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

The case for a 1-year surgical tank for the Habs

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-30-2012, 08:14 PM
  #351
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Finally, I wish to call BS on the slogan of "league parity". There is a massive gulf between teams like the New York Rangers, Los Angeles Kings, Vancouver Canucks, Pittsburgh Penguins at the top and teams like the Montreal Canadiens, Toronto Maple Leafs and Columbus Blue Jackets at the bottom.
Man...this is just hilarious.

Before last season, Montreal got a whopping ONE POINT more than NYR in the last 5 years.

LA? Seriously.

Montreal at the bottom?

What kind of 'what have you done for me lately' garbage is this?

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 08:16 PM
  #352
Dekar
Registered User
 
Dekar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bound Kingdom
Posts: 5,129
vCash: 500
I think all the tankers (or "calculated losing" advocates or whatever the hell terms these people are using are) are seriously under-rating the impact a healthy Gionta alone would have done for our season last year.

Another year under Subban and Pacioretty's belts should do nothing but good for their performance this season, and our young defencemen (Emelin, Diaz, Weber) should be MUCH better this year, as last year was the first taste of a full NHL season Diaz and Emelin saw, and Weber showed promise along with his growing pains. I fully expect at least two current AHLers to make life tough on our coaching staff too (in a good way, obviously).

Call me an optimist, but that's just what I see.

Dekar is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 08:29 PM
  #353
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Man...this is just hilarious.

Before last season, Montreal got a whopping ONE POINT more than NYR in the last 5 years.

LA? Seriously.

Montreal at the bottom?

What kind of 'what have you done for me lately' garbage is this?
OK.

LA sucks and the Habs are better than the Rangers.


DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 08:48 PM
  #354
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
OK.

LA sucks and the Habs are better than the Rangers.

You must have missed the part where a few years ago neither the Rangers nor the Kings were in the playoffs. Kings didn't make the show for like 6 years straight, the NYR straddled the 6-7-8-9 seed just as long as the Habs did.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 08:52 PM
  #355
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
You must have missed the part where a couple of years ago neither the Rangers nor the Kings were in the playoffs.
The Rangers turned their ship around when they traded Gomez for McDonagh and then signed Gaborik.

That's what Bergevin's been doing .

DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:05 PM
  #356
NovaScotia Habsfan31
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
You must have missed the part where a few years ago neither the Rangers nor the Kings were in the playoffs. Kings didn't make the show for like 6 years straight, the NYR straddled the 6-7-8-9 seed just as long as the Habs did.
Yeah the Kings missed the playoffs for a long time doing a REBUILD... they didn't pi$$ away draft picks like crazy to make 8th place and get beat out in the first round. In fact they hoarded draft picks, developed the players they took with those picks, made some trades involving a few of them and voila... Cup.

Meanwhile Montreal was.............

NovaScotia Habsfan31 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:06 PM
  #357
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The Rangers turned their ship around when they traded Gomez for McDonagh and then signed Gaborik.

That's what Bergevin's been doing .
Let's compare a few things in the last 5 years:

1st in conference: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Conference finals berth: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Second round berths: Montreal (2), NYR (2)
Playoff berths: Montreal (4), NYR (4)

So..uh... who is 'on the top' and who is 'on the bottom' exactly again?

The sooner you realize that the NHL is a glorified crapshoot; the sooner you will be at ease with low expectations for your team.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:09 PM
  #358
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NovaScotia Habsfan31 View Post
Yeah the Kings missed the playoffs for a long time doing a REBUILD... they didn't pi$$ away draft picks like crazy to make 8th place and get beat out in the first round. In fact they hoarded draft picks, developed the players they took with those picks, made some trades involving a few of them and voila... Cup.

Meanwhile Montreal was.............
A rebuild from what exactly? 1993? The Kings were in the crapper for like 17 years. They made the playoffs a whopping 4 times out of 15 seasons.

Some short memories people have around here geez. I mean christ, LA was so bad that they freaking filed for bankruptcy in one of the most lucrative markets in the league.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:10 PM
  #359
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekar View Post
I think all the tankers (or "calculated losing" advocates or whatever the hell terms these people are using are) are seriously under-rating the impact a healthy Gionta alone would have done for our season last year.

