Colin226

The Official "2012 Playoffs Excitement" Thread

1,220 posts in this topic

[quote

Maybe the series against the Penguins drained you emotionally?

"I wouldn't say so. It's just Pittsburgh plays and lets others play. And New Jersey plays but doesn't let others play."

U gotta like that.

Edited by ben00rs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ludicrous. The team with a better 2nd period shot index from sticks with white tape will win.

are you including blocked shots? I was thinking it will be the team that has the most tape-to-tape (color is immaterial here) passes while on a 5-on-3 advantage will take the game. Oh, and the team that misses the net with more shots will have a huge advantage.

Wow, New York, again, in a game 7. You would of thought they had already won this series, beaten the Devils, and were gearing up to take on the western winner by the way Ranger fans are talking. The last couple of days a lot of them have been talking like the Capitals were already beaten. Typical of Ranger fans.

Not this ranger fan. I am confident they will win, but certainly not looking past the caps. Not as if me looking past them will actually have any impact on the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want 4 ots minimum tonight + debilitating injuries for the victor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want 4 ots minimum tonight + debilitating injuries for the victor.

The game is tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want 4 ots minimum tonight + debilitating injuries for the victor.

Don't want anything career ending for anyone anyway (Avery is no longer on the team after all). However, it would be nice if Lunqvist tweeked something that slows him down a bit. If it's the Rangers, how he plays will be the deciding factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you including blocked shots? I was thinking it will be the team that has the most tape-to-tape (color is immaterial here) passes while on a 5-on-3 advantage will take the game. Oh, and the team that misses the net with more shots will have a huge advantage.

I know you think you're being 'funny' - as if this isn't Chinese Gibberish I haven't heard 30 times before - but who wins is on the scoreboard, and in one-game sample sizes, Fenwick and Corsi don't really matter. Maybe if the 45% shot hits and the Rangers lose, you'll have plenty of time during the long summer to read up on why they matter. If not, I suspect you'll have even more of a chance next year when the Rangers finish 4-10 in the Conference and people are wondering 'What happened to the Rangers?'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want 4 ots minimum tonight + debilitating injuries for the victor.

Game 7 is tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you think you're being 'funny' - as if this isn't Chinese Gibberish I haven't heard 30 times before - but who wins is on the scoreboard, and in one-game sample sizes, Fenwick and Corsi don't really matter. Maybe if the 45% shot hits and the Rangers lose, you'll have plenty of time during the long summer to read up on why they matter. If not, I suspect you'll have even more of a chance next year when the Rangers finish 4-10 in the Conference and people are wondering 'What happened to the Rangers?'

So, if the Rangers do not win the division next year, it will because of Fenwick and Corsi? Got it. If that happens, it will be just as much because the Rangers play in the best division in the league. I won't be surprised if the Flyers win the division next year or the Penguins or even the Devils. Although, I'd be shocked as all hell if the Isles win the division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you think you're being 'funny' - as if this isn't Chinese Gibberish I haven't heard 30 times before - but who wins is on the scoreboard, and in one-game sample sizes, Fenwick and Corsi don't really matter. Maybe if the 45% shot hits and the Rangers lose, you'll have plenty of time during the long summer to read up on why they matter. If not, I suspect you'll have even more of a chance next year when the Rangers finish 4-10 in the Conference and people are wondering 'What happened to the Rangers?'

You and your buddy Jason have written several times on here throughout the season how the Rangers will fall back to the middle of the pack because of their fenwick and corsi and fenwick tied numbers arent strong enough to maintain them being in first place. Well, they did fall back slightly, but never relinquished first. I remember one of you saying how they wont stay in first place because their defensemen shooting percentage was way too high to maintain and when then starts to come down, they will lose more and fall out of first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You and your buddy Jason have written several times on here throughout the season how the Rangers will fall back to the middle of the pack because of their fenwick and corsi and fenwick tied numbers arent strong enough to maintain them being in first place. Well, they did fall back slightly, but never relinquished first. I remember one of you saying how they wont stay in first place because their defensemen shooting percentage was way too high to maintain and when then starts to come down, they will lose more and fall out of first place.

I didn't realize that the Rangers had literally their best possession player stashed away in the minors.

http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2012/1/10/2691296/new-york-rangers-stats-new-york-rangers-blog

This is a good explanation for why the season turned out as it did. The team improved greatly on their first 20 games, Hagelin helped out a ton with that but the team as a whole also seemed to get better. And yes, Lundqvist's ridiculous season and the .636 winning percentage in one-goal games kept them on top. They're not the best team in the Conference, even still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize that the Rangers had literally their best possession player stashed away in the minors.

http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2012/1/10/2691296/new-york-rangers-stats-new-york-rangers-blog

This is a good explanation for why the season turned out as it did. The team improved greatly on their first 20 games, Hagelin helped out a ton with that but the team as a whole also seemed to get better. And yes, Lundqvist's ridiculous season and the .636 winning percentage in one-goal games kept them on top. They're not the best team in the Conference, even still.

