I truly believe as it is