HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

are we becoming a contender if not already one?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-21-2011, 11:04 AM
  #101
HamrlikTheStud*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Too bad more of our fans can't even recognize this..
You're fooling yourself if you actually believe the Bruins played as good against the Habs than they did against the other 3 teams. Honestly. They took us lightly at the start of the series and it showed. They scored 3 OT goals, but it has a lot to do with the fact their forwards lineup was far deeper than ours. We were no match for them up front. Luckily, Price played great and most of our Ds had great playoffs. But all in all, we are not contenders. Not even close. We need 2 more top-9 forwards with size, including a guy capable of getting 60pts+, and at least 1 experienced top-3/4 d-man along with Markov to carry the load, preferably being about 30 years old.

Add Kopecky, Cole and Brewer to this team in addition to Markov, and I'd say we're a force to be reckoned with.

Cammalleri - Plekanec - Cole
Pacioretty - Gomez - Gionta
Kostitsyn - Eller - Kopecky
Moen - Desharnais - White

Markov - Gorges
Gill - Subban
Brewer - Weber

Price
Garon

Now THIS, when healthy, could match what the Bruins are.

HamrlikTheStud* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 11:14 AM
  #102
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
If not for your pp, Chara being sick, and Thomas being very shaky early on, this could've been a 4 or 5 game series.
Homer much?

It could've been a 4-5 game Habs win more than it could've been a 4-5 game Bruins win. Montreal outplayed the Bruins at even-strength in the first five games, and the Bs were lucky to escape despite Thomas's heroic.

I think you're falling in the common trap of buying the Bruins hype and overestimating them. Winning the Cup isn't helping, but you need to be realistic about your club and not set expectations for them they don't have the horses to fulfill. I'd double-check the Boston roster. The Bruins' forward corps isn't all that... but they especially need better defensemen, they're really quite shallow at that position.

I do agree with you that I wouldn't use the playoff series as a decision point whether the Habs are a contender, but that's because I don't think the Bruins are a good measuring stick for that, Cup or no Cup. Taking the Bruins to 7 games doesn't mean much, everyone took Boston to 7 games, they made it a specialty of escaping long series this year (which also speaks to their actual level of play).

Washington and Pittsburgh remain the class of the East, with Philly very close, and Tampa will need to be added to that list, I think. Boston had an "up" year, but they're not to that level. I don't think being better than Boston necessarily means you are a serious Cup Contender (and mind, I think Montreal already are anyway).

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 11:18 AM
  #103
Souvenirs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Trois-Rivieres
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
you guys need better forwards. Don't let your success against the stanley cup winners cloud your judgement. Habs were exceptionally motivated against the Bs after the MaxPac incident and the 8-0 drubbing. Your pp was hot. But your top line was like -6 for the series. If not for your pp, Chara being sick, and Thomas being very shaky early on, this could've been a 4 or 5 game series.
If not for Pacioretty having his neck broken , we could have a very different conversation right now.

Souvenirs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 11:21 AM
  #104
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
 
Shoebottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: 7 steps from my can
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Homer much?

It could've been a 4-5 game Habs win more than it could've been a 4-5 game Bruins win. Montreal outplayed the Bruins at even-strength in the first five games, and the Bs were lucky to escape despite Thomas's heroic.

I think you're falling in the common trap of buying the Bruins hype and overestimating them. Winning the Cup isn't helping, but you need to be realistic about your club and not set expectations for them they don't have the horses to fulfill. I'd double-check the Boston roster. The Bruins' forward corps isn't all that... but they especially need better defensemen, they're really quite shallow at that position.

I do agree with you that I wouldn't use the playoff series as a decision point whether the Habs are a contender, but that's because I don't think the Bruins are a good measuring stick for that, Cup or no Cup. Taking the Bruins to 7 games doesn't mean much, everyone took Boston to 7 games, they made it a specialty of escaping long series this year (which also speaks to their actual level of play).

