Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Triumph

Race To The Bottom II - 2018-19 Edition

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, NJDfan1711 said:

To your first point - I've seen several games that Cory has started post-injury live and in person, both this season, and last.  Yes, he is slower, but it's not just that.  He's off on angles, he's terrible playing the puck (even worse than he was initially), etc.  And to say that a guy who suddenly moves slower is absolutely due to an injury is an insult to every goalie out there right now who still moves quickly. You can't look at a guy whose play has declined and just go "Oh, he let in 7 goals tonight, yup, he must be injured.  There's no other way to explain it".  That's just horrendously absurd on so many levels.  To your point "what else could it be?"  I dunno, old age?...a general decline in skills?...  MENTAL RETARDATION?  I mean c'mon man.  

To your second point, you're right, we don't know exactly what happened, but basing an opinion on average recovery times does make sense.  Yes, every injury is different, but there's a reason why initial timetables are given.  No doctor is going to say "Yes, you will absolutely be healed by this date X/Y/ZZ", but there's enough evidence through the history of time since doctors have been in existence where they can reasonably (and, usually accurately) suggest a timeframe for recovery.  It can be done even with the most advanced and severe injures related to the brain, and it can absolutely be done with hip injuries.  

lol what?!  There have been countless times where doctors literally tell patients and their families "I don't know" in regards to prognosis of severe injuries.

I can imagine you going to a hospital where family members of those in comas for extended periods of time and have no clue when they will wake up and telling those people "well they should have woken up by now according to the averages."  Please do that as I would like to see the reactions you would get. 

Edited by DevsMan84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

lol what?!  There have been countless times where doctors literally tell patients and their families "I don't know" in regards to prognosis of severe injuries.

I can imagine you going to a hospital where family members of those in comas for extended periods of time and have no clue when they will wake up and telling those people "well they should have woken up by now according to the averages."  Please do that as I would like to see the reactions you would get. 

Jesus, you are pretty dense.  Thank God you're not a doctor in any hospital.  I could just see you delivering news to people.  You:  "Welp, he's got pretty severe swelling, we're not really sure how long it's gonna be, he'll get better eventually, don't worry."  Normal person: "Um, don't you have the most advanced scientific data and tools to help at least give a rough estimate?"  You:  "Well, yeah, but that stuff isn't important or accurate, so we don't like to use that around here.  We just wing it, and hope for the best.  It usually works out!"

Yeah, people in comas sometimes have vastly undetermined recovery times.  But, yes, apparently unbeknownst to you, people with head traumas and brain injuries can, and do, have very predictable recovery times as well.  I mean, I don't browse these forums under the assumption that most or anyone of us here are doctors, but I didn't think you had to be one to understand that pretty simple concept.  

I really didn't think I had to go to these lengths, but you seem like the type of person who needs concrete and demonstrable proof before you actually believe something, so here's just one example that took me literally 2 seconds to find:  https://msktc.org/tbi/factsheets/Understanding-TBI/The-Recovery-Process-For-Traumatic-Brain-Injury

Quote

The fastest improvement happens in about the first six months after injury. During this time, the injured person will likely show many improvements and may seem to be steadily getting better. The person continues to improve between six months and two years after injury, but this varies for different people and may not happen as fast as the first six months. Improvements slow down substantially after two years but may still occur many years after injury. Most people continue to have some problems, although they may not be as bad as they were early after injury. Rate of improvement varies from person to person.

Scour the internet for 5 minutes and you'll find countless other examples of injuries (yes, even brain-related), that have very predictable and average recovery times.  Please do, actually.  You'll probably learn something (hopefully). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Jesus, you are pretty dense.  Thank God you're not a doctor in any hospital.  I could just see you delivering news to people.  You:  "Welp, he's got pretty severe swelling, we're not really sure how long it's gonna be, he'll get better eventually, don't worry."  Normal person: "Um, don't you have the most advanced scientific data and tools to help at least give a rough estimate?"  You:  "Well, yeah, but that stuff isn't important or accurate, so we don't like to use that around here.  We just wing it, and hope for the best.  It usually works out!"

Yeah, people in comas sometimes have vastly undetermined recovery times.  But, yes, apparently unbeknownst to you, people with head traumas and brain injuries can, and do, have very predictable recovery times as well.  I mean, I don't browse these forums under the assumption that most or anyone of us here are doctors, but I didn't think you had to be one to understand that pretty simple concept.  

