Predators 2, Flames 0: Back on Track

Like I said on the GDT, there was improvement. It wasn’t the kind of hockey that will win lots of games but there were things that we did better than we did over the last several games. If nothing else, Shea didn’t take a single penalty and there was a bit less of the Keystone Kops routine.

it’s like the clouds parted and the sun came out. glad that ugly losing streak is over. those have got to be 2 of the funnier looking head coaches in the NHL.

Were you this ouraged when Shea took absolutely stupid penalties ( Yes that is plural ) last game?

Calgary has no one that would go with Brian, but yet he has more minutes than the guy who scores the first goal for the Preds. Care to guess why?

O’Reilly, Erat, Fisher, Cubes are injury scratches again.

Why is this so hard for people to understand why BMG is suiting up?

He should have been a scratch today. Aginst Calgary, I have no problem with that.

His 6 + minutes and his penalty wasn’t the problem in a 2-0 WIN.

The problem is getting outshot 33-14 and eeking this one out.

I know we are hurt but it baffles me that matt halischuck is playing on our “top” line.

With all the good he’s done and the energy he’s brought to the team, Toots was responsible for a staggering number of turnovers in the defensive zone. There were sequences when he would turn the puck over, the Preds would recover, and Toots would turn it over again. Each time it was when he was trying to break out of the zone. Some of the best Flames scoring chances were a result of Tootoo’s turnovers.

this win hasn’t made me feel better at all! we still sucked out there. There was a little bit more hustle, but we still sucked against a team that sucks… and they out shot us. We don’t have any major time in our offensive zone. This was just like our first two wins, lucky.

Face it, we have little to nothing without our the guys on the sick list. We aren’t going to do much of anything until they are in the game.

looks like a pretty poor offensive effort.

I will take the 2 points with the guys we had out any day.

14 SOG is pitiful.

Just watched the game on the DVR. They played better than the last 2 disasters games. The fact that we won, all I have to say is “Oh, what a relief it is!”

I’m OK with Hustlechuck on the “top” line. His effort has been outstanding this year.

Blum’s save was awesome!

But Blum had an AMAZING save after the puck slid across the crease behind Rinne. At about 2:45 in the video. They say he hit the post in the video, but watching the Fox Sports feed they replayed it and he made a spectacular save to keep it from being 1-1.

I heard pete and terry say that Cube may be ready to go on tuesday.

Klein is 130th on the list of defensemen sorted by salary. Almost exactly halfway down the list of all Dmen pulling a paycheck. He is above average in play. Perhaps not greatly, but still above average.
Vs. Oilers, Klein had better Corsi than Suter.
Did I mention that he hasn’t taken any penalties, like your boys Webs and Suter?

I never presented an either-or situation. You did. You chose to dismiss out of hand a well-established psychological theory (supported by many, many studies) about how individuals think and make decisions and how we process our world. You did so by claiming that “familiarity” and “complacency” mask reality and objective truth and by making an implicit claim that “talent” was some sort of unchanging and “real” thing waiting to be uncovered in the data. You made a claim that your conclusions were better than mine because they were more objective.

I am challenging you to show that what you dismissed as not happening actually isn’t happening . I am challenging you to live up to your claim of objectivity and intellectual rigor. I am challenging you to define the terms on which you made those claims. But it seems like you either can’t articulate or don’t know what it is you are trying to measure. How can you measure something if you can’t figure out what it is? You are telling yourself you’re being objective and I’m indulging in subjectivity, but that’s not true. We are both being subjective. You challenged me to think about what I was proposing, and I am challenging you to think about what you are proposing.
 
If you want to be intellectually rigorous about this, think about how to define your terms and then stick to that definition. Make sure you know what is to be used as a standard and what is to be descriptive. Stop using the same damn word to mean whatever you want it to at that particular moment and stop using any it interchangeably with other words like “skill” or “role”.

And just acknowledge that even if you don’t like the questions I ask it doesn’t mean that you already have all the answers

Btw, paradigmatic thinking isn’t bad, it just is. That concept is simply a way of understanding human beings’ pattern-making intelligence.