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

Habs defeated by the Sabres 3-1

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-19-2011, 04:33 PM
  #326
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
21st best offense in the league after 5 games
22nd best last year
25th best the year before

trend established.
Stop posting the facts, it gets in the way of things around here.

Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 04:43 PM
  #327
habfan1968
Registered User
 
habfan1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,126
vCash: 50
Trends?

Last two full season 09-10 88 pts 8th in conf

10-11 96 pts 6th in conf

26 total playoff games

habfan1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 04:47 PM
  #328
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habfan1968 View Post
Trends?

Last two full season 09-10 88 pts 8th in conf

10-11 96 pts 6th in conf

26 total playoff games

88 points is the worst record to make the playoffs in the history of the current standings format.
Without a goaltender that shall remain nameless that p/o total would be 19 games shorter.


Last edited by Agnostic: 10-19-2011 at 04:55 PM.
Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 04:51 PM
  #329
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
88 points is the worst record to make the playoffs in the history of the current standings format.
Without a goaltender that shall remain nameless that p/o total would be 19 games shorter.

Don't make me laugh.
You miss the point of his post. You seem to like overlooking the points.

Your post showed a trend which indicate consistent low scoring over the last three season.

His trend suggested moving upwards over the last two.

He was kind enough to acknowledge your point, you should be kind enough to do the same without having to act smug all the time.

And 5 games is a really small sample size and you know that, stop playing dumb.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:00 PM
  #330
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
You miss the point of his post. You seem to like overlooking the points.

Your post showed a trend which indicate consistent low scoring over the last three season.

His trend suggested moving upwards over the last two.

He was kind enough to acknowledge your point, you should be kind enough to do the same without having to act smug all the time.

And 5 games is a really small sample size and you know that, stop playing dumb.
Give me a break. Maybe I misread the tone of that post, 5 games is not a small sample size when it completely fits with the pre-season and the last TWO FULL SEASONS. There is no anomaly in there that I am trying to fool anyone with ffs.
It is remarkably consistent in it's weakness.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:03 PM
  #331
habfan1968
Registered User
 
habfan1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,126
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
88 points is the worst record to make the playoffs in the history of the current standings format.
Without a goaltender that shall remain nameless that p/o total would be 19 games shorter.

Don't make me laugh.

Excuse me? you talking to me? Nameless goalie sucks ass right now, secondly I am pretty sure it's team game still., Not taking away anything from Halak but fact is we got better last year on the season by posting 96 points over the 88 the year before. Sure the bruins took us out in seven but over all it was a better season. We will get more points again this season and do better in the playoffs as well. Whether or not its the worst point total to make the playoffs or not make no difference, they made it in and took advantage of it.

habfan1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:11 PM
  #332
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habfan1968 View Post
Excuse me? you talking to me? Nameless goalie sucks ass right now, secondly I am pretty sure it's team game still., Not taking away anything from Halak but fact is we got better last year on the season by posting 96 points over the 88 the year before. Sure the bruins took us out in seven but over all it was a better season. We will get more points again this season and do better in the playoffs as well. Whether or not its the worst point total to make the playoffs or not make no difference, they made it in and took advantage of it.
So, last year was a better overall season negates my point that as an offensive team they have been flat for 2 years++?

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:15 PM
  #333
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Give me a break. Maybe I misread the tone of that post, 5 games is not a small sample size when it completely fits with the pre-season and the last TWO FULL SEASONS. There is no anomaly in there that I am trying to fool anyone with ffs.
It is remarkably consistent in it's weakness.
You do realize that 80% of the people in the pre-season currently do not play on this roster so I don't get how that is a representation or a parallel to this team. Stop acting stupid.

5 games is a small sample size. Should I assume Kessel will beat Gretzky's record? No...why? Because 5 games is a small sample size. Should I expect MAB to score 90 points this season? No. Use your head and stop acting stupid because the numbers after 5 games reflect your pre-determined view of the season.

I never said there was an anomoly you were trying to fool. Once again you glazed over the point of not only his post, but mine.

You showed a trend of consistent low scoring. He responded to your point by providing another trend that showed overall improve. He never said your post was false, he showed you another trend that shows that despite consistent low scoring, the team has actually improved overall. You decided to completly glaze over that twice.

Again stop acting stupid, stop acting childish, put your hate aside for 10 minutes and be reasonable.

Using your logic you'd have to agree that Halak is on the decline

09-10 924 SV%
10-11 909 SV%
5 games in .840 SV%

would you agree to this trend about Halak? No you wouldn't because you'd admit that 5 games is a small sample size. Now use that revelation applied to your lover and apply to the habs the team you hate.

