The Pittsburgh/Detroit back-to-back Cup Finals in retrospect

[daver]

That would be relevant if that were the situation. It isn't though. The situation either a large gap between the conclusion of the conference finals and the beginning of the Stanley Cup finals or a rushed start with a slow conclusion to the series if it makes that many games. I am amazed by your ability to seemingly convince yourself that what happened actually didn't. The NHL significantly moved up the start of the series. Putting a larger than normal gap between the final games was certainly beneficial for Detroit, but not nearly to the degree that significantly moving the series up was detrimental to Detroit. Again, those are the breaks sometimes

OK, if we can agree that a nine day break between the end of the CFs and the start of the SCF would have been even more unusual than what happened and, in theory, would have been more beneficial to the Wings than the actual start was, in theory, beneficial for the Pens then we are done here.

 

[JackSlater]

OK, if we can agree that a nine day break between the end of the CFs and the start of the SCF would have been even more unusual than what happened and, in theory, would have been more beneficial to the Wings than the actual start was, in theory, beneficial for the Pens then we are done here.

Sure, it would have been even more unusual and certainly it would have been more beneficial to Detroit than the actual start was. Again though, that has nothing to do with what I've said. I do wonder if this "done" is more official than your "officially done" from before.

 

[daver]

Again, this has nothing to do with my post. I still don't know if you just don't read posts or if you are genuinely confused. I didn't talk about what the NHL should have done or why the NHL moved the schedule ahead. I said that the schedule was moved ahead and that it was obviously to Pittsburgh's benefit. Your three points have zero pertinence to my statements.

Not the one about "them's the breaks". The Wings opened the door to "the breaks" when they took more games than the Pens did to win their CF.

Do you think it was reasonable for the league to establish the original SCF schedule (at least Games 1 to 5), released before the start of the CFs, once a nine day break became a reality if the Wings won on May 27th?

 

[daver]

Sure, it would have been even more unusual and certainly it would have been more beneficial to Detroit than the actual start was. Again though, that has nothing to do with what I've said. I do wonder if this "done" is more official than your "officially done" from before.

Like the NHL, I reserve the right to change my mind.

 

[JackSlater]

Not the one about "them's the breaks". The Wings opened the door to "the breaks" when they took more games than the Pens did to win their CF.

Do you think it was reasonable for the league to establish the original SCF schedule (at least Games 1 to 5), released before the start of the CFs, once a nine day break became a reality if the Wings won on May 27th?

The break that Detroit "opened the door to" by the NHL's own schedule was a longer break. Of course that didn't end up happening and the series was moved up, to the benefit of Pittsburgh.

I think that actually following the released schedule was reasonable, though not ideal. This of course, again, has nothing to do with what I said. The breaks didn't go Detroit's way in 2009. It happens sometimes.

 

[daver]

The break that Detroit "opened the door to" by the NHL's own schedule was a longer break. Of course that didn't end up happening and the series was moved up, to the benefit of Pittsburgh.

I think that actually following the released schedule was reasonable, though not ideal. This of course, again, has nothing to do with what I said. The breaks didn't go Detroit's way in 2009. It happens sometimes.

Let's not pretend that you feel that Detroit would have won if there was a longer break. This debate started originally in the thread titled "Why did Detroit not win in 2009".

Or I am incorrect in that assumption?

If I am not, where is the evidence that the Pens did benefit from the start? Other than "I felt the Wings were better on paper so obviously the Pens benefited from the early start"

 

[JackSlater]

Let's not pretend that you feel that Detroit would have won if there was a longer break. This debate started originally in the thread titled "Why did Detroit not win in 2009".

Or I am incorrect in that assumption?

If I am not, where is the evidence that the Pens did benefit from the start? Other than "I felt the Wings were better on paper so obviously the Pens benefited from the early start"

I do expect that Detroit would have won if given a later start. I am even more confident that Detroit would have won, convincingly even, had both teams been at even health. That has nothing to do with what I said though, which is that the series was moved forward and that moving the series forward was beneficial to Pittsburgh.

I really hope that you don't actually require an explanation as to why when one team is relatively more injured than the other, it is beneficial for the healthier team for the games to be played as soon as possible. Your strawman about "on paper" is again irrelevant to what I said.