Washington and Pittsburgh remain the class of the East, with Philly very close, and Tampa will need to be added to that list, I think. Boston had an "up" year, but they're not to that level. I don't think being better than Boston necessarily means you are a serious Cup Contender (and mind, I think Montreal already are anyway).
They are the cup champs which means they are at that "level". And they did sweep your highly regarded Philly. Thomas put the Bruins behind the 8 ball early in each of the 1st 2 games while Price played lights out. Thats the only reason it wasn't a 4 or 5 game series.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Souvenirs View Post
If not for Pacioretty having his neck broken , we could have a very different conversation right now.
Max is a non factor, he'd be just another Pouilot.

Shoebottom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 11:25 AM
  #105
Souvenirs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Trois-Rivieres
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis Moen View Post
Lol at you thinking we are contenders. We have as much chance to miss the playoffs than we have to make them.
maybe

but I just think we'll be much better than last year: our players who had career lows will probably bounce back, we'll get Markov and Gorges back, we'll hopefully have Pacioretty for the whole year and Eller picking up from where he left when he'll be back from his injury. Subban will have more experience, Desharnais will provide some scoring depth on the bottom 2 lines. Gauthier might add a player or two to complement our core.

We competed for the division all season long and finished with only 7 points less than the Bruins. I think we can repeat, and possibly do better. Our current bunch made it to the Conference finals last year. Nothing's impossible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
Max is a non factor, he'd be just another Pouilot.
The guy was on pace for a 28 goals season. I want more non-factors like that!

ps : Komisarek has been a Leaf for 2 yeeaarss. outdated avatar much?

Souvenirs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 11:27 AM
  #106
Dellstrom
We Like Eich
 
Dellstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 18,388
vCash: 500
Get your D up a bit and get a few better forwards, and you're looking great. Price is spectacular in the net, and if you get the right chemistry on your team he'll have more motivation to play better. The B's had their hands full with you, and you had quite a bit of injuries. You're already a contender. Just make the playoffs.

Dellstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 11:28 AM
  #107
76ftw
24
 
76ftw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,120
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
you guys need better forwards. Don't let your success against the stanley cup winners cloud your judgement. Habs were exceptionally motivated against the Bs after the MaxPac incident and the 8-0 drubbing. Your pp was hot. But your top line was like -6 for the series. If not for your pp, Chara being sick, and Thomas being very shaky early on, this could've been a 4 or 5 game series.
And had the Habs not played poorly at the start of game 3, it could have been a sweep for the Habs too.

76ftw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 01:20 PM
  #108
De Montreal
help
 
De Montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: omg montréal lolzzz
Country: Martinique
Posts: 5,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
Max is a non factor, he'd be just another Pouilot.
That is just one stupid post.

De Montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 01:27 PM
  #109
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
They are the cup champs which means they are at that "level".
Here is your mistake: the Cup is awarded to the league's champion team, not the league's best team. A common misconception, especially given the romantic mystique surrounding the Cup, but a fallacy nonetheless.

Hockey is a game where the best team doesn't always win, and after all you only need a 57% win percentage to win a best-of-7 series. Also, a playoff series is by definition a small sample.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
And they did sweep your highly regarded Philly.
Well, I expect to stop being idiots with regards to their goaltending. Why they would use a proven below league-average goalie when they had a potentially better option on the bench befuddles me. I've thought that about them before, but if they do sign Bryzgalov that should take care of that.

Philly has more depth than the Bruins at F and at D. All they need is a decent enough goalie. And they had one, they just decided not to use him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
Thomas put the Bruins behind the 8 ball early in each of the 1st 2 games while Price played lights out. Thats the only reason it wasn't a 4 or 5 game series.
The reason it wasn't a 4 or 5 game series is that Tim Thomas saved the Bruins while the Habs were outplaying them in games 3-4-5. Montreal was the better club on the ice for the five first games of the series (and then injuries caught up to them). It was nice to get breaks and score early in games one and two, but in terms of getting breaks, the Bruins had the most (including going 3-0 in overtime while Montreal generally controlled the play with the score tied).

