I just don’t think you’re following at all. Underlying numbers can tell whether results are indicative of quality of play, or whether there was other factors at play. No post is claiming that we are magically going to rewrite the past, but it can tell you if what we’ve seen is what we are likely to see. That’s what “unsustainable” means. Like in my previous post, it’s the reason that you probably shouldn’t put a large wager on Washington winning the cup next year, or that Columbus and Montreal have gotten over the hump and are finally good teams. It’s also the reason I wouldn’t go gloating over how bad NYR and Nashville have been because they’re primed for some extreme positive regression. Yet you point out that Calgary has plenty of indicators that say we are in the positive regression group and not pretend bubble teams like Montreal and Columbus, and everyone who sold the farm guaranteeing we’d be awful this offseason is full of vitriol.