Tbh, I'm enjoying this discussion as frustrating as it can be at times lol. I also agree with what others and you have said about Keefe being successful during the regular season and Dubas making some great moves (e.g. McCabe, Muzzin). Also, the stats you present are not wrong. The problem is your perception of the team and what these stats mean in assessing the success of the team. As someone stated earlier, you have a tendency of cherry-picking and spinning these stats at times. For example, you said we've finished 1st before. However, we have never finished first in the Atlantic division. The only other time was finishing first in the Canadian division during covid (an asterisk is probably warranted for that).
It reminds me of the parable of the three blind men touching an elephant. Each blind man, feeling a different part of the elephant (like the tusk, ear, or leg), forms a distinct and incomplete understanding of what the elephant is like, leading to disagreement and conflict. The moral of the parable is that humans have a tendency to claim absolute truth based on their limited, subjective experience as they ignore other people's limited, subjective experiences which may be equally true. The story emphasizes the need to consider different perspectives and engage in dialogue to build a more complete and accurate understanding of complex issues. In essence, the parable encourages us to be open to different perspectives, acknowledge the limitations of our own understanding, and seek a more comprehensive view of reality
We both know there was no cherry picking or spin. As I reminded that individual, I used a wide variety of stats - both basic and advanced - to reflect our overall performance and our performance in each position and game state relative to each of the past 5 seasons, and included both stats commonly used by others and ones that addressed specific claims made by others. In our discussion, I then used the stats that
you used first. And you've acknowledged the stats I provided are correct and you haven't brought any further alternatives; only attempted to discredit stats altogether.
If anything, you're the one literally trying to put an asterisk on our division win just because it wasn't the Atlantic. Do all of our division wins before the Atlantic was a thing not count? Do all Stanley Cups when there were less than 4 rounds not count? And it's worth remembering that we weren't winning divisions because 3 of the 8 highest point totals in
NHL history were in our division, not because we didn't have great teams.
You also keep trying to pretend that this is a discussion of differing subjective opinions, but that is not what's happening here. This is just your subjective opinion against objective fact. This is not two blind men feeling different parts of an elephant and coming to different conclusions. This is two men with sight looking at a whole elephant, and then one of them says 'I think this is a unicorn so it's a unicorn now and nothing will ever change my mind'. The issue is not my perception, that is based on all facts and evidence. The issue is your perception, that is based on absolutely nothing. You're the one that won't accept what these stats mean, even though nobody is even saying that they make your perception of success impossible.
You also state there is no evidence that Berube's change in style is any more successful than in the past. It's been successful in the regular season and yet to be determined if it will be in the playoffs. A lot depends on your definition of success. For many, success is winning more than one round. It's a fact that in the past, the systems used by Babcock and Keefe were not ultimately successful.
It hasn't been more successful in the regular season. Y'all keep talking about the advanced stat bogeyman but even by points, wins, goals for, and goals against, we've been better in past years. That's as basic as you can get.
There are many different definitions of success. For some, success is whatever we haven't done yet. "Win more than one round" is a pretty obscure definition. One would think, even if you only care about the playoffs, that the cup is what matters. Not losing in a later round because you faced some easier experiences.
People around here put way too much emphasis on playoff outcomes to tell them everything about everything, when there is so much - both internal and external - that impacts outcomes in the playoffs. To attribute series outcomes to a system being better/worse just because that's what you want to believe is lazy. Teams with successful systems can lose for reasons unrelated to their system, and teams with unsuccessful systems can win for reasons unrelated to their system.
Having a successful regular is important to the development of a team that will be prepared for the playoffs. This is where Dubas and Keefe have failed. Too many changes at the deadline, not enough time to build a team ready for the playoff grind. They were too focused on having great advanced and individual stats. Treliving has shown that he knows what gives us the greater chance of winning more than a playoff round. He's built a defence ready for the playoff grind, regardless of what your advanced stats say.
I'm not sure how you're attempting to argue that we failed at having successful regular seasons now (literally contradicting yourself from your first paragraph). Treliving made 3 deadline additions to the playoff roster last year, and made 2 + Jarnkrok this year, so I'm not sure why you're pretending like adding at the deadline has changed, or is a problem in the first place. Nobody was ever focused on individual or advanced stats. Good advanced stats are just a result of building a good team. And as I've shown you, they are not reserved for one style of play.
Treliving has not shown that he knows what gives us a better chance of winning in the playoffs. His defence isn't any more ready for the playoff grind than past ones, regardless of what your narratives say. That doesn't mean we won't win. You will just continue to be confused about why, and probably further entrench your misconceptions.
Regardless, this team imo is poised to win more than they have in the past. You can disagree, and that's ok, just don't constantly piss on everybody's parade who are excited that this team is playing a style that may lead us to reaching our goal.
We are poised to win more than we have in the past. Just not for the reasons you think. If you want to ignore objective evidence in favour of fairy tales about a style that somehow has no quantifiable impact on any aspect of play but simultaneously a big quantifiable impact on outcome, that's your choice. Be excited. However, don't expect others not to "piss on your parade" if you're going around pissing on past versions of this team, and anybody who didn't drink the kool aid.
It's not necessarily the advanced stats that are the problem with people, it's the narrow-minded, holier-than-thou, "I know more than you", arrogant, condescending attitudes that rub people the wrong way.
Do you not see the irony of you accusing people utilizing statistics of acting "arrogant", "condescending", "narrow-minded", and "holier than thou"? They are the ones that recognize their inherent limitations and biases, and utilize objective information to come to evidence-based conclusions. It is your side that believes that they and their eyes are infallible, that their opinions are more valuable than fact, and that they can properly evaluate every aspect of their team - in general, relative to past versions of the team, and relative to the rest of the league that they haven't even seen - so much that they refuse to budge off of their preconceived ideas, no matter how much evidence is presented, and attack anybody who doesn't follow.
If one accepts that there is more parity in the division and the entire league, and there is some evidence of that, then it is possible that it would be harder to gain as many points, and win the division with less points.
A few opponents getting better and a few opponents getting worse doesn't create a net increase in difficulty gaining points. It did however create a lower bar to clear to "win the division".
)
www.sportsnet.ca