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 09:43 AM
  #110
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
 
Shoebottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: 7 steps from my can
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Here is your mistake: the Cup is awarded to the league's champion team, not the league's best team. A common misconception, especially given the romantic mystique surrounding the Cup, but a fallacy nonetheless.

Hockey is a game where the best team doesn't always win, and after all you only need a 57% win percentage to win a best-of-7 series. Also, a playoff series is by definition a small sample.



Well, I expect to stop being idiots with regards to their goaltending. Why they would use a proven below league-average goalie when they had a potentially better option on the bench befuddles me. I've thought that about them before, but if they do sign Bryzgalov that should take care of that.

Philly has more depth than the Bruins at F and at D. All they need is a decent enough goalie. And they had one, they just decided not to use him.



The reason it wasn't a 4 or 5 game series is that Tim Thomas saved the Bruins while the Habs were outplaying them in games 3-4-5. Montreal was the better club on the ice for the five first games of the series (and then injuries caught up to them). It was nice to get breaks and score early in games one and two, but in terms of getting breaks, the Bruins had the most (including going 3-0 in overtime while Montreal generally controlled the play with the score tied).
Here is your mistake. The President's trophy is given to the regular season league champ. The stanley is given to the tournament champ. The tournament was set up to decide the best team. Bruins are the best team right now. Love how you try to down play the stanley cup lol

Shoebottom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 10:12 AM
  #111
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
Here is your mistake. The President's trophy is given to the regular season league champ. The stanley is given to the tournament champ. The tournament was set up to decide the best team. Bruins are the best team right now. Love how you try to down play the stanley cup lol
We have a lot of romantic notions about the Stanley Cup, but the reality is that it's a short tournament where maintaining a 57% win rate will win it for you. In hockey any team can maintain a 57% win rate against any other team over seven games if things go their way. 57% won't even get you in the playoffs out West. C'm'on -- do you seriously think the Habs last year were better than the Penguins or the Caps?

The Cup is awarded to the champion, but being the champion and being the best team is not one and the same. Though being the best team does help your odds.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:11 PM
  #112
xposbrad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 841
vCash: 500
Half the league makes the playoffs, so half the league are contenders. Add that to the fringe playoff teams, and practically the whole league is contending for the cup. Are we a top team? No. Do we have stud prospects in our system that will turn this franchise around? No .. We just need Gomez' contract to end so we can hopefully just fill more holes we seem to have every year and fight for a playoff spot, and that will please the fans. The Montreal Canadiens are a business.

xposbrad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:25 PM
  #113
Darth Joker
Registered User
 
Darth Joker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,794
vCash: 500
I think we need to add at least one more key piece up front (preferably a power forward) before we can be a contender. Maybe Jagr is the answer here.

That, and we need to bring back at least two of Markov, Gorges, and Wiz.

Darth Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:36 PM
  #114
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Max is a non-factor omfg rofl

In terms of importance, I may run into some differences of opinion and that's fine but roughly something like this dude:

Price (#1g Yes, having a good goalie on the back end means everything)
Markov (#1D superstar)
Subban (#1D budding superstar)
Plekanec (#1b center who is solid 2ways)
Cammalleri (#1b sniper who has potential to be a #1a)
Gionta (#2a captain of our team and solid goal scorer)
Gorges (#2b solid defenseman with no real offense, guy every team has)
Pacioretty (#2b young potential star 30g scorer, could be a #2a or even #1b one day, are you out of your mind?)
Kostitsyn (#2b proven solid player improving still but streaky, #2a potential as well)
Gomez (#3a would be a great 3rd line center but needs to step up his game and return to #2a form, see Pacioretty for why that will happen)
Desharnais (#3b potential to be a #2b kind of center. No slouch and Pacioretty is ahead of him on the depth chart)
Eller (#3b potential to be a #1b imo, most will say #2a, this guy is behind Pacioretty on the depth chart)
Rest of our team (Behind Pacioretty on the depth chart)