 

[daver]

I do expect that Detroit would have won if given a later start. I am even more confident that Detroit would have won, convincingly even, had both teams been at even health. That has nothing to do with what I said though, which is that the series was moved forward and that moving the series forward was beneficial to Pittsburgh.

Based on what? How the series played indicates the start date was irrelevant in terms of tiring out the Wings or that the Wings were a different team when Datsyuk came back.

It seems you are taking a theory, not an unreasonable one IMO, that more time for injuries to heal is better and combining with your opinion that the Wings were the better team on paper.

Once the Wings had time to better their health, after Game 5, they lost.

 

[JackSlater]

Based on what? How the series played indicates the start date was irrelevant in terms of tiring out the Wings or that the Wings were a different team when Datsyuk came back.

It seems you are taking a theory, not an unreasonable one IMO, that more time for injuries to heal is better and combining with your opinion that the Wings were the better team on paper.

Once the Wings had time to better their health, after Game 5, they lost.

Based on the series being incredibly close despite the injuries. That Detroit managed to win the first two games and keep the series close does not indicate that the start date was not a negative factor for Detroit. I am also not talking about players being tired, I am talking about players being hurt. Detroit had six players who sat out a game just three days before the series began. Two of those players (Lidstrom and Ericsson) had surgery within a week of the finals starting. Datsuk missed four finals games, including two Detroit losses. I think that it is fairly obvious that the injured players would have been better, even later in the series if necessary, if given several days of rest before the series began. That doesn't guarantee a Detroit win, but it is the main reason that I expect that Detroit wins the series with the original start date.

None of that is my main point however, which is that the finals were moved forward and that the change was to Pittsburgh's benefit.

 

[daver]

None of that is my main point however, which is that the finals were moved forward and that the change was to Pittsburgh's benefit.

Technically, the finals were never officially scheduled until after the WCF was done. There were tentative schedules but to say that the finals were moved forward is not entirely true.

Anyways, it is a moot point at best, and sour grapes at worst. Surely you can see how a Pens fan would take offense at the premise of scheduling/injuries being brought up to dismiss their Cup win.

 

[JackSlater]

Technically, the finals were never officially scheduled until after the WCF was done. There were tentative schedules but to say that the finals were moved forward is not entirely true.

Anyways, it is a moot point at best, and sour grapes at worst. Surely you can see how a Pens fan would take offense at the premise of scheduling/injuries being brought up to dismiss their Cup win.

I understand where you're coming from in that regard and I am certain that if it was the other way around (Pittsburgh is without Malkin, Letang had surgery etc.) most Detroit fans would take offence at the mere suggestion that Detroit benefited from the schedule change. It is what it is. Dismissing the victory would be a step much too far. Pittsburgh didn't cheat and won the series under fair enough circumstances.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Anyways, it is a moot point at best, and sour grapes at worst. Surely you can see how a Pens fan would take offense at the premise of scheduling/injuries being brought up to dismiss their Cup win.

Personally, I blame people like Mitch Albom for continuously feeding into the idea that after the back-to-back Stanley Cups in 1997 and 1998, if Detroit lost, the finger could be pointed at an injury, a blown call, or an individual player that would be treated as an “other”.

I think the best the Detroit Free Press took a loss between 1999-2009 was in 2000 when Albom said Bowman wasn’t using Shanahan properly.

At a certain point, a team can win so much that much of a city can struggle with not winning (thankfully, we’re not seeing that in this thread, but we’ve seen it in others in the past) - even with the league’s safeguard of requiring 4 losses prior to elimination.

And then there’s the goaltending. Joseph will have the longest summer of all, and given his huge contract, he’s here for a couple more years, for good or bad. That will never make Wings fans feel confident unless he reverses fortune and wins a Cup.

On the other hand, as Shanahan said, “There’s always a tendency to blame the new guys when you lose. You say, ‘What’s different from this year to last year? Oh, Curtis Joseph. Oh, Dave Lewis.’ But that would be wrong.”

 

[Pancakes]

Did the Pens have to face any added adversity due to the schedule in the last two finals? Nope, standard finals, both had 9 days in between the end of the CFs and game 3. Must. Be. Nice.

Pens had to win a Cup last year with no Letang. And this year the NHL gave them a shit regular season schedule with tons of back to backs. The new playoff format has also ensured that the two years they won they had to face a really good Caps team in the second round instead of third. Malkin also wasn't 100% in the finals run the year before last, and Crosby obviously got concussed last year on top of no Tanger.

