PromoTheRobot Posted April 10, 2009 Report Posted April 10, 2009 2008-09: 89pts (10th) Last 10: 6-3-1 2007-08: 90pts (10th) Last 10: 6-3-1 2006-07: 113pts (1st) Last 10: 7-3-0 2005-06: 110pts (4th) Last 10: 7-3-0 2004-05: Lock out 2003-04: 85pts (9th) Last 10: 6-3-1-0 2002-03: 72pts (12th) Last 10: 5-3-1-1 2001-02: 82pts (10th) Last 10: 5-3-2-0 2000-01: 98pts (5th) Last 10: 6-4-0-0 1999-00: 85pts (8th) Last 10: 7-1-1-1 This team is all about playing catch-up. Usually when it's too late. PTR
Kristian Posted April 10, 2009 Report Posted April 10, 2009 2008-09: 89pts (10th) Last 10: 6-3-12007-08: 90pts (10th) Last 10: 6-3-1 2006-07: 113pts (1st) Last 10: 7-3-0 2005-06: 110pts (4th) Last 10: 7-3-0 2004-05: Lock out 2003-04: 85pts (9th) Last 10: 6-3-1-0 2002-03: 72pts (12th) Last 10: 5-3-1-1 2001-02: 82pts (10th) Last 10: 5-3-2-0 2000-01: 98pts (5th) Last 10: 6-4-0-0 1999-00: 85pts (8th) Last 10: 7-1-1-1 This team is all about playing catch-up. Usually when it's too late. PTR Only thing these teams have in common are Maxim Afinogenov, Darcy Regier and Lindy Ruff. Food for thought.
Stoner Posted April 10, 2009 Report Posted April 10, 2009 Only thing these teams have in common are Maxim Afinogenov, Darcy Regier and Lindy Ruff. Food for thought. Ruff's teams traditionally start very slowly.
jad1 Posted April 10, 2009 Report Posted April 10, 2009 Only thing these teams have in common are Maxim Afinogenov, Darcy Regier and Lindy Ruff. Food for thought. Actually, the thing that the non-playoff teams have in common is a lack of veteren leadership on the ice.
Kristian Posted April 10, 2009 Report Posted April 10, 2009 Actually, the thing that the non-playoff teams have in common is a lack of veteren leadership on the ice. According to some, players who have made the ECF twice are automatically considered veterans, and therefore leaders on the ice. At least I know Larry the Moron and Darcy swear by that theory.
jad1 Posted April 10, 2009 Report Posted April 10, 2009 According to some, players who have made the ECF twice are automatically considered veterans, and therefore leaders on the ice. At least I know Larry the Moron and Darcy swear by that theory. Well that was the plan that the organization followed, and it wasn't a bad one a couple of seasons ago, but it failed. The problem is that they stuck with it through the trading deadline this season, which proved to be too long.
buftex Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 Actually, the thing that the non-playoff teams have in common is a lack of veteren leadership on the ice. I don't think this team lacks vetrans, but it does lack leadership. They seem to come prepared with every excuse in the book... if I have one complaint about Lindy (who I really do like) it is that he makes too many excuses for them. Maybe it is him trying to support his team, but, honestly, the more he sticks up for his guys, the less accountable they seem, and, the softer they seem. I know Lindy can be a tough guy, but he always seems concerned with this teams fragile ego... hasn't Max been in Lindy's doghouse for almost a decade now? Remember the team that went to the finals back in 1999? Those guys were nowhere near the skill level, overall, to the team now, but they were so much grittier. And not all of them loved their coach so much...sorry to ramble...just very disappointed with the effort this season...
carpandean Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 Ruff's teams traditionally start very slowly. Games or seasons? Here's some decent starts: 2005-06: 6-2-0 2006-07: 15-1-1 2008-09: 6-0-2 Obviously, in two of those, they took a tumble after those starts, but the starts themselves weren't slow.
Stoner Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 Games or seasons? Here's some decent starts:2005-06: 6-2-0 2006-07: 15-1-1 2008-09: 6-0-2 Obviously, in two of those, they took a tumble after those starts, but the starts themselves weren't slow. I can make a case for nine slow starts in 11 seasons, but I'll admit, that would be somewhat unfair (I'd be using different definitions of "start.") You'd have to define "start." 10 games? 20 games? Just the facts... Ruff's starts: 1997-98 3-5-2 (6-10-4) 1998-99 5-3-2 (11-5-4) 1999-00 2-6-2 (8-10-2) 2000-01 5-3-1-1 (11-6-2-1) 2001-02 5-3-1-1 (8-10-1-1) 2002-03 3-5-2 (4-12-3-1) 2003-04 5-5 (9-8-2-1) 2005-06 6-4 (11-9) 2006-07 10-0 (16-3-1) 2007-08 5-5 (9-11) 2008-09 6-2-2 (9-8-3) Saturday morning eyes and tiny media guide print -- I might be off a tiny bit. I think it's fair to say Ruff has had three slow 10-game starts in 11 seasons, and five slow 20-game starts. What's "slow" though? :) "Ruff's teams traditionally start very slowly." I overreached. But how many fast starts has he had? A handful of out 22? Ruff's teams do tend to underachieve at the beginnings of seasons and come on toward the end, including playoffs. How's that? Amazing to consider that the Cup finalist team in 98-99 had as many points as this year's team if it wins this afternoon!
SwampD Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 It's not their starts that concern me. It's how they finish that sucks.
Stoner Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 It's not their starts that concern me. It's how they finish that sucks. How can that be? Ruff is such a great playoff coach!
Chief Enabler Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 2008-09: 89pts (10th) Last 10: 6-3-12007-08: 90pts (10th) Last 10: 6-3-1 2006-07: 113pts (1st) Last 10: 7-3-0 PTR This is my new favorite stat 1st, 10th, 10th I have to give credit where its due; Who said Drury & Briere wasnt a big deal?
calti Posted April 11, 2009 Report Posted April 11, 2009 This is my new favorite stat 1st, 10th, 10th I have to give credit where its due; Who said Drury & Briere wasnt a big deal? hehe.... They should both be in the 3rd yr of their 5 yr 25 mil contracts. Nice work MGMT.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.