Friday, April 29, 2011

Best Show in the Universe, "Animals are people (you can eat"

Good news. There's a new Best Show in the Universe.



It's not a highlight, because the entire video is great, but ... it's a perfect ending: Maddox's smile to say, "thanks for watching."

Perfect.

I haven't paid a penny to watch these videos, he's done them without any obligation, so good for him, but man ... I wish these came out with more regularity!

Dinosaur round-up

Another dinosaur round-up. I've got loads of information burning up my inbox to turn into these.

Dinosaur Death Trap: Gobi Desert Fossils Reveal How Dinosaurs Lived
On a trip to the Gobi Desert, a team of fossil hunters unearths a death scene that reveals new clues about how dinosaurs lived
Gobi Desert in Inner Mongolia indicates how "these dinosaurs interacted with one another, how their society was built, as well as the circumstances surrounding their gruesome and untimely deaths."

You have to subscribe to Scientific American to read more, which sucks. Why post it online? Nobody pays for things online!
They didn't even tease which dinosaur or important discovery they made - just a bunch of rhetoric and flowery language. Thanks a bunch, "scientists."

Click to read more.

Dinosaur named 'thunder-thighs'
By Jonathan Amos Science correspondent, BBC News

Dr Mike Taylor explains why he thinks Brontomerus had "thunder thighs". The team has named its dinosaur Brontomerus mcintoshi - from the Greek "bronto", meaning "thunder"; and "merĂ³s", meaning "thigh".

Scientists have named a new dinosaur species "thunder-thighs" from fragmentary remains from a quarry in Utah, because of the huge thigh muscles it would have had.

The new species, described in the journal Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, is a sauropod - the family of dinosaurs famous for their long necks and tails.

It could have given other animals a hefty kick, say its discoverers.

"If predators came after it, it would have been able to boot them out of the way," said Dr Mike Taylor, from University College London, UK.

The fossilised bones of two specimens - an adult and a juvenile - have been dated to be about 110 million years old.

The wide, blade-shaped bone projects forward ahead of the hip socket, providing a proportionally massive area for the attachment of muscles.

"As you put the skeleton together, you can run muscles down from the hip-bone to join at the knee and that gives you a whopping thigh," Dr Taylor told BBC News.

"What's interesting is that if it were a sauropod that could move particularly fast, you would expect to see very strong muscles on the back of the leg to pull it along. But we don't; this is the opposite. It seems most likely to us that what this is about is being able to deliver a strong kick," he told BBC News.
Click to read more.

Government by Dinosaur Repellent
Ben Tripp
www.huffingtonpost.com

I spray my yard with dinosaur repellent. It must be working -- I've never seen a dinosaur around here. That's an old joke, of course. But it's no joke when it's our system of government. The entire Washington establishment is engaged in a mighty game of "pretend that's the problem."

The Democrats didn't lose some seats in the midterm elections because they tried to do too much. They lost because they did too little, and then claimed to have accomplished a great deal. They boasted they'd solved real problems that were not, in fact, solved at all. Republicans, meanwhile, did great business selling dinosaur repellent. And even now, it looks like Washington Democrats are buying the stuff in bulk.

As things continue to get worse in this country -- which they will, because nobody is focused on the real problems we face -- the crises are going to get harder and harder to ignore. Democrats may eventually start doing something about them, regardless of the apoplectic harrumphing of the opposition. I'm thankful they haven't started making up imaginary crises of their own. Not yet. But the Democrats do seem to respond to Republican scare tactics as if they were genuine. So right now we're locked in a vicious cycle, trying to keep the dinosaurs at bay.
Click to read more.

Thursday, April 28, 2011

auto-post | 7 out of 8 an't bad!

I've found a feature on the blog here where you can post a blog, but schedule it to be posted automatically at a later day.

I have absolutely no idea if this is going to work - but I figure, let's give it a try. Who knows what possibilities it could unleash (my guess is not many).

anyhow - now that the first round of the playoffs have ended, here were my picks and my results:

Eastern Conference:
Washington (1) vs. New York (8). WIN - I picked it, and blamed Gaborik before the series started.

