|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 17:41:45 GMT -4
Every year a stacked team gets swept in round 1? Has a top 4 or 5 team ever been swept in round 1? Round 2 tends to be where bigger upsets happen I would think. VD last year, Wildcats at least once 2006-2007 and a couple of years ago, Chi has 2005-2006, Cape Breton has once I think 2009-2010 or twice.... maybe not always 4 but 5 and not even 6 or 7. It happens every year. It will happen again this year. VD lost in 6 last year I believe. Wasn't a sweep but was a big upset. We weren't swept in 2010. But we were also playing a stacked team. When 2 stacked teams meet in round 1 then yes 1 stacked team has to lose. There's almost never huge upsets in sweeps in round 1 of the Q playoffs. That's what you brought up....round 1 upset sweeps that happen every year. Can you name 3 that have happened ever? Since it happens every year that shouldn't be hard...there should be 40+ examples.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 17:42:21 GMT -4
Happens every year he says Posts about series ten years ago to support his claim he says Val dor loaded up couple years back last year was not there year Then posts series that werent sweeps and says well maybe they lose in 5 or 6 lol
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 10, 2017 17:45:12 GMT -4
The Océanic being dumped by the Olympiques in 2013 was quite the upset. Rimouski finished with 91 points - just three points shy of clinching the East Division. Hull finished with 63 points. But wasn't a sweep. The discussion was only about the fact that there are favorites swept every year in round 1. I said there are almost none. Then he changed it to upsets in general of which there are very few. But nobody would have responded if he didn't say "every year some stacked team leaves after 4 games in the first round."
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Jan 10, 2017 17:49:01 GMT -4
VD last year, Wildcats at least once 2006-2007 and a couple of years ago, Chi has 2005-2006, Cape Breton has once I think 2009-2010 or twice.... maybe not always 4 but 5 and not even 6 or 7. It happens every year. It will happen again this year. The WC were swept by Victo a few years back after the Danault trade, but I wouldn't say they were stacked. Had a shaky D and Dubeau had a so so year in nets. Wasn't a sweep. Cats lost in 5.
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on Jan 10, 2017 18:02:40 GMT -4
In the case of Mackinnon, I think you need to weigh the superstar vs the sum of the return assets if you are a small market team. If Mackinnon reports to BC, you have a superstar to fill the building for 2 years (GREAT!), but do you have the assets to build a championship team around him? You could argue that some of the chips they got helped them build those teams that went to the finals. I believe one of the picks may even have been Meloche who in turn nabbed them Joly and also Gatineau's first in 2017. Mackinnon is long out of the league but BC is still seeing rewards from it. I believe MacKinnon reporting to BC would have been better for that franchise than the return they received in trading him. If the assets you can get are better than the player, why would Halifax (or anyone) trade for him?
|
|
|
Post by sc74 on Jan 10, 2017 18:05:08 GMT -4
In the case of Mackinnon, I think you need to weigh the superstar vs the sum of the return assets if you are a small market team. If Mackinnon reports to BC, you have a superstar to fill the building for 2 years (GREAT!), but do you have the assets to build a championship team around him? You could argue that some of the chips they got helped them build those teams that went to the finals. I believe one of the picks may even have been Meloche who in turn nabbed them Joly and also Gatineau's first in 2017. Mackinnon is long out of the league but BC is still seeing rewards from it. I believe MacKinnon reporting to BC would have been better for that franchise than the return they received in trading him. If the assets you can get are better than the player, why would Halifax (or anyone) trade for him? I agree.
|
|
|
Post by aquilae on Jan 10, 2017 18:07:42 GMT -4
The Océanic being dumped by the Olympiques in 2013 was quite the upset. Rimouski finished with 91 points - just three points shy of clinching the East Division. Hull finished with 63 points. But wasn't a sweep. The discussion was only about the fact that there are favorites swept every year in round 1. I said there are almost none. Then he changed it to upsets in general of which there are very few. But nobody would have responded if he didn't say "every year some stacked team leaves after 4 games in the first round." Oh. Well, in that case, it's only happened six times in the last 20 years: Océanic over Wildcats in 99 Remparts over Saguenéens in 2002 Cataractes over Tigres in 2003 MAINEiacs over Cataractes in 2005 Tigres over Titan in 2011 Drakkar over Tigres in 2012 The biggest points discrepancy was in the 2012 playoffs. The Drakkar finished with 63 points while the Tigres finished with 94. Oof. Yanni Gourde led the league with 124 points but tallied just three in that series. Crazy.