Another year under Subban and Pacioretty's belts should do nothing but good for their performance this season, and our young defencemen (Emelin, Diaz, Weber) should be MUCH better this year, as last year was the first taste of a full NHL season Diaz and Emelin saw, and Weber showed promise along with his growing pains. I fully expect at least two current AHLers to make life tough on our coaching staff too (in a good way, obviously).

Call me an optimist, but that's just what I see.
I've been following the Habs on boards, in detail for several years.

The first thing I have to say to you, which I've said several times on this thread, is that the belief "next year when we have no injuries" is an old and tired song in Habsland. We hear it every summer but then every single year there are new injuries and then we repeat the cycle the following summer. The fact is that in this NHL a good team is a team that still makes the playoffs if any two of its players are injured. Look at the Habs defense. Any one injury to Subban, Gorges, Markov, or Emelin and we're screwed.

The other one Habs fans say every summer is "our youth have gained a year of experience". It's a nonargument. Every team in the NHL has young players that have gained a year of experience, and in this case we're in a division that is full of young players that we play against: Seguin, Hamilton, Kadri, Bozak, Gardiner, JVR, Hodgson, Myers, Turris, etc. We're not a particularly young team, and as our youth gain a year our vets gain a year as well. Cole, Gionta, Gomez, Markov, Bourque, Moen, Budaj, Bouillon, Kaberle are all a year older.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:19 PM
  #360
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I've been following the Habs on boards, in detail for several years.

The first thing I have to say to you, which I've said several times on this thread, is that the belief "next year when we have no injuries" is an old and tired song in Habsland. We hear it every summer but then every single year there are new injuries and then we repeat the cycle the following summer. The fact is that in this NHL a good team is a team that still makes the playoffs if any two of its players are injured. Look at the Habs defense. Any one injury to Subban, Gorges, Markov, or Emelin and we're screwed.

The other one Habs fans say every summer is "our youth have gained a year of experience". It's a nonargument. Every team in the NHL has young players that have gained a year of experience, and in this case we're in a division that is full of young players that we play against: Seguin, Hamilton, Kadri, Bozak, Gardiner, JVR, Hodgson, Myers, Turris, etc. We're not a particularly young team, and as our youth gain a year our vets gain a year as well. Cole, Gionta, Gomez, Markov, Bourque, Moen, Budaj, Bouillon, Kaberle are all a year older.
still trying to defend you're weak ass arguement eh buddy ??i gotta give ya props for being so determined.and while you're at it ,,what exactly does "tank" mean again??

haburger is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:27 PM
  #361
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Gauthier traded three vets (Cammalleri, Gill, and Kostitsyn) for prospects.
Cammy was traded for Bourque and a throw in 2nd rounder. Not a rebulding move. The 2nd will help but it's hardly what we should've done. That was a waste of an asset. Even worse was AK. We should've just held onto him. The only real rebuild move was Gill and it was done very late in the season after we'd already made the stupid Kaberle move.

Bottom line is that the team should've rebuilt and didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Bergevin hasn't traded any prospects for vets and there are no hints that he plans to. The veterans he added to bolster the Habs in this coming season were all affordable free agents. He didn't even nibble at Semin and I doubt he'll go ater Doan. Please withhold any criticism of Bergevin until you become aware of his intentions. So far he seems to be sane. I doubt he'll do anything to make me change my mind.
Bergevin has a clean slate. I wasn't trying to slag him and if came out that way it wasn't my intention. We'll see what Bergevin's about soon enough. I'm cautiously optimistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekar View Post
I think all the tankers (or "calculated losing" advocates or whatever the hell terms these people are using are) are seriously under-rating the impact a healthy Gionta alone would have done for our season last year.
He might've made us a bubble team. Maybe we make 8th and maybe we get eliminated in the 1st or 2nd round. That's the best case scenario. And it would've sucked.

Why?

Because we wouldn't have gotten the prospects we did. Do you still not understand this? We''re better off having the season we had. It's just too bad that we tied ourselves to dumb contracts on the way down instead of rebuilding instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekar View Post
Another year under Subban and Pacioretty's belts should do nothing but good for their performance this season, and our young defencemen (Emelin, Diaz, Weber) should be MUCH better this year, as last year was the first taste of a full NHL season Diaz and Emelin saw, and Weber showed promise along with his growing pains. I fully expect at least two current AHLers to make life tough on our coaching staff too (in a good way, obviously).

