Post-Game Talk: Unsatisfactory win?

[guymez]

Not against you at all, bud. You agreed with me in general and then brought that up as one example. You get it. There was another poster
who used it exclusively, and simply failed to understand the difference in teams and era.. Cheers.

All good.

 

[Stoneman89]

The whole debate from my side was whether or not the dynasty team took nights off vs weaker teams. Here is the quote I challenged:


This is evidence that even one of the best teams of all time did exactly that coming out .500 in an 8 game series vs one of the weakest teams in the league. That same year they went 4-3-1 vs LA, another mediocre division rival, and went 1-1-1 vs Pittsburgh and the Rangers. They also lost games to NJ, Hartford and Toronto. That's a total of 10 out of 20 losses to teams in the bottom part of the League. Of course sometimes they ran teams like this out of the building. But there were lost of nights where they just went through the motions as a team when they played weak opposition. As I said though one difference is that Gretzky on many of those nights would simply win the game almost on his own.

As I mentioned, a lot of nights it would be hard to tell if they were mailing it in, they were so talented. When you're winning games 8-4, hard to say how much of it was "mailing it in" and how much was supreme talent taking over. You've cherry picked some results against a few teams. Losing 7-8 games against inferior opposition in an 82 game schedule is not mailing it in a whole lot. Once again, different team, different era. But really done beating this to death. If you want, you can continue, but I'm moving on.

 

[Fourier]

As I mentioned, a lot of nights it would be hard to tell if they were mailing it in, they were so talented. When you're winning games 8-4, hard to say how much of it was "mailing it in" and how much was supreme talent taking over. You've cherry picked some results against a few teams. Losing 7-8 games against inferior opposition in an 82 game schedule is not mailing it in a whole lot. Once again, different team, different era. But really done beating this to death. If you want, you can continue, but I'm moving on.

How am I cherry picking results. The Stanley Cup champ lost 10 games, half the number they lost the whole year, to teams in the bottom of the league. I was at every home game that year. There were lots of nights when they went through the motions. That's absolutely to be expected. And yes they did win games on nights when they were on cruise. But to claim there was not much mailing it in is just false.

 

[bone]

Since Nov 10th, the first game after the brutal 12 game start, the team is 1st in points and point percentage3rd in GF/gm with 3.72 GF/gm (Colorado is at 3.79), 5th best GA/gm at 2.52, 3rd in pp% at 27.3%, 5th best pk at 83.0%, third best in ShA/gm and 4th best in ShA/gm. They are also third best in CF% 5 vs 5, 5th in SCF% and second in xGF%. And yet when I come here it often feels like doom and gloom reigns supreme. I think it is PTSD from so many years of disappointment.

For sure. Big picture, this team is still a wagon over the last few months. What I'm liking right now is Knoblach is tinkering around with a lot of stuff to see what he has to work with in much lower leverage situations.

I like that when the team needed wins desperately, he locked in lines that were working and didn't panic in game and stayed the course leading a historic winning streak.

Through that they built up a bit of a buffer in the standings so that now he's into a lower leverage situation and it allows him to tinker and he's trying all kinds of strange combinations (would never have dreamed of RNH/AH/DR line).

Some have been pretty bad, which is creating the appearance that the team isn't playing as well, but so what, at least he's learning these things in lower leverage situations than Game 5 of a playoff series.

 

[Stoneman89]

How am I cherry picking results. The Stanley Cup champ lost 10 games, half the number they lost the whole year, to teams in the bottom of the league. I was at every home game that year. There were lots of nights when they went through the motions. That's absolutely to be expected. And yes they did win games on nights when they were on cruise. But to claim there was not much mailing it in is just false.

I was at every home game as well. Depends what your interpretation of mailing it in is. Players are not robots, so to expect 100 % every single night simply is not realistic. Can they be near the top, or 80-90 % every night? Of course not. But playing at say 70 % or so is not mailing it in. It may look like it at times, but that doesn't mean they're mailing it in. Some nights you just don't have it, they're human. Doesn't mean you're mailing it in. And the other team may be playing at their 90 % that night, making it look even worse. Saying these guys were spending a lot of time mailing it in, is what is false.

 

[Fourier]

I was at every home game as well. Depends what your interpretation of mailing it in is. Players are not robots, so to expect 100 % every single night simply is not realistic. Can they be near the top, or 80-90 % every night? Of course not. But playing at say 70 % or so is not mailing it in. It may look like it at times, but that doesn't mean they're mailing it in. Some nights you just don't have it, they're human. Doesn't mean you're mailing it in. And the other team may be playing at their 90 % that night, making it look even worse. Saying these guys were spending a lot of time mailing it in, is what is false.

I actually agree with this virtually all of this post. Unfortunately, I think that most people here feel that giving it 70% is mailing it in which is why I wrote what I did.

If you also agree that under this definition the present day team seldom mails it in then I think we are in agreement.