Philadelphia (2) vs. Buffalo (7). WIN - figures that no stars on Buffalo would hurt them.

Boston (3) vs. Montreal (6). WIN - frankly, I was rooting for the Habs, but my best guess was that the Bruins were going to win anyhow.

Pittsburgh (4) vs. Tampa Bay (5). WIN - I totally preferred the Lighting to beat the Pens. See y'a later, bitches.

Western Conference:
Vancouver (1) vs. Chicago (8). WIN - it didn't go as i suspected, but BAM - it worked out anyhow.

San Jose (2) vs. Los Angeles (7). WIN - even though I didn't really know who to pick in this one.

Detroit (3) vs. Phoenix (6). w..i..n... I'm not happy nor proud of picking it, but ... Detroit was unlikely to lose, and apparently they weren't going to lose any games

Anaheim (4) vs. Nashville (5). Proof that you can't win 'em all. Nashville wins despite all the odds. Granted, I'm excited for Nashville, what with winning their first playoff round in ages.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Dinosaur round

Lots of dinosaurs to check out this time around.

If you're new to the site: check out Tomb of the Undead. I hope you like it!


Miami geologist part of "dawn runner" discovery in early dinosaur graveyard
Recap: Brian Currie reported in Science the discovery of a South American 230 million year old (Triassic period) Eodromaeus, meaning "dawn runner."

It may have weighed only 15 pounds, and they discovered a nearly complete skeleton.

It was discovered in the foothills of the Andes, in the "Valley of the Moon"

Flaw: eoraptor, a "similar-sized plant-eating dinosaur" discovered in 1991 is classified as a theropod, or meat-eater. (some challenge it is a sauropodomorph - or plant-eater, though)


‘Jurassic Park’ Images, Details Revealed By Game Informer
No recap: just pictures of the game!




I guess there's a new Jurassic Park game, but I have to think that this is old hat. What are you adding to the game to make revisiting the movie (the 18-year-old movie) cool? What are you going to add that wasn't added in the sequel, and the sequel's sequel?

Saturday Art: Twentieth Century Dinosaurs
Some impressive metal sculptures of dinosaur skeletons. Lookin' good! They were made by Jim Gary in Monmouth Country, New Jersey.




'Terra Nova' Not Plagued By Cost Overruns
Reporters describe the series having an 'Avatar' visual feel

Recap: Fox is ready to give a sneak peek at its new series "Terra Nova" in May.

Peter Rice, Fox's entertainment chair, told the Television Critics Association tour last week that "Terra Nova" is expensive, but it's on budget. In fact, it's so expensive, Fox ordered 13 episodes right out the gate, to try and spread those costs out.

Seeing some clips of "Terra Nova," TheWrap reported that the visual aspect of "Terra Nova" rivals that of James Cameron's masterpiece "Avatar." And it should be -- the pilot reportedly cost $20 million, six times a typical episode.

From Steven Spielberg, "Terra Nova" transports about 1,000 families from a dying future Earth to prehistoric Earth, 85 million years in the past. The idea is to rebuild civilization, even if it's in the midst of dinosaurs and the like.

The show stars Jason O'Mara from ABC's "Life on Mars" as well as an "Avatar" actor himself, Stephen Lang.

Fox hopes "Terra Nova" will become the new "Lost." It has put former "Star Trek: Voyager" and "FlashForward" showrunner Brannon Braga in charge, and hopes the May 23 preview will whet the appetite for an even bigger fall premiere.

Producers have made it clear, they are not sticking to your typical Jurassic Park style dinosaurs. In fact, they plan on creating some of their own, banking on the fact that it's possible we haven't found the fossils for every creature that lurked on Earth millions of years ago.

