OT: Leafs/NHL Thread

[WaltFrazier]

Watch on YouTube

Couple things not mentioned:

Hockey - hot goalie

NBA - refs and the league try to engineer outcomes. Look at the unattractive markets eliminated already this season

[Dr Positivity]

Seems like a good time for Canadian team to finally win but I could also see some teams like Rangers and Stars being dangerous. Hurricanes got unlucky with injuries after they had been on 120 pt pace most of the season overshadowed by Boston, still I wouldn't rule it out.

The Avs went down swinging more than the Bruins, Kraken were playing not to lose in the end and got lucky. So hard to repeat in NHL due to the physical wear and tear, the recent Tampa and Penguins teams that did it deserve credit.

[ontnut]

It's crazy that we go from just praying for a 1st round victory, to possibly considering anything less than winning the Cup a failure. But the Leafs have their best opportunity to do so right now, and it might very well be one of, if not their last opportunity to do so. We're out a lot of picks, and our core is slowly aging and approaching FA. I think they know this may be the best shot they'll ever have and are playing accordingly though - reflected in their interview demeanour and responses.

[Steelo Green]

Oilers and Leafs SCF will be fun asf

bad for ratings, but great for these long time franchises and their fans

Leafs revenue sharing is keeping teams like Arizona alive.

[ItsDanger]

If Carolina wins their next round, Leafs have potential to make the Cup Finals. Canes are solid but without Svechnikov & Teuvo, their offense is kind of limited.

[Merit]

Hope the Bruins win. Leafs/Bruins will be unreal.

Panthers beating the Bruins would be funny. I'm down for laughs at Bruins fans expense.

Alright leafs, let's get it.

[mdenny]

Lol now Seattle is about to beat Colorado. Not sure I like how random this sport is.

I like that expansion teams can literally become contenders out of the gate. Las Vegas made the playoffs in their first season and reached the finals in their third season. They've only missed the playoffs once (barely) in their existence. They've been more successful in 5 years than the Leafs have been in 50.

Seattle is now on the verge of a second round berth in their second season.

In other sports, it takes years for a new team to become relevant. Part of what makes it possible in hockey is the hard cap which doesn't allow teams to hoard players, so there is enough talent to go around to every team.

Bittman and NHL did that on purpose with the expansion draft. The protection rules are ridiculous.

About half the league would take the hypothetical option of wiping the slate clean and choosing a brand new roster under those same rules. Bettman was determined to ensure those markets would thrive early. It was basically the opposite of the NBA expansion into Toronto and Vancouver.

Ppl pretended to be shocked when Vegas was so good their first year. I wasn't. The fix was in.

They start off by getting the best backup goalie in the league who is often better than the average starter.

Then teams could only protect 7 forwards. And usually around 2 of those protections had to be used on prospects. So you are essentially picking from 30 of the 5th best forwards from each team and then all the best 3rd line players in the league.

This immediately makes you one of the deepest teams in the league. The only team NOT to have 4th line players and a boatload of elite checking players, all of whom are effective in playoff hockey.

I guarantee that any hypothetical additional expansion team would have the exact same outcome. They would be a playoff team right out the gate. A playoff team WITHOUT any bad contracts and ALL future draft picks. All they'd have to do is amalgamate some of their plentiful assets and add 2 or 3 star players (which is exactly what Vegas did) in their 2nd/3rd seasons and then they're cup contenders.

Seattle and Vegas aren't flukes. The same outcome would happen over and over again with those we expansion draft rules.

[LBJKB24MJ23]

Seems like a good time for Canadian team to finally win but I could also see some teams like Rangers and Stars being dangerous. Hurricanes got unlucky with injuries after they had been on 120 pt pace most of the season overshadowed by Boston, still I wouldn't rule it out.

The Avs went down swinging more than the Bruins, Kraken were playing not to lose in the end and got lucky. So hard to repeat in NHL due to the physical wear and tear, the recent Tampa and Penguins teams that did it deserve credit.

anything short of a stanley cup appearance, now, would be a disappointment.

[YogurtProducer]

Watch on YouTube

Couple things not mentioned:

Hockey - hot goalie

NBA - refs and the league try to engineer outcomes. Look at the unattractive markets eliminated already this season

And just the nature of a low scoring sport that relies on luck like Hockey.

[OakleyDokely]

Lol now Seattle is about to beat Colorado. Not sure I like how random this sport is.

I like that expansion teams can literally become contenders out of the gate. Las Vegas made the playoffs in their first season and reached the finals in their third season. They've only missed the playoffs once (barely) in their existence. They've been more successful in 5 years than the Leafs have been in 50.

Seattle is now on the verge of a second round berth in their second season.

In other sports, it takes years for a new team to become relevant. Part of what makes it possible in hockey is the hard cap which doesn't allow teams to hoard players, so there is enough talent to go around to every team.