Basing it mostly on last season and using common sense for Markov and Gorges, where in that line up do you see Max Pacioretty as a non-factor? Do you see Pouliots name on that list? No you see "rest of our team". Just saying, Pacioretty is in the upper level of our depth chart as it stands until proven otherwise. On pace for 28g in your rookie season, and no I don't consider whatever that other "season" was to be a real season. It was like Brad Marchand just too early to bring him up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xposbrad View Post
Half the league makes the playoffs, so half the league are contenders. Add that to the fringe playoff teams, and practically the whole league is contending for the cup. Are we a top team? No. Do we have stud prospects in our system that will turn this franchise around? No .. We just need Gomez' contract to end so we can hopefully just fill more holes we seem to have every year and fight for a playoff spot, and that will please the fans. The Montreal Canadiens are a business.
They won't be superstars but Tinordi, Leblanc, Kristo don't look bad at all for a few years down the road.

Palushaj imo looks to be a decent 3rd line winger, something we could potentially use if Pouliot doesn't pan out here. We already have cleaned the cupboard in Subban(#1d), White(good 4th liner) and Weber (#4 offensive D potential)

We aren't the best team in the league for prospects but we're a far cry from terrible. Plus we still have an upcoming draft have a little faith. We aren't as screwed as you try and make it sound our team is in a position to be a big contender if PG makes the right moves. That remains to be seen but I have faith. If anything Subban + Price will make this team worth watching for years to come even if the management does screw everything else up


Last edited by neofury*: 06-22-2011 at 11:41 PM.
neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 12:16 AM
  #115
JackieChan
Registered User
 
JackieChan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
We have a lot of romantic notions about the Stanley Cup, but the reality is that it's a short tournament where maintaining a 57% win rate will win it for you. In hockey any team can maintain a 57% win rate against any other team over seven games if things go their way. 57% won't even get you in the playoffs out West. C'm'on -- do you seriously think the Habs last year were better than the Penguins or the Caps?

The Cup is awarded to the champion, but being the champion and being the best team is not one and the same. Though being the best team does help your odds.
Thing is, stepping up when it means most, wanting it more, playing injured, etc, etc, isn't taken into account in your pure statistics point of view.

All those statistically intangible characteristics go a long way in defining who the best team is.

I have a feeling you're having as much fun flipping a coin as you are having watching hockey.

JackieChan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 12:20 AM
  #116
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackieChan View Post
Thing is, stepping up when it means most, wanting it more, playing injured, etc, etc, isn't taken into account in your pure statistics point of view.
Like I said, lots of romantic notions, generally ascribed after the fact when the result is known.

They wanted it more because they won the Cup, not the other way around...

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 12:37 AM
  #117
SB164
Registered User
 
SB164's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoebottom View Post
you guys need better forwards. Don't let your success against the stanley cup winners cloud your judgement. Habs were exceptionally motivated against the Bs after the MaxPac incident and the 8-0 drubbing.
Yeeeah, see I don't remember that

SB164 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 12:43 AM
  #118
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
The group is "eastern teams that will make the playoffs every year, in the next few years", that's the post of mine you responded too.

Habs have missed the playoffs once, by a single point, over the last 7 seasons. How can they make the playoffs more consistently than that? They would be, if they didn't miss that one single time, by a single point?
In a "normal" playoff year, you'd expect the threshold to make the playoffs to be around 92 or 93 points. That's usually the minimum to get in.

If I use your 6 out of 7 example we've finished with 93 points or worse 5 times. That my friend is a bubble team. Yes, we've been inside the bubble but we've been right on the line most of the time. Three years ago we got in on a tie breaker with 93 points and incredibly made it in two years ago with a putrid 88.

Why do you ignore these facts? You scream that we 'only missed the playoffs by a single point' but ignore that we made it with 88 two years ago despite stellar goaltending? You ignore that the vast majority of the time we made it by the skin of our teeth?

Yes, we finished with 96 this past season and I felt that we were much better than the year before and maybe we can build on this. But if you average both seasons together you get... 92 points.