I don't usually post e-mails

but this one is a special example from my aunt. Now, my aunt sends me a dozen "FWD:s" a week, and they're not all great, and I don't even watch the video ones where you have to download something.

but this one was poignant. Especially considering all the sustainability and environmental stories I've been doing at work lately.
In the line at the store, a cashier, Regan, told an older woman, Agnes, that she should bring her own grocery bag because plastic bags weren't good for the environment. Agnes apologized to Regan and explained, "We didn't have the 'green thing' back in my day."

Regan said, "That's our problem today. The former generation did not care enough to save our environment."

She was "right," that generation Agnes's didn't have the green thing in its day.

Back then, they returned their milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled.

But they didn't have the green thing back in her day.

In her day, they walked up stairs, because they didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. They walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time they had to go two blocks.

But she was right. They didn't have the green thing in her day.

Back then, they washed the baby's diapers because they didn't have the throw-away kind. They dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts - wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

But that old lady is right, they didn't have the green thing back in her day.

Back then, they had one TV, or radio, in the house - not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief, not a screen the size of the state of Montana . In the kitchen, they blended and stirred by hand because they didn't have electric machines to do everything for you. When they packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, they used a wadded up old newspaper to cushion it, not styro-foam or plastic bubble wrap.

Back then, they didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. They used a push mower that ran on human power. They exercised by working so they didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

But she's right, they didn't have the green thing back then.

They drank from a fountain when they were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time they had a drink of water. They refilled their writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and they replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

But they didn't have the green thing back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or rode the school bus instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. They had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And they didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.

But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful the old folks were just because they didn't have the green thing back then?

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Weird Al day

It's not an official day, but I'm sure Weird Al would like it if there were an official Weird Al day.

In any case, I've had a few things about Weird Al come up over the past few months, and I've finally decided to put it all together into a blog.

First - from April 8, 2009 was a shout out for Al's new song CNR which I don't really understand. I've never heard of Charles Nelson. It seems to be a style parody of something the White Stripes would record.

Then on March 2, 2011

'Cause maybe I'll be a gorilla masseuse
Or an artist who sculpts out of chocolate mousse
Or a rodeo clown or a movie director
Or maybe professional pickle inspector...
Billy's classmates may have never considered careers in snail training or sumo wrestling before, but by the time the exuberant eight-year-old is done cataloging his dream jobs, they just might share his belief in unlimited potential!Virtuoso wordplay, irresistible rhythm, and laugh-out-loud humor abound in the first picture book by the one and only "Weird Al" Yankovic. This unbridled celebration of creativity and possibility invites readers of all ages to consider afresh what they want to be when they grow up.

Then he announced he's releasing a children's book that he wrote. I'm confident it will be better than the awful children's books that other celebrities like Rosanne Barr and Evangeline Lily are putting out.

In fact, it sounds awesome.

Then today - I've heard that Al is releasing a new record.




In case you haven’t heard, Weird Al and Lady Gaga recently made a big splash in the news – it seems there was some kind of misunderstanding over Al’s parody of “Born This Way” (which he retitled “Perform This Way.”)

Monday, April 25, 2011

Rangers Post Mortem

My initial thoughts were that the Rangers weren't good enough to be a playoff team, and though they made the playoffs, I think we're going to find that even though they played somewhat consistent to their regular season in the playoffs, that that wouldn't be good enough against a true playoff team.

There were some significant injuries that had an impact as well, I think.

First, and this isn't rocket science, they didn't have Ryan Callahan who had 48 points and was fifth in TOI for the team, didn't play at all in the playoffs. Alex Frolov didn't help being injured, either.

Anyhow - good on Dubinsky for really being the leader on the team, and too bad he missed having Callahan with him. Especially nice to see Bryan McCabe return to the playoffs and play so well, despite not not lasting more than five games.


Shame on Gaborik, but people have been saying that his entire career.

He's going to wind up with a reputation like Kovalev some day soon. Too fragile, but awfully talented. Avery is still obviously at odds with Torterella, and nothing's going to change there.

Chris Drury should be embarrassed with his play this year. I'm sure he is.

