Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes

LakeLivin

Full Member
  • Content Count

    6,865
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    43

Everything posted by LakeLivin

  1. They only had 63 points.
  2. Let me double check my understanding of antibody testing. Even if the inferior tests are completely eliminated, the inverse relationship of disease prevalence to false positives means that antibody testing won't likely be a useful tool to identify those that are "safe" from the disease until a relatively large proportion of the population has actually had the disease. Obviously, if tests with a higher degree of specificity were developed that would help, but is that take more or less correct?
  3. My sense is to accept that short term immunity for those who've actually contracted covid-19 isn't a huge concern. But it seems like we still don't have a good enough sense about the accuracy of antibody testing to make it a useful tool in managing covid-19 at this time. From what I'm reading, false positives could be as high as 50%, depending on the disease prevalence in the population. That's particularly disconcerting to me, as I was hoping (maybe naively?) that antibody testing might be one of the more effective tools in mitigating the impact of the disease right now. And yeah, the question of long term immunity is very scary one.
  4. Ok, thanks Rem. I suspect Pesce will still be tricky if he lags much behind the time others can start getting back into game shape. Clearly a 100% Pesce plays. But as gocanes said, it might come down to how well the rest of the D corps are doing. How would a 70% game shape Pesce compare to a 100% TVR or Fleury (he has effectively been playing his off side, hasn't he?)? Any chance a Chex right shot D (Kaskie, McKeown) might get enough of a look to factor into the playoffs? (seems doubtful to me given how Brindy has used young players)
  5. Do you have a feel if that applies not just to contracting the disease, but also to potential long term lung damage if an asthmatic does contract covid-19?
  6. I know Waddell said that Pesce will be close to being ready, but when it comes right down to it, I wonder if the fact that he has asthma, combined with our new found depth, might lead to him not coming back this summer.
  7. Sorry it came across that way to you Jon. The "oops!" emoji was actually meant to make the post a bit more lighthearted. That's one of the problems with online communication, it's often open to different interpretations.
  8. We had a couple conspiracy theorists around here that were more or less convinced Dundon would be moving the team to Houston as soon as he could. Anyone want to own up?
  9. My concern when it comes to positive antibody tests wouldn't be as much with lack of immunity as it would be with accuracy. Do they definitively know the false positive rate for those tests? I hate to think about people going out there thinking they have immunity when in actuality they don't.
  10. Congrats to Bean; that's a pretty substantial honor. Gotta believe that's another nail in Jake Gardiner's coffin with respect to him being on the Canes roster next season. How do you not give Bean a shot, especially still on his ELC?
  11. Agree, and a field of 22 would have been no more a scheduling problem than a field of 24. Including Montreal and Chicago grates against my sense of fairness as well, but it's in the best interest of the players as well as the teams to recoup as much revenue as possible, so given the size of those 2 markets, I've grudgingly accepted the 24 team format. Inclusion in the play-in rounds does lower the lottery odds for Montreal and Chicago with respect to this years draft, so it's not a completely free ride.
  12. I'm guessing that Pesce coming back might take away more time from TVR, another R shot D. If not for "politics", I'd consider starting Fleury on the 3rd pair ahead of Gardiner and Edmundson.
  13. Right D: Hamilton, Pesce, Vatanen, TVR Left D: Slavin, Skjei, Fleury, Gardiner, Edmundson Talk about depth on D, lol.
  14. Return to the stone age, lol? Black or white, all or nothing, eh? We live in a society, and everyone making their own "informed decision" does have certain limitations with respect to our laws. I'm not going to get into an argument as to where that line is with respect to current circumstances; I haven't even resolved that question in my own mind. But I do think all but the most partisan zealots will agree that there is a line somewhere. https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlawsregulationsquarantineisolation.html
  15. If we had an overall average age for the group, I bet you'd have just moved it lower by a couple years, lol.
  16. A lot better than our odds of getting Lafreniere, lol. Let's say you balance our better record against the Rangers recent domination of us and go with 50-50 odds for our play-in series. Right now, that gives us an overall chance at the number 1 pick of 1.5%. Actually, it's a bit less once you factor in the probability of Toronto falling into a top 10 draft slot, which would mean we wouldn't get to keep the 1OA even if we won it. Wouldn't that be a major kick in the cods!
  17. With our young core, that would immediately position us over the next decade similarly to how the Pens and Hawks were in the recent past, imo.
  18. If Toronto wins the lottery they retain their pick, which I'm pretty sure means that Rangers would get ours this year. I'd bet that the actual terms with NY translate to "lower" as relates to draft order this year, not "worse" from a qualitative perspective that could span years. Yeah, Toronto winning the lottery would really suck, leaving us with no 1st round pick this year. But what if the Canes won it? Can you imagine adding Lafreniere to this young Canes team?
  19. One theory as to why they opened up a chance at a lottery pick for the play-in losers is to "balance" the unfairness of them having to win a series to make the playoffs given that some of them had a very high probability of making it if the season hadn't been interrupted. You could argue that if they end up losing in the play-in, 5th seeded teams like Edmonton and Pittsburgh should have lower odds at a lottery pick than teams like Montreal and Chicago, should they lose. But you could just as easily make the argument that Edmonton and Pittsburgh, highly likely playoff qualifiers if the season had completed, are being "penalized" by having to play in, whereas Montreal and Chicago are being more or less gifted a shot at the playoffs. The theory is that the modified draft rules that reduce the lottery odds for teams like Montreal and Chicago and increase them for teams like Pittsburgh and Edmonton help balance the inequities of the play-in structure. If I did my ciphering correctly, each of the 8 play-in losers has a 3% chance at winning the first overall pick. Can you imagine the uproar if that turns out to be a team like Edmonton or Pittsburgh?
  20. I'm pretty sure that if a placeholder (qualifying round loser) wins one of the first 3 picks, the second lottery for that pick only includes the 8 teams that lost in the play-in round. The way I think of it is that the 8 play-in losers form a "pool" with respect to the first lottery. If that pool wins a top 3 pick, each of the 8 teams in the pool has an equal chance (12.5%) of winning the second lottery to actually get that pick. From TheHockeyNews: "Where things get tricky is if a placeholder wins one or more of the Phase 1 lottery. In that case, there will be a Phase 2 lottery between the eight qualifying round losers – and only those eight teams. In this lottery, each team has the same odds."
  21. You don't see Vatanen playing on the second line with Skjei? Not only is he better than TVR, why have 2 pairs that aren't all that familiar with each other instead of just one? Just curious; if you were the coach and could completely ignore "politics" (salary, status, trade implications, etc.), for the play-in round would you start Gardiner on the third line or Fleury?
  22. I hear ya. For over a decade I've been of the opinion that hyper partisanship is one of the biggest challenges our country is facing. But we've gotten to the point where the concept of "alternative facts" isn't a bit from a stand up comedy routine. I wish I knew how we get past this, but I have no idea.
  23. And Edmundson. Playing time is going to be hard to come by for a couple of those guys. Hamilton, Vatanen, and TVR right shot, the other 5 left shot. How much has Fleury been playing on his off side lately?
  24. I heard that they're considering making all players wear full face shields. That would seem to make a lot of sense.
  25. Anyone know the status of Pesce and his shoulder surgery? I haven't heard that he's recovered, and even if so, he has asthma. Would they risk him even playing if the shoulder was ready? Even without Pesce sounds like we'd have 8 NHL d-men ready to go. Wonder how they'll juggle all 8? edit: just read Pesces expected to be out all summer.
×
×
  • Create New...