If you think 5 games is a good sample size, then you have to concede that Halak is on the decline, that Kessel will beat Gretzky's record, that Montreal and Boston will score the least goals and that Toronto won't lose a game.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:18 PM
  #334
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelHabs View Post
Poor goaltending in the Winnipeg case. We were badly outshot. Good point in the Colorado case but... that's 1 game in 5. Even a broken clock is accurate twice a day.
The outshooting only started when the Habs had built up a large lead which often happens as teams start spraying and praying (why Montreal outshot Calgary). With the score tied Montreal has been outshooting their opponents consistently.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:28 PM
  #335
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
21st best offense in the league after 5 games
22nd best last year
25th best the year before

trend established.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs View Post
Stop posting the facts, it gets in the way of things around here.
Hmmm, I don't know about that.

First of all, we are tied for 20th. If you want to bring stats, be precise, wouldn't you agree?
Second of all, it's 5 games. You know how much things can fluctuate after one single game?? If we score 4 goals next game (which we've done 2 out of 5times so far), we'd sit 14th in terms of offense.

Also, wouldn't you agree that 5-5 scoring is a more interesting stat? We're tied 11th so far at 1.25.
Last year we were 16th at 1.01, two years ago 22nd at .90.
Hmm, I see an improvement trend here, but then again, it's only 5games so let's not get carried away.

Boston has the worst offense in the NHL, but I have a feeling you guys have more trust in them bouncing back, right?

Quite frankly, the number of goals we score every game is irrelevant. As long as we allow less than our opponents, we're good.


Facts don't get in the way of things here, you just need to recognize which stats are the important ones. How many seasons did NJ dominate despite having weak-average offense?? We can have a weak offense, as long as we have a good defensive game and so far that's been a problem, but I have no doubt it will improve. This as well as a good ES scoring ratio could put us at the top end of the league, even with a weak offense. So, simply spewing out offensive numbers is rather useless, especially 5 games in.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:28 PM
  #336
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
You do realize that 80% of the people in the pre-season currently do not play on this roster so I don't get how that is a representation or a parallel to this team. Stop acting stupid.

5 games is a small sample size. Should I assume Kessel will beat Gretzky's record? No...why? Because 5 games is a small sample size. Should I expect MAB to score 90 points this season? No. Use your head and stop acting stupid because the numbers after 5 games reflect your pre-determined view of the season.

I never said there was an anomoly you were trying to fool. Once again you glazed over the point of not only his post, but mine.

You showed a trend of consistent low scoring. He responded to your point by providing another trend that showed overall improve. He never said your post was false, he showed you another trend that shows that despite consistent low scoring, the team has actually improved overall. You decided to completly glaze over that twice.

Again stop acting stupid, stop acting childish, put your hate aside for 10 minutes and be reasonable.

Using your logic you'd have to agree that Halak is on the decline

09-10 924 SV%
10-11 909 SV%
5 games in .840 SV%

would you agree to this trend about Halak? No you wouldn't because you'd admit that 5 games is a small sample size. Now use that revelation applied to your lover and apply to the habs the team you hate.

If you think 5 games is a good sample size, then you have to concede that Halak is on the decline, that Kessel will beat Gretzky's record, that Montreal and Boston will score the least goals and that Toronto won't lose a game.
you're in character I see. If Kessel's and Halak's stats were identical for this year as they were over the past 2+ seasons it could be argued their present is consistent with the past. It's not.

Montreal's stats are very similar to the past 2 years and so consistency is evident. Just because you desperately want to make a counter argument but can't muster it is not my problem. The Habs this year look as effective offensively as they have for the past 2 seasons under Martin.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:28 PM
  #337
habfan1968
Registered User
 
habfan1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,126
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
So, last year was a better overall season negates my point that as an offensive team they have been flat for 2 years++?
Yes, I don't think of us as an offensive team. JM is a defense first kinda coach and most of the forwards on this team are strong two way players, not just offensive guys so where did you get the idea we are an offensive team? Do you watch the games or no?

habfan1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:31 PM
  #338
habfan1968
Registered User
 
habfan1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,126
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
you're in character I see. If Kessel's and Halak's stats were identical for this year as they were over the past 2+ seasons it could be argued their present is consistent with the past. It's not.

Montreal's stats are very similar to the past 2 years and so consistency is evident. Just because you desperately want to make a counter argument but can't muster it is not my problem. The Habs this year look as effective offensively as they have for the past 2 seasons under Martin.