Overachievers:
  • Brandon Dubinsky
  • Ruslan Fedotenko
  • Bryan McCabe
  • Brandon Prust

Consistent Players:
  • Henrik Lundqvist
  • Marc Staal
  • Dan Girardi
  • Michael Sauer
  • Ryan McDonagh
  • Brian Boyle
  • Vinny Prospal
  • Matt Gilroy
  • Artem Anisimov
  • Erik Christensen
  • Wojtek Wolski
  • Mats Zuccarello

Underachievers:
  • Marian Gaborik
  • Derek Stepan
  • Sean Avery
  • Chris Drury

Henrik Lundqvist saw more rubber during the playoffs than he did in the regular season.
Significant stats:
Good - His goals against average was lower than his regular season at only 2.25 GAA. His saves per game were up as well, by two. So he saved those two extra shots he saw each night. His average time on ice was up by 10 minutes, on average, indicating his reliability in overtime when necessary.
Bad - he saw 2.3 more shots per game, at 31 on average. His save percentage was down, but by a negligible amount. He had no shutouts, which might have hurt their chances.

Marc Staal (ranked 1 in TOI) increased his physical game and takeaways without taking penalties, but saw a decrease in his plus minus rating.
Significant stats:
Good - didn't take any penalties. His hits were up to 2 hits per game, better by 0.18 per game. His blocks per game were up by 1.5, to 3 per game. His take aways increased to one per game, which is a very good rate.
Bad - points per game went down a little, only 1 assist, wasn't as defensively responsible as the regular season suggested he'd be with a -3 after being a +8. He was missing the net at a higher rate, his give aways were higher.
Dan Girardi (ranked 2 in TOI) was physically tough, increased his role blocking shots and was smart about it by not taking any penalties. But he generated no offense and wasn't able to maintain his defensive posture, with a minus rating after a positive regular season.
Significant stats:
Good - Took no penalties, though hits per game increased by .76 to 3.2. His blocks per game almost doubled, increasing to 5.20, up 2.25 from the regular season.
Bad - he scored no points, went from a 7 to a -2, his ice-time went down, he lost 5 shifts per game in the playoffs,
Brandon Dubinsky (ranked 3 in TOI) was very strong for the Rangers, delivering with results similar to the regular season, and he increased his physical game and shooting percentage in the playoffs.
Significant stats:
Good - nearly consistent offensive numbers, including two goals, with consistency in his defensive results (-3). His shooting percentage was up, his shifts were up 7.2 per game. He craned out 4 hits per night, up 2.17 from the regular season, and was consistent in his blocks per game, missed the net less often with his shots, and was consistent in his give aways and take aways.
Bad - his faceoff percentage went down by almost 14 points, to 38.8 %.
Marian Gaborik (ranked 4 in TOI) was counted on with increased ice-time to try and generate offense, but failed to deliver on special teams. He was looked to for offense, and found none.
Significant stats:
Good - shifts per game increased by 8.7, he picked up his physical by 1.86 more hits per game with his extra ice-time.
Bad - points per game decreased by over a 1/3, he had no power play presence, , his shooting percentage was decimated.
Michael Sauer (ranked 5 in TOI) was given more ice-time to lend defensive strength to the team, but had negative results with his plus/minus.
Significant stats:
Good - consistent points per game, increased ice-time and shifts per game (to the tune of 8.6 more than during the regular season). He increased his hits per game by 0.77 and had a minor increase in blocked shots.
Bad - was a - 1 after being a +20 in the regular season.
Ryan McDonagh (ranked 6 in TOI) was consistent with his regular season expectations, and and provided some defensive reliability.
Significant stats:
Good - consistent offensive numbers, reliable defensive plus/minus, increased ice-time, 6.8 more shifts per game. With the extra ice time he threw 1.2 more checks per game.
Bad - generated no offense, but he never did that for the Rangers anyhow. With more ice-time came more time with the puck, and he had more giveaways, a few more takeaways and missed shots, as well.
Brian Boyle (ranked 7 in TOI) increased his physical presence and ice-time.
Significant stats:
Good - She was given an increased ice-presence with an extra 8 shifts per night. He fit an extra hit per game in those extra 8 shifts, as well.
Bad - pointless performance, which surely resulted in his decreased plus/minus rating. His puck management didn't improve from increased ice-time as his giveaways increased and takeaways decreased.
Ruslan Fedotenko (ranked 8 in TOI) was consistent in his offensive role, and saw increased ice-time to bring more physical play to the game.
Significant stats:
Good - consistent points per game, increased ice-time and almost 9 more shifts per game from the regular season. He was perfect in the face-off circle when called upon, as well. Impressively, he added 2.33 his per game, doubling his contributions over the regular season.