I really didn't think I had to go to these lengths, but you seem like the type of person who needs concrete and demonstrable proof before you actually believe something, so here's just one example that took me literally 2 seconds to find:  https://msktc.org/tbi/factsheets/Understanding-TBI/The-Recovery-Process-For-Traumatic-Brain-Injury

Scour the internet for 5 minutes and you'll find countless other examples of injuries (yes, even brain-related), that have very predictable and average recovery times.  Please do, actually.  You'll probably learn something (hopefully). 

"The fastest improvement happens in about the first six months after injury. During this time, the injured person will likely show many improvements and may seem to be steadily getting better. The person continues to improve between six months and two years after injury, but this varies for different people and may not happen as fast as the first six months. Improvements slow down substantially after two years but may still occur many years after injury. Most people continue to have some problems, although they may not be as bad as they were early after injury. Rate of improvement varies from person to person."

 

You seemed to have skipped the bolded parts or just not understood that that is pretty vague and no indication of guarantee.  What you posted is what is "typical" but the medical field, with all its advances, is not a perfect science and can vary person to person.  Doctors always tell patients the typical recovery process but they never make any guarantees and often do respond with "I don't know" and "depends."

That part, in relation to Schneider's injury, is where the argument is.  You seem to constantly imply that Cory's injury is typical when we have no idea if it is or isn't.  Yet you keep harping on how other athletes recovered but neither you or anyone else outside of Cory and his doctors know the full extent of his injury.  That fact seems to go way above your head on multiple occasions yet you call me dense.  Good lord.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, here is the next paragraph in the link you posted.  Notice the bolded parts.

Long-term impacts

It is common and understandable for family members to have many questions about the long-term effects of the brain injury on the injured person's ability to function in the future. Unfortunately, it is difficult to determine the long-term effects for many reasons.

  • First, brain injury is a relatively new area of treatment and research. We have only begun to understand the long-term effects in patients one, five, and ten years after injury.
  • Brain scans and other tests are not always able to show the extent of the injury, so it is sometimes difficult early on to fully understand how serious the injury is.
  • The type of brain injury and extent of secondary problems such as brain swelling varies a great deal from person to person.
  • Age and pre-injury abilities also affect how well a person will recover.

We do know that the more severe the injury the less likely the person will fully recover. The length of time a person remains in a coma and duration of loss of memory (amnesia) following the coma are useful in predicting how well a person will recover.

The Rancho Los Amigos Levels of Cognitive Functioning (RLCF) is one of the best and most widely used ways of describing recovery from brain injury. The RLCF describes ten levels of cognitive (thinking) recovery. Research has shown that the speed at which a person progresses through the levels of the RLCF can predict how fully a person will recover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said:

To your first point - I've seen several games that Cory has started post-injury live and in person, both this season, and last.  Yes, he is slower, but it's not just that.  He's off on angles, he's terrible playing the puck (even worse than he was initially), etc.  And to say that a guy who suddenly moves slower is absolutely due to an injury is an insult to every goalie out there right now who still moves quickly. You can't look at a guy whose play has declined and just go "Oh, he let in 7 goals tonight, yup, he must be injured.  There's no other way to explain it".  That's just horrendously absurd on so many levels.  To your point "what else could it be?"  I dunno, old age?...a general decline in skills?...  MENTAL RETARDATION?  I mean c'mon man.  

Old age or a general decline in skills basically overnight? No, that doesn't happen. And yes, you can totally look at a goalie who can't move and say that's why he is letting in plenty of goals. That's how goaltending works, you have to move. Did I say there was no other way to explain it? No. If I thought that, I'd make that argument regarding Kinkaid, which I haven't. But Cory had a major hip injury for a long time, it only takes about half a brain to link that up with his inability to move. More so than "mental retardation", which is funny when you use it a sentence after calling something else horrendously absurd. 

The fact is, we have evidence from the fact that he had a hip injury and how he played during it and after it. You have ZERO EVIDENCE of anything else, you're just acting like the dude suddenly got old and forgot how to play hockey with nothing to support your arguments. 

2 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said:

To your second point, you're right, we don't know exactly what happened, but basing an opinion on average recovery times does make sense.  Yes, every injury is different, but there's a reason why initial timetables are given.  No doctor is going to say "Yes, you will absolutely be healed by this date X/Y/ZZ", but there's enough evidence through the history of time since doctors have been in existence where they can reasonably (and, usually accurately) suggest a timeframe for recovery.  It can be done even with the most advanced and severe injures related to the brain, and it can absolutely be done with hip injuries.  

Do you know how to calculate an "average" or a "timeframe" of something?

