The All-Purpose Toughness Thread
View Single Post
10-03-2011, 03:49 PM
Join Date: Jan 2010
Originally Posted by
Heh. You missed the part in 2009-2010 when they were actually lucky to get there in the first place and just reverted to normal?
The Flyers just were outright better than the Habs in the series. In some ways, that was also the case in 2008-2009.
There's really only one way to win a Cup. Build as good a team as you can to tilt the odds in your favor, then hope things go your way -- revel when they do, but accept that they probably won't. After all, even the hands-down best team in the league is always a massive underdog to win the Cup against the rest of the field:
That doesn't mean you don't keep upgrading your team. But at some point, people who follow hockey are going to have to stop saying "anything could happen in the playoffs" then act shocked when it does.
I would question whether Philly -- a team largely built around small, skilled forwards -- would classify as one of the "toughest, most physical teams in the league" other than by reputation.
In any case, it is simply not the case that size and physicality has been the primary or even secondary cause of the Habs losing any playoff series. That's purely a narrative based on the reputation of the teams involved and it simply does not survive scrutiny.
I agree more with Lshaps here than you, you seem to think these are absolutes, I think you're partially right, but rely a little too much on these.
Anything can happen in the playoffs isn't necessarily true either. I don't remember a 8th seed ever winning a cup, can't really remember a 7th either, feel free to correct me if i'm wrong.
I also think something is missing in your analysis of the Bruin's, although I can't pinpoint what it is. The idea that they were outplayed and out shot often should lead to a worse record type of thinking. How much of the Bruins poster about playing with the lead was taking into account here?
I also expect the habs goal scoring 5vs5 to increase this year, but don't believe it's based solely on regressing to the mean, it will have more to do with adding 2 power forwards for entire year creating a net presence we've never really had in previous years. Small skillzy types have a more difficult time getting to the dirty areas of the ice and winning the grinding battles down low and in front of the net. I would think the opposite would be true with the bruins, their big forwards win more battles down low and score a higher % of goals from the dirty areas of the ice. Being able to win battles in the corners and sustaining pressure down low. It's just a theory, so don't shoot me if you've already seen this studied somewhere, but it's a theory I think holds some merit.
Last edited by habsjunkie2*: 10-03-2011 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by habsjunkie2*