Jump to content
LittleBallofHate

2018 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread

Recommended Posts

I am mixed about Vegas in the finals.  I mean good for them to start off on probably the best foot you can ask for.  However, in a league that is already seen by many outsiders as a sort of hokey league this just is flat out embarrassing.

Yeah the Knights were shrewd with their picks and deals, but if they had the exact same expansion rules that say Columbus, Wild, Senators, Sharks, Thrashers, etc had then they wouldn't have even sniffed the playoffs.  Anyone who thinks otherwise are only kidding themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

I am mixed about Vegas in the finals.  I mean good for them to start off on probably the best foot you can ask for.  However, in a league that is already seen by many outsiders as a sort of hokey league this just is flat out embarrassing.

Yeah the Knights were shrewd with their picks and deals, but if they had the exact same expansion rules that say Columbus, Wild, Senators, Sharks, Thrashers, etc had then they wouldn't have even sniffed the playoffs.  Anyone who thinks otherwise are only kidding themselves.

So, forgive me if I’m misreading, we’re actually upset the league made it easier so a team was more competitive? I sh!t on the NHL about a lot of things, but I think they finally got something right here.

it also gave all of the GMs a chance to get rid of a contract mistake without it being a buyout, only catch was you had to make it worth it for an experienced GM.

Yes the Vegas talent pool was significantly better than the aforementioned teams’, however, let’s also stop pretending that the group they put together was a lock for the playoffs, let alone dominate some of the best teams while getting there. A top line of Marchessault, Smith and Karlsson in the preseason was on paper a glorified third line. David Perron did Perron things, had a great season, now is pretty invisible. Flower also had his run in with the injury, then had a shaky few games in the playoffs, only there wasn’t Matt Murray waiting in the wings, he persevered.

Not saying you, DM, but I think a lot of people are masking personal jealousy under the guise of “oh it’s bad for the league and making mockery of it.”

Me personally, I’d rather have this kind of parity in the league where a good GM and a good coach can build a competitive lineup, instead of that other league where teams can’t win so players go and make super teams. To me, THAT is a mockery of the sport and embarrassing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jagknife said:

So, forgive me if I’m misreading, we’re actually upset the league made it easier so a team was more competitive? I sh!t on the NHL about a lot of things, but I think they finally got something right here.

it also gave all of the GMs a chance to get rid of a contract mistake without it being a buyout, only catch was you had to make it worth it for an experienced GM.

Yes the Vegas talent pool was significantly better than the aforementioned teams’, however, let’s also stop pretending that the group they put together was a lock for the playoffs, let alone dominate some of the best teams while getting there. A top line of Marchessault, Smith and Karlsson in the preseason was on paper a glorified third line. David Perron did Perron things, had a great season, now is pretty invisible. Flower also had his run in with the injury, then had a shaky few games in the playoffs, only there wasn’t Matt Murray waiting in the wings, he persevered.

Not saying you, DM, but I think a lot of people are masking personal jealousy under the guise of “oh it’s bad for the league and making mockery of it.”

Me personally, I’d rather have this kind of parity in the league where a good GM and a good coach can build a competitive lineup, instead of that other league where teams can’t win so players go and make super teams. To me, THAT is a mockery of the sport and embarrassing.

It's not jealousy for Christ sake.  If they win the cup I won't be moping around for days and acting like the sky is falling.  Plus I have seen the Devils win the cup 3 times in my lifetime, so until they win 3 cups I would hardly call my feelings jealousy.

Put yourself into the shoes of the expansion teams from the 90's and early 2000's.  Outside of Anaheim and Nashville, don't you think that maybe some of their fans think their team's trajectory might have been significantly different if their teams were able to draft 3rd liners in the expansion draft instead of players who were marginal 4th liners?  I think calling a lot of players in the 92-93 Senators marginal 4th liners is being generous at that.

