Around the NHL - 2013-2014

[JJFIVEOH]

Oh no you di'int! :clapping:

[Andrew Amerk]

 

Shocking! 75% of the teams in the conference championships have won SC's in the past. :o

 

You do realize that 19 (of 30) teams have previously won (or at least been awarded) Stanley Cups, right? If we discount the past 4 expansion teams, that's 19 of 26. Which, is 73%. So, a completely random sample of teams other than those from the latest round of expansion would result in 73% of the competitors having won a SC in the past. 75% is as close to 73% as we can get choosing 8 teams. That is what statistically is expected.

 

Clearly, that 6 out of 8 is PROOF that parity doesn't exist. <_<

 

And, 24 of 30 (80% of all) teams have previously been in the SCF's. If we throw out the most recent version of expansion teams again, EVERYBODY but Phoenix Arizona and San Jose have been in the finals before. AKA, 92% of all teams not counting the most recent expansion. We had 7 out of 8 teams (88%) in the CF's that had been to a SC before. Again, it is what would statistically be expected.

 

And, along those previous lines, clearly, that 7 out of 8 is PROOF that parity doesn't exist. <_<

 

:P

 

Whoa! Shut it down

[deluca67]

Shocking! 75% of the teams in the conference championships have won SC's in the past. :o

 

You do realize that 19 (of 30) teams have previously won (or at least been awarded) Stanley Cups, right? If we discount the past 4 expansion teams, that's 19 of 26. Which, is 73%. So, a completely random sample of teams other than those from the latest round of expansion would result in 73% of the competitors having won a SC in the past. 75% is as close to 73% as we can get choosing 8 teams. That is what statistically is expected.

 

Clearly, that 6 out of 8 is PROOF that parity doesn't exist. <_<

 

And, 24 of 30 (80% of all) teams have previously been in the SCF's. If we throw out the most recent version of expansion teams again, EVERYBODY but Phoenix Arizona and San Jose have been in the finals before. AKA, 92% of all teams not counting the most recent expansion. We had 7 out of 8 teams (88%) in the CF's that had been to a SC before. Again, it is what would statistically be expected.

 

And, along those previous lines, clearly, that 7 out of 8 is PROOF that parity doesn't exist. <_<

 

:P

Of the 6 teams that have made the conference finals, 5 have won Cup Championships within the last 9 seasons. Including the last four straight Cup Champions. You're trying to argue parity in the game today by using all-time percentages. That logic fails you since it has no relevance to state of the league today. The Stars winning the Cup in 1999 and the five total Cups that Edmonton won mean nothing to this conversation. I will assume you understand the concept of parity. The NHL is not in a state of parity. You look at recent Cup winners, look at the conference finalists in recent years and you will see the same teams to be favored to playing for the Cup this year even with the re-alignment. Teams like Boston, Pittsburgh and Chicago are built for long term success. These teams will be, along with the Kings and Detroit the same teams we'll see come May/June in 2014 and going forward. Occasionally a lessor team will get hot at the right time or a team will come out of nowhere, that's not parity.

 

Seriously, how many teams have a legitimate chance at a Cup in 2014? 5? 10? Is that parity?

[qwksndmonster]

That's the argument back at Taro's breakdown? The teams that are good are good? Wowza. Talk about grade school tee ball vs. the New York Yankees.

[deluca67]

That's the argument back at Taro's breakdown? The teams that are good are good? Wowza. Talk about grade school tee ball vs. the New York Yankees.

So, the point of your post is to show you're not understanding the conversation? That's kind of odd.

[sicknfla]

 

How close is the parity in this league when the final four teams this season just happened to be he last four Cup Champions.

 

The Sabres are in as bad a position as any team in the NHL. They are prospect heavy with not much on the actual NHL roster. Reasonable expectations are that the influx of youth won't yield results for at 2-3 years down the road. Your looking at another couple of seasons for that youth to mature.

 

What scares me more than anything is we are already being asked to"suffer" for a few years. What if these guys don't pan out? What if they mature into an average team? Just because you decide to rebuild and develop prospects does not guarantee nothing. All I know is I would much rather start a season with a chance to compete. Come January we will all be begging just to have a team to make the playoffs. This is not going to be fun. It is downright embarrassing that we are being told to expect to "suffer". In today's sports world that is unacceptable. I hope the ###### that run this team get what they deserve and that is about 7k per night in the arena.

 

Living in Tampa I see a team that finishes 3rd from last have a fanbase that believes they are a few players from competing for the cup. They have hope and excitement. Yet as a die hard Sabres fan we have prospects. #@+# me!!!!