Bad - weak plus/minus with -1 after being a plus 10 in the regular season.
Derek Stepan (ranked 9 in TOI) struggled as a rookie. His offense and physical presence were diminished, although they increased his ice-time to get him going.
Significant stats:
Good - The Rangers needed offense, and looked to this rookie for some goals, his shifts per game were 7.5 more than the regular season, and his ice-time went up (but it didn't work). His face-offs were similar to the regular season.
Bad - no points after a 20-goal regular season. A -5 after being a +8 in the regular season. His checks were down per game by 0.41.
Vinny Prospal (ranked 10 in TOI) solid defensively, but point production and faceoffs struggled in the playoffs.
Significant stats:
Good - His plus/minus was +1, which put him higher than most of his teammates. He was given 6 more shifts per game in the playoffs. Checks were up in the playoffs for Vinny, too - with 1.28 more checks per game.
Bad - point production went way down, dropping by almost 0.6 points per game. He had only one goal. Face-off percentage dropped by 20 % to only 1/3. Blocked shots were down a little, and his giveaways were up a little.
Bryan McCabe (ranked 11 in TOI) returned to the playoffs with great success.
Significant stats:
Good - bumped his point production to .5 per game, up by 0.18. Defensively, he improved to a +1 from a -1. He had five more shifts per game than in the regular season. He ratcheted up his hits by 1.21 hits per game, improved his blocked shots by 0.71, and drew 0.34 more takeaways from the regular season.
Bad - nothing to be upset about. His stats were strong.
Brandon Prust (ranked 12 in TOI) improved in all his strengths, with increased ice-time.
Significant stats:
Good - He earned 5.8 more shifts per game, and bumped his hits per game by 2.84 to lead the team with 4.8 per game. His blocks went up by a 1/3 and his takeaways were up.
Bad - points per game were down, and +/- was down by 2. His giveaways were up, too.
Matt Gilroy (ranked 13 in TOI) consistent point production, but significantly worse plus/minus rating.
Significant stats:
Good - He got more icetime, with 4.6 more shifts per game, and his hits were up by 0.93 per game. He also had no giveaways during the playoffs.
Bad - His plus/minus dropped to -1 after being a +5 in the regular season.
Artem Anisimov (ranked 14 in TOI) with consistent ice-time and shifts per game, he was as reliable in the playoffs as he'd been in the regular season. Faceoff percentage was about the same, he was as advertised, he just wasn't counted on to do much.
Significant stats:
Good - was still a plus 2 in the playoffs, and his shooting percentage was 2 % better than the regular season. Blocks per game was up a little, no giveaways and consistent takeaways.
Bad - points per game was way down.
Erik Christensen (ranked 15 in TOI) showed improvement in most categories from the regular season into the playoffs, but he just wasn't good enough to make a difference in the series.
Significant stats:
Good - plus/minus was even, his shifts were up by 2 per game, his face-off percentage was greatly improved, his hits per game were up by 1.2, his blocks were up a little.
Bad - point production was down, but his giveaways were up, and takeaways were down.
Sean Avery (ranked 16 in TOI) given his ice-time, I thought Avery was miserable in the playoffs, but what it indicates really is that he was miserable all season, and he just played consistently from there.
Significant stats:
Good - His plus/ minus wasn't as bad in the playoffs as it was in the regular season. He even managed to get 5.5 more shifts per game. He was perfect in the face-off circle.
Bad - points per game were down, and he only chipped in one assist in the playoffs. His hits per game were down by over a 0.5 per game, probably indicating Torterella had him on a short leash.
Wojtek Wolski (ranked 17 in TOI) improved much of his game, and was defensively responsible.
Significant stats:
Good - his points per game were up by 0.09, was an even plus/minus, his hits were up by .55 per game. He had no giveaways and his takeaways were up.
Bad - his point production was still not good enough. His time on ice was down, and shifts were down slightly.
Chris Drury (ranked 18 in TOI) was consistent with his regular season stats, but his regular season stats were atrocious.
Significant stats:
Good - point production was consistent with the regular season, and he was an even plus/minus. His shifts per game were up a bit, and face-off percentage was improved. His hits and blocks were up as well.
Bad - it was all bad, just a little less bad in the playoffs.
Mats Zuccarello (ranked 19 in TOI) didn't do much on the ice, but was strong at moving the puck when given the chance.
Significant stats:
Good - had an even plus/minus. His giveaways were zero, and his takeaways were up by 0.62 per game.
Bad - scored no points, down a full 0.55 points per game. His time on ice was down, and shifts decreased by almost 5 per game. He didn't get any hits recorded, no blocks either.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Post-mortem on the Coyotes