In this context, it necessarily requires some people to require a shorter recovery time, and others to have a longer recovery time. To use that information, calculate an average, and then criticize a guy for not hitting the average is not only ridiculous, but you have to completely disregard the math behind it. And in addition to all of that, your assessment would require specific information about the specific player's specific injury that you don't and will never have. 

What you DO have is knowledge of his injury and sh!tty play during it and post-surgery. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DevsMan84 said:

Yet you keep harping on how other athletes recovered but neither you or anyone else outside of Cory and his doctors know the full extent of his injury. 

Maybe not even Cory. Ask Mike Peluso about that lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please get this stuff about comas and injuries out of this thread - this is the Race to the Bottom II thread.  It's not to talk about Cory and Keith and whatever else - it's just to look at the Devils' position in the standings.  There are other threads for whatever the hell you guys are yelling about.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Triumph said:

Please get this stuff about comas and injuries out of this thread - this is the Race to the Bottom II thread.  It's not to talk about Cory and Keith and whatever else - it's just to look at the Devils' position in the standings.  There are other threads for whatever the hell you guys are yelling about.

There’s been injury discussion from post #2, just saying. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching this team play has put me into a coma several times this season. 

Edited by Satans Hockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus those two sieves are key components to the potential free fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wings beat Edmonton (lol) and Chicago beats the Isles (lol), Ottawa loses... Devils tied with Ottawa (with 2 less GP) for last place in the NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't love the Cory deal at the time because it was clear that team wasn't ready to compete. We saw this time and time again, Lou was willing to sell off future assets to patchwork a marginal competitor together to give him a few more years here. New ownership was in town and it was probably clear to him they eventually wanted to go in a different direction. 

And that's not to say at the time the trade wasn't a great value; it absolutely was. It just wasn't the right deal at the right time. We were in no position to be trading top ten picks for something that was maybe going to make us a bubble team. I don't think Bo Horvat was on the Devils draft board with that 9th pick, but how good is Vancouver feeling about that deal almost six years (holy sh1t) later. 

But no one saw this coming, obviously. This isn't some kind of "i told you so". Just unfortunate how it panned out, if we really have seen the last of Cory as an effective goaltender. Imagine someone telling you on the day of that trade that Luongo would outlast Cory.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, DevsMan84 said:

"The fastest improvement happens in about the first six months after injury. During this time, the injured person will likely show many improvements and may seem to be steadily getting better. The person continues to improve between six months and two years after injury, but this varies for different people and may not happen as fast as the first six months. Improvements slow down substantially after two years but may still occur many years after injury. Most people continue to have some problems, although they may not be as bad as they were early after injury. Rate of improvement varies from person to person."

 

You seemed to have skipped the bolded parts or just not understood that that is pretty vague and no indication of guarantee.  What you posted is what is "typical" but the medical field, with all its advances, is not a perfect science and can vary person to person.  Doctors always tell patients the typical recovery process but they never make any guarantees and often do respond with "I don't know" and "depends."

That part, in relation to Schneider's injury, is where the argument is.  You seem to constantly imply that Cory's injury is typical when we have no idea if it is or isn't.  Yet you keep harping on how other athletes recovered but neither you or anyone else outside of Cory and his doctors know the full extent of his injury.  That fact seems to go way above your head on multiple occasions yet you call me dense.  Good lord.

 

 

 

14 hours ago, mfitz804 said:

Old age or a general decline in skills basically overnight? No, that doesn't happen. And yes, you can totally look at a goalie who can't move and say that's why he is letting in plenty of goals. That's how goaltending works, you have to move. Did I say there was no other way to explain it? No. If I thought that, I'd make that argument regarding Kinkaid, which I haven't. But Cory had a major hip injury for a long time, it only takes about half a brain to link that up with his inability to move. More so than "mental retardation", which is funny when you use it a sentence after calling something else horrendously absurd. 

The fact is, we have evidence from the fact that he had a hip injury and how he played during it and after it. You have ZERO EVIDENCE of anything else, you're just acting like the dude suddenly got old and forgot how to play hockey with nothing to support your arguments. 

Do you know how to calculate an "average" or a "timeframe" of something?

In this context, it necessarily requires some people to require a shorter recovery time, and others to have a longer recovery time. To use that information, calculate an average, and then criticize a guy for not hitting the average is not only ridiculous, but you have to completely disregard the math behind it. And in addition to all of that, your assessment would require specific information about the specific player's specific injury that you don't and will never have. 

