View Single Post
Old
01-09-2013, 04:11 PM
  #439
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,023
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CrAzYNiNe
Quote:
Originally Posted by shutehinside View Post
I'm not sure what you mean with your post. Could you please elaborate.

If I'm not supposed to use the last 2 full seasons that Markov was in and out of the line up, than what else am I supposed to use. The facts are they facts. When he was in the line up, they won. When he wasn't they lost. I think that's pretty clear. Saying they have a different team now and so on doesn't change what their record was with and without Markov. Trying to extrapolate anything from that is futile and only muddy's the waters, which is why you're not seeing it for what it is. Habs are much better with Markov than not. Don't see how you're arguing against this.
Let's look at the latest record:

With the small sample we have from the 11-12 season; with Markov 5-3-5, without Markov 26-32-11. This actually does coincide with the Habs being stronger with Markov.

Where I am skeptical is how much better are the habs with Markov in this lineup. I don't believe, probably because I am pessimistic after last season, that the teams previous success (With Koivu, Kovalev the team achieved first in the east and with Gomez and company they went to the east finals) with Markov is any gauge at how this team will perform this season.

But after reading the person you quoted and seeing what you were arguing against...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post
My point is winning% can't be tied to one player unless it's a goalie.
A team can win more because of one top end player in the lineup, and who loses more when said player is missing. Markov is proof that the Montreal Canadiens had this one player in the 09-10 season.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post
That's silly because you completely ignore all other factors that contribute to wins and losses. It's silly.
This is what he said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by shutehinside View Post
What does winning % have to do with anything?? Really? If a team wins the vast majority of the games they play with a particular player and loses the vast majority of games without him, then yes, I put stock in that.
He is right to put stock in a teams ability to win more with one player than when that player is missing. He didn't say he was putting the farm on this one aspect, just some stock. It's not the only thing he thinks is important, it's one of many.

Markov finding his form and influencing the game the same way as he did would be great, and even better if it can compliment Subban' style. I hope they can co exist and bring success. Again, I am just pessimistic.

CrAzYNiNe is offline