Call me an optimist, but that's just what I see.
And you could be right. But you're sitting there saying that it's all going to go right for us and that's rarely the case. Sure it happens but usually there's some good and some bad. Bottom line is that we were terrible last year and we could be just as bad this season. We certainly aren't contenders nor are we likely to be next year so why not unload some guys like Gionta who still have value and can help teams win now?

Winning now isn't going to happen for us but it could happen down the road. That's what we should be building towards. Another 8th place finish is meaningless. Yes it would be great to see our players develop. No we shouldn't try to lose. But dealing away some vets right now makes a lot of sense.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:31 PM
  #362
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Let's compare a few things in the last 5 years:

1st in conference: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Conference finals berth: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Second round berths: Montreal (2), NYR (2)
Playoff berths: Montreal (4), NYR (4)

So..uh... who is 'on the top' and who is 'on the bottom' exactly again?

The sooner you realize that the NHL is a glorified crapshoot; the sooner you will be at ease with low expectations for your team.
Right... its all a random crapshoot. I guess there's no point in actually trying to build a good team then. Let's just play Gomez and see how it goes because obviously its just about luck. While we're at it, lets go trade Galchenyuk for some over the hill overpaid vet too so it can look like we're trying to win 8th...

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:32 PM
  #363
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Let's compare a few things in the last 5 years:

1st in conference: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Conference finals berth: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Second round berths: Montreal (2), NYR (2)
Playoff berths: Montreal (4), NYR (4)
5 years? Why not 100 years? The Habs have won 24 cups and the Rangers have only won 4, we're a better team we'll probably finish higher in the standings next year .

Now I'm going to stop being sarcastic, and try educating you:

5 years ago doesn't matter. The Habs have lost Koivu, Kovalev, and Hamrlik. Meanwhile, the Rangers have gained McDonagh, Gaborik, Richards, and now Nash. The teams are completely different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
The sooner you realize that the NHL is a glorified crapshoot;
It's not a glorified crapshoot. On average the better teams get better results. That's why the standings look the same from one year to the next.

In 2011-2012, the 8 eastern conference teams that made the playoffs were the Rangers, Bruins, Panthers, Penguins, Flyers, Devils, Capitals, and Senators. 6 of those 8 teams made the playoffs in 2010-2011. Of the 8 teams that made the playoffs in 2010-2011, 7 made he playoffs in 2009-2010. That's an extremely high correlation.

Meanwhile,
of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2006, 2 made the lottery in 2007.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2007, 1 made it in 2008.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2008, 4 made it in 2009.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2009, 1 made it in 2010.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2010, 3 made it in 2011.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2011, 2 made it in 2012.

So overall out of 30 trials, we have 13 subsequent recurrences. If it was a "glorified crapshoot", you would expect 5. You know what the probability of seeing 13 recurrences is if the whole system were governed by pure chance? 0.132%, about 1 part in 750.

Further, many of the non-recurrences up drafting 6-10 and return to the lottery the following year.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:36 PM
  #364
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
still trying to defend you're weak ass arguement eh buddy ??i gotta give ya props for being so determined.and while you're at it ,,what exactly does "tank" mean again??
I wonder. Does it mean trade away key players until the team's red blood cell count is in the anemic range? Or does it mean neglectingto file qualifying offers? Or does it mean telling Carey Price to let in easy shots? Or does it mean taking low percentage shots? Or does it mean taking bench penalties? Or does it mean unscrewing vials or popping corks? Or does it mean a combination of the foregoing?

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:46 PM
  #365
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
I wonder. Does it mean trade away key players until the team's red blood cell count is in the anemic range? Or does it mean neglectingto file qualifying offers? Or does it mean telling Carey Price to let in easy shots? Or does it mean taking low percentage shots? Or does it mean taking bench penalties? Or does it mean unscrewing vials or popping corks? Or does it mean a combination of the foregoing?
I wonder, does finishing 8th or 9th year after year the way we have yield any kind of benefit? I mean seriously, no top picks to build with and mediocre teams built with mediocre players and prospects. What do we gain by doing what we've done and not trading for picks and prospects? What gain has there been in 'going for it' year after year and icing mediocre teams?