Bittman and NHL did that on purpose with the expansion draft. The protection rules are ridiculous.

About half the league would take the hypothetical option of wiping the slate clean and choosing a brand new roster under those same rules. Bettman was determined to ensure those markets would thrive early. It was basically the opposite of the NBA expansion into Toronto and Vancouver.

Ppl pretended to be shocked when Vegas was so good their first year. I wasn't. The fix was in.

They start off by getting the best backup goalie in the league who is often better than the average starter.

Then teams could only protect 7 forwards. And usually around 2 of those protections had to be used on prospects. So you are essentially picking from 30 of the 5th best forwards from each team and then all the best 3rd line players in the league.

This immediately makes you one of the deepest teams in the league. The only team NOT to have 4th line players and a boatload of elite checking players, all of whom are effective in playoff hockey.

I guarantee that any hypothetical additional expansion team would have the exact same outcome. They would be a playoff team right out the gate. A playoff team WITHOUT any bad contracts and ALL future draft picks. All they'd have to do is amalgamate some of their plentiful assets and add 2 or 3 star players (which is exactly what Vegas did) in their 2nd/3rd seasons and then they're cup contenders.

Seattle and Vegas aren't flukes. The same outcome would happen over and over again with those we expansion draft rules.

When the Raps/Grizz came into the league, NBA teams could protect 8 players, which means the Raps/Grizz were basically selecting borderline rotation players / end of bench guys. Plus, neither team could get the #1 pick for a few years (Raps would've got Iverson) but were bumped to #2 after winning the lottery and got Camby instead. In their first draft, they were slotted 6th/7th and weren't included in the lottery. They made it nearly impossible for the Raps/Grizz to be good.

[KL78192020]

Star power doesn't matter as much in the NHL. A single guy can't make all the difference like a Steph Curry can in the NBA. Mitch Marner averaged 23 minutes of ice time. One of the leafs best players, that would be the equivalent of a NBA star playing about 19 minutes per game. In hockey a hot goalie can make all the difference.

[tecumseh18]

Wow, Game 1 against Florida is tomorrow? That's a quick turnaround, which should favour the Leafs. Getting it done in less than seven games against the 3-time finalist Lightning should really help the the Leafs going forward.

[will]

LETS GO LEAFS!

- The Rock

[mdenny]

I like that expansion teams can literally become contenders out of the gate. Las Vegas made the playoffs in their first season and reached the finals in their third season. They've only missed the playoffs once (barely) in their existence. They've been more successful in 5 years than the Leafs have been in 50.

Seattle is now on the verge of a second round berth in their second season.

In other sports, it takes years for a new team to become relevant. Part of what makes it possible in hockey is the hard cap which doesn't allow teams to hoard players, so there is enough talent to go around to every team.

Bittman and NHL did that on purpose with the expansion draft. The protection rules are ridiculous.

About half the league would take the hypothetical option of wiping the slate clean and choosing a brand new roster under those same rules. Bettman was determined to ensure those markets would thrive early. It was basically the opposite of the NBA expansion into Toronto and Vancouver.

Ppl pretended to be shocked when Vegas was so good their first year. I wasn't. The fix was in.

They start off by getting the best backup goalie in the league who is often better than the average starter.

Then teams could only protect 7 forwards. And usually around 2 of those protections had to be used on prospects. So you are essentially picking from 30 of the 5th best forwards from each team and then all the best 3rd line players in the league.

This immediately makes you one of the deepest teams in the league. The only team NOT to have 4th line players and a boatload of elite checking players, all of whom are effective in playoff hockey.

I guarantee that any hypothetical additional expansion team would have the exact same outcome. They would be a playoff team right out the gate. A playoff team WITHOUT any bad contracts and ALL future draft picks. All they'd have to do is amalgamate some of their plentiful assets and add 2 or 3 star players (which is exactly what Vegas did) in their 2nd/3rd seasons and then they're cup contenders.

Seattle and Vegas aren't flukes. The same outcome would happen over and over again with those we expansion draft rules.

When the Raps/Grizz came into the league, NBA teams could protect 8 players, which means the Raps/Grizz were basically selecting borderline rotation players / end of bench guys. Plus, neither team could get the #1 pick for a few years (Raps would've got Iverson) but were bumped to #2 after winning the lottery and got Camby instead. In their first draft, they were slotted 6th/7th and weren't included in the lottery. They made it nearly impossible for the Raps/Grizz to be good.

Yep. The draft thing was particularly egregious.

[mdenny]

Watch on YouTube

Couple things not mentioned:

Hockey - hot goalie

NBA - refs and the league try to engineer outcomes. Look at the unattractive markets eliminated already this season

And just the nature of a low scoring sport that relies on luck like Hockey.