So yeah..the Pens have faced plenty of adversity to win their Cups, just like every other Cup winner ever has. Championship teams find a way to rise above it all and get it done.

 

[Pancakes]

There's no rational way you can say that moving the schedule up didn't hurt the Wings. There doesn't have to be a conspiracy for that to be obviously true.

If it truly did, wouldn't we have seen that in the first two games? Instead Detroit won both, so how much difference could it honestly have made?

 

[BHD]

The schedule was such a detriment to Detroit's chances that they won the first two game and Game 5 by a combined score of 11-2. Sucks they couldn't get it done, but that's hockey.

 

[danincanada]

Pens had to win a Cup last year with no Letang. And this year the NHL gave them a **** regular season schedule with tons of back to backs. The new playoff format has also ensured that the two years they won they had to face a really good Caps team in the second round instead of third. Malkin also wasn't 100% in the finals run the year before last, and Crosby obviously got concussed last year on top of no Tanger.

So yeah..the Pens have faced plenty of adversity to win their Cups, just like every other Cup winner ever has. Championship teams find a way to rise above it all and get it done.

They definitely faced some adversity, especially last year with the injuries, but they received standard finals schedules. They didn’t have to deal with “something different” exactly when it would magnify what they were already going through. Neither Pens teams faced the amount of adversity that the ‘09 Red Wings did heading into the finals. Few teams have. And sometimes too much adversity can stop the best teams from winning - at least there can be too much to overcome.

“Tanger” is a good player but he’s more of a Rafalski level guy. Sometimes too porous defensively and too much of a risk taker and reckless for my taste. As we saw a solid 6D was enough without him.

 

[danincanada]

If it truly did, wouldn't we have seen that in the first two games? Instead Detroit won both, so how much difference could it honestly have made?

Look at their roster, even without Datsyuk, and what they did the year before. They were a really great team, with loads of skill, two-way guys, experience and calm and poised players. I don’t think we really got to see that team in the finals. They gritted out the first two games at home but they didn’t look like themselves and winning playing like that didn’t feel sustainable. Zetterberg looked like he was going to collapse at the end of game two because he was one of the healthier guys and they relied on him very heavily. Again, they bent but didn’t break within those two games but the adversity did hit then hard in the series. Of course it did, so many core and even elite players were in rough shape before the series even started and it went right into 3 in 4, which I think was a first for the NHL Finals.

 

[Pancakes]

They definitely faced some adversity, especially last year with the injuries, but they received standard finals schedules. They didn’t have to deal with “something different” exactly when it would magnify what they were already going through. Neither Pens teams faced the amount of adversity that the ‘09 Red Wings did heading into the finals. Few teams have. And sometimes too much adversity can stop the best teams from winning - at least there can be too much to overcome.

“Tanger” is a good player but he’s more of a Rafalski level guy. Sometimes too porous defensively and too much of a risk taker and reckless for my taste. As we saw a solid 6D was enough without him.

I'd have to respectfully disagree that less days off is the equivalent in adversity to playing an entire playoffs without your number one defenseman. Yeah the Pens won anyways, but it was a real struggle. Much different than 15-16 where they mostly cruised thanks to health.

But yes I won't disagree that sometimes the adversity is too much to overcome. Pens certainly had that this year with Malkin getting hurt, general fatigue, etc. Maybe what the Wings faced in 09 was too much to overcome. But I think that's excuses. Even with that adversity, they looked like the better team for much of that series. Imo they should have won. So whether they were diminished from what they could be at their very best, I think that Wings team even with the adversity they faced was good enough to beat Pittsburgh, and they just came up short.

I bet if you asked most of the players on that 09 Wings team if they thought they should have won, they'd say yes.

 

[daver]

They definitely faced some adversity, especially last year with the injuries, but they received standard finals schedules. They didn’t have to deal with “something different” exactly when it would magnify what they were already going through. Neither Pens teams faced the amount of adversity that the ‘09 Red Wings did heading into the finals. Few teams have. And sometimes too much adversity can stop the best teams from winning - at least there can be too much to overcome.

“Tanger” is a good player but he’s more of a Rafalski level guy. Sometimes too porous defensively and too much of a risk taker and reckless for my taste. As we saw a solid 6D was enough without him.