'Tanking' or losing on purpose will never happen, nor should it. But it's silly to sit here with the vets we have and not deal some of them away for younger prospects and picks. Absolutely nothing wrong with doing that and we should've done this long ago.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:55 PM
  #366
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
The coach is the one who would have the power to deliberately lose individual games, and I don't see that happening.

The GM is the one who has the power to deliberately lose a season. Luck might still drag the Habs kicking and screaming into the playoffs to lose in the 1st or 2nd round, but it's extremely unlikely at this point. Bergevin didn't go for Jagr, didn't go for Semin. He is entering the season with a weak roster because he's thinking long-term. If he wanted a stronger roster it would have been easy to sign Semin.

If he signs Doan or trades for both the defensive defenseman and PP triggerman the Habs are missing, then I'll take it back. But right now he has put together a team that will lose the season.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:00 PM
  #367
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Right... its all a random crapshoot. I guess there's no point in actually trying to build a good team then. Let's just play Gomez and see how it goes because obviously its just about luck. While we're at it, lets go trade Galchenyuk for some over the hill overpaid vet too so it can look like we're trying to win 8th...


Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
5 years? Why not 100 years? The Habs have won 24 cups and the Rangers have only won 4, we're a better team we'll probably finish higher in the standings next year

Now I'm going to stop being sarcastic, and try educating you:

5 years ago doesn't matter. The Habs have lost Koivu, Kovalev, and Hamrlik. Meanwhile, the Rangers have gained McDonagh, Gaborik, Richards, and now Nash. The teams are completely different.
Okay, let's do three then:

First in conference: Montreal (0), NYR (1)
Conference finals berths: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Second round berths: Montreal (1), NYR (1)
Playoff berths: Montreal (2), NYR (2)

Oh wait...what happened again?

Quote:
It's not a glorified crapshoot. On average the better teams get better results. That's why the standings look the same from one year to the next.

In 2011-2012, the 8 eastern conference teams that made the playoffs were the Rangers, Bruins, Panthers, Penguins, Flyers, Devils, Capitals, and Senators. 6 of those 8 teams made the playoffs in 2010-2011. Of the 8 teams that made the playoffs in 2010-2011, 7 made he playoffs in 2009-2010. That's an extremely high correlation.

Meanwhile,
of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2006, 2 made the lottery in 2007.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2007, 1 made it in 2008.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2008, 4 made it in 2009.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2009, 1 made it in 2010.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2010, 3 made it in 2011.
Of the 5 teams that made the lottery in 2011, 2 made it in 2012.

So overall out of 30 trials, we have 13 subsequent recurrences. If it was a "glorified crapshoot", you would expect 5. You know what the probability of seeing 13 recurrences is if the whole system were governed by pure chance? 0.132%, about 1 part in 750.

Further, many of the non-recurrences up drafting 6-10 and return to the lottery the following year.
Why don't you re-do your stats factoring in salary expenditures? See what happens. There is a reason lottery teams often remain near the bottom. Yeah, I am looking at teams like Columbus, NYI ect.

Lastly, you guys do actually see the significance of the word 'glorified' right?

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:02 PM
  #368
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Oh and BTW, in the last 9 seasons. Guess how many different SC winners there have been?

Wait for it...yeah, 9 different teams.

You know how many different teams have made the finals in those 9 seasons (out of a possible 18)? Wait for it...14 different teams.

Almost half the league has had a 50:50 shot at winning the cup in less than a decade.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:15 PM
  #369
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Oh and BTW, in the last 9 seasons. Guess how many different SC winners there have been?

...

Almost half the league has had a 50:50 shot at winning the cup in less than a decade.
The correlations I presented you in the preceding post were correlations of one year over the next.

The correlations you're presenting are over a 10-year period. That's a completely different statistic.