Yep. The better team doesn't always win in soccer too. It's also kinda true in football - a team can dominate in yards and time of possession but a couple fluky turnovers can determine the outcome. Not sure either way about baseball.

Basketball is definitely the most "best team wins" sport. Fluky/lucky plays only count for 2 to 3 points in either direction.

[Dr Positivity]

Glad the Lightning didn't have Palat on their team this year.

[Dr Positivity]

Basketball is definitely the most "best team wins" sport. Fluky/lucky plays only count for 2 to 3 points in either direction.

There is still variance although not as much as in the other sports. The Heat getting crazy hot from 3 against the Bucks is kind of the equivalent of a team who gets some lucky bounces in a series.

[mdenny]

Basketball is definitely the most "best team wins" sport. Fluky/lucky plays only count for 2 to 3 points in either direction.

There is still variance although not as much as in the other sports. The Heat getting crazy hot from 3 against the Bucks is kind of the equivalent of a team who gets some lucky bounces in a series.

Any baseball fans who can comment on luck/variance in that sport? Doesn't seem to be as much of the "best team wins" that we see in basketball because predictions seem much tougher. Definitely more upsets in baseball playoffs then there is in basketball. But I can't think of any reason why that is.....

I wonder if it's a sample size thing....because there's so much variance in player performance from game to game. Ie it's not unusual for a .200 hitter getting 3 or 4 hits in one particular game or a .350 hitter going 0 for 5.

Also it seems like player performance in baseball is such a yo-yo. A guy can won the cy young award and then be horrible the next season. You don't see nba MVP candidates suddenly fall off the map like that. Seems like baseball players can yo-yo from month to month and even week to week.

[Dr Positivity]

Basketball is definitely the most "best team wins" sport. Fluky/lucky plays only count for 2 to 3 points in either direction.

There is still variance although not as much as in the other sports. The Heat getting crazy hot from 3 against the Bucks is kind of the equivalent of a team who gets some lucky bounces in a series.

Any baseball fans who can comment on luck/variance in that sport? Doesn't seem to be as much of the "best team wins" that we see in basketball because predictions seem much tougher. Definitely more upsets in baseball playoffs then there is in basketball. But I can't think of any reason why that is.....

I wonder if it's a sample size thing....because there's so much variance in player performance from game to game. Ie it's not unusual for a .200 hitter getting 3 or 4 hits in one particular game or a .350 hitter going 0 for 5.

Also it seems like player performance in baseball is such a yo-yo. A guy can won the cy young award and then be horrible the next season. You don't see nba MVP candidates suddenly fall off the map like that. Seems like baseball players can yo-yo from month to month and even week to week.

Definitely variance in terms of the balls hit inside the park landing in play vs to a fielder. In addition to that and 5 game series, baseball teams in the playoffs aren't really that far apart in the standings. One of the biggest wtfrandom baseball champions I remember was the first Giants one where they beat the Phillies who after making the last 2 World Series and getting Halladay seemed inevitable to make it again. But that was still only 97 Ws vs 92 over a 162 season, barely anything.

In general all these sports can be lopsided if the talent difference is big enough, hockey may seem like a sport vulnerable to bounces but we know that Team Canada playing Kazakhstan is going to be a joke. I'd suspect the NFL/MLB/NHL wouldn't want teams to be that stacked even if they could. The casual fan likes everyone who gets in the playoffs having a chance, it's more fun for them to see cinderella Vegas Golden Knights run to the nhl finals or big dick Nick Foles beating the Pats. The NFL really has it figured out between that and how fast bad teams can turnaround and become a playoff team, it keeps everyone interested. However the NBA's route whether it's intentional or not or just the nature of superstars, is to have a more hierarchal system where you need one of the best players to win, that's ok as it's something different than the other sports, and it's probably why we like it the most. You could argue the MLB's current system with high variance champions is actually not working that much for it right now in terms of popularity and they would be better off being less like the NFL and NHL and more like the NBA or EPL, I'd probably be more interested in it if there was juggarnaut teams like late 90s Yankees. Then again I'm not sure what more they could do to make that happen, they already have no salary cap.

[Badonkadonk]

anything short of a stanley cup appearance, now, would be a disappointment.

IDK the NHL playoffs are extremely random. Every season we see madness, and the 1st round this year is just the most recent reminder that odds don't mean much. Consider:

- The Presidents Cup curse
- Hot goalie is always a huge variable
- Related to above - Habs went to Cup final in '21 and were *dead last* without Carey Price the next season
- Injury variance - short turnaround and brutal physical grind = war of attrition
- Like an MMA fight, matchups and styles matter

Probably not many will appreciate the last point on a hoops forum, here's a small example of what I'm talking about:

Read on Twitter

?s=20