If Dallas Wins, Will it be the Biggest Giant-Slaying Run?

[CupHolders]

Based on the consensus in this thread, apparently:

Kings beating 1, 3, 9 and 11 is more impressive than;
Isles beating 1, 2, 4 and 12.

That year the Isles finished 5th overall in the league, but with only 91 points. On the way to the Cup they beat teams with 116, 110 and 105 points (no loser OT points in those days, and 2 less games in the regular season, so topping 100 points meant you were dominant during the regular season - Philly for example had 48 wins and 12 losses).

All while generating a whole lot of free chili!

 

[kingsholygrail]

So how could the Coyotes and Devils be "giants" if they were on their own underdog Cinderella runs? Simply put, they were not giants, or anything close. New Jersey is almost inarguably the weakest finalist in the ten year span of 2007-2016. Phoenix was your typical decent team that played well and went on a nice little run, similar to last year's Hurricanes. It's telling that Los Angeles, despite being an 8 seed, was solidly favoured against both those teams. There was nothing great about either of them.

Giants of circumstance. If New Jersey is the weakest finalist, how bad were the Rangers that year to lose to them?

 

[Kyle McMahon]

So what you are really arguing is that 2012 was a year of weak teams? I have seen many make similar arguments about the 2006 Stanley Cup playoffs as to suggest that the success that the Hurricanes and Oilers achieved to make it to the Cup Finals should be minimized.

Seriously, anyone that wants to talk smack about the fact that a team defeats the teams that they are required to defeat in order to achieve success... well they can take a hike.

I'm not implicitly saying 2012 was a year of weak teams, I'm saying it wasn't the "greatest giant slaying run", as has been suggested. It shouldn't be in the discussion. That same LA team won again in 2014 after defeating WAY tougher competition. That's the year that should be debated, not 2012.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Giants of circumstance. If New Jersey is the weakest finalist, how bad were the Rangers that year to lose to them?

I don't see how the quality of the 2012 Rangers is particularly relevant, but they were nothing special, barely even escaping the first round.

If New Jersey isn't the weakest finalist in the time frame I gave, who do you believe is?

 

[lawrence]

I'm not implicitly saying 2012 was a year of weak teams, I'm saying it wasn't the "greatest giant slaying run", as has been suggested. It shouldn't be in the discussion. That same LA team won again in 2014 after defeating WAY tougher competition. That's the year that should be debated, not 2012.

2012 l.a was the 8th seeded team. However they didn’t have to go through a dynasty level Chicago team like they did in 2014.

 

[acor]

2012 l.a was the 8th seeded team. However they didn’t have to go through a dynasty level Chicago team like they did in 2014.

But before the season they were popular team to "break out" and some people picked them for the cup... It's just they had crappy RS, at least before Carter trade and hiring Sutter... They were not some cinderella run out of nowhere...

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

But before the season they were popular team to "break out" and some people picked them for the cup... It's just they had crappy RS, at least before Carter trade and hiring Sutter... They were not some cinderella run out of nowhere...

1. True but there was damn near no one picking them to make any noise in the playoffs after the start of the year. That's revisionist. There were a few people starting to dabble in advanced stats and some others who noticed, but most people picked powerhouse Vancouver to crush them, and then called them a fluke all the way until the moment they swept St. Louis.

2. Is Dallas? They were an OT goal against the Cup champs away from advancing deep last year too.

 

[acor]

1. True but there was damn near no one picking them to make any noise in the playoffs after the start of the year. That's revisionist. There were a few people starting to dabble in advanced stats and some others who noticed, but most people picked powerhouse Vancouver to crush them, and then called them a fluke all the way until the moment they swept St. Louis.

2. Is Dallas? They were an OT goal against the Cup champs away from advancing deep last year too.

1. I wouldn't treat "pre-playoff predictions" seriously ever, because people often pick the team that simply done better recently... I also probably picked Vancouver back then...

Facts are- Kings were not some improbable team out of nowhere, but were contenders, who simply f***ed up Regular Season- claiming otherwise is revisionist... Other teams like that- Philadelphia'10, Nashville'17, to some excent St. Louis'19- despite poor regular season all reached SCF (or won), and these weren't some cinderella runs, just runs of a great teams that underachieved in RS...

Despite having lower points total, Kings were oddmakers favourite in each round except the 1st one...

2. Never said that...

 

[Lt Dan]

I'm not implicitly saying 2012 was a year of weak teams, I'm saying it wasn't the "greatest giant slaying run", as has been suggested. It shouldn't be in he discussion. That same LA team won again in 2014 after defeating WAY tougher competition..

I don't agree with the WAY tougher competition line

First round 2012 Canucks vs 2014 Sharks = The Canucks were no doubt a better team. HUGE Edge to 2012 Canucks
Second Round 2012 Blues vs 2014 Ducks = slight edge to 2014 ducks
Third Round 2012 Coyotes vs 2014 Hawks- Pretty big edge to 2014 Hawks
SCF 2012 Devils vs 2014 Rangers= the 2012 Devils were a better team than the 2014 Rangers.

 

[Aoko]

Actually LA faced 1, 3, 9, and 11 ranked teams in 2012, which is more impressive

As a eight seed.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I don't agree with the WAY tougher competition line

First round 2012 Canucks vs 2014 Sharks = The Canucks were no doubt a better team. HUGE Edge to 2012 Canucks
Second Round 2012 Blues vs 2014 Ducks = slight edge to 2014 ducks
Third Round 2012 Coyotes vs 2014 Hawks- Pretty big edge to 2014 Hawks
SCF 2012 Devils vs 2014 Rangers= the 2012 Devils were a better team than the 2014 Rangers.

I can't agree that the Devils were better than the Rangers. Those Rangers were a game away from getting back to the final again the next season and were a regular top team in the east for several years around that time period. New Jersey missed the playoffs in both surrounding years and benefited greatly from Boston and Pittsburgh both gagging in the first round. They were the most out-of-left-field finalist of the cap era other than Edmonton IMO.

 

[fsanford]

As a eight seed.

That rolled through the playoff's on top of it.

I remember how they had to back in in the first place I think the Preds had to win or lose like the last night of the regular season for the Kings to qualify it was that close. But I could be wrong about that.