Also, Marchessault was a 30-goal scorer.  Top scorers on those expansion teams in those first years were the likes of Terry Yake (Anaheim), Norm Maciver (Ott), and the like while they had to work with goalies like Sidorkiewicz (Ott), Jablonski (Tampa), Tugnutt (Columbus), Rhodes (Atlanta), Hackett (SJ), etc.  Any one of those teams would have killed to have someone like MAF on their roster.

Again credit goes to McPhee for putting together a team that was competitive, but they had a lot more help than what other expansion teams have had in the last 30 years.  Teams like Nashville, Ottawa and SJ had to pay their dues for years.  I would be livid if I was a fan of any of those teams.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

It's not jealousy for Christ sake.  If they win the cup I won't be moping around for days and acting like the sky is falling.  Plus I have seen the Devils win the cup 3 times in my lifetime, so until they win 3 cups I would hardly call my feelings jealousy.

Put yourself into the shoes of the expansion teams from the 90's and early 2000's.  Outside of Anaheim and Nashville, don't you think that maybe some of their fans think their team's trajectory might have been significantly different if their teams were able to draft 3rd liners in the expansion draft instead of players who were marginal 4th liners?  I think calling a lot of players in the 92-93 Senators marginal 4th liners is being generous at that.

Also, Marchessault was a 30-goal scorer.  Top scorers on those expansion teams in those first years were the likes of Terry Yake (Anaheim), Norm Maciver (Ott), and the like while they had to work with goalies like Sidorkiewicz (Ott), Jablonski (Tampa), Tugnutt (Columbus), Rhodes (Atlanta), Hackett (SJ), etc.  Any one of those teams would have killed to have someone like MAF on their roster.

Again credit goes to McPhee for putting together a team that was competitive, but they had a lot more help than what other expansion teams have had in the last 30 years.  Teams like Nashville, Ottawa and SJ had to pay their dues for years.  I would be livid if I was a fan of any of those teams.

 

23 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Also take a look at the picks from the 1992 expansion for Ottawa and Anaheim.  Compare that to the selections Vegas was able to make.  To say they are even close in quality in relative to the year is a complete bold-face lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_NHL_Expansion_Draft

I wasn't calling you jealous, sorry if it came off that way, but there are DEFINITELY people pulling that card under the "bad for the league" one.

To the point of the other expansion teams, I don't think the talent was in the league then, also, the deck was stacked against. But I do think the combination of better talent and the league giving them a better chance was the right call for the betterment of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

It's not jealousy for Christ sake.  If they win the cup I won't be moping around for days and acting like the sky is falling.  Plus I have seen the Devils win the cup 3 times in my lifetime, so until they win 3 cups I would hardly call my feelings jealousy.

Put yourself into the shoes of the expansion teams from the 90's and early 2000's.  Outside of Anaheim and Nashville, don't you think that maybe some of their fans think their team's trajectory might have been significantly different if their teams were able to draft 3rd liners in the expansion draft instead of players who were marginal 4th liners?  I think calling a lot of players in the 92-93 Senators marginal 4th liners is being generous at that.

Also, Marchessault was a 30-goal scorer.  Top scorers on those expansion teams in those first years were the likes of Terry Yake (Anaheim), Norm Maciver (Ott), and the like while they had to work with goalies like Sidorkiewicz (Ott), Jablonski (Tampa), Tugnutt (Columbus), Rhodes (Atlanta), Hackett (SJ), etc.  Any one of those teams would have killed to have someone like MAF on their roster.

Again credit goes to McPhee for putting together a team that was competitive, but they had a lot more help than what other expansion teams have had in the last 30 years.  Teams like Nashville, Ottawa and SJ had to pay their dues for years.  I would be livid if I was a fan of any of those teams.

They had more help than expansion teams in the past, there's no doubt about that and that's how the expansion draft was designed this time around. However, in theory, it should have been a team full of 3rd liners – which is to say they should have had a fairly competitive team without the high end talent. Two things happened: other teams royally fvcked up with their pre-draft protection trades and some players produced at a level we didn't think was possible (see William Karlsson spiking from 6 goals in 2017 to 43 goals in 2018). 5 of Vegas' top 6 forwards were players they got as a result of protection deals, if the other 30 GM's in the NHL just laid their cards on the table and let Vegas pick whomever they wanted, Vegas probably would have been about as bad as expected, instead they got gift wrapped some real quality players by a few incompetent GM's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jagknife said:

 

I wasn't calling you jealous, sorry if it came off that way, but there are DEFINITELY people pulling that card under the "bad for the league" one.

