| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 02/05/2009 : 15:12:53
Okay, so the title may be a wee bit dramatic....
Another theoretical for all of you out there. The NHL is forced to shut down operations for the immediate future during this economic downturn, global warming, gas prices rising out of control...whatever.
They have 2 weeks to operate and still want to name a champion for the season.
Here's the question; 1st in the East plays 1st in the West, best of 7, with a game every second night for the next 2 weeks if needed. No playoff grind of getting through the rounds. No time to bolster any teams with trades. No time to let any nagging injuries mend. To make it as fair as possible, all 7 games will played in a neutral rink to alleviate the travel times and subsequent jet lag, as well as take away any sort of a home advantage due to the shortened season, say Toronto(I've hacked on the Leaf fans enough, here's the payback  ).
The finals start tomorrow, and as it sits, it's Boston versus San Jose....who wins and why? Who is better suited as is, right now, to be Stanley Cup champs?
|
| 16 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 08:20:32
Dan Boyle puts San Jose ove the top. I'd take San Jose over Boston in a playoff matchup. the west in general is WAY stronger than the east. Id take Detroit over Boston as well.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| n/a |
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 07:53:54
Ok Beans, I admit - we east coasters do not see a lot of the west coast teams.
But going by San Jose's recent playoff history, and by extension Joe Thornton's performance in the playoffs - it's a big "meh".
2nd line of Clowe, Pavelski and Michalek as good as anyone else's?!?
Not as good as the elite 2nd lines in Boston, Detroit, New Jersey, Philly or Chicago, in my mind . . .
Nah, I'd still stick with Boston, despite San Jose winning their last match-up. Boston would physically beat up San Jose, and most any other team, in the playoffs.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest9838 |
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 13:11:06
Well they go tonight so let's call this a theoretical game 7.
In this post right now I think it's 3-2 for SJ.
|
| Guest4803 |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 16:15:33
ya ya confrence whatever i had a brain fart, good on ya |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 14:50:07
Just a personal opinion here.
How many of you people picking Boston are from the East Coast??
With all due respect, people from the West have more of an opportunity to see teams play from each Conference. Most people in the east will more rarely watch the end of a late game. If SJ is playing Vancouver, that game starts 8:30ish Western time, meaning 10:30pm start in the east. Most likely the game is over around or after midnight.
The reason I bring his up is that I am seeing a few people grossly underestimating the Sharks. There was mention about the Sharks operating around Joe Thorton's Line more so tha Boston drives around Savard's. I disagree. Firstly, their 2nd line today of Clowe, Pavalski, and Michalek is as good a 2nd line as there is in the league. Secondly, Marleau can easily drop into a 2nd line centre roll in the playoffs with Michalek moving up to the 1st line. That makes both line very similar and very dangerous. Plus, their shutdown line is not weak when considering Greir, Goc, and Lemiuex(who is a dangerous player come playoff time). Plus, they have some beef in Shelley to manage the physical play. And I have yet to even bring up Roenick or Cheechoo(who is perenially a late season bloomer).
The defensive core in SJ is the best in the league(in my opinion). Blake, Boyle, Vlasic, Murray, Ehrhoff, and Semenov are as good or better than any other group. And Nabokov is a complete gamer.
Above everything I've said, I personally see a swagger in SJ that they have never had before. The are owning nearly everyone they have played and seem to be merciless in punishing teams. I think their new coach has a little something to do with that.
Playoff start today, my money is on SJ against any other team in the league. The only team that I would have a hard time betting againts would be Detroit. They are still sickly deep and talented.
Sorry fellers, the Cup stays in the West for the 3rd straight year in 09. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 12:36:29
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803
i know this is suppose to be theoretical but this is maybe the dumbest thread from one of your theoretical questions. The NHL would NEVER just say oh ok the top team in each division as of right now has a chance at the cup. They would at least have to make if 4 teams from each confrence and shorten the series to best of 3's, at least that would be more realistic.
And sorry guest4803, I hate to be picky, but you've confused me a bit here.
If, and I paraphrase from your above quote,'The NHL would NEVER just say oh ok the top team in each division as of right now has a chance at the cup.', does that mean that the 6 teams from both conferences wouldn't get a shot, as there are 3 divisions in each conference?
