AktionT4 Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 You know why I hate it? Because the regular season means Jack-Schit. You know how Montreal and Philly finished this year? Back of the pack. The only thing that matters is winning 16 in the postseason once you've earned the right to play there in the first 82. That's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Where did the Sharks and Hawks finish in the regular season?:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 quite the breakthrough psychologically Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 You know why I hate it? Because the regular season means Jack-Schit. You know how Montreal and Philly finished this year? Back of the pack. The only thing that matters is winning 16 in the postseason once you've earned the right to play there in the first 82. That's it. Totally agree. And, not to beat a dead horse, but it's not like it's 1997, where they roared from way back to overcome Pittsburgh. They won the division by default. You know who looks very foolish when he trumps how "good" the Sabres were in the regular season? Darcy. In the presser, his point seemed to be you have to be a "good" team in the regular season to win a Cup. He had the numbers handy, of course. Since the late 60s no team had won a Cup after finishing outside the top 8 in the league in the regular season. "Oh you can get to the finals," he sniveled, citing the Sabres in 99. But you can't win it, he seemed to be implying, as if when the Sabres and Stars were battling in the third OT in Game 6, Darcy didn't really believe the Sabres could win the Cup. I am praying for Philly to win, just so Darcy can look that much worse and more out of touch with the state of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Even so,the stats would seem to prove Darcy right on that point.The weaker team has'nt gone on to win in the majority of cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Even so,the stats would seem to prove Darcy right on that point.The weaker team has'nt gone on to win in the majority of cases. But he's going all the way back to LBJ to find that trend. Times changes. Lindy was preaching parity all season. Maybe this is the beginning of a new post-lockout trend that is just now emerging. The problem is that Darcy never wants to really improve his team in season ("take a run"). If this is because he's waiting for some mythical regular season beast that looks like a can't-lose in the playoffs, we're really screwed. With Darce, it's all about not taking the big risk. I think he knows that unless he screws things up big time (think sugar packets), he's safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 82 games that mean absolutely nothing. It's time to get rid of them. Seed the top 16 teams in the conference based solely on paper and then start the playoffs immediately. Stop wasting our time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 I am praying for Philly to win, just so Darcy can look that much worse and more out of touch with the state of the league. How nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Even so,the stats would seem to prove Darcy right on that point.The weaker team has'nt gone on to win in the majority of cases. My question is why would Darcy even know that stat? The only stat that matters is 4 games to two. The Sabres should be focusing on correcting why they lost with home ice advantage. After winning game one and being up 2-0 in game two. The answer is simple and if Regier can't figure it out he should never be allowed to work in the NHL again. Outside of a hot goaltender, a rookie blueliner and a streaky Austrian goal scorer this roster is filled with bottom feeder level talent. Regier needs to realize that having a bunch of average and below average hockey players isn't depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Totally agree. And, not to beat a dead horse, but it's not like it's 1997, where they roared from way back to overcome Pittsburgh. They won the division by default. You know who looks very foolish when he trumps how "good" the Sabres were in the regular season? Darcy. In the presser, his point seemed to be you have to be a "good" team in the regular season to win a Cup. He had the numbers handy, of course. Since the late 60s no team had won a Cup after finishing outside the top 8 in the league in the regular season. "Oh you can get to the finals," he sniveled, citing the Sabres in 99. But you can't win it, he seemed to be implying, as if when the Sabres and Stars were battling in the third OT in Game 6, Darcy didn't really believe the Sabres could win the Cup. I am praying for Philly to win, just so Darcy can look that much worse and more out of touch with the state of the league. Or, you can just wait till free agency starts and Regier holds his annual "the market caught him by surprise" press conference followed by the every enlightening "teams just aren't willing to make trades" presser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 82 games that mean absolutely nothing. It's time to get rid of them. Seed the top 16 teams in the conference based solely on paper and then start the playoffs immediately. Stop wasting our time. No one is arguing that the regular season should be meaningless in terms of playoff qualification, just that its meaning should pale in comparison with the second season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 No one is arguing that the regular season should be meaningless in terms of playoff qualification, just that its meaning should pale in comparison with the second season. It's 82 games to look at your team and make adjustments that best prepare the team for the playoffs. Regier gets a 'F' for the regular season. There were players available and the best he came up with was Torres. If a GM isn't going to use the entire season to make this team playoff ready then it is indeed meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 It's 82 games to look at your team and make adjustments that best prepare the team for the playoffs. Regier gets a 'F' for the regular season. There were players available and the best he came up with was Torres. If a GM isn't going to use the entire season to make this team playoff ready then it is indeed meaningless. Problem with your point is that none of the four finalists made a significant in season move. In fact Philly and Montreal were lambasted in their own cities for doing nothing to shore up their weaknesses. Philly had/has no goaltending and decided to enter the playoffs with Boucher and Leighton! