*1. San Jose
*2. Vancouver
*3. St. Louis
4. Detroit
5. Chicago
6. Los Angeles
7. Anaheim
8. Nashville
-----------------------
9. Columbus
10. Dallas
11. Minnesota
12. Colorado
13. Edmonton
14. Calgary
15. Phoenix
The key in that statement is if the stars align. San Jose and LA have more depth than Anaheim. Barring injuries to all three teams, I don't see Anaheim keeping up. I think I would expect them to go further than either in the playoffs though. They seem built for a playoff run.
Even without the stars aligning, the Ducks insane top line, mixed with an improved 2nd and 3rd line (I don't even think they had a 3rd line last season), mixed with a vastly improved defense yoy, will certainly keep up with LA and SJ.
*1. San Jose
*2. Vancouver *3. St. Louis
4. Detroit
5. Chicago
6. Los Angeles
7. Anaheim
8. Nashville
-----------------------
9. Columbus
10. Dallas
11. Minnesota
12. Colorado
13. Edmonton
14. Calgary
15. Phoenix
I like your dark horse pick, wonder what Vegas odds are on ST.Louis to win the Central
While I think LA & Ana will challenge for the Pacific , Sharks are the team to beat. Improved their D tremendously(top 5 NHL), Niemi with a full year under his belt, a top 6 that can play with anyone, top 5 PP. Sharks win the Pacific by 8-10 points.
Even without the stars aligning, the Ducks insane top line, mixed with an improved 2nd and 3rd line (I don't even think they had a 3rd line last season), mixed with a vastly improved defense yoy, will certainly keep up with LA and SJ.
We'll have to agree to disagree then, especially with San Jose. San Jose is a major cup threat, with arguably the best top 6 in the NHL, very good bottom 6, and now what could be a top 3 defense core.
And I think LA adding Richards to the mix really puts them a step up on Anaheim. They were a better team before they had Richards, and adding Richards adds more than the additions Anaheim made.
We'll have to agree to disagree then, especially with San Jose. San Jose is a major cup threat, with arguably the best top 6 in the NHL, very good bottom 6, and now what could be a top 3 defense core.
And I think LA adding Richards to the mix really puts them a step up on Anaheim. They were a better team before they had Richards, and adding Richards adds more than the additions Anaheim made.
Care to explain how? Because I say they won't win their division when arguably the best team in the conference is sitting in the same division? Its not like I'm calling for them to miss the playoffs. Are you honestly saying that because I think San Jose and LA are better I am underestimating them "big time"?
Care to explain how? Because I say they won't win their division when arguably the best team in the conference is sitting in the same division? Its not like I'm calling for them to miss the playoffs. Are you honestly saying that because I think San Jose and LA are better I am underestimating them "big time"?
You said the Kings were a better team before acquiring Richards.
Quote:
And I think LA adding Richards to the mix really puts them a step up on Anaheim. They were a better team before they had Richards, and adding Richards adds more than the additions Anaheim made
Check last years standings. Anaheim was the 4th seed, LA was 7.
I wouldnt put the kings so high. I honestly think they might take a step back this year and this coming from a die hard haha. But maybe who knows.
Kings will be more formidable this year. How much, I can't say for sure. But I believe it will be enough for at least 1 seed higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17
If Hiller can't play at least 55-60 games, Anaheim could be in trouble.
I think if he plays at least 50 games, they'll be fine. Below that, they'll probably be a little nervous in the standings once March and April roll around.
You said the Kings were a better team even before acquiring Richards. Check last years standings. Anaheim was the 4th seed, LA was 7th.
To be fair, the difference between them was only 1 point. Had either of the last two games gone in favor of the Kings, then they would have switched positions. So to say one team was 4th seed while the other was 7th is a bit misleading.
You said the Kings were a better team before acquiring Richards.
Check last years standings. Anaheim was the 4th seed, LA was 7.
You do realize there was a one point difference, right? A shootout win VS a shootout loss was the difference. Regardless of standings, I think LA had a better team last year. And adding Richards certainly helps them out more than Anaheim adding Cogliano. I still fail to see a "big time" underestimation of Anaheim anywhere. If I had said they wouldn't make the playoffs, I could understand your criticism.
Edmonton has back to back 62pt seasons; 9th in the West is almost assuredly 92+ points. I don't think Smyth and some young players developing adds 30 points. They're still not a good team.