What you DO have is knowledge of his injury and sh!tty play during it and post-surgery. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened. 

Ugh.  I was going to respond to this yesterday evening but was a little busy, and frankly, just didn't have the energy, and I still don't this morning either.  You both have expressed why you feel Cory's injury is the reason for, and justifies, his poor play, and I respect that.  I just don't see it that way.  We can debate it til we're all blue in the face, but it really doesn't matter.  At the end of the day there's really no wrong or right, because we're not him, and like it's been mentioned, there's things we just don't and won't ever know.  No hard feelings.  Have a good Wednesday boys.  LGD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, Steven M. said:

Wings beat Edmonton (lol) and Chicago beats the Isles (lol), Ottawa loses... Devils tied with Ottawa (with 2 less GP) for last place in the NHL.

Was a pretty good night, all things considered.  Chiarelli being fired can only be good for the Devils' chances here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Triumph said:

 

Was a pretty good night, all things considered.  Chiarelli being fired can only be good for the Devils' chances here.

I guess it could go the other way.  Chiarelli reportedly put the Oilers first rounder on the table for a trade, which could have been a contributing factor to his dismissal.  Ownership might not want to tank the rest of the season, but at the same time might not want to light a fire under anyone's ass to improve now, as that was the idea of bringing in Hitchcock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Chiarelli's firing won't matter much until they clean out the Old Boy's Club up there. This reddit thread was pretty hilarious in hindsight: https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/33qqgc/peter_chiarelli_will_be_named_president_of_hockey/

It's like complete deja vu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we head into the break, here's where things stand:

21.  ANA 0

22.  ARI 0

23.  STL 0

24. FLA 0

25. EDM -1

26. PHI -4

27. NJD -5

28. DET -6

29. CHI -6

30. LAK -6

31. OTT -7

I think it's going to be these 6 teams jockeying for the bottom and if Carter Hart is for real, Philadelphia won't be one of them soon enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2019 at 9:04 AM, Triumph said:

As we head into the break, here's where things stand:

21.  ANA 0

22.  ARI 0

23.  STL 0

24. FLA 0

25. EDM -1

26. PHI -4

27. NJD -5

28. DET -6

29. CHI -6

30. LAK -6

31. OTT -7

I think it's going to be these 6 teams jockeying for the bottom and if Carter Hart is for real, Philadelphia won't be one of them soon enough.

Part of me is concerned Blackwood, if called back up, will get hot and do just enough despite what’s in front of him to keep us at the top end of the bottom 5-6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jagknife said:

Part of me is concerned Blackwood, if called back up, will get hot and do just enough despite what’s in front of him to keep us at the top end of the bottom 5-6

Yeah, that's a tough call. On one hand you want to see blackwood develop in the nhl, on the other you REALLY want to be in that bottom 4 to improve your odds at a top 3 pick ..  Blackhawks need some goaltending this 2nd half  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EdgeControl said:

Yeah, that's a tough call. On one hand you want to see blackwood develop in the nhl, on the other you REALLY want to be in that bottom 4 to improve your odds at a top 3 pick ..  Blackhawks need some goaltending this 2nd half  

Yeah it’s brutal, it’s such a good spot for the kid cause he has absolutely no pressure to succeed and can just focus on finding his way, but if he does well, it hurts the team as a whole draft wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Losing to the Rags sucks but it does really throw dirt on the season.

4 Teams tied for 0

2 Teams tied for -1

NJD -5

CHI, LAK, DET -6

OTT -7

One of the teams above NJ would really have to collapse or the Devils would really have to crush in order to make up the ground now - the Devils are pretty much locked in to finishing 27th or worse.  Somehow sportsclubstats thinks the Devils are a favorite to finish above 27th (and its model does not take into account strength of schedule), but that can't be right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, good shot at drafting at least 5th overall (assuming no one behind us wins the lottery).

I mean, not bad but after this sh!t season I'll be really disappointed if we're out of the top 3.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This team isn't turning around and doing a 180 next year with a 5th overall pick or later.  fvck last night's loss, and fvck our current situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Devilsfan118 said:

So, good shot at drafting at least 5th overall (assuming no one behind us wins the lottery).

I mean, not bad but after this sh!t season I'll be really disappointed if we're out of the top 3.

The odds of no one behind the Devils winning the lottery are not all that high.  Tankathon, a site I just found by googling, says that if the season ended today, the Devils would have a 25% chance of picking in the top 3, an 8.4% chance of picking 5th, and 65% chance of picking lower than 5th.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.