Well that's great then, let's hope we can go further in the playoffs this season since it looks like we'll be there since we are that consistent.

habfan1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:33 PM
  #339
JohnLennon
Registered User
 
JohnLennon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
you're in character I see. If Kessel's and Halak's stats were identical for this year as they were over the past 2+ seasons it could be argued their present is consistent with the past. It's not.

Montreal's stats are very similar to the past 2 years and so consistency is evident. Just because you desperately want to make a counter argument but can't muster it is not my problem. The Habs this year look as effective offensively as they have for the past 2 seasons under Martin.
You do know we are a completely different team than we were two years ago, right? Arguing that there is consistency is a little silly in my opinion. I'm of course referring to the state of our defense at this point in time.

You can't blame our whole team for how we are doing right now, it's quite obvious bounces aren't going our way and we have been extremely unlucky when it comes to injuries.

JohnLennon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:48 PM
  #340
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
you're in character I see. If Kessel's and Halak's stats were identical for this year as they were over the past 2+ seasons it could be argued their present is consistent with the past. It's not.
It's not about stats being identicle, it's about observing trends. The Kessel example was to show that 5 games is much too small a sample size, using that data in and of itself to make prediction.

The Halak example was to show a trend like you did using the last three years. The stats were not identical, but that's not the point, it showed a trend. They have decreased.

You can't only use your line of argument when it backs up your opinion. You used the last two years and these 5 games to show a trend to reflect your opinion. I used the same method on your favorite goalie to show another trend of declining. For whatever reason you don't think that's valid because the stats weren't identicle. Stats don't need to be identicle when what you are looking for are trends. Trends are not about identical stats.

Quote:
Montreal's stats are very similar to the past 2 years and so consistency is evident. Just because you desperately want to make a counter argument but can't muster it is not my problem. The Habs this year look as effective offensively as they have for the past 2 seasons under Matin
There is consistency in one aspect. There have been improvements in others. You chose to only look at one factor to prove a point which no one disputed that Montreal generally is a low scoring team over the last two seasons since it was true. People are questioning your use of 5 games to determine a trend. I used your same method to demonstrate another trend in a goalie you like which you refused to acknowledge.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:57 PM
  #341
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Hmmm, I don't know about that.

First of all, we are tied for 20th. If you want to bring stats, be precise, wouldn't you agree?
Second of all, it's 5 games. You know how much things can fluctuate after one single game?? If we score 4 goals next game (which we've done 2 out of 5times so far), we'd sit 14th in terms of offense.

Also, wouldn't you agree that 5-5 scoring is a more interesting stat? We're tied 11th so far at 1.25.
Last year we were 16th at 1.01, two years ago 22nd at .90.
Hmm, I see an improvement trend here, but then again, it's only 5games so let's not get carried away.

Boston has the worst offense in the NHL, but I have a feeling you guys have more trust in them bouncing back, right?

Quite frankly, the number of goals we score every game is irrelevant. As long as we allow less than our opponents, we're good.


Facts don't get in the way of things here, you just need to recognize which stats are the important ones. How many seasons did NJ dominate despite having weak-average offense?? We can have a weak offense, as long as we have a good defensive game and so far that's been a problem, but I have no doubt it will improve. This as well as a good ES scoring ratio could put us at the top end of the league, even with a weak offense. So, simply spewing out offensive numbers is rather useless, especially 5 games in.
You have raised this nonsense before and it is patently false. time for facts to get in the way of you.


1999-2000 - NJ wins CuP - 2nd best offense in league
2000-2001 - NJ loses in final - #1 ranked offense in the league
2002-2003 - NJ wins cup - #14 ranked offense ***** OUTLIER ****

Since that time:

2003-2004 - Tampa wins - #3 ranked offense
2005-2006- Carolina wins - #3 ranked offense
2006-2007 - Ducks Win - #7 ranked offense
2007-2008 - Detroit wins - #3 ranked offense
2008-2009 - Pittsburgh wins - #4 ranked offense
2009-2010 - chicago - #3 ranked offense
2010-2011 - Boston - #8 ranked offense

So, you have taken the most extreme outlier in the past decade and tried to peddle it as a philosophy that wins championships. And you repeat it over and over.

Where are the teams with 21st-25th ranked offenses winning cups there Kriss?
Going to go back 20 years to find a new "golden rule". lol.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 05:59 PM
  #342
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Guys, he said stop posting facts!

So classless.

Protest the Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 06:02 PM
  #343
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLennon View Post
You do know we are a completely different team than we were two years ago, right? Arguing that there is consistency is a little silly in my opinion. I'm of course referring to the state of our defense at this point in time.