Smyth thrives playing in Edmonton due to those passionate fans.
Whitney is healthy, our bottom 6 on offense is more solidified, refer to all those injuries Edmonton had last season, there is added depth.
Real hockey fans will also discover who Jeff Petry is.
and please, the rookies we had last season won't have sophomore slumps, will only progress with the talent they're provided with on their lines.
*1. San Jose
*2. Vancouver
*3. Detroit
4. Los Angeles
5. Chicago
6. Anaheim
7. Minnesota
8. Columbus
-----------------------
9. St. Louis
10. Nashville
11. Colorado
12. Edmonton
13. Calgary
14. Dallas
15. Phoenix
People forget how strong the Blues were before losing everyone to injury.
A full year with Stewie, development of Berglund, Pietrangelo, Oshie, and Shattenkirk. Not to mention bringing in vet presense over the AHL depth they had last year. The Blues are going to be a playoff team, and I'd lay money on them finishing 5-7.
Over here we could also point out that people forget how capable Mason was in goal when the goaltending coach was in town.
Everybody has their "we're actually better than you think" excuse. Let's not overdo 'em, 'kay?
__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards
Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
To be fair, the difference between them was only 1 point. Had either of the last two games gone in favor of the Kings, then they would have switched positions. So to say one team was 4th seed while the other was 7th is a bit misleading.
The truth isn't misleading. It's where they finished the season and Anaheim had much worse injury woes than the Kings.
You do realize there was a one point difference, right? A shootout win VS a shootout loss was the difference. Regardless of standings, I think LA had a better team last year. And adding Richards certainly helps them out more than Anaheim adding Cogliano. I still fail to see a "big time" underestimation of Anaheim anywhere. If I had said they wouldn't make the playoffs, I could understand your criticism.
Fact is though, LA didn't have a better team. Regardless of how close it was, Anaheim finished ahead and the better team finishes ahead after an 82 game season.
Anaheim also faced exponentially more adversity and finished aheadan which is a sign of the better team.
The truth isn't misleading. It's where they finished the season and Anaheim had much worse injury woes than the Kings.
If the ducks had lost their the best player I would agree with you. If the ducks had lost perry or getz what do you think who have happend? I think it shows alot for the kings to lose there best player and still give the sharks a run for their money. Now that being said if they lose selenne then do how do you think that will effect them? just wondering.
Fact is though, LA didn't have a better team. Regardless of how close it was, Anaheim finished ahead and the better team finishes ahead after an 82 game season.
Anaheim also faced exponentially more adversity and finished aheadan which is a sign of the better team.
Anaheim finished ahead of Nashville...who was the better team last year?? It's an incredibly flawed statement to say that the better team finishes ahead. (1 point...really?!?!) Were the Sharks the better team in 08-09 when they won the President's trophy...or were the Ducks?? I think it's pretty clear that Vancouver was better than Anaheim and LA last year...but with the conference races so close last year, there is no way to definitively say that Anaheim was better than LA just because they finished 1 point ahead. Especially because both teams had big injuries (Kopitar/Hiller specifically)
Anaheim finished ahead of Nashville...who was the better team last year?? It's an incredibly flawed statement to say that the better team finishes ahead. (1 point...really?!?!) Were the Sharks the better team in 08-09 when they won the President's trophy...or were the Ducks?? I think it's pretty clear that Vancouver was better than Anaheim and LA last year...but with the conference races so close last year, there is no way to definitively say that Anaheim was better than LA just because they finished 1 point ahead. Especially because both teams had big injuries (Kopitar/Hiller specifically)
Anaheim was the better team. Nashville was the better team in that series.
It should also be noted that Anaheim played that series w/o their number one goaltender.
The Ducks were ravaged by injuries all year. Not just Hiller at the end.
Your other questions?
SJ was the better team. Ana matched up against them well and was the better team in that series.
If the ducks had lost their the best player I would agree with you. If the ducks had lost perry or getz what do you think who have happend? I think it shows alot for the kings to lose there best player and still give the sharks a run for their money. Now that being said if they lose selenne then do how do you think that will effect them? just wondering.
The Ducks lost Getzlaf for part of the season too. Injuries are part of the game.
You mention "best player". I would rather lose my number 1 center than my number one goalie.