[JJFIVEOH]

What scares me more than anything is we are already being asked to"suffer" for a few years. What if these guys don't pan out? What if they mature into an average team? Just because you decide to rebuild and develop prospects does not guarantee nothing. All I know is I would much rather start a season with a chance to compete. Come January we will all be begging just to have a team to make the playoffs. This is not going to be fun. It is downright embarrassing that we are being told to expect to "suffer". In today's sports world that is unacceptable. I hope the ###### that run this team get what they deserve and that is about 7k per night in the arena.

 

Living in Tampa I see a team that finishes 3rd from last have a fanbase that believes they are a few players from competing for the cup. They have hope and excitement. Yet as a die hard Sabres fan we have prospects. #@+# me!!!!

 

Odd that you paint a picture of optimism and hope and compare them to the Sabres............ yet they've gone to the playoffs less times since the lockout? Yet you blame the pessimism in BFLO on the team. On one hand we have a more successful team in recent years with a restless fan base, on the other hand we have a less successful team in recent years with bonafide superstars and the fan base is excited. I recognize the common denominator, not sure you do.

 

In one post you managed to cover immediate success, competitive enough to make the playoffs, suffering, being terrible for a few years, happy, sad, pessimism, optimism............. man you're all over the map. At least when Deluca manages to have all basis covered so that he can contradict everybody, he does it singularly. :angel:

[Taro T]

Of the 6 teams that have made the conference finals, 5 have won Cup Championships within the last 9 seasons. Including the last four straight Cup Champions. You're trying to argue parity in the game today by using all-time percentages. That logic fails you since it has no relevance to state of the league today. The Stars winning the Cup in 1999 and the five total Cups that Edmonton won mean nothing to this conversation. I will assume you understand the concept of parity. The NHL is not in a state of parity. You look at recent Cup winners, look at the conference finalists in recent years and you will see the same teams to be favored to playing for the Cup this year even with the re-alignment. Teams like Boston, Pittsburgh and Chicago are built for long term success. These teams will be, along with the Kings and Detroit the same teams we'll see come May/June in 2014 and going forward. Occasionally a lessor team will get hot at the right time or a team will come out of nowhere, that's not parity.

 

Seriously, how many teams have a legitimate chance at a Cup in 2014? 5? 10? Is that parity?

So, now only 6 teams made the Conference Finals? :huh:

 

You had a fluke occurence, the past 4 SC winners all making the CF's, this past season. Your argument against parity was stronger when you were only arguing a single data point.

 

This past season, the 4 teams in the final 4 were Chicago, LA, Baaah-ston, and Pittsburgh. Year before that, it was LA, Phoenix, Joisey, and NYR. The season before that it was Vancouver, SJ, Baaaah-ston, and TB. The year before that it was Chicago, SJ, Filthy, and Moe-ray-all. The year before that, you had Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and the Canes. Even with this past year's fluke, in only 5 years, you had 14 different teams making the Conference Finals - out of 20 slots.

 

The year the Kings won, they didn't slump and barely make the playoffs, they had to go on a tear to just make them, and they made them by the skin of their teeth. The Phlyers only made the playoffs on the last day of the season via a tiebreaker the year they lost to Chicago. Chicago went to Game 7 in the 2nd round, and the B's don't even get past the 1st round (against a team that hadn't won a playoff series, much less been in the playoffs in forever) without a couple of convenient non-calls in game 7.

 

And again, if it's so easy to pick the team that's going to be there in the show when all is said and done, why did Iginla tell the B's to suck rocks?

 

(Fun discussion. Not sure that I'll be able to respond again for a couple of days as I have some major deadlines that must get met. So I guess you'll get the last word (at least for now).)

[sicknfla]

 

 

Odd that you paint a picture of optimism and hope and compare them to the Sabres............ yet they've gone to the playoffs less times since the olockout? Yet you blame the pessimism in BFLO on the team. On one hand we have a more successful team in recent years with a restless fan base, on the other hand we have a less successful team in recent years with bonafide superstars and the fan base is excited. I recognize the common denominator, not sure you do.

 

In one post you managed to cover immediate success, competitive enough to make the playoffs, suffering, being terrible for a few years, happy, sad, pessimism, optimism............. man you're all over the map. At least when Deluca manages to have all basis covered so that he can contradict everybody, he does it singularly. :angel:

 

The only picture I painted is one of disgust. Again, I am a die hard Sabres fan, however, my greatest thrill in sports has come in attending game 7 of the finals in my hometown. Unfortunately,that is tampa. You can take all your post lockout success and ram it. What success?? You call a couple trips to the playoffs success?