It's well known in statistics that over extremely long periods of time correlations drop to zero. The reason for that is that you're no longer comparing the same thing. No team in the NHL resembles what it looked like 10 years ago. Most teams don't even resemble what they looked like 3 years ago, though you keep grasping onto the fact the Habs played well when they were a completely different team with Hamrlik and Kovalev.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:28 PM
  #370
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The correlations I presented you in the preceding post were correlations of one year over the next.

The correlations you're presenting are over a 10-year period. That's a completely different statistic.

It's well known in statistics that over extremely long periods of time correlations drop to zero. The reason for that is that you're no longer comparing the same thing. No team in the NHL resembles what it looked like 10 years ago.
I was not pointing out correlations, I was pointing out the complete opposite in case you noticed.

What exactly is a crapshoot to you?

There is one SC winner a year in the NHL. Out of the last decade, 9 out of a possible 9 teams have won. In addition, 14 out of a possible 18 teams have made the finals.

What exactly, about the above, does not strike you as a crapshoot?

If this trend continues for two more decades, every single team will have won the cup.

Quote:
Most teams don't even resemble what they looked like 3 years ago, though you keep grasping onto the fact the Habs played well when they were a completely different team with Hamrlik and Kovalev.
Kovalev wasn't on the team 3 years ago, but thanks for playing. And BTW, yes, the Habs team resembles quite well to the team that made the conference finals 3 years ago. Before Kosty, Gill and Cammy were traded, it was more or less the same team.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:42 PM
  #371
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
What exactly is a crapshoot to you?
A uniform random distribution.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/UniformDistribution.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
There is one SC winner a year in the NHL. Out of the last decade, 9 out of a possible 9 teams have won. In addition, 14 out of a possible 18 teams have made the finals.

What exactly, about the above, does not strike you as a crapshoot?
The fact you cherrypicked the 9-year baseline in order to prove your point undermines your whole argument.

In 2002 Detroit won the cup, same team as in 2008. They beat Carolina, who won in 2006.
In 2001, Colorado won, they beat New Jersey who again made the finals in 2012.
In 2000, New Jersey won, who made the finals in 2001 and 2012.
In 1999, Dallas won, they made the finals in 2000.
In 1997 and 1998, Detroit won, they also won in won in 2002 and 2008.

You specifically picked the time baseline that would support your argument. Your cutoff date, "9 years", which is a cutoff line that nobody uses for anything, is at exactly the point before we see repeats.

Very slick move on your part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
If this trend continues for two more decades, every single team will have won the cup.
Here's a guide to understanding short-term versus long-term correlations:

The 2012-2013 Kings are more likely to win the cup than the 2012-2013 Habs. Every hockey observer of sound mind agrees with that.

But what of the 2019-2020 Kings versus the 2019-2020 Habs? The odds are even, because we have effectively no information.

Thus, over very long periods of time, say 30 years in the example of Budha smoke, many teams will have won the cup. Correlations drop to zero or close to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Kovalev wasn't on the team 3 years ago, but thanks for playing. And BTW, yes, the Habs team resembles quite well to the team that made the conference finals 3 years ago.
Actually this team is completely different from the conference finals team.

No Cammalleri, no Halak, no Gill, no Spacek, no Hamrlik. We've lost our sniper, our goaltender, and half of our defense. Gomez is replaced by Desharnais. Cole and Pacioretty are our top wingers. Kostitsyn is replaced by the inferior Bourque. No Dominic Moore. No Marc-Andre Bergeron.

Thanks for playing.


Last edited by DAChampion: 07-30-2012 at 11:45 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 03:56 AM
  #372
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 9,908
vCash: 1707
why do i even bother reading threads like this...

MasterDecoy is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 05:58 AM
  #373
NovaScotia Habsfan31
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
A rebuild from what exactly? 1993? The Kings were in the crapper for like 17 years. They made the playoffs a whopping 4 times out of 15 seasons.

Some short memories people have around here geez. I mean christ, LA was so bad that they freaking filed for bankruptcy in one of the most lucrative markets in the league.
Try 2006 when Lombardi was hired

He signed some free agents but otherwise stockpiled draft picks like crazy and didn't piss them away like Gainey and Gauthier did.

Ooooh the Kings were bad at one point .... they just won the Stanley Cup through rebuilding... it is close to 20 years since the Habs won it and that is because of all the bandaid solutions that Montreal GMs have employed since then.