To the point of the other expansion teams, I don't think the talent was in the league then, also, the deck was stacked against. But I do think the combination of better talent and the league giving them a better chance was the right call for the betterment of the game.

That's a very interesting take.  The reason I say that is because every time there is talk of expansion (like there was in Vegas) the naysayers always cried that talent level in the league is already diluted because of the sheer numbers of teams and that adding teams would dilute the league further.

Now you are saying the exact opposite of what many have been saying about the talent level of the league.  So which is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CommonDreads said:

They had more help than expansion teams in the past, there's no doubt about that and that's how the expansion draft was designed this time around. However, in theory, it should have been a team full of 3rd liners – which is to say they should have had a fairly competitive team without the high end talent. Two things happened: other teams royally fvcked up with their pre-draft protection trades and some players produced at a level we didn't think was possible (see William Karlsson spiking from 6 goals in 2017 to 43 goals in 2018). 5 of Vegas' top 6 forwards were players they got as a result of protection deals, if the other 30 GM's in the NHL just laid their cards on the table and let Vegas pick whomever they wanted, Vegas probably would have been about as bad as expected, instead they got gift wrapped some real quality players by a few incompetent GM's.

Team full of 3rd liners will always > team with 4th liners and marginal NHL players.

Also your post is somewhat contradictory.  If the other GM's were allowed to protect more players, then yeah they wouldn't have had to part with many of them.  I doubt guys like March and Karlsson would be in Vegas if you had 90's expansion draft rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

That's a very interesting take.  The reason I say that is because every time there is talk of expansion (like there was in Vegas) the naysayers always cried that talent level in the league is already diluted because of the sheer numbers of teams and that adding teams would dilute the league further.

Now you are saying the exact opposite of what many have been saying about the talent level of the league.  So which is it?

I don't think the talent level of the league is diluted at all, even when people were freaking out about it, I didn't think it was going to be a factor...

EDIT: Talent level now compared to then.

Edited by jagknife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said:

Team full of 3rd liners will always > team with 4th liners and marginal NHL players.

Also your post is somewhat contradictory.  If the other GM's were allowed to protect more players, then yeah they wouldn't have had to part with many of them.  I doubt guys like March and Karlsson would be in Vegas if you had 90's expansion draft rules.

Karlsson may have been though, cause he was part of the package to get Vegas to take Clarkson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DevsMan84 said:

Team full of 3rd liners will always > team with 4th liners and marginal NHL players.

Also your post is somewhat contradictory.  If the other GM's were allowed to protect more players, then yeah they wouldn't have had to part with many of them.  I doubt guys like March and Karlsson would be in Vegas if you had 90's expansion draft rules.

Well yeah, I never refuted that, the first line in my post said that these expansion rules were more generous to Vegas than previous expansion teams. But, they weren't stacked in a way that should have made Vegas a contender, you can thank Florida, Minnesota, and Columbus for an equal part in building this Frankenstein monster.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CommonDreads said:

Well yeah, I never refuted that, the first line in my post said that these expansion rules were more generous to Vegas than previous expansion teams. But, they weren't stacked in a way that should have made Vegas a contender, you can thank Florida, Minnesota, and Columbus for an equal part in building this Frankenstein monster.

Either way they would have ended up in a lot better shape than a lot of 90's expansion teams were in their first years.

I am not discounting their selections, coaching or how their players played.  Yes they played above expectations.  However let's not pretend that people who are slightly annoyed or even embarrassed about their success is due to some sort of jealousy.  If anyone is to be jealous, it's the fans of those 90's era expansion teams who had to grind and claw their way for years to even get to the playoffs.