 

So let me ask you, as a fan, would you rather have Tampas results the last 10 years or ours. How excited would you be if all of a sudden Stamkos, St.Louis, Druin, etc were suddenly a Sabre. No I wouldn't want that. We have grigs, girgs, risto, and these other guys you want to slap with a nickname and Stanley cup expectations. Keep on dreaming buddy and keep drinking the Kool-aid. Ownership is counting on fools like you to keep the seats warm.

 

So I don't know what map you think I am all over. I have never once expressed anything but disgust for this joke of a team that unfortunately is in my DNA to root for. You, me, and everyone else deserves better. Let me throw in some optimism- there's always next year. Oh ######, I forgot I was already told by my GM and owner next year is going to suck. Oh well that's ok there's always the year after next.....and next.....and next.

 

Any fan that accepts this must be a moron. Are you a moron??

Edited July 30, 2013 by sicknfla

[spndnchz]

Tim Brent, UFA with Carolina, is headed to the KHL.

[TrueBlueGED]

Tim Brent, UFA with Carolina, is headed to the KHL.

 

Time to purge the roster of Canadians. Too much KHL risk.

[LTS]

The only picture I painted is one of disgust. Again, I am a die hard Sabres fan, however, my greatest thrill in sports has come in attending game 7 of the finals in my hometown. Unfortunately,that is tampa. You can take all your post lockout success and ram it. What success?? You call a couple trips to the playoffs success?

 

So let me ask you, as a fan, would you rather have Tampas results the last 10 years or ours. How excited would you be if all of a sudden Stamkos, St.Louis, Druin, etc were suddenly a Sabre. No I wouldn't want that. We have grigs, girgs, risto, and these other guys you want to slap with a nickname and Stanley cup expectations. Keep on dreaming buddy and keep drinking the Kool-aid. Ownership is counting on fools like you to keep the seats warm.

 

So I don't know what map you think I am all over. I have never once expressed anything but disgust for this joke of a team that unfortunately is in my DNA to root for. You, me, and everyone else deserves better. Let me throw in some optimism- there's always next year. Oh ######, I forgot I was already told by my GM and owner next year is going to suck. Oh well that's ok there's always the year after next.....and next.....and next.

 

Any fan that accepts this must be a moron. Are you a moron??

 

This just in science declares that team fandom is a predetermined DNA trait. Oh wait.. that will never happen. So, since you will still be rooting for that team that will suck year after year after year it seems you have just self-selected into the question you asked. Pot, kettle.. what? I'm pretty sure ownership is counting on fools like you to blame their DNA for HAVING to ROOT for the team.

 

As a fan I am happy to have a hockey team... as a person I can choose to pay attention to that team or not.

 

You know what I am worrying about today? The fact that a good acquaintance of mine was run over and killed Sunday night and that my dog, who is 15, keeps throwing up and won't eat.

[LGR4GM]

Pavelski signing a 5yr extension with the Sharks... still wondering whats up with Hodgson.

[JJFIVEOH]

The only picture I painted is one of disgust. Again, I am a die hard Sabres fan, however, my greatest thrill in sports has come in attending game 7 of the finals in my hometown. Unfortunately,that is tampa. You can take all your post lockout success and ram it. What success?? You call a couple trips to the playoffs success?

 

So let me ask you, as a fan, would you rather have Tampas results the last 10 years or ours. How excited would you be if all of a sudden Stamkos, St.Louis, Druin, etc were suddenly a Sabre. No I wouldn't want that. We have grigs, girgs, risto, and these other guys you want to slap with a nickname and Stanley cup expectations. Keep on dreaming buddy and keep drinking the Kool-aid. Ownership is counting on fools like you to keep the seats warm.

 

So I don't know what map you think I am all over. I have never once expressed anything but disgust for this joke of a team that unfortunately is in my DNA to root for. You, me, and everyone else deserves better. Let me throw in some optimism- there's always next year. Oh ######, I forgot I was already told by my GM and owner next year is going to suck. Oh well that's ok there's always the year after next.....and next.....and next.

 

Any fan that accepts this must be a moron. Are you a moron??

 

I would be a moron if I continued to waste any more time on your posts. Perhaps you need to go join the Tampa board and have lunch with Deluca. Like LGR says, there's more important things in life than regurgitating the same hatred post after post.

Edited July 30, 2013 by JJFIVEOH

[sicknfla]

 

 

This just in science declares that team fandom is a predetermined DNA trait. Oh wait.. that will never happen. So, since you will still be rooting fIor that team that will suck year after year after year it seems you have just self-selected into the question you asked. Pot, kettle.. what? I'm pretty sure ownership is counting on fools like you to blame their DNA for HAVING to ROOT for the team.

