Do you think the Canucks will lose to the Stanley Cup champions?
- Thread starter TychoFan
- Start date
I dont think we'd beat the Pens in the Finals. I think we'll get to WCF and face the Hawks. I think that series will go 7 games. If there is one team in the west that can beat chicago, it's us. I'm hoping this team will go to the Finals.
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
I don't think we would beat Chicago. Strange how one game completely alters fan opinions. Am I the only one that remembers the game in Chicago before? The one where it should've been roughly 15-0 for Chicago, if Schneider weren't making saves by breakdancing on his head backwards and looking like he was going through an exorcism throughout? Pretty sure an NHL record for odd-man rushes was made that game. That was not a deserved victory for the Canucks, in any way, shape, or form. And the reality is that that game was much more meaningful than the one on Monday.
To the OP - I don't really think it's relevant, to be honest.
Bro Horvat
2011 Truther
I was saying even before the Canucks drew the Sharks that they're my darkhorse pick for the cup, so yeah.
Shareefruck
Registered User
I think that trend/stat is pretty pointless, personally-- In the playoffs, there are only eight teams you can get beat by-- 4 if you get to the second round, two if you make it to the conference finals, and one if you make it to the final.
If you're a competitive team who isn't at the bottom of the playoff teams, it isn't too unlikely/surprising to get knocked out by the eventual cup winner, IMO. Especially taking into account that the eventual cup winner is going to beat 3 out of the other 7 teams, and when you lose a round, you're increasing the chances of the team that beat you exponentially.
It's barely even a coincidence, IMO.
If you're a competitive team who isn't at the bottom of the playoff teams, it isn't too unlikely/surprising to get knocked out by the eventual cup winner, IMO. Especially taking into account that the eventual cup winner is going to beat 3 out of the other 7 teams, and when you lose a round, you're increasing the chances of the team that beat you exponentially.
It's barely even a coincidence, IMO.
Last edited:
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2008
- 6,780
- 3,596
I've heard several people say this, and I don't understand it much. I see this Sharks team as being significantly worse than the President's Trophy Contending Sharks of a few years ago. And those teams never even made the Stanley Cup Finals.
Of course the same thing could be said about the canucks now I suppose.
I've heard several people say this, and I don't understand it much. I see this Sharks team as being significantly worse than the President's Trophy Contending Sharks of a few years ago. And those teams never even made the Stanley Cup Finals.
Of course the same thing could be said about the canucks now I suppose.
once they dumped murray and clowe everything about the team kicked up a notch. they've had an extremely strong post-deadline, similar to LA last year
Fat Tony
Fire Benning
- Nov 28, 2011
- 3,012
- 0
That's kind of the definition of a darkhorse. I think the Canucks are a darkhorse too. =\
Royal Canuck
Taco Enthusiast
I say IF we lose to a team in the post-season, yes.
But I feel we're going all the way.
Call me cocky or confident, either works.
But I feel we're going all the way.
Call me cocky or confident, either works.
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2008
- 6,780
- 3,596
After a few minutes research...I can declare your statement complete balderdash. The Sharks are 7-5-1 since trading Clowe on April 2. Not really a surge...in fact its a points percentage of 0.577 over those 13 games, compared to an overall points percentage of 0.594.
The canucks are also a rather ordinary 7-5-1 in their last 13 games...including 2 mean-nothing losses to close the season.
Compare this to the King's last 13 games last season: 8-2-3 for a 0.731 points percentage, compared to a season average of 0.579
Last edited:
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2008
- 6,780
- 3,596
Fair enough. I maintain however that this Sharks team is much worse than their best teams of a few years ago...and those teams couldn't even make the Stanley Cup Finals. This canucks team is imo only marginally worse than the 2011 team (when healthy) a team that at least made the finals.
Fat Tony
Fire Benning
- Nov 28, 2011
- 3,012
- 0
If they're going to be stepping stones, they should be wobbly stepping stones. People hate wobbly stepping stones.
Fat Tony
Fire Benning
- Nov 28, 2011
- 3,012
- 0
I think the Canucks can win. They're the team that will least likely try to force the Canucks out of their game.
BenningHurtsMySoul
Unfair Huggy Bear
Chicago is just the worst matchup for us, bottom line. They have a winning history against us, they know they can get in our heads and they're the best team in the league at applying pressure when they smell blood.
opendoor
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 11,719
- 1,403
Given that their record post trade deadline was mediocre, I'll assume you're talking about their possession stats. Personally I'm hesitant to read too much into a 13 game sample in which they played a selection of some the worst possession teams in the league. IIRC only 3 of those 13 games were against teams with Fenwick close ratings of over 50% and they got 3 games against Dallas (47.73%), 2 games against Columbus (45.05%), and 2 games against Minnesota (48.47%).
I don't think that's really comparable at all to the Kings' 19 game sample from last season where they put up by far the best numbers of any team post-deadline in a sample that saw over half of their games be against the top 10 possession teams in the league.
That said, San Jose still has an advantage over the Canucks in that regard because Vancouver has been downright terrible in terms of possession despite a collection of pillow soft competition over the last month or so.
Three key differences:
1 - LA made a lateral move at the deadline, adding Carter for Johnson. They didn't actively distribute.
2 - LA's core was/is made up of guys in their mid-20s, who had been underachieving as a unit all year.
3 - LA was a strong road team last year. SJ has a pitiful road record, which, to me, is a sign of a lack of heart/work ethic/discipline/compete.
me2
Go ahead foot
I don't see the trend continuing this year. I think the Canucks getting knocked out in the 1st/2nd round is more likely, it would take a whole bunch of other upsets for this to be a year where they lose to the eventual SC winner.
