Big Blue Huddle

I think it's hard for fans to really know. Maybe those of us who have attended live camp sessions (I have not) and have managed to be within earshot of Daboll or at least observe his body language can have some idea, but the reality is it's difficult for any of us to really know other than what we hear others say, which is only reliable some of the time, as people (especially people who work for him or play for him) tend to only say complimentary things.

Rangers basically need to win one of two in Ft Lauderdale. Like everyone else here, I'd love it if they won both, but realistically 1-1 in these next two games should be the primary objective. That would then put them in a position to win at home to go up 3-2 in the series and have two cracks at winning it including, if necessary, a game seven at MSG.

If they win one out of two, I don't really care which one it is, but I would obviously strongly prefer they win today to keep the hopes of taking a commanding 3-1 series lead alive.

One thing I know for sure is we need the Shesty of game two, not game one, in this game. We also need the physicality of game two as well. I think if we have both of those two ingredients, the other stuff will take care of itself.

Quote from: uconnjack8 on Today at 07:37:00 AMLooking at where almost 60% land, that would likely put Flott more than 2 standard deviations from the mean.

I went back and looked at various lists of the best CBs of the 2000s and 2010s. I couldn't find one below 185 and the vast majority were, as @MightyGiants noted earlier in the thread, somewhere in the 190-210 range.

There have clearly been CBs under 180 in the NFL and are now, but it's a small group, and, based on the moderate amount of backward looking I did, the group does not appear to include any who were distinctly above average.

I think the statement that size (including weight) matters much more for CBs than it does for WRs was a pretty accurate one based on the evidence.

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 06:57:33 AMThis article covers lightest current CBs

https://hortonbarbell.com/average-height-and-weight-of-an-nfl-cornerback/

Good find. Thanks.

Quote from: BluesCruz on Today at 05:19:30 AMBy that I meant the NE starter and bring them back to relevance
He has the intangibles that made Brady good and its between the ears, confidence etc
His arm is also grossly underrated

We have never had much luck with QBs    Some have been good, none dominant in a Brady, Montana type sense

We will find a way to fumble Tommy D away- just watch

If that happens, it won't matter unless he has meaningful success elsewhere.

Keep in mind that a year ago the Giants were the only team in the NFL that was interested in him.

Strands #84
"Beyond Nashville"
💡🔵💡🔵
💡🔵🟡🔵
🔵🔵🔵

Fell for the trap on the first guess.

Connections
Puzzle #350
🟩🟪🟦🟨
🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟦🟦🟦🟦
🟪🟪🟪🟪

Who are the best NFL CBs in somewhat recent times (say the last 20 yrs) who were lighter than 180 lbs?

Can someone provide three or four recognizable names?

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 25, 2024, 04:21:45 PMI read the words from the bottom up and then scan for pairs. It's usually the case where I have three pretty solid matches and then there are a couple of words that could match as a 4th. Then I search for another set of words before I commit to that set. I try to get three sets with at least two word matches and then go process of elimination. Often I pick four and one is wrong. Sometimes two are wrong. Occasionally the purple is obvious but that's rare.

Not too dissimilar from me.

I read through the whole thing once ideally without rushing - sometimes twice - and try to spend a few seconds thinking about each word and potential multiple meanings it might have. Once I've gone through that, on most days, I can usually get one right away. Obviously some days are harder than others. Once I get that first one it's generally a process of finding pairs or possibly sets of three that I feel pretty good about and then finding the best candidate(s) for the last word(s).

I think I've mentioned this before, but one thing I try to do is when I think I have one dead right, and then it's wrong, and it's early in the puzzle, I try to move away from that category altogether and find something else. Too many times when I first started doing Connections I'd get stuck on one idea, and then it turned out the whole idea was wrong. By cutting my losses with a given theme when I get it wrong once, I have found the results seem to be better than when I keep using up guesses by just swapping out one word for another. Obviously if it's later in the puzzle you may not have any other option, but I try to avoid that when it's early.

Quote from: jgrangers2 on May 25, 2024, 03:26:31 PMIt's hard to argue the Rangers record with Rempe in the lineup. How much of it is him vs. coincidence is up for debate. Yesterday's game played out very similar to Wednesday's with the exception that the Rangers got the benefit of a slightly fluky early goal. Not sure how much of an impact it can be said he had.

Also, I think people need to stop getting on Kakko. He hasn't become the player we wanted to but he's a highly useful bottom 6 forward that is very good defensively and with regards to puck possession.

All that said, I think Vesey likely being out makes the decision much easier for Lav.