It bodes well that we've improved and I hope it stays that way. But I don't think that it's foolish to wait for the club to prove that it can play at that level next season first. We've been a bubble team for a long time. Don't pretend that we haven't been.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
You're so stuck into your mindset, you're wearing blinders, and can't even respond logically.
Dude,

If anyone says anything even remotely negative about this club you freak out. Chill man, it's just a message board and I don't hate the team...

Just because I don't see us as a powerhouse doesn't mean that I hate the club. Ditto if I don't see Markov in the same class as Lidstrom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
So just reply by answering this : You disagree that the Habs are one of those teams in the east that are almost sure of making the playoffs every year, despite having made them 6 out of the last 7, and the present crew having made them twice in their only 2 years together, having made them in 6th position 7 points out of first place of the division without our MVP for almost the entire season this year, despite having one of the best goalies in the league, despite the rookies who are performing well and getting added to an already performing squad?
I've answered the question in this post (see above) but please don't give me this built in excuse with Markov. I hope the guy returns but at this stage he's far from a sure thing just like he was far from a sure thing at the beginning of this season. If he comes back and produces like he can, then great. But we can't count on this any more than the Bruins can count on Savard.

My skepticism stems from our past performances. We've been an inconsistent team that looks like world beaters one moment and horrific the next. Even Mathman will tell you that our Corsi numbers (whatever that is) was horrible two years ago. This past season I felt we played better but we weren't a powerhouse and that's against very weak competition.

For the record, I think we'll make the playoffs this year too and I've said so already. I don't see how you can freak out on somebody though for not seeing us as contenders though given the way we've played over the past few years.

There's lots to be excited about for the future. For the first time in... forever, I see two guys who actually could be superstars and that's great news for us. Maybe it's enough to bring us into perpetual 100 point seasons at some point but I don't think we're there yet. I need to see it first to believe it. Barring significant roster changes I don't think we'll finish higher than: Pitts, Washington, Philly, or Boston. And I think it will be us vs. the usual suspects for the bottom half: TB and Buffalo (both of whom had as good or better seasons than us) NJ (who could easily leapfrog us) and Carolina. Fortunately for us though, the rest of the Conference is a complete disaster. But who knows? Toronto just might get good enough goaltending to squeak into 8th and we could go on another one of our classic losing streaks.

I think we'll finish somewhere around 5th or 6th.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 06-23-2011 at 12:51 AM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 12:52 AM
  #119
JackieChan
Registered User
 
JackieChan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Like I said, lots of romantic notions, generally ascribed after the fact when the result is known.

They wanted it more because they won the Cup, not the other way around...
If you keep digging deeper in your analysis, at some point those "romantic notions" will have to be factored in...

Just because you don't have access to the locker room to see, quantify and add to your analysis how injuries (for example) are affecting what's happening on the ice, doesn't mean they don't.

If somebody had access to each team's trainers and medical staff reports at the beginning of every playoffs to compare the physical and mental state each team is in, and tried to predict the Cup winner each year for the next hundred years (or whatever sample suits you), there is no way your approach would give better results.

JackieChan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 01:00 AM
  #120
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 25,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackieChan View Post
If you keep digging deeper in your analysis, at some point those "romantic notions" will have to be factored in...

Just because you don't have access to the locker room to see, quantify and add to your analysis how injuries (for example) are affecting what's happening on the ice, doesn't mean they don't.

If somebody had access to each team's trainers and medical staff reports at the beginning of every playoffs to compare the physical and mental state each team is in, and tried to predict the Cup winner each year for the next hundred years (or whatever sample suits you), there is no way your approach would give better results.
I believe that adds more weight to the saying the Best team doesn't always win.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 01:22 AM
  #121
JackieChan
Registered User
 
JackieChan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I believe that adds more weight to the saying the Best team doesn't always win.
If you define the best team as the most talented team, yes, but if you define it as the team with the most tools at it's disposition to win hockey games at a given moment, then no.

