I'm pretty sure there is no number of failures that would be enough for some people, after all, there's no limit to the number of times you can get "out-goalied".
PTS% for team of course.
Thank you sir, that's exactly what I was after. Seems like 44 games is a big enough number that it can't easily be dismissed because playoffs are a small sample size either.
Based on the bolded, I guessing those teams did indeed have more playoff success then we've had. But since you want us to look as good as possible so to this end, you're dismissing 1st round wins as irrelevant.
What's more successful, winning a round or losing a round?
That question has been answered thousands of times in a roundabout way by people posting here - of course we are!
What's more successful, winning a round or losing a round?
In other news, I decided to humor you and took a look Colorado's history to see if this earlier post of yours had any validity.
They lost for sure, they are just over halfway there to the amount of times Washington's or Colorado's core lost.
Here's what I found.
Colorado
2014-15 - missed playoffs
2015-16 - missed playoffs
2016-17 - missed playoffs
2017-18 - 95 points, lost to a team with 117 points
2018-19 - 90 points, beat a team with 107, lost to a team with 101
2019-20 - 92 points, beat a team with 74, lost to a team with 82
2020-21 - 82 points, beat a team with 63, lost to a team with 82
2021-22 - won the cup
So after missing the playoffs for 3 years, in the next 4 seasons (before winning the cup in the 5th season), COL played 7 playoff series.
3 times they faced a team that finished higher in the standings they won one and lost two, exactly what you'd expect.
3 times they faced a team that finished lower in the standings they won two and lost one, exactly what you'd expect.
1 time they faced a team they were tied with in the standing, they lost.
Or to put it another way, their playoff performance in those years was almost exactly what you'd expect based on where they finished during the regular season while our team is now 1-7 in playoff series, some of those losses coming when we were massive favorites and some coming where we were either pickem, or slight underdogs.
Conclusion - Colorado performed as expected in the playoffs whereas we have been massive underachievers so thinking COL is a comparable to us is ...
Like I said earlier, I suggest you try to be more objective if you expect to be taken seriously.
Well, at least he hasn't signed someone we don't need for $11.55M (13.83%) for 7 years, so there is that much of an improvement.
LOL nice obfuscation there pal. It's not a matter of "expect", it's a matter of probability and based on probability, we've been massive underachievers with this core.
And our colors are blue and white. Not sure what cluttering up discussion with random facts achieves, seems like more obfuscation to me.
Any team that plays, has a chance to win. Again, not sure what cluttering up discussion with random facts achieves, seems like more obfuscation to me.
This I agree with completely, and I would say the same applies to trades.
More obfuscation.
Reaves definitely, Kampf maybe (imo).
There was a study done several years ago (of NFL, NBA, and NHL teams, if memory serves) that concluded that the more black in the uniform, the more penalties you were assessed, or the more likely you were to be penalized for a particular level of infraction.
Option 4 with Boston is that the grass is always greener. This team never won a cup with this core (they did win when this core was young and supporting a previous core). They bowed out in the first round last year, are without any top centres, dumped Hall to sign mediocre players to fill out a roster, have no cap space at all, no picks and no real prospects. We would much rather be the Leafs, no?
How are you not making these determinations. Defense wins cups. Gio and Brodie are old. We need a young stud dman. That's all. Go look at Samsonovs playoff record.He can't win a round on his own. We lost OReilly, Accarri and Schenn. Three character guys.