To Bergevin's credit he hasn't pissed any picks away yet and is using free agency to bring in some decent vets on decent contracts.

NovaScotia Habsfan31 is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 06:32 AM
  #374
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NovaScotia Habsfan31 View Post
Try 2006 when Lombardi was hired

He signed some free agents but otherwise stockpiled draft picks like crazy and didn't piss them away like Gainey and Gauthier did.

Ooooh the Kings were bad at one point .... they just won the Stanley Cup through rebuilding... it is close to 20 years since the Habs won it and that is because of all the bandaid solutions that Montreal GMs have employed since then.

To Bergevin's credit he hasn't pissed any picks away yet and is using free agency to bring in some decent vets on decent contracts.
See this is the problem with this argument that people keep making on this board over and over again.

Like I said, the LA Kings were garbage for almost two decades. Two decades. They made the playoffs 6 times in 19 years.

Then one year, everything goes right for them and they win a cup.

Now all of a sudden their 'rebuilding' process is 100% legitimate and qualified because of one year? Give me a break.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
why do i even bother reading threads like this...
I don't know, I don't even know why I am replying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Of which you know, rarely exist in the real world.

Quote:
The fact you cherrypicked the 9-year baseline in order to prove your point undermines your whole argument.

In 2002 Detroit won the cup, same team as in 2008. They beat Carolina, who won in 2006.
In 2001, Colorado won, they beat New Jersey who again made the finals in 2012.
In 2000, New Jersey won, who made the finals in 2001 and 2012.
In 1999, Dallas won, they made the finals in 2000.
In 1997 and 1998, Detroit won, they also won in won in 2002 and 2008.

You specifically picked the time baseline that would support your argument. Your cutoff date, "9 years", which is a cutoff line that nobody uses for anything, is at exactly the point before we see repeats.

Very slick move on your part.
Of course I did. It just goes to show how you can basically use any information regarding the NHL to point to a conclusion you want.

Regardless, just as you might think teams change quickly; the league is vastly different now than it was when Dallas and Detroit were winning cups because of their 70 million dollar payrolls.

Quote:
Here's a guide to understanding short-term versus long-term correlations:

The 2012-2013 Kings are more likely to win the cup than the 2012-2013 Habs. Every hockey observer of sound mind agrees with that.

But what of the 2019-2020 Kings versus the 2019-2020 Habs? The odds are even, because we have effectively no information.

Thus, over very long periods of time, say 30 years in the example of Budha smoke, many teams will have won the cup. Correlations drop to zero or close to it.
Actually, the chance of LA winning the cup next year are quite low. With the exception of Pittsburgh and Detroit that one year, no team since the lockout has made it past the first round the following year after winning the cup. Hell, 3 have missed the playoffs altogether.

Quote:
Actually this team is completely different from the conference finals team.

No Cammalleri, no Halak, no Gill, no Spacek, no Hamrlik. We've lost our sniper, our goaltender, and half of our defense. Gomez is replaced by Desharnais. Cole and Pacioretty are our top wingers. Kostitsyn is replaced by the inferior Bourque. No Dominic Moore. No Marc-Andre Bergeron.

Thanks for playing
If you noticed, I edited my post with a qualifier about Cammy, Gill and Kosty. About half way through last season, the only missing players were Halak, Bergeron, Moore and Hammer. Big whoop. 4 players on a 22 man roster.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 07:06 AM
  #375
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekar View Post
I think all the tankers (or "calculated losing" advocates or whatever the hell terms these people are using are) are seriously under-rating the impact a healthy Gionta alone would have done for our season last year.

Another year under Subban and Pacioretty's belts should do nothing but good for their performance this season, and our young defencemen (Emelin, Diaz, Weber) should be MUCH better this year, as last year was the first taste of a full NHL season Diaz and Emelin saw, and Weber showed promise along with his growing pains. I fully expect at least two current AHLers to make life tough on our coaching staff too (in a good way, obviously).

Call me an optimist, but that's just what I see.
Funny that you manage to make your point without talking about Markov. He alone makes a major difference.

Fozz is online now  
Closed Thread

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 12:41 PM.

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.