 

As a fan I am happy to have a hockey team... as a person I can choose to pay attention to that team or not.

 

You know what I am worrying about today? The fact that a good acquaintance of mine was run over and killed Sunday night and that my dog, who is 15, keeps throwing up and won't eat.

 

I won't be the one sitting in the seats spending my hard earned money to support an inferior product. I won't be the guy wearing a new Armia jersey. So no, its not the pot calling...... However, I am the guy who used to lay in bed and listen to the games on the radio as a kid. That may not be DNA but it is part of what makes you a FAN. Part of what makes you move to Florida 17 years ago but yet still be on a Sabres forum.

 

As for your friend and dog. Sorry about that. Everyone on here has bigger problems and concerns than the status of the Sabres. However, for many, sports and rooting for your team is a temporary escape from all that other stuff. That is why I continue to say that the fans deserve better. We have given this team everything we have. We buy the tickets, merchandise, etc. When I leave work and head to a game I want to know I am going to watch a respectable product. Many of you work all day and make less money than what you spend during the 3 hours or so you devote to the game. No thanks. Not me. I will make better use of my money.

 

Back to work for me. Real life is waiting.

Edited July 30, 2013 by sicknfla

[LGR4GM]

Okay easy boys.

1) There is nothing wrong with buying merch and going to games if it makes you happy regardless of the on ice product than awesome

2) If not supporting the team financially when they suck is how you show your disapproval than okay awesome.

 

The point is that neither of these approaches are wrong. I enjoy going to games periodically (when I lived in Buffalo) regardless of how well the team was doing. It was fun to go. However during the lockout and until the last couple weeks of the season I boycotted buying anything Hockey or Sabres related because I thought they deserved that. People can be different but I completely understand the emotional investment in the Sabres and the full force of being consistently disappointed.

[LGR4GM]

Pavelski details...

 

Joe Pavelski's new five-year deal is worth $30 million, per @CraigCustance. That carries a $6 million cap hit, up from his prior $4 million.

[sicknfla]

 

 

I would be a moron if I continued to waste any more time on your posts. Perhaps you need to go o join the Tampa board and have lunch with Deluca. Like LGR says, there's more important things in life than regurgitating the same hatred post after post.

 

Ok I will check back in around December. By then we can start the who do we pick number 1 threads.

[TrueBlueGED]

Pavelski details...

 

Joe Pavelski's new five-year deal is worth $30 million, per @CraigCustance. That carries a $6 million cap hit, up from his prior $4 million.

 

Especially when you consider some of the deals handed out this summer, that's really a great value for Pavelski.

[darksabre]

 

 

Ok I will check back in around December. By then we can start the who do we pick number 1 threads.

 

You're not a Sabres fan are you?

[LGR4GM]

HEY LOOK!!!! We are going to be one of the worst teams but not necessarily they worst!!! Woot Woot!

David Staples ‏@dstaples

#Flames, #Sabres, #Leafs and #Oilers will be worst teams in NHL this season, analytics expert @robvollmanNHL predicts http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2013/07/29/the-edmonton-oilers-were-the-worst-team-in-the-nhl-last-season-hockey-analytics-expert-concludes/ …

[JJFIVEOH]

HEY LOOK!!!! We are going to be one of the worst teams but not necessarily they worst!!! Woot Woot!

David Staples ‏@dstaples

#Flames, #Sabres, #Leafs and #Oilers will be worst teams in NHL this season, analytics expert @robvollmanNHL predicts http://blogs.edmonto...rt-concludes/ …

 

Yet the Leafs and Oilers were in the top half of Cup odds. Hmmmmm........

[qwksndmonster]

I don't understand the Leafs being named in the same breath as the Sabres right now. And the Oilers have to turn it around sometime, right?

[Trettioåtta]

I think this next season will have a lot of 'surprises'. I think the shortened season gave a really false impression of both teams and individual players. Even little things like a fraction of players coming in out of condition etc. will have had big effects

[spndnchz]

This just in science declares that team fandom is a predetermined DNA trait. Oh wait.. that will never happen. So, since you will still be rooting for that team that will suck year after year after year it seems you have just self-selected into the question you asked. Pot, kettle.. what? I'm pretty sure ownership is counting on fools like you to blame their DNA for HAVING to ROOT for the team.

 

As a fan I am happy to have a hockey team... as a person I can choose to pay attention to that team or not.

 

You know what I am worrying about today? The fact that a good acquaintance of mine was run over and killed Sunday night and that my dog, who is 15, keeps throwing up and won't eat.

 

Sorry dude. That sucks.