Fat Tony
Fire Benning
- Nov 28, 2011
- 3,012
- 0
i think it was a pretty trivial inference
True. He's wrong either way.
i think it was a pretty trivial inference
More mind-reading.
In 2012, the Sedins were top 30 in league scoring. Last season, they didn't crack the top 90. That bucks any kind of trend one cares to bring up, league-wide or among "top scorers".
sure it is but here is a set of numbers (Hank's adjusted point totals)
81
82
84
119
101
90
85
55
Seems to be a decline pretty plain and simple there isn't it?
some people just have a hard time admitting the truth and that all players age even their hometown favorites.
So you think Burrows is more likely to score 30 then Daniel? I'll take that bet.
....
burrows looks like burrows but hes not getting results, daniel doesnt look like daniel sedin. when daniel got results, he still doesn't look like daniel sedin.
they both had a terrible year in terms of boxcar stats. i would put money on burrows being more likely to recover (to full) than daniel. theres obviously a reality where daniel does and burrows doesnt, and a reality where they both recover, but i think the most likely conclusion is that daniel isn't going to get back to where he was three years ago relative to henrik
accusing someone of racism is a pretty ****** way to say "i dont understand why a and not b"
i think either is pretty unlikely sadly
You keep saying this and I keep responding that it doesn't matter what they did in the first 41 games. If you want to arbitrarily change your time period, let's break that down even further. In the first 15 games, for example, Henrik was slightly above a PPG. Then Henrik proceeded to score 17 points over his next 26 games, for a 0.65PPG average. Daniel scored a PPG in October, and then scored 20 points in 26 games in November/December (0.77PPG)
You can try to hide that fact all you want but that doesn't change anything, they simply weren't very good last year. They had a great October (to the levels that most people think they can still play over a full season...I'm not one of those people) and they weren't close to what we need them to be over the rest of the season.
If they scored 35 points over the 1st 41 games, that means Henrik scored 15 points and Daniel 12 in the second half of the season. So we had half a season where they were 60-80 point pace players, and have a season where they were 20-30 point pace players. Put the two halves together and we got a 50 point seasons out of them.
We'll have to wait and see how they do, but scoring like decent top line players one half of the season then average 3rd liners the next half is abnormal. That's not a downward slope that's a straight up plunge, as if they aged 10 years after the new year. That points heavily to injuries and coaching being the culprits of their poor output last season.
the "decline" just seems worse than it actually is because the league's stars are getting shut down
sorry if i wasn't clear the first time, hope you didn't lose any sleep over it
No. The Sedins' production had fallen off the map in the second half of last season relative to other scorers.
ftfy
Ignoring November and December are we?
If that's the case, it's depressing to think that a good first half only helped them break into the top 100 in scoring.
It was their worst stretch of games in a very, very long time. We've been pretty spoiled by the twins consistency over the years.
It was their worst stretch of games in a very, very long time. We've been pretty spoiled by the twins consistency over the years.
You'd think that after 15 years of being constantly under-estimated by the fanbase here, people would have learned not to under-estimate them any longer. Apparently not.
We're never going to contend for a Stanley Cup again with the Sedins as our front line players plain and simple. What makes this situation even worse is none of our prospects are ready to step in and make a significant impact to make up for this. I'd argue that none of our prospects even have elite first line upside. We're going to be a mediocre team for the foreseeable future. The Canucks will not be good enough to contend (if everything falls into place) and not bad enough to have a high lottery pick (even if injuries and further regression occur).
You'd think that after 15 years of being constantly under-estimated by the fanbase here, people would have learned not to under-estimate them any longer. Apparently not.