There's a lot more to just losing in the first round, but when you're in the western conference and you played three other playoff teams in your own division 6 times each all season, you should be competitive enough to win at least one game in the first round, which every other playoff team has been able to do.

So shame on Phoenix - but why did they lose? It's not just because they bumped into a juggernaut or anything like that. FOR THE RECORD - the Red Wings couldn't have played any better with Zetterberg in the lineup. They were dominating.

In this review I compared the regular season stats with the post-season stats to see where players might have achieved or not achieved according to their average numbers. Obviously, to succeed in the playoffs, you'd expect you'd need to improve your performance in the playoffs, or at least be consistent. It's no time for slumps.

Also, you might argue that comparing four games in the playoffs isn't comparable to the 70+ games in the regular season. As accurate as that would be, if they'd played better there'd be "more accurate" numbers? Who cares. This is results comparing results to see why a big point producing playoff team became a declawed kitten in the playoffs.

In short
Over achievers


  • Shane Doan. If your best players have to be your best players, all Phoenix proves is you need more than one "best player" to win in the playoffs. All Doan's numbers exploded in the right direction in the playoffs, he was amazing.
  • Martin Hanzal was great in the faceoff circle and impressive in generating offense.
  • Rusty Klesla improved his defensive and physical game.

Consistent players

  • Keith Yandle, excellent ice-time, fantastic offense, but defensive weakness that can't be ignored.
  • Michal Rozsival's increased offense wasn't matched by increased defense.
  • Ray Whitney was great in the regular season, and didn't miss a beat int he playoffs.
  • Lori Korpikoski improved his offense, but it exposed his defensive weaknesses.
  • David Schlemko, wasn't great, but he wasn't great in the regular season either.
  • Andrew Ebbett played so little it'd be unfair to say he underacheived.
Underachievers

  • Goalie Ilya Bryzgalov put up numbers that belong in the OHL, and betrayed the team with his performance. He owes them an apology.
  • Adrian Aucoin didn't deliver defensively.
  • Eric Belanger wasn't as defensively consistent as hoped.
  • Ed Jovanovski seems to be entering the twilight of his career.
  • Taylor Pyatt's ice-time showed more was expected of him than what he delivered.
  • Lee Stempniak didn't deliver anything. His future in the NHL could be in jeopardy.
  • Vernon Fiddler didn't deliver either, though didn't have much of a role.
  • Mikkel Boedker's role was small and didn't show much while he was at it.

Hope for the future - these guys weren't called on to make a difference, but they showed some spark in their games

  • Kyle Turris showed reliability
  • Paul Bissonnette's physical play really showed promise.
Player breakdowns.