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Jan 10, 2017 19:51:31 GMT -4
VD last year, Wildcats at least once 2006-2007 and a couple of years ago, Chi has 2005-2006, Cape Breton has once I think 2009-2010 or twice.... maybe not always 4 but 5 and not even 6 or 7. It happens every year. It will happen again this year. The WC were swept by Victo a few years back after the Danault trade, but I wouldn't say they were stacked. Had a shaky D and Dubeau had a so so year in nets. No they weren't stacked and most of us Wildcats fans knew that, but to the rest of the league we made moves to play late in the playoffs, only to be put out in 5 or 6 games. The same thing is happening now. Did any team truly build a bullet proof team with the winning mindset? There was 6 teams going for it and they are followed closely by up and coming teams. I think you will see at least one upset if not two in the first round. Its not common to see the first place teams with 13 or 14 loses.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 10, 2017 19:56:52 GMT -4
The WC were swept by Victo a few years back after the Danault trade, but I wouldn't say they were stacked. Had a shaky D and Dubeau had a so so year in nets. No they weren't stacked and most of us Wildcats fans knew that, but to the rest of the league we made moves to play late in the playoffs, only to be put out in 5 or 6 games. The same thing is happening now. Did any team truly build a bullet proof team with the winning mindset? There was 6 teams going for it and they are followed closely by up and coming teams. I think you will see at least one upset if not two in the first round. Its not common to see the first place teams with 13 or 14 loses. Chicoutimi and Victo are in a tough spot unless the finish strong...Currently 7th and 10th, would face off round 1. there are some tough non-buyers in the 8-9-10-11 range who could upset. I think ultimately the top 4-5 teams ,big buyers like SJ and Cha are safe round 1.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 12, 2017 9:43:53 GMT -4
Did any team truly build a bullet proof team with the winning mindset? Could anyone do that this year though? Looking at the league, who was traded, and what was given up I don't think it was possible to build a bullet proof team. Saint John might be the closest but with the league lacking a superstar player on a Crosby, Radulov, MacKinnon level impact wise I don't know if any team could have built a bullet proof team in this league. But are they that far ahead of the other 4 or 5 who bought big? Was there say any goalie who could have moved that would have moved any team get that bullet proof label? The team Canada D were not going anywhere so only their teams could have really become bullet proof. Up front 2 of the top NHL drafted forwards moved to contenders. A guy like Fortier is on top of league scoring with guys like Boland, Highmore, and Abramov right behind. The top player in the league might be Hischier playing on a rebuilding team that couldn't trade him even if they wanted to. Bullet proof was never possible this year in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jan 12, 2017 9:54:01 GMT -4
Right now, I'd say SJ is about as close as it gets.
-possibly the best goalie in the Q -strong and deep defense, dominant top 3 -deep core of forwards with 3-4 stars
|
|
|
Post by bois on Jan 12, 2017 10:11:48 GMT -4
Did any team truly build a bullet proof team with the winning mindset? Could anyone do that this year though? Looking at the league, who was traded, and what was given up I don't think it was possible to build a bullet proof team. Saint John might be the closest but with the league lacking a superstar player on a Crosby, Radulov, MacKinnon level impact wise I don't know if any team could have built a bullet proof team in this league. But are they that far ahead of the other 4 or 5 who bought big? Was there say any goalie who could have moved that would have moved any team get that bullet proof label? The team Canada D were not going anywhere so only their teams could have really become bullet proof. Up front 2 of the top NHL drafted forwards moved to contenders. A guy like Fortier is on top of league scoring with guys like Boland, Highmore, and Abramov right behind. The top player in the league might be Hischier playing on a rebuilding team that couldn't trade him even if they wanted to. Bullet proof was never possible this year in my opinion. and the league is better off for it in my opinion having 1-2 teams far superior to everyone else is pretty boring and anti climactic
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 12, 2017 10:51:09 GMT -4
Could anyone do that this year though? Looking at the league, who was traded, and what was given up I don't think it was possible to build a bullet proof team. Saint John might be the closest but with the league lacking a superstar player on a Crosby, Radulov, MacKinnon level impact wise I don't know if any team could have built a bullet proof team in this league. But are they that far ahead of the other 4 or 5 who bought big? Was there say any goalie who could have moved that would have moved any team get that bullet proof label? The team Canada D were not going anywhere so only their teams could have really become bullet proof. Up front 2 of the top NHL drafted forwards moved to contenders. A guy like Fortier is on top of league scoring with guys like Boland, Highmore, and Abramov right behind. The top player in the league might be Hischier playing on a rebuilding team that couldn't trade him even if they wanted to. Bullet proof was never possible this year in my opinion. and the league is better off for it in my opinion having 1-2 teams far superior to everyone else is pretty boring and anti climactic Agreed. I do think that there are years where you can build that team. And history will show that it's not necessarily loading up on acquired talent to do that. Some teams just draft the pieces they need and have a coach with a system that if the players execute it then as a team they will be dominant. That was Lewiston's recipe to going on a nearly perfect playoff run 10 years ago. I think there's most agree there are 6 teams that if things fall together playoff seeding wise, injury wise, and another variable or 2 could win the whole thing. Yes that means 2 teams don't even reach the final 4. But those are the chances you take to try and win.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 12, 2017 10:54:39 GMT -4
Right now, I'd say SJ is about as close as it gets. -possibly the best goalie in the Q -strong and deep defense, dominant top 3 -deep core of forwards with 3-4 stars Agreed. Their team also have a bit more experience playing with each other then a couple of the teams that loaded up so there is a bit of an advantage though. I will say that Booth isn't intimidating anyone as a #1 goalie. He's very good, absolutely. But I don't think anyone views him as being on par with many of the other dominant goalies from over the years.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Rogan on Jan 12, 2017 11:57:05 GMT -4
Could anyone do that this year though? Looking at the league, who was traded, and what was given up I don't think it was possible to build a bullet proof team. Saint John might be the closest but with the league lacking a superstar player on a Crosby, Radulov, MacKinnon level impact wise I don't know if any team could have built a bullet proof team in this league. But are they that far ahead of the other 4 or 5 who bought big? Was there say any goalie who could have moved that would have moved any team get that bullet proof label? The team Canada D were not going anywhere so only their teams could have really become bullet proof. Up front 2 of the top NHL drafted forwards moved to contenders. A guy like Fortier is on top of league scoring with guys like Boland, Highmore, and Abramov right behind. The top player in the league might be Hischier playing on a rebuilding team that couldn't trade him even if they wanted to. Bullet proof was never possible this year in my opinion. and the league is better off for it in my opinion having 1-2 teams far superior to everyone else is pretty boring and anti climactic Agreed. As special as it was to watch our (Mooseheads) championship run, it was extremely anti climactic. We were never really challenged in any series, including the Memorial Cup. I had more fun as a fan watching our team the year before and year after, despite neither of them winning anything.
|
|