You can't blame our whole team for how we are doing right now, it's quite obvious bounces aren't going our way and we have been extremely unlucky when it comes to injuries.
Jacques Martin is the common link. That was the point of the OP which bears out in the stats. Different teams, results eerily similar.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 06:07 PM
  #344
WhiskeySeven
President of Canada
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,994
vCash: 500
Awesome points, maybe we should forward these to the GM.

WhiskeySeven is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 06:14 PM
  #345
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Jacques Martin is the common link. That was the point of the OP which bears out in the stats. Different teams, results eerily similar.
Are you sure Martin is the link? Didn't he have some of the highest scoring teams for 2 years when he was in Ottawa?

It's most likely a personnel issue than a Martin one. In 09-10 we didn't have a formal top 6 until Pouliot was acquired. In 10-11 we didn't have a formal top 6 until Pacioretty was acquired...then he got injured. Very hard to score when you don't have a solid top 6.

This year we have more than enough scoring depth, but no offense from the back end, which will be tough.

I think your analysis is a shallow one. Martin was present in both teams, but correlation does not equate to causation. I don't really like Martin, but I'm not too sure that he is the problem for the offense.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 07:21 PM
  #346
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Are you sure Martin is the link? Didn't he have some of the highest scoring teams for 2 years when he was in Ottawa?

It's most likely a personnel issue than a Martin one. In 09-10 we didn't have a formal top 6 until Pouliot was acquired. In 10-11 we didn't have a formal top 6 until Pacioretty was acquired...then he got injured. Very hard to score when you don't have a solid top 6.

This year we have more than enough scoring depth, but no offense from the back end, which will be tough.

I think your analysis is a shallow one. Martin was present in both teams, but correlation does not equate to causation. I don't really like Martin, but I'm not too sure that he is the problem for the offense.
I am not peddling this as a deep analysis, just supporting the observation that the team is offensively challenged and that it's an impediment to getting to the end-goal.

I am neutral on JM, I think he's brought some pros and cons, but by design , by accident, or by the talent given to him he's delivered weak offensive teams (so far).

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 08:36 PM
  #347
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
You have raised this nonsense before and it is patently false. time for facts to get in the way of you.


1999-2000 - NJ wins CuP - 2nd best offense in league
2000-2001 - NJ loses in final - #1 ranked offense in the league
2002-2003 - NJ wins cup - #14 ranked offense ***** OUTLIER ****

Since that time:

2003-2004 - Tampa wins - #3 ranked offense
2005-2006- Carolina wins - #3 ranked offense
2006-2007 - Ducks Win - #7 ranked offense
2007-2008 - Detroit wins - #3 ranked offense
2008-2009 - Pittsburgh wins - #4 ranked offense
2009-2010 - chicago - #3 ranked offense
2010-2011 - Boston - #8 ranked offense

So, you have taken the most extreme outlier in the past decade and tried to peddle it as a philosophy that wins championships. And you repeat it over and over.

Where are the teams with 21st-25th ranked offenses winning cups there Kriss?
Going to go back 20 years to find a new "golden rule". lol.
There you go, misunderstanding as you do so well.
I said, ''how many SEASONS did NJ dominate despite having average-weak offense''. Your answer, they had a good offense two years. Somehow, you feel like this proves your point... Then, you talk about offensive teams winning the cup...Great. Nothing to do with what I was saying, but okay, great.

09-10, 1st in Atlantic, 19th offense.
08-09, 1st in Atlantic, 15th offense.
07-08, 2nd in Atlantic, 4th in Conference, 26th in offense.
06-07, 1st in Atlantic, 24th in offense.

As I said, they dominated (maybe that was a big word, but they had very good years) despite having average to weak offense. There is so many different factors that goes into winning a cup. Yes you need good offense, among other things, but I was talking about seasons.

In any event, the problem is that you come to a conclusion 5 games into the season, which is ridiculous.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 09:46 PM
  #348
Sabres4theCup
Registered User
 
Sabres4theCup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
How come McCormick didn't get an instigator, Moen and Gaustad were shoving and McCormick jumped him from behind, BS.
lmao youre going to complain about the refs?!?!?!?

Sabres4theCup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 09:49 PM
  #349
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,494
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabres4theCup View Post
lmao youre going to complain about the refs?!?!?!?
Why? They were in Buffalo's favor.

Getting our PP on the ice was to Buffalo's advantage.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-19-2011, 10:40 PM
  #350
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post

In any event, the problem is that you come to a conclusion 5 games into the season, which is ridiculous.
.... this season is starting where last season left off.

Habs 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 01:59 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.