To think: On paper, this could end up being the best Rangers team in history
View Single Post
03-30-2012, 04:25 PM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Originally Posted by
Not to be pedantic, but don't you mean the opposite of "on paper?" That's a phrase normally meant as an evaluation of team potential based on looking at individual player talent. "On paper," the Rangers teams with big names and hired guns were better than the current one. But this team has already proven that in real terms it is far better than they.
Nope. Meant it how I meant it, in context. The on paper in this case is the team's stat record, not the team itself. The point to ponder was that based on that stat isolated alone, if we were to break such records, this years team would indefinitely be on the top of the list as the best single season team in franchise history; despite other variables.
The point to ponder was then do we deserve such standing in our club's great history? Many have argued kinda, but not really, based on a lot of other criteria; some of which is best guesses, some of which is mere perceptual opinion, and some based on logic. But my conclusion was that for different reasons of which I detailed, that just maybe, if they can continue this journey they're on, they are in fact deserving.
As a side note, I don't put as much weight into the overtime argument as others do. If there is no shootout, you approach the game; both in overtime and at times even in regulation; differently. Because the whole approach is different it is impossible to determine what the true outcome would be. You can't just take SO wins and turn them into a tie. Some of them we very well may have won in OT instead. Some we may have lost. Some that we actually did lose in the SO maybe back then we would've won in OT. You just don't really know. But we've benefited so little from the SO this year, and so few games overall are affected, I considered it to be an even wash as to games we may have won in OT anyway, games we won but may have lost and games we lost but who knows, may have even won. So what I'm getting at; is that if we break the records I don't really consider it to be dismissible due to rule changes.
I also fully understand how passionate some are about teams of other years. But my post, a piece written solely on opinion, is about knowing that comparing player to player we wouldn't seem to be the best ever. I completely understand why some would, even passionately, discount them as such and instead firmly believe other years teams were. But my point was to make the case that we are in fact worthy of if not that title, at least being in that company. The question to ponder was if we don't have the skill of the 71 team, the 94 team, etc, then what is it that brought us there? What makes us that special to join those elite teams, and possibly on paper actually rank above them? My conclusion was work ethic.
My position is that this is the hardest working, most dedicated, and most willing to sacrifice team overall that I think I've ever had the pleasure of watching throughout the course of a season. Opinions will of course differ. But it was my hope that all of us could at least agree on the pride we have for this team, and on what makes this team so special that they could earn a place atop Rangers history. I hope I've explained myself a bit better here.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by IAMREALITY