I know it would take extraordinary means to gather all that info, like standardized protocols to quantify every parameter we can think of, but in order to numerically model something as complex as hockey, you need to identify which parameters are significant to the experiment.

He's just throwing too many parameters out the window by labeling them "romantic notions" instead of acknowledging his model is too simplistic.

JackieChan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 01:33 AM
  #122
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
We have a lot of romantic notions about the Stanley Cup, but the reality is that it's a short tournament where maintaining a 57% win rate will win it for you. In hockey any team can maintain a 57% win rate against any other team over seven games if things go their way. 57% won't even get you in the playoffs out West. C'm'on -- do you seriously think the Habs last year were better than the Penguins or the Caps?

The Cup is awarded to the champion, but being the champion and being the best team is not one and the same. Though being the best team does help your odds.
once again MM you reveal a serious lack of appreciation/understanding of what acutally happens in elite sports.

any team can of course have a 57% win% against another team in a random 7 game sample, satisfying the numbers game...

but the reality is that 7 games in September are NOT the same as 7 games in October, nor are 7 games in the first round the same as 7 games in the cup finals.

pressure impacts athletes in various different ways, most of which are extremely difficult to measure, and almost impossible to predict.

being the Champions is EXACTLY the same as being the "best team", so long as you describe "best" the way the MW dictionary describes it:

1: excelling all others <the best student>
2: most productive of good : offering or producing the greatest advantage, utility, or satisfaction <what is the best thing to do>

perhaps you have a different, personal, interpretation of what "the best" means?

there is a reason why the cup is not given to the team that wins the preseason, or the first team to win 4 games in the regular season, of the first team to win 4 games in the first round of the playoffs...

the cup goes to the team who wins 4 straight BEST of 7 series, thus rightfully claiming the tittle of "champions", excelling all others for that given year.

attempts to use various stats or figures to somehow undermine the team that claims that title amounts to nothing more than sour grapes.

I may not personally think the Boston Bruins deserve to be called the best team of the 2010-2011 season, but FACT remains that they were the most productive of the good teams in the league this season, and according to the litmus test established by the league they compete in (winning the cup), they EARNED the title as the "best" team.

but I know you can't be swayed by these types of arguments, so i simply ask you this...

if you won't use the same standard as the NHL to determine who is the "best" team in a given year, what standard or stat package do you think equates to being the best?

- goal differential?
- goals for?
- goals against?
- time of possession?
- shots for?
- shots against?

or is it some random combination of stats you, or someone else, has devised?

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 07:08 AM
  #123
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
I may not personally think the Boston Bruins deserve to be called the best team of the 2010-2011 season, but FACT remains that they were the most productive of the good teams in the league this season, and according to the litmus test established by the league they compete in (winning the cup), they EARNED the title as the "best" team.
Yeah, this. It's sad for us this year, but if hfboards had existed in 1993, would we not be bombarded with opposing fans slamming our Cup win then and saying we weren't the "best" team? That Pittsburgh was really the "best" team that year? And what would our answer be? "We won this year, they didn't. That gives us the right to be called the champion and best team this year. End of discussion."

optimus2861 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2011, 08:12 AM
  #124
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackieChan View Post
If you keep digging deeper in your analysis, at some point those "romantic notions" will have to be factored in...
I'll factor them in when there's some evidence they are actually things that affect the game, not made up by the media after the fact. Right now, all the evidence we have shows that "clutchness" is in the eye of the beholder.

In a more general sense, I think intangibles are valuable, but it's untrue that they are an unmeasurable thing. If intangibles affect the game than the stats will pick them up and count them as part of a player's overall talent. We concern ourselves with how effective a player is, not so much with the tools he uses to get there. And if the intangibles don't affect the game in a measurable, visible manner, then I ask you, are the intangibles there at all?

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2011, 02:07 PM
  #125
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,316
vCash: 500
Well, Philly's a question mark now.

This Conference is getting weaker by the day.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:38 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.