• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Around the League 2019-2024 Edition

Habsy said:
While an elite team in the regular season has a better shot at a cup. A cup winner does not need to be an elite team.
Click to expand...

History shows this to be untrue though, as I've already pointed out. 2 cup winners over the last 30 years have been teams that we wouldn't consider "elite" in that regular season, and both were in fact elite if you isolated the 2nd half of that regular season. The long and the short of it is this...if you're not really, really good in the regular season, there's no magic playoff formula waiting to take you to glory. The playoffs is basically a contest between the top 6-7 regular season teams of that season to see who can survive through 4 rounds of playoff hockey. There really isn't any evidence to suggest anything else is more than even remotely possible.
Habsy said:
Same as an elite regular season team does not necessarily make an elite playoff team.
Click to expand...

Again though, I can't find any examples of a consistently elite regular season team that didn't eventually have significant playoff success (conference finals, cup finals). Even my hilarious Maple Leafs actually looked very fucking good in the playoffs last season, they're just unfortunate that it was against a perennial elite contender that nudged by them in 7.
Habsy said:
There are actually two different style of games at play so using the metrics for the regular season to predict playoffs is akin to using American football to project Canadian football playoffs. The game is called differently. If someone is unable to understand this variable then they're bound to miscalculate playoff performance.
Click to expand...

Again though, there's no examples of elite regular season clubs that consistently under perform their regular season form, nor are there examples of mediocre clubs that durably and consistently overperform their regular season performances. What we see is a lot of weird because hockey outcomes are heavily influenced by luck and short samples are a motherfucker. It's like a US election in a way...30% chance to win a presidential election are terrible odds...but that means that 3 out of 10 times they're going to win.

Sure, if would be Leafy as fuck for the Leafs to be the first, but based on how they looked against Tampa, I don't think that's going to be the case. They seem to know how to play "playoff hockey" just fine now.
 
Holland Changes


McDavid ----> McDavid
Draisaitl -----> Draisaitl
RNH ---------> RNH
Yamamoto ----> Yamamoto
Puljujarvi ------> Puljujarvi
McLeod -------> McLeod
Malone -------> Malone

Chiasson -----> Hyman
Kassian -------> Kane
Lucic ----------> Janmark
Gagner -------> Foegele
Rieder --------> Shore
Brodziak -----> Ryan
Khaira --------> Kostin
Rattie --------> Holloway
Cave ----------> Hamblin



Nurse --------> Nurse
Bouchard ----> Bouchard

Klefbom ------> Barrie
Larsson -------> Ceci
Russell --------> Kulak
Sekera --------> Murray
Benning ------> Niemelainen
Jones ----------> Broberg



Talbot ----------> Skinner
Koskinen -------> Campbell




Looks like a pretty similar pile of crap. Maybe worse depending on what you think of the goalies.

The unforgiveable thing though is that Holland presided over a whole bunch of expiring money and had TONS of capspace to work with to improve the team, and instead just locked in a similar crap roster for much longer and being much older.

He completely screwed their chance to fix the team.
 
MindzEye said:
Again though, I can't find any examples of a consistently elite regular season team that didn't eventually have significant playoff success (conference finals, cup finals).
Click to expand...
What's your definition of elite? What is the benchmark?
 
McD about to see his 4th coach fired while he cheats for offense and shoots daggers at his teammates all game long and nobody dares call him a coach killer.
 
zeke said:
McD about to see his 4th coach fired while he cheats for offense and shoots daggers at his teammates all game long and nobody dares call him a coach killer.
Click to expand...
It's almost like you're not a fan of the guy
 
I think it's fair to criticize the defensive commitment by McD but... wouldn't that club probably suck regardless?

Like if he's on pace for 100 points right now and work his ass off defensively, are they actually any good anyway? I dunno. Hard to say. It's selfish, but I'd probably grimace at that blueline too.
 
Habsy said:
What's your definition of elite? What is the benchmark?
Click to expand...

