| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/24/2007 : 22:04:22
In all honesty, I never thought much of the weaker division/stronger division argument, because hey, they are all NHL teams, right? I think I've changed my opinion after watching tonight's Atlanta Thrashers - Pittsburgh Penguin's game.
As an avid Pens watcher, I've seen them struggle offensively in most of their games this year (Sid included). Even though Crosby is still averaging over a point a game, he's hasn't been overly dominant, points wise. They seem to really have trouble finishing, and now I see why. They are in a much stronger division.
Tonight, against a Southeastern Division team like Atlanta, the Pens were scoring at will. If you watched that game, you'd agree the 5-0 score was very flattering to the Thrashers. Crosby was all over the ice, passing, shooting, and skating with almost no resistance. Colby Armstrong looked like an offensive juggernaut out there.
Kovalchuk? Invisible. I think I heard his name three times all night, which is twice more than I heard Hossa's.
My point is, with Lecavalier and Kovie so high is the scoring race, it makes sense to me that they come from that weak-a** division like the Southeast. In fact, five of the top 11 scorers do come from that division!
Meanwhile, Jagr and Crosby have to face the best goalies (Brodeur, Lundqvist, DiPietro, etc.), and the best defensive teams and systems in the Atlantic eight times a year.
I know this is not rocket science, but I'm just pointing out to all the Kovalchuk lovers out there that tonight he looked like a bantam second-liner next to Crosby. Against the defensively-challenged Souteast teams eight games a year each, I guess he is bound to score a few goals now and then.
This supports the obvious that most experts have been calling for... more inter-division and inter-conference games next year!!! |
| 2 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 11/29/2007 : 14:28:05
Top 10 in scoring through November 29th.
South East-3
North West-1
Central-1
Atlantic-3
North West-2
Pacific-0
Does that mean that the Atlantic is a weak division too because they have 3 of the leagues top 10 scorers?? Does it mean that the Pacific is the best league because they don't have a scorer in the top 10??
When you look at the top 100 point getters in the league, the distribution is interesting.
Atlantic 13
Northeast 14
Pacific 15
Central 19
Southeast 18
Northwest 21
So is this saying the the hardest divisions are the Atlantic, Northeast, and Pacific with the weakest being the Central, Southeast, and Northwest. Perhaps. Kind of makes sense.
Let's look statistically at each division in regards to win %, GF and GA per game.
Win %
Central 0.560
Atlantic 0.530
Northeast 0.513
Northwest 0.488
Pacific 0.471
Southeast 0.443
GF/Game
Northeast 2.94
Central 2.88
Southeast 2.79
Northwest 2.69
Pacific 2.66
Atlantic 2.66
GA/Game
Southeast 3.05
Northwest 2.84
Northeast 2.80
Pacific 2.75
Central 2.58
Atlantic 2.57
Considering these numbers, the Northeast scores the most per game and Atlantic the least, yet they each have nearly the same amount of players in the top 100 in scoring?? Does that mean the Pacific with a low win percentage, low GA and low GF is really good or really bad??
What does all this say?? To me it says there is no relation to the highest scorers in the league and the division they play in. The top 25 or so scorers in the league would still be in the top 25 regardless of where they play. If you took Kovalchuk and Crosby and switched teams, they will still both be very high on the list of league scorers. It's virtually impossible to say if Kovalchuk would have more or less points and the same with Crosby. I think that holds true for all of the top offensive players.
In my humble yet geeky opinion.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| andyhack |
Posted - 11/29/2007 : 12:45:03
quote:
Originally posted by fly4apuckguy
In all honesty, I never thought much of the weaker division/stronger division argument, because hey, they are all NHL teams, right? I think I've changed my opinion after watching tonight's Atlanta Thrashers - Pittsburgh Penguin's game.
It often surprises just how much the weaker/stronger division thing is downplayed actually. Not so much now, but there have been times historically in all sports where one or two divisions were SO much stronger than the others and yet people tended to compare the numbers of players from different divisions/conferences without really giving it much thought.
Looking at another sport, for those of you closer to my generation, think of Earl Campbell having to go up against those Pittburgh and Cleveland teams twice a year each back in the late 70s/early 80s. If he were playing against some other defences, his numbers in his prime years would have been even higher (and there would have been more pictures of three guys hanging onto those huge thighs of his as he "rampaged' through them all ).
Anyway, even if you want to factor the Atlantic-Southeast division difference in this case as very minor, it still would come out (say at an additional point every every 8 games or so for the top offensive guys in the Atlantic) to about TEN extra points a year. That's a fair bit actually, and the actual calculation may indeed be more favorable to the Atlantic guys.
Edit - just fixed up the division references
- also, Beans, my point is that even if the difference is VERY slight (let's make it a point every sixteen games if you like), that still would amount to a five point difference over the course of the year - not sure how much the difference is but my educated guess is that there would be a difference if Sid or Jagr were playing in the Southeast - it IS worth noting in my opinion |
|
|