Ilya Bryzgalov they key factors that keep a team competitive (save percentage and goals against average) were bush-league at best. He needed to save more shots, and he just couldn't do it.
Significant stats:
Good - not much to see here.
Bad - he saw only 3.75 more shots per game, but his goals against average went up by 1.88 goals per game. Thus, 2 of those 3 extra shots basically went in the net. Not good. No one seems to win with a GAA over 3.00 yet his was 4.36, which leaves him way out of the game. No one seems to win with a save percentage under .900, and of course his was a dismal 0.879, which was down 0.042 from the regular season. Not good for him.
Keith Yandle (ranked 1 in TOI) offensively generative, but defensively he struggled. Led the team in ice-time.
Significant stats:
Good - offensively jumped 0.53 points per game to 1.25 ppg! That's 103 points in the regular season, an incredible number for a defenseman. His giveaways were dropped by almost .25 per game, but over four games, that's only one giveaway.
Bad - But a bad number for a defenseman is being a -5 after being a +12 in the regular season. His hits went down a little, his blocks were down by 1 per game, he started missing the net more often, and decreased his takeaways.
Shayne Doan (ranked 2 in TOI) offensively dominating, he was scoring at a goal every four shots, which is incredible! With increased ice-time he delivered hits, shots and points.
Significant stats:
Good - his increased his points per game by 0.42 per game, at a 1.25 points per game pace. That's 103 points in the regular season, compared to his 60. Definitely picked his game up. He was given even more ice time than in the regular season, he was dishing out 3.6 more hits per game, averaging 6 each night.
Bad - was a -2, but that's only a difference of 7 from the regular season. His faceoff percentage was significantly worse than the regular season, though that's not one of his strengths. No blocked shots and no takeaways suggest his defense was weaker than the regular season as well.
Michal Rozsival (ranked 4 in TOI) increased physical presence came at a cost of defensive consistency.
Significant stats:
Good - His average time on ice was identical to the regular season, which shows consistency from the coach. He increased his hits per game by 1.
Bad - scored no points, though this isn't one of his strengths. His -3 was disappointing after his +3. His giveaways increased, his blocks per game were down, which didn't help his defensive game.
Martin Hanzal (ranked 5 in TOI) increased his offensive contributions and improved on his already strong faceoff percentage.
Significant stats:
Good - increased points per game by 0.32, saw an increase in shifts by 3.7, an improved faceoff percentage at 52%! an increase in hits per game, blocks, was more accurate with his shots on net.
Bad - was a -6 after being a +4 in the regular season.
Ray Whitney (ranked 6 in TOI) consistent play from regular season to the playoffs. He didn't miss a beat which must feel good for the coach.
Significant stats:
Good - continued his strong offensive numbers at 0.75 per game from the regular season into the playoffs, and earned increased ice-time as they were often trying to play catch-up in the score. He hit more often per game, and remained consistent with the plus/minus as well.
Bad - his blocks were way down, failing to block any shot during the games. His giveaways were down, but his takeaways were down by a similar margin.
Adrian Aucoin (ranked 7 with TOI) wasn't as defensively reliable as he suggested he'd be over the regular season.
Significant stats:
Good - blocks per game increased by a full shot, and take aways increased by 0.65 per game.
Bad - he was a -4 after being +18 over the regular season. Plus he scored no points, which doesn't help.
Rusty Klesla (ranked 8 in TOI) improve his defensive and physical game.
Significant stats:
Good - improved his plus minus, from -6 in the regular season to only -2. His hits increased by 1.75 per game to 3 every night.
Bad - his blocks per night were down, he missed the net on shots much more often and his giveaways per night were up.
Lauri Korpikoski (ranked 9 in TOI) increased physical presence came at the price as his offensive and defensive roles both went south.
Significant stats:
Good - physical game improved to the tune of 2.75 hits per game, 1.65 better than his average over the regular season.
Bad - offense decreased by half, and he was a -6 after being a +17 in the regular season. He missed the net more and had more giveaways, which isn't good, and his takeaways were down. Not good.