Obviously some grey in there because the NHL loves awarding regular season points that don't matter in the playoffs. But as a set of general rules

- 100+ points, more is better because at least loser points show that you're capable to carrying close games into OT...but nobody should care about 3v3 or shootout results for obvious reasons
- Top 6-7 in regulation wins
- Top 10 in 5v5 expected goal type metrics
- Top 10 in team SV%
- Above average special teams

We could probably come up with a few more if we put our minds to it. A team doesn't need to have all of it, but most of it definitely. I'm entirely good with someone challenging my interpretation of whether or not a team was elite in the regular season on a case by case basis. I've looked at enough of them to be comfortable with my assessment not being altered by classifying an additional cup winner or two as not quite elite but instead just real gud.

The most important point imo, is that there are zero examples of teams that were mediocre or worse regular season clubs that showed a consistent ability to over perform in the playoffs. There are weirdo runs, but they're almost all one and done. The absolute closest any club has come to that is the Isles from a few years ago and of course, they didn't actually win anything
 
Last edited:
hockeylover said:
I think it's fair to criticize the defensive commitment by McD but... wouldn't that club probably suck regardless?

Like if he's on pace for 100 points right now and work his ass off defensively, are they actually any good anyway? I dunno. Hard to say. It's selfish, but I'd probably grimace at that blueline too.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of crappy teams that buy in defensively to get better than deserved results, and with much less firepower than Edmonton had. Hell, given how bad they are 5v5 and how PP relisnt they are already they should be playing all out defense all the time.

And I happen to believe they have a coach that knows what he's doing this time.

But McD won't lead by example.
 
hockeylover said:
I think it's fair to criticize the defensive commitment by McD but... wouldn't that club probably suck regardless?

Like if he's on pace for 100 points right now and work his ass off defensively, are they actually any good anyway? I dunno. Hard to say. It's selfish, but I'd probably grimace at that blueline too.
Click to expand...

If you have a guy who is that dominant offensively, you roster construct around his deficiencies. Zack Kassian was his winger for long stretches over the last few years ffs. That's just abysmal. If you have a McDavid, you pay the cost to go out and get two real 2-way wingers that can play with him while covering up his shortcomings away from the puck.
 
MindzEye said:
Obviously some grey in there because the NHL loves awarding regular season points that don't matter in the playoffs. But as a set of general rules

- 100+ points, more is better because at least loser points show that you're capable to carrying close games into OT...but nobody should care about 3v3 or shootout results for obvious reasons
- Top 6-7 in regulation wins
- Top 10 in 5v5 expected goal type metrics
- Top 10 in team SV%
- Above average special teams

We could probably come up with a few more if we put our minds to it. A team doesn't need to have all of it, but most of it definitely. I'm entirely good with someone challenging my interpretation of whether or not a team was elite in the regular season on a case by case basis. I've looked at enough of them to be comfortable with my assessment not being altered by classifying an additional cup winner or two as not quite elite but instead just real gud.
Click to expand...
Ok now I'm getting you more. I don't view 100 points as elite. I always felt very good was that vernacular. Elite to me was 110 and up because I've seen plenty of meh teams hit 100 in a season (usually due to strength of schedule). That doesn't generally happen with 110 teams.

Regardless of the pedantic nature of opinion, when 16 teams make the playoffs and the majority are over 100 points I don't see it as elite.

Are the Leafs elite rn? Sure, can't say otherwise. Are the Kraken? Sure.

Doesn't feel the same now does it?
 
zeke said:
There's plenty of crappy teams that buy in defensively to get better than deserved results, and with much less firepower than Edmonton had. Hell, given how bad they are 5v5 and how PP relisnt they are already they should be playing all out defense all the time.

And I happen to believe they have a coach that knows what he's doing this time.

But McD won't lead by example.
Click to expand...
I think they'd still be a pretender in a weak West even if he commits to D personally.
 
MindzEye said:
If you have a guy who is that dominant offensively, you roster construct around his deficiencies. Zack Kassian was his winger for long stretches over the last few years ffs. That's just abysmal. If you have a McDavid, you pay the cost to go out and get two real 2-way wingers that can play with him while covering up his shortcomings away from the puck.
Click to expand...

Draisaitl Kane Hyman RNH he can't complain about linemates.
 
Their backend has been crap for years because of the dollars spent up front. Holland needs a bottomless pocket to GM, he can't construct a back end on a shoe string budget and neither could Chiarelli
 
Holland had tons of caproom to work with.

Their blueline costs the same as the Leafs', but with longer committments.

Their goalies cost the same too, but with longer committments.

Their bottom 6 forwards are more expensive than the leafs', but with longer committments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top