5 minutes ago, jagknife said:

I don't think the talent level of the league is diluted at all, even when people were freaking out about it, I didn't think it was going to be a factor...

Didn't mean you in particular, but that is the card that is almost always drawn by those who are always railing against expansion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Either way they would have ended up in a lot better shape than a lot of 90's expansion teams were in their first years.

I am not discounting their selections, coaching or how their players played.  Yes they played above expectations.  However let's not pretend that people who are slightly annoyed or even embarrassed about their success is due to some sort of jealousy.  If anyone is to be jealous, it's the fans of those 90's era expansion teams who had to grind and claw their way for years to even get to the playoffs.

Didn't mean you in particular, but that is the card that is almost always drawn by those who are always railing against expansion.

Yeah, we've both done the "must be me" to one another already... next time I'm out at a game we should cheers over a beer.

 

To your quote to CD: Why can't it be both?

I think this is our principle friction point. You are understandably identifying the disparity between the two eras of expansion and how those fans can be justifiably not happy with how Vegas was treated. I'm looking at the considerable number of people who are barely veiling their emotions, which is blatant jealousy, under the idea of "its bad for the league."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said:

Either way they would have ended up in a lot better shape than a lot of 90's expansion teams were in their first years.

I am not discounting their selections, coaching or how their players played.  Yes they played above expectations.  However let's not pretend that people who are slightly annoyed or even embarrassed about their success is due to some sort of jealousy.  If anyone is to be jealous, it's the fans of those 90's era expansion teams who had to grind and claw their way for years to even get to the playoffs.

Didn't mean you in particular, but that is the card that is almost always drawn by those who are always railing against expansion.

Oh yeah I agree, those 90's expansion teams had it way harder and those fans have some ground to be jealous/upset about. My post was more so directed at people that are angry at the NHL for what's happening (which isn't necessarily you, I've just seen it around and heard it on podcasts), the NHL gave Vegas more stable ground than other expansion franchises with these rules but it rests squarely on some truly incompetent management for Vegas' rise to a true cup contender.

Again, not even necessarily directed at you, just feel it's worth pointing out :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also just saw this and found it interesting as well, not even stats I was aware of:

Quote

“Vegas’ 18 man lineup combined had 291 points last season. The year before the Preds’ inaugural season, they had 458. CBJ 456. ATL 397. MIN 385.”
And 
“The Vegas Golden Knights lineup tonight had a combined 291 points in the 2016/17 season. The lowest scoring team were the Avalanche, and their top 18 players totaled 402 points. 111 point difference. But yeah, they were just handed an all star team by the NHL.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, CommonDreads said:

Also just saw this and found it interesting as well, not even stats I was aware of:

 

That's a terrible comparison.  All teams in the NHL back even in the dead puck era were scoring more than the average team today.  Vegas scored 272 goals this season.  That puts them in the top 5 or 6.  Ottawa in their expansion year scored 202 goals, which was dead last in the league.  Atlanta scored 177 goals in 99-00 season, also dead last.  By comparison, the 92-93 highest scoring team had 369 goals and in 99-2000 was 278.  In 17-18 it was 296.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

That's a terrible comparison.  All teams in the NHL back even in the dead puck era were scoring more than the average team today.  Vegas scored 272 goals this season.  That puts them in the top 5 or 6.  Ottawa in their expansion year scored 202 goals, which was dead last in the league.  Atlanta scored 177 goals in 99-00 season, also dead last.  By comparison, the 92-93 highest scoring team had 369 goals and in 99-2000 was 278.  In 17-18 it was 296.

While I agree that the comparisons with the old era can be a tad skewed, the comparison with the 2017 Avalanche is more interesting to me. That's a direct 1-to-1 comparison, same era, it just puts into perspective what was expected of this team versus what's taken place. Just truly crazy.

Edited by CommonDreads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jagknife said:

Yeah, we've both done the "must be me" to one another already... next time I'm out at a game we should cheers over a beer.

 

To your quote to CD: Why can't it be both?

