Toggle sidebar

Around the League 15-16 Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
deeshamrock said:
Neither. They're a lot better than either team, they've made the ECF 3 of the last 4 years and the SCF as well.
Click to expand...

They just choke it up later in playoff season.

But they still choke it up. So there is similarity there.
 
From Friedman's 30 thoughts

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-try-bigger-nets-in-the-all-star-game/

Note 3- on Tyson Barrie of the Avs, who turned down a 4 yr deal and took a bridge deal, betting on himself. Which if he is an RFA next summer with arbitration rights and there would be suitors come callin' if he were out there

15. Things you don’t see every day: Both Erik Karlsson and PK Subban played every second of their team’s power play time Monday night — 3:54 for the former and a full 8:00 for the latter.
Click to expand...

25. Another suggestion to increase scoring? Don’t let goalies leave the blue paint; force them to stay in the crease. Was talking with Eli Wilson, who runs successful goalie camps (and worked for Hockey Canada, Anaheim and Ottawa) on another matter, and asked him about this. “It would create scoring chances that don’t exist right now,†Wilson said. “If the goalie stays in the paint, the shooter can score. The goalies would have to become more athletic, more reactionary.†Then, he paused: “But no one under 6-foot-4 would be able to play goal anymore.†We’re getting there anyway. When Mike Gillis ran the Canucks, policy was not to draft anyone under 6-foot-2 for that position. He wasn’t alone.
Click to expand...
 
Ron said:
They just choke it up later in playoff season.

But they still choke it up. So there is similarity there.
Click to expand...

Until the Blues or Sharks get to 3 Conf Finals and a Cup final in a 4 year timeframe, no there is no similarity at all. Losing in the SCF is not 'choking'. ONe teams wins, doesn't mean the other three teams that get to the Conf finals, 'choke'. It's the hardest trophy in professinal sports to win for a reason and as a hockey fan who loves the playoffs, I wouldn't be that poor a sport and ridicule the teams that lose.
The Rangers are a very good team. They lost to a better team, that's the way it goes.
 
deeshamrock said:
Until the Blues or Sharks get to 3 Conf Finals and a Cup final in a 4 year timeframe, no there is no similarity at all. Losing in the SCF is not 'choking'. ONe teams wins, doesn't mean the other three teams that get to the Conf finals, 'choke'. It's the hardest trophy in professinal sports to win for a reason and as a hockey fan who loves the playoffs, I wouldn't be that poor a sport and ridicule the teams that lose.
The Rangers are a very good team. They lost to a better team, that's the way it goes.
Click to expand...

The Blues made it to the Stanley Cup Final three seasons in a row from 1968 to 1970.

So yes, actually, there is similarity.
 
tsanuri said:
I wouldn't count them getting there as part of the loser bracket a thing.
Click to expand...

Can't disagree more with the "loser bracket" tag.

There was a lot of talent on those old Blues teams. I remember the 1968 Finals (and there has been some "old hockey" television shows that replicate that Final). Even though St. Louis got swept, every game was a one-goal decision and two of those games were lost in OT (sounds familiar?).

If you see some of the old tapes, Canadien players were thoroughly frustrated in those games. Lots of broken sticks.
 
Ron said:
Can't disagree more with the "loser bracket" tag.

There was a lot of talent on those old Blues teams. I remember the 1968 Finals (and there has been some "old hockey" television shows that replicate that Final). Even though St. Louis got swept, every game was a one-goal decision and two of those games were lost in OT (sounds familiar?).

If you see some of the old tapes, Canadien players were thoroughly frustrated in those games. Lots of broken sticks.
Click to expand...

It was comprised of just the 6 expansion teams only. And they went on to play one of the established teams.
In 68 they had 70 points in 74 games there was only one team in the other conference that had a worse point total.
In 69 they did play well and had 88 points in 76 games which would have been 3rd in the other conference.
In 70 they had 86 points in 76 games but once again only 1 team in the other conference had a worse point total.

And where they did not have had bad teams they were sorely outmatched by the existing teams. They never even won a game in the finals in all 3 of those years.

I actually feel sorry for those fans that have been around since the beginning. We never even saw the finals until 1993 and lost. They went 3 times in a row were swept each time. And have never been back since they changed the divisions around. They got to think they could make it very early on and it was just an illusion.
 
tsanuri said:
It was comprised of just the 6 expansion teams only. And they went on to play one of the established teams.
In 68 they had 70 points in 74 games there was only one team in the other conference that had a worse point total.
In 69 they did play well and had 88 points in 76 games which would have been 3rd in the other conference.
In 70 they had 86 points in 76 games but once again only 1 team in the other conference had a worse point total.

And where they did not have had bad teams they were sorely outmatched by the existing teams. They never even won a game in the finals in all 3 of those years.

I actually feel sorry for those fans that have been around since the beginning. We never even saw the finals until 1993 and lost. They went 3 times in a row were swept each time. And have never been back since they changed the divisions around. They got to think they could make it very early on and it was just an illusion.
Click to expand...