It would be ... who...hmm like Montreal and Chicago in the final? Or, did you mean that they WOULD have to tell the DIVISION leaders that they get the shot, even though that's now 6 teams, and then they would then have to decide which 4 get the shot?
This damnable theoretical math gets me every time! 
PS. Just jokingly pointing out that sometimes if you use 'dumbest', in your replies, it has a way of haunting you. By all means, tell me I have the perfect face for anonymous internet posting, or such...that I can understand.  |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 11:57:38
Sorry, above was me...forgot to sign in....I must be theoretically dense and forgetful... |
| Guest9282 |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 11:56:04
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803
i know this is suppose to be theoretical but this is maybe the dumbest thread from one of your theoretical questions. The NHL would NEVER just say oh ok the top team in each division as of right now has a chance at the cup. They would at least have to make if 4 teams from each confrence and shorten the series to best of 3's, at least that would be more realistic.
Geez man!!
Get your own theoretical...this one's already taken... 
And besides, if they're theoretical, can they actually even be dumb? Perhaps they are theoretically super-intelligent, and it's just your theoretical numbskulledness, not allowing you to recognize them as such...you never know...theoretically  |
| Guest4803 |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 11:03:31
i know this is suppose to be theoretical but this is maybe the dumbest thread from one of your theoretical questions. The NHL would NEVER just say oh ok the top team in each division as of right now has a chance at the cup. They would at least have to make if 4 teams from each confrence and shorten the series to best of 3's, at least that would be more realistic. |
| Alex |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 11:02:30
You're right Slozo, honest mistake.  For some reason I thought it went 5 games. In any case, I do think that Detroit dominated that series. And I stand by my statement that two evenly matched teams will rarely have a back and forth series.
''Yes we can!'' -Obama |
| Guest9278 |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 10:31:52
san jose.... just for the fact that tim thomas has no style and he can win you a game just as much as he can blow a game.
Nabokov will 99% win the game argubly the 2nd best goalie in the league behind luongo. therefore i will go for san jose but i have to say they are 2 big strong team with strong players built for playoff hockey so anything could happen but until thomas shows me he is worthy i do not have confidence in him |
| Guest9838 |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 06:19:03
Tampa didn't just have Vinny and St. Louis, you forget the Conn Smythe winner winner was Brad Richards, who was arguably the most rounded overall forward in the NHL at the time. I remember around that time when they were thinking they might have to dump one of their big 3, everybody I talked to thought they must keep Richards... In the next year's pools, all the pools I went to saw Richards picked before Vinny.
Tampa also had Stillman, Modin, and Fedotenko who were all having great seasons at the time. And Andreychuk as a leader and motivation to win it for.
On D they had Boyle, Kubina (when he was good) amongst others and they had the Bulin wall in net, who was huge for them (5 post season shutouts, 1.71 GAA, .933 Sv%) |
| n/a |
Posted - 02/06/2009 : 05:46:03
Alex - you really must have forgotten that last year's final went 6 games, otherwise you wouldn't have stated that you predicted a short series, and bragged about it.
But really, sometimes, the difference between a 5 or 6 or 7 game series is quite minimal. I recall a few series between Dallas and Edmonton in particular that went 5 games, but all were decided by only one goal, almost all in overtime . . .
I think Bos/SJ would go 6/7 games, and without any significant injuries and whatnot, I'd give Boston the edge. I think their shutdown of superstars is key, as San Jose operates around Joe Thornton far more than Boston operates around Savard. I'll take the slightly more balance attack in a big pressure situation.
In the last ten, fifteen years of Stanley Cup winners, the more balanced team has won out over the team with one or two supertars every time, with the lone exception being Tampa Bay with Lecavalier and St. Louis. Prudence says, with what appear to be two evenly matched teams here, the more balanced team wins.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest0228 |
Posted - 02/05/2009 : 19:51:03
But Det-Pitts went to 6? So your prediction was wrong... I mean sure, it could totally be as simple as who's hotter today, but where would the fun be in discussing that. |
| Alex |
Posted - 02/05/2009 : 19:37:33
This always makes me laugh. Whenever people think two teams are even, they say a series between them will go six or seven games. Everyone said that would happen with Pittsburgh and Detroit. I was one of the few who predicted a short series (check the Alex Blog archives circa June 2008.)