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 It's 82 games to look at your team and make adjustments that best prepare the team for the playoffs. Regier gets a 'F' for the regular season. There were players available and the best he came up with was Torres. If a GM isn't going to use the entire season to make this team playoff ready then it is indeed meaningless. Problem with your point is that none of the four finalists made a significant in season move. In fact Philly and Montreal were lambasted in their own cities for doing nothing to shore up their weaknesses. Philly had/has no goaltending and decided to enter the playoffs with Boucher and Leighton! Beat me to it. I'd go so far as to ask whether any of the playoff rentals on any team was an impact player this year (Kovy certainly wasn't, notwithstanding all the sound and fury from DeLuca on that one). I'm sure I'm missing someone, but I can't think of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Problem with your point is that none of the four finalists made a significant in season move. In fact Philly and Montreal were lambasted in their own cities for doing nothing to shore up their weaknesses. Philly had/has no goaltending and decided to enter the playoffs with Boucher and Leighton! Two of the teams made coaching changes in season this year. Two made changes last year. Those are significant changes. It's amazing what different/better results you can get from the same players with a change of scenery at head coach. Beat me to it. I'd go so far as to ask whether any of the playoff rentals on any team was an impact player this year (Kovy certainly wasn't, notwithstanding all the sound and fury from DeLuca on that one). I'm sure I'm missing someone, but I can't think of one. The playoff rental concept might not have worked (this year), but the "blow the whole thing up" concept sure has born some fruit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Problem with your point is that none of the four finalists made a significant in season move. In fact Philly and Montreal were lambasted in their own cities for doing nothing to shore up their weaknesses. Philly had/has no goaltending and decided to enter the playoffs with Boucher and Leighton! Actually, Montreal's big in season addition was the same one we made last year (minus the Tellqvist trade). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Where did the Sharks and Hawks finish in the regular season?:doh: But can you really compare the 1st and 2nd seeds from the west and east? The general belief seems to be that the west play a brand of regular season hockey which seems more like playoff hockey than what we see in the east? That would certainly go a long ways to explain why the 7th and 8th seeds are playing for the final in the east, and the 1st and 2nd seeds are playing for the final in the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjbnice Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 Last time an eight seed advanced was 4 years ago with Edmonton. The Winter Olympics change the NHL season & cause extended wear on superstar players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 Problem with your point is that none of the four finalists made a significant in season move. In fact Philly and Montreal were lambasted in their own cities for doing nothing to shore up their weaknesses. Philly had/has no goaltending and decided to enter the playoffs with Boucher and Leighton! I have more faith that the GM's in Philly and Montreal at least picked up the phone and tried to make a deal to improve their team than I do in Regier doing the same. All four teams have been regular participants in the trade and free agent markets. It's amazing that they are able to while still being able to have home grown talent as well. According to Regier that's impossible. To go out and sign a quality free agent would be the demise of the franchise. It's really not fair to compare he final four teams to the Sabres. They do not work under the same misguided self imposed restrictions the Sabres do. If Chicago and Philly ran their clubs like the Sabres do? They wouldn't be playing for the Stanley Cup. You can say the same about the Wings/Pens and Ducks/Senator in years past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 Last time an eight seed advanced was 4 years ago with Edmonton. The Winter Olympics change the NHL season & cause extended wear on superstar players. That is right. That team was also led by Chris Pronger. This is Pronger's third final's appearance in recent years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 That is right. That team was also led by Chris Pronger. This is Pronger's third final's appearance in recent years. Marian Hossa's been there 3 staright. I think this year he got it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 The playoff rental concept might not have worked (this year), but the "blow the whole thing up" concept sure has born some fruit. Only Montreal, but I will admit to being surprised at how well it worked. I'm not convinced that this is anything more than a one-year flash, but Gainey deserves credit for assembling a team that played a very mentally tough game in the postseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 Only Montreal, but I will admit to being surprised at how well it worked. I'm not convinced that this is anything more than a one-year flash, but Gainey deserves credit for assembling a team that played a very mentally tough game in the postseason. I don't know if it really fits the typical "blow the whole thing up" scenario. That kind of thing is usually done by choice. Montreal had no choice. Half their roster was free agents so they had to bring in new bodies. The only true exchange was the Gomez deal, and then if you want to look in season, trading Bill the Tenderness for Pouliot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 I don't know if it really fits the typical "blow the whole thing up" scenario. That kind of thing is usually done by choice. Montreal had no choice. Half their roster was free agents so they had to bring in new bodies. The only true exchange was the Gomez deal, and then if you want to look in season, trading Bill the Tenderness for Pouliot. Well, they kinda made it clear that they weren't interested in bringing back a couple of the big FAs (Koivu, who was their captain, and Kovalev), and I think they made a lowball offer to Komisarek. When you combine that with the Gomez trade, it's pretty close to a blow-the-team-up situation, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted May 25, 2010 Report Share Posted May 25, 2010 Well, they kinda made it clear that they weren't interested in bringing back a couple of the big FAs (Koivu, who was their captain, and Kovalev), and I think they made a lowball offer to Komisarek. When you combine that with the Gomez trade, it's pretty close to a blow-the-team-up situation, IMHO. Sorta like what Buffalo did, only Montreal did it on purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.