What was magnified? Please don't bring up how tired they were. You are hanging your hat on one day that was more than made up for after Game 5 but the Wings couldn't close the deal.

 

[danincanada]

What was magnified? Please don't bring up how tired they were. You are hanging your hat on one day that was more than made up for after Game 5 but the Wings couldn't close the deal.

I’ve explained what I think at length already to you and tried to display what I think was the big picture. If you still don’t know what I’m trying to say or my opinion then you won’t from me repeating it all over again.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

If it truly did, wouldn't we have seen that in the first two games? Instead Detroit won both, so how much difference could it honestly have made?

They lost the series, did they not?

I can think of one other outcome that could've transpired.

 

[K Fleur]

Letang was a season removed from a 2nd team AS nod the in 2017. Losing him was a significant blow.

Brian Rafalski is not a good comparison.

 

[daver]

I’ve explained what I think at length already to you and tried to display what I think was the big picture. If you still don’t know what I’m trying to say or my opinion then you won’t from me repeating it all over again.

The series wasn't "moved up" so the injury excuse nor the "Wings were gassed" excuse was not "magnified" . That's been clearly established. The way the games were actually scheduled (Games 1 to 5 anyways) was already established prior to the CFs. Once the CFs were finished, they formally scheduled the SCF games; there was no change to the formal schedule. That the Pens had one more day of rest was 100% attributed to them sweeping the Caines.

You are making waaaay too much of the NHL's illogical attempt to publicize tentative scheduling.

Whatever advantage you think the Pens gained at the start was made up at the end, and no reasonable person looks at the individual game results and says either team took was affected by either of those "advantages".

 

[danincanada]

The series wasn't "moved up" so the injury excuse nor the "Wings were gassed" excuse was not "magnified" . That's been clearly established. The way the games were actually scheduled (Games 1 to 5 anyways) was already established prior to the CFs. Once the CFs were finished, they formally scheduled the SCF games; there was no change to the formal schedule. That the Pens had one more day of rest was 100% attributed to them sweeping the Caines.

You are making waaaay too much of the NHL's illogical attempt to publicize tentative scheduling.

Whatever advantage you think the Pens gained at the start was made up at the end, and no reasonable person looks at the individual game results and says either team took was affected by either of those "advantages".

It appears the NHL had a schedule format they wanted but that doesn't mean they had to follow it if there were better options, did they? There was no reason for the back to back and 3 in 4 obsession - the league had never even tried it before and suddenly it had to be done. They had a tentative schedule they didn't just move up a little, they moved it up 7 days so instead of 9 days of there were only 2. One extreme to another, in place of something more reasonable. When is the last time they started the finals with only 2 days off after the CFs finished so early? Prove to me this was not totally unusual in the modern era. Everything the NHL was doing with the schedule was accelerated early on compared to what they usually do and MOVED UP overall as well!

Are you also going to go against common sense and pretend more games early on instead of a more evenly spread out series wouldn't make it even tougher on a team that was in the Red Wings state at the time? If you are then I am "officially done" with you because I don't have time to debate with someone like that.

 

[danincanada]

I'd have to respectfully disagree that less days off is the equivalent in adversity to playing an entire playoffs without your number one defenseman. Yeah the Pens won anyways, but it was a real struggle. Much different than 15-16 where they mostly cruised thanks to health.

But yes I won't disagree that sometimes the adversity is too much to overcome. Pens certainly had that this year with Malkin getting hurt, general fatigue, etc. Maybe what the Wings faced in 09 was too much to overcome. But I think that's excuses. Even with that adversity, they looked like the better team for much of that series. Imo they should have won. So whether they were diminished from what they could be at their very best, I think that Wings team even with the adversity they faced was good enough to beat Pittsburgh, and they just came up short.

I bet if you asked most of the players on that 09 Wings team if they thought they should have won, they'd say yes.

That's not what I meant, I wasn't trying to compare the impact of losing Letang with the schedule. The Red Wings had their own injuries in '09 you could compare that with.

You saw a team that had so many guys playing at a fraction of their usual level due to injuries that you saw a team playing at a fraction of their usual level as well. It was a really tight series and I don't remember the Red Wings looking like the better team the majority of the time but you and I were watching it from two different perspectives because I watched Detroit all season and I'm assuming you watched Pittsburgh play. I was extremely proud of my team because so many guys were clearly playing hurt but they fought until the very end and still made it close.