View Single Post
05-10-2012, 04:25 PM
Registered User
JackSlater's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 6,942
vCash: 500
Uhoh I've drawn the Finns to the thread. I will try to tread lightly.

Originally Posted by Mara View Post
I wouldn't call it a fluke. The first game was very even, and could have ended both ways, ending in SO for Finland. In the second game Finland was clearly better as a team for most of the game, and completely shut down the Russian stars. It proves that Finland was the better team in that tournament.
I remember that Finland was better in the final game (I don't remember the first) and I was cheering for them. Finland may have played better in that tournament too. Does not mean that they were the best team, or that they were better than Russia. The sample size was very, very small. Far to small to say that anything was proven. It does not mean that Finland was not the deserving winner.

Originally Posted by Random Oracle View Post
A 7-game series still doesn't mean that the team which looks better on paper will win 100% of the time. Upsets happen in the Stanley Cup playoffs, too.
Yep, you're right. Not only does the better team on paper not always win a series, but the better team does not always win a series either. Still, the huge disparity in talent between that Finnish team and a few other teams at that tournament would make them very, very unlikely to win if it was a similar format to the Stanley Cup playoffs (which would be a better indicator of what team is better). They seemed to come together as a team much better than the other teams last year, and that advantage would likely be gone over a larger sample size. You are right that it was an upset, and there is a reason for that. The Oilers could beat the Bruins in a single elimination tournament, or even a seven game series, but they still would not be a better team.

Also, am I right to assume that Russell will play tomorrow?

JackSlater is offline   Reply With Quote