Eric Belanger (ranked 10 with TOI) wasn't as defensively reliable as he suggested he'd be over the regular season.
Significant stats:
Good - he was delivering over 1 hit more per game than average, and increased his shifts per game, BUT
Bad - scored no points, was a - 4 after being a +11 in the regular season and his giveaways were up, takeaways were down, and he wasn't shooting the puck as much.
David Schlemko (ranked 11 in TOI) consistent ice-time, but inconsistent defensive reliability. Ultimately, he remained consistent from the regular season to the playoffs.
Significant stats:
Good - consistent offensive contributions, with increased shooting percentage.
Bad - inconsistent defensive effort, dropping from a +8 to a - 3.
Ed Jovanovski (ranked 12 in TOI) saw his role diminished in the playoffs as his defense and ice-time dried up.
Significant stats:
Good - consistent in his hits per game at around 1.75, though he had decreased ice-time and fewer shifts.
Bad- scored no points, was a -2 after being a +4, his ice-time decreased, fewer shifts and his givewaways were up significantly by almost an extra 1/2 giveaway per game.
Taylor Pyatt (ranked 13 in TOI) defensive role as underwhelming while he was counted on with top-6 ice-time.
Significant stats:
Good - faceoff percentage was improved, though he wasn't asked to do this often. His hits were more frequent.
Bad - offense shrank, but not as much as his defense did, dropping from a +11 in the regular season to -3.
Kyle Turris (ranked 14 in TOI) wasn't called upon to do a lot, but showed promise for the future.
Significant stats:
Good - increased offense by over 1/3 point per game, was a +1 (above his average of 0 in the regular season), improved shooting percentage, in a diminished role with less ice-time. His face-off percentage was imrpoved (almost 50 %) and his hits per game increased by 1 per game. Blocks were up, takeaways were even and giveaways were down. All good things.
Bad - I'm not going to say anything bad about him - I think there's plenty going on here for the future.
Lee Stempniak (ranked 15 in TOI) outmatched in his role, failing to meet his regular season standards in almost all offensive and defensive categories. He was the ghost of himself in the playoffs.
Significant stats:
Good -
Bad - scored no points. What role does he fill if he's not scoring? His faceoff percentage shrank by 15 %, he was a -3 after being a +4 in the regular season, leading to decreased ice-time, and his hits per game dropped by 0.5 per game. His blocks were down, giveaways were up and takeaways down.
Vernon Fiddler (ranked 16 in TOI) saw his ice-time decrease and his role with the team shrink with decreased physical play.
Significant stats:
Good - takeaways were increased by a 1/3 per game.
Bad - but ultimately he didn't do much with the puck. He scored no points, was a -2 after being a + 3 in the regular season, has his ice-time decreased, lost almost 5 shifts per game from the regular season. His hits per game decreased by 0.45 and was less effective at shot blocking.
Mikkel Boedker (ranked 17 in TOI) wasn't as defensively reliable as he suggested he'd be over the regular season. He struggled, but wasn't relied upon in his role to be a difference maker.
Significant stats:
Good: (nothing) which indicates he has a lot of learning to do.
Bad: points per game were down 0.16, he was a -1 after being +11 in the regular season, and his hits were down by almost a quarter hit per game in the playoffs. He hadn't any blocked shots, and his takeaways were down and his giveaways were up.
Andrew Ebbett (ranked 18 in TOI) didn't have enough ice-time to make a difference in the series.
Significant stats:
Good - wasn't really counted on with a major role, and his ice-time reflects this at 7:58 per night. He did increase his hits per game by 0.27.
Bad - scored no points, decreased 3.2 shifts per game in the playoffs, and didn't do much with the puck when he was on the ice.
Paul Bissonnette (ranked 19 with TOI) wasn't a factor in the series, but provided significantly more checking that the regular season would suggest.
Significant stats:
Good - his hits per game were at 5 in the playoffs, 2.46 higher than his regular season average. His blocks per game were increased by 7.90 per game, he had no giveaways and fewer takeaways than he averaged in the regular season.
Bad - he only played one game. If these stats mean anything, he might have added more defensive prowess with an increased roll.