I think this is our principle friction point. You are understandably identifying the disparity between the two eras of expansion and how those fans can be justifiably not happy with how Vegas was treated. I'm looking at the considerable number of people who are barely veiling their emotions, which is blatant jealousy, under the idea of "its bad for the league."

Lol name another first year expansion team in a 30+ team league at the highest level that gets to the finals in their expansion year?

That whole line of the "Stanley Cup is the hardest trophy to win in all of sports" can now be put to rest forever if the Knights win the cup.  Already I am seeing outsiders who don't really care much about the NHL looking at the league and thinking it's an even bigger joke than it was before.  Just because a few of those hockey experts like Puck Daddy are saying that anyone who hates it must be jealous doesn't make it so.  These guys who all predicted the Knights to be dead last in their conference (along with the Devils) are suddenly the moral authority on how we must feel?  C'mon now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CommonDreads said:

While I agree that the comparisons with the old era can be a tad skewed, the comparison with the 2017 Avalanche is more interesting to me. That's a direct 1-to-1 comparison, same era, it just puts into perspective what was expected of this team versus what's taken place. Just truly crazy.

Outside of March and MAF, how many of them were playing the minutes that they were previously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DevsMan84 said:

Outside of March and MAF, how many of them were playing the minutes that they were previously?

I mean that's the point, no one thought you could make a group of 1st and 2nd liners out of a bunch of guys who were previously stuck in bottom sixes and minor league teams. Vegas did a great job of identifying the skill set and attributes they wanted on their players when building this roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, CommonDreads said:

I mean that's the point, no one thought you could make a group of 1st and 2nd liners out of a bunch of guys who were previously stuck in bottom sixes and minor league teams. Vegas did a great job of identifying the skill set and attributes they wanted on their players when building this roster.

That's fair enough and no one is going to discount the drafting they did.  However, it is also wrong to blanket call people anyone who questions their success as being jealous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DevsMan84 said:

Yeah the Knights were shrewd with their picks and deals, but if they had the exact same expansion rules that say Columbus, Wild, Senators, Sharks, Thrashers, etc had then they wouldn't have even sniffed the playoffs.  Anyone who thinks otherwise are only kidding themselves.

Obviously I'm missing some key parts here, but in what way was last year's expansion draft with Vegas different than 98-01 with the Preds, Thrashers, Wild, and Blue Jackets?

Pretty sure they got to pluck a player from every team just like most expansion drafts, right?  Were the rules wider for the existing teams in terms of who/how many they could protect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

That's fair enough and no one is going to discount the drafting they did.  However, it is also wrong to blanket call people anyone who questions their success as being jealous.

I think 3 times now I've said you're right that some people are entitled to be pissed, but you aren't acknowledging the fact there are in fact people out there that are jealous.

I'd also take "being a joke" because an expansion team has the chance to win a cup over the bullsh!t of players colluding to create super-teams, guys having TV special to brag about themselves and where they're going next, and having next to no parity or team mindset any day.

EDIT: Puckdaddy can shove his pious stand up his ass cause back in October and November, him and Lozo did nothing but mock Vegas for as much as they could on their podcast.

Edited by jagknife
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Obviously I'm missing some key parts here, but in what way was last year's expansion draft with Vegas different than 98-01 with the Preds, Thrashers, Wild, and Blue Jackets?

Pretty sure they got to pluck a player from every team just like most expansion drafts, right?  Were the rules wider for the existing teams in terms of who/how many they could protect?

I think, and don't quote me, but the amount of players required to be exposed this time around were significantly larger than the ones back in the first waves of expansion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Obviously I'm missing some key parts here, but in what way was last year's expansion draft with Vegas different than 98-01 with the Preds, Thrashers, Wild, and Blue Jackets?

Pretty sure they got to pluck a player from every team just like most expansion drafts, right?  Were the rules wider for the existing teams in terms of who/how many they could protect?

Yes.  Teams back in the 90's and early 2000's were allowed to protect up to about 14-16 players, so they were basically drafting fringe NHL players at best.  Last year teams could protect only up to 9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.