Kakko is a disappointment relative to the once high expectations around draft-time, but if you brush those aside, forget about them, and just look at him in absolute terms he's a totally serviceable bottom six guy on a competitive team. I think most fans have moved past the hopes they once had and have come to accept the player he in fact is. But someone had to be scratched last night to make room for Rempe, and I think it's hard to criticize Laviolette's decision.

As for Rempe, playing him on the road might be trickier than at home given the matchup issues you have as the road team with the last change rule, but to me he's close to a no-brainer at home. His presence seems to elevate those around him, and he was doing good things on the ice for the most part. He got the puck deep, he was strong on the forecheck, and he had some big hits and no dumb penalties. I would love to see him parked in front of the net more, but it's very difficult to hold the zone against the Panthers. Overall I thought he was additive last night.

How do you "do" Connections, Ed?

In other words how do you approach the puzzle each day? Do you have some sort of process that you rigidly apply to each game, or do you just kind of eyeball it and wing it?

Just curious.

Quote from: kartanoman on May 25, 2024, 11:00:20 AMRempe's presence, at the Garden, is like having an extra skater on the ice. The article brings that point out so well. Ranger fans get into the game even more with the chants and the electricity builds. What more could you ask for?

This series has set the tone for something even more intense than what we've witnessed so far. This is what championship level hockey is all about and our Blueshirts our holding their own right now.

It will be interesting to see what tactical changes to each lineup both coaches make ahead of game three in Florida.

Peace!

I suspect if you polled the players anonymously, they'd say they want him in the lineup. I can't prove that obviously, but it is a hunch. The fact that Messier endorsed playing him carries a lot of weight with me too. He knows way more about the intangibles of winning in the postseason than almost anyone (and certainly than any fan who has never played professional hockey).

Playing Rempe on the road is perhaps a trickier discussion given the matchups and the last change rule. Not to mention you don't have the entire building chanting his name on the road (albeit you get a lot of Rangers fans in some of these venues).

Playing him at home seems like close to a no-brainer to me. At least until he significantly messes up and hurts the team, which he clearly hasn't to this point. I just think the positives outweigh the negatives with this guy, and I think the positives go beyond when he is on the ice.

Does anyone here think Kakko was sorely missed last night?

I wouldn't have an issue with this, provided it's definitely more accurate than human calls. I don't see a good argument for why sports should not use technology to make officiating more accurate. Why allow for human error when you don't have to? Tennis is way better now that they have the technological arbiter on close calls. What is worse than a team losing a game because of a wrong call that could have been avoided with the use of available technology?

I started "Ripley" on Netflix earlier this week. I am really enjoying it so far. A few comments:

(1) It is, as I am sure most know, based on the same novel by Patricia Highsmith that the movie "The Talented Mr. Ripley" is based on. The storyline is more or less the same in a broad sense.

(2) The characters are mostly the same people, but they are portrayed very differently than they are in the movie. The "Marge" character for example, played by Dakota Fanning, is a completely different take on the character than Gwyneth Paltrow's character. The Dickie character is also different in some ways.

(3) The show is in black and white, which for some is a negative. I don't see it that way, myself. Not only does it not bother me, but I actually think it is effective in making the 1950s time backdrop seem more authentic. I said this to my wife, and I'll say it here: if Netflix gave you the option of watching it in color or black and white, I'm not sure I'd pick the color option having now watched a few episodes in black and white.

(4) If you're someone who needs constant, face-paced, intense action, I would not recommend this show. There are some intense scenes, but it is on the slow, brooding side. It has more of a foreboding, macabre feel.

(5) The cinematography in this show is not just very good; it is exceptional. If you are someone who appreciates fine cinematography, I strongly recommend this show. I have been blown away by how good it is.

(6) Overall I am really enjoying the show. It is different from the movie, but still very good.

Quote from: Philosophers on May 25, 2024, 10:00:06 AMIf he becomes a good guard on another team and Giants never saw that, shame on the Giants.

For sure. He's still on his rookie contract. Not that it's a negligible amount of money relative to what he has given them, but they should at least use the time he's on it to see if he can contribute meaningfully in any way.

He needs to perform this year though, one way or another. While I agree that the Giants need to explore other spots on the line if he continues to be a bust at OT, this team also has a history of clinging to, accepting underperfomance from, and making excuses for picks they had high aspirations for that, in reality, simply weren't the players they thought they were. This happened with Will Hernandez, Lorenzo Carter, and a host of others in recent times that I'd rather not have to name because it's not a very pleasant topic.