Over a span of seven games, how many teams will play consistently good or bad? Teams are streaky. The only series that go to seven games is those where each team will have offsetting good / bad streaks. Example, the Canadiens and Bruins last season.
Even though both the Sharks and Bruins are great this year, it would be a short series. One team would just be peaking at the right time, and that's why they would win.
So I pick the Bruins, simply because they are on a four game winning streak, and the Sharks are on a one game losing streak. No other reason
|
| Guest0228 |
Posted - 02/05/2009 : 19:14:42
Good question... the scenario is kinda funny but I like it, because in this case this may be the last Stanley Cup for a while, so who wants it more...
Some stats:
Goals Per Game
Bos - 3.48
SJ - 3.48
Wow... that's even
Goals against Per Game
Bos - 2.19
SJ - 2.33
Slight edge to Bos
Shots Per Game / Shots Against Per Game
Bos - 29.3 / 30.8
SJ - 34.5 / 26.9
Seems like a big advantage here for SJ
Top Hitters
Bos - Lucic (170), Chara (116), Ward (94)
SJ - Murray (110), Grier (104), Clowe (93)
Shot Blocks (top 5, all D on both teams)
Bos - 77, 68, 67, 64, 56
SJ - 71, 69, 60, 55, 55
Bos may have a slight edge in these grit type categories
Penalties (total Mins, Minors, Minors/Game, fights)
Bos - 662, 221, 4.25, 30
SJ - 610, 215, 4.48, 24
Not much of a difference here, Bos takes slightly less bad penalties per game, and again shows a slight edge in toughness
Away Records (since it's on neutral ice)
Bos - 19-5-3 - 70% win percentage
SJ - 13-5-3 - 62% win percentage
As we know SJ is a monster in the shark tank so having it all away might work against them
The players:
Forwards:
Bos - Savard, Krejci, Kessel, Wheeler, Lucic, Ryder, Bergeron, Axelsson, Kobasew, Thornton, Yelle
vs
SJ - Thornton, Marleau, Setoguchi, Michalek, Pavelski, Clowe, Cheechoo, Goc, Grier, Shelley, Plihal, Lemieux
Both teams have an awesome top 2 lines, and some decent 3rd options, San Jose has an edge in experience. Not sure how all those young guys in Bos would hold up under the stanley cup pressure. Edge SJ. Marleau and Thornton have often been playoff no shows though so that could be a factor.
Defence:
Bos - Chara, Wideman, Stuart, Ward, Ference, Hnidy, Hunwick
vs
SJ - Boyle, Blake, Vlasic, Ehrhoff, Murray, Semenov, Lukowich
Offensively I'd say SJ has the edge, but like the GAA shows, Bos may have the defensive edge. Ehrhoff is the only Defenseman on either team to be a minus player.
Goalies:
Bos - Thomas, Fernandez
SJ - Nabakov, Boucher
Another tough call from a number 1 and number 2 stand point
Nabakov is # 2 in the league in wins, and sports a 2.40 GAA and .911 Sv%, while Thomas is tied # 6 in wins with less GP, with a 2.08 GAA and 9.34 Sv%. Thomas has better stats but would never play 7 games in 14 nights. Fernandez has a 2.07 GAA and .928 Sv% in 19 GP, while Boucher has a 1.88 GAA and .927 Sv% in 12 GP, In all I'd almost have to give the edge to SJ for goalies in that I'm not sure how a tandem (no matter how good) would work in a stanley cup playoff scenario. Also Boucher seems to hold the slightest edge as a backup.
In all I think these teams are well matched, I think it would go to 6 or 7 but in the end I'd say SJ's experience would win the day, where many of these great break out season's happening in Boston could go away in a playoff setting. Also I think Nabakov would have no problem going the distance where Thomas might not, and switching goaltenders in the playoffs is usually a good thing. I think what would bring this series to 7 would be Boston's defence.
By the way I like the neutral site for this scenario, like the superbowl. It would have to be a huge hockey city/venue like Toronto, Montreal or New York. wouldn't like it in reality but for this it's fun.
|
|
|