In fairness, I do remember Tri saying that the Rangers being successful long-term based on what they were doing at the BEGINNING of the season was not sustainable, but did point out that the Rangers had improved on some of those first quarter-season issues. And of course, when your #1 goalie spends most of the season putting up a .940 save%, a lot of ills are going to be covered up. Lundqvist was absurdly good for most of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic isn't worth regurgitating time after time. Matteau clearly is ignorant on the topic and refuses to open his mind to the possibility of it being correct. Fenwick/CORSI certainly helped predict NJ and LA's rise in the playoffs and probably won me 200 dollars in a hockey pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a nugget for everyone:

Since the NHL playoffs went to 7 games in the first round in 1986, no team who has advanced to the Semis despite playing 14 games in the first two rounds of the playoffs has won the next round. They're 0-8 with a combined record of 12-32 in the next round.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a nugget for everyone:

Since the NHL playoffs went to 7 games in the first round in 1986, no team who has advanced to the Semis despite playing 14 games in the first two rounds of the playoffs has won the next round. They're 0-8 with a combined record of 11-32 in the next round.

Burn out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a nugget for everyone:

Since the NHL playoffs went to 7 games in the first round in 1986, no team who has advanced to the Semis despite playing 14 games in the first two rounds of the playoffs has won the next round. They're 0-8 with a combined record of 11-32 in the next round.

Wow. Gotta say, I'm loving this stat right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burn out?

Dunno - I want to take a closer look at it. I saw plenty of teams that had played 13 games and advanced, so I'd be curious. Could be luck + burnout + 14 games means you probably aren't that hot a team to begin with. Still, 12-32 is pretty damn bad.

(Whoops, it's 12-32)

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a nugget for everyone:

Since the NHL playoffs went to 7 games in the first round in 1986, no team who has advanced to the Semis despite playing 14 games in the first two rounds of the playoffs has won the next round. They're 0-8 with a combined record of 11-32 in the next round.

Now this a stat everyone can get behind (except Matteau)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least two of them won both Game 7's on the road ('03 Wild and '09 Canes) like the Caps are trying to do and got wiped out in a third-round sweep.

I honestly don't remember another team that won two straight seven-game series to start the playoffs besides the Leafs in '02 I think.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least two of them won both Game 7's on the road ('03 Wild and '09 Canes) like the Caps are trying to do and got wiped out in a third-round sweep.

I honestly don't remember another team that won two straight seven-game series to start the playoffs besides the Leafs in '02 I think.

Like I said, there are 8 of them, and you are correct about the 2002 Maple Leafs:

2010 Canadiens

2009 Hurricanes (yuck)

2003 Wild

2002 Maple Leafs

2002 Avalanche

1994 Maple Leafs

1993 Maple Leafs

1990 Blackhawks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for teams playing 13 games in the first 2 rounds, there are 16 of these teams since the playoffs expanded to 7 game first rounds, 2 of them ended up winning the Cup (2009 Penguins, 1992 Penguins). They went 6-10 in their next round, 41-46 overall. Twice, two sets of 13 game teams met in the Conference Finals (2011 Sharks-Canucks, 2001 Devils-Penguins).

Just interesting things to look at, I doubt it's predictive at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for teams playing 13 games in the first 2 rounds, there are 16 of these teams since the playoffs expanded to 7 game first rounds, 2 of them ended up winning the Cup (2009 Penguins, 1992 Penguins). They went 6-10 in their next round, 41-46 overall. Twice, two sets of 13 game teams met in the Conference Finals (2011 Sharks-Canucks, 2001 Devils-Penguins).

Just interesting things to look at, I doubt it's predictive at all.

How many of those games went to OT would be interesting to look at as well. Rangers have been involved in four OT playoff games, including one that went to 3 OT. And the Caps have now gone to SIX OT playoff games, one of which went to 2 OT, and another that went to 3 OT. And at the rate they're going, yet another OT game in Game 7 wouldn't come as any great shock.

In the topsy-turvy world that is the NHL playoffs, I wouldn't dare say the Devils are locks to get to the SC Finals, but no matter what team they face, both the Caps and the Rangers have played A LOT of hockey in these playoffs so far...either one could simply run out of gas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold the phone bro, there's no doubt the Rangers are going to win tomorrow! Check it out: Rangers 4-0 at home all-time in Game 7s; Ruslan Fedotenko 5-0 all-time in Game 7s. Brad Richards and Marian Gaborik, each 3-0 in Game 7s. John Tortorella 3-1 in Game 7s.

Poor Washington doesn't stand a chance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now