Well, we know all about just getting in and then winning the whole thing (see circa 2012). Regular season records don't matter and have never mattered, with the lone exception of getting in in the first place.
 
The Ducks / Preds game is ****ing wild lol. Broken sticks flying into the stands, face washes, and right now the Ducks are dominating play but still down 3-2 in the third.
 
Ron said:
They just choke it up later in playoff season.

But they still choke it up. So there is similarity there.
Click to expand...

I don't think they choke, I just think they don't have the talent.

They remind of the Canucks under Alain Vigneault. A good team, but just not good enough to win it all.
 
All those 1 goal wins just aren't there this season for the Ducks. They were what, 25-7 in them last season? This season they've lost 7 in 19 games. And what a stinker by Andersen from the blueline.But hey, all the talking heads say they're trending up ward.:laugh:
 
Brad Doty said:
Sharks are quietly sneaking back up the standings.
Click to expand...

Sharks are always going to be near the top of the Pacific. I think they're still a pretty good team. Their top forwards yeah a bit older but still pretty good. Only question is the goaltending. Is Jones going to work in San Jose pretty much the big ?. They'll get bounced in the playoffs if they make it but will be battling for the Pacific all year I think.
 
Brad Doty said:
Sharks are quietly sneaking back up the standings.
Click to expand...

ru4reals said:
Sharks are always going to be near the top of the Pacific. I think they're still a pretty good team. Their top forwards yeah a bit older but still pretty good. Only question is the goaltending. Is Jones going to work in San Jose pretty much the big ?. They'll get bounced in the playoffs if they make it but will be battling for the Pacific all year I think.
Click to expand...

In the end, it still will be Kings/Ducks/Sharks atop the Pacific. Vancouver and Arizona are pretenders.
 
Brad Doty said:
Sharks are quietly sneaking back up the standings.
Click to expand...

They are. But after they beat the Kings, Ducks, and Washington in the first 3 games, they haven't done much against the better teams.

6 of their 7 wins since then are against teams in the bottom half of the NHL, most near the bottom.

They've won 1 out of 7 games against teams in the top half, and are 0-6 against top 10 teams.

They've got a nasty section from mid-January through mid-Feburary that's going to dictate whether they stay up in a playoff spot or not.

Dallas
Ottawa
Arizona
Minnesota
LA
Colorado
Anaheim
St. Louis
Nashville
Chicago

That's a rough stretch right there. I guess the million dollar question is can any other Pacific division team play well enough to catch them? The division is pretty pathetic.
 
Fishhead said:
They are. But after they beat the Kings, Ducks, and Washington in the first 3 games, they haven't done much against the better teams.

6 of their 7 wins since then are against teams in the bottom half of the NHL, most near the bottom.

They've won 1 out of 7 games against teams in the top half, and are 0-6 against top 10 teams.

They've got a nasty section from mid-January through mid-Feburary that's going to dictate whether they stay up in a playoff spot or not.

Dallas
Ottawa
Arizona
Minnesota
LA
Colorado
Anaheim
St. Louis
Nashville
Chicago

That's a rough stretch right there. I guess the million dollar question is can any other Pacific division team play well enough to catch them? The division is pretty pathetic.
Click to expand...

When you have Arizona, Vancouver, Calgary, and Edmonton in the division, there is absolutely no excuse to not making the playoffs. As poorly as Anaheim as looked in the first five weeks of the season, they are still only four points out of third place. That should tell you all you need to know about the Pacific this season.
 
25. Another suggestion to increase scoring? Don’t let goalies leave the blue paint; force them to stay in the crease. Was talking with Eli Wilson, who runs successful goalie camps (and worked for Hockey Canada, Anaheim and Ottawa) on another matter, and asked him about this. “It would create scoring chances that don’t exist right now,†Wilson said. “If the goalie stays in the paint, the shooter can score. The goalies would have to become more athletic, more reactionary.†Then, he paused: “But no one under 6-foot-4 would be able to play goal anymore.†We’re getting there anyway. When Mike Gillis ran the Canucks, policy was not to draft anyone under 6-foot-2 for that position. He wasn’t alone.
Click to expand...

It's weird. It's almost like no matter what rules get put in, management, coaches, and players adapt. Maybe it's a new thing. Probably just a fad.

We keep trying to re-create like 1987, without existing in the context of 1987. If only we could stop evolution/adaptation. Everything would be a lot easier.
 
Ron said:
The Blues made it to the Stanley Cup Final three seasons in a row from 1968 to 1970.

So yes, actually, there is similarity.
Click to expand...

You really have to take a look at the way the Eastern and Western Conferences were constructed back then. The Western Conference was made up of all expansion teams and the Blues were coached by Scotty Bowman.

In those three seasons the best 5 teams in the NHL were in the East in the Bruins, Hawks, Canadiens, Red Wings and Rangers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom