.

Here's the easy answer, that stat is a nice retrospective to kind of get a sense of who carried play, but it is in no way an indicator of who will win a future game. Anyone who's using that stat as a predictor of how a series will go is doing it wrong. In that sense, it's pointless.

Rempe should play the home games, unless he's ridiculously out over his skis in game one.

Because fuck the Canes.

He still had a year on his deal, according to Elliot, so this gives him another year. At the end of this contract he will have been the Lightning's coach for close to 14 years. I think this makes sense. One of the reasons why he was so successful when he came in is because he coached a lot of the Tampa players in the AHL. That's not the case anymore, and his message may start to lose its impact as the veterans go out and the young players come in. There's not really a reason to sign him longer than that. They can always extend him again.

Report is they expect Pesce to play games in the series, but they're not sure at what point. And how good will he be when he comes back from an ankle injury? Good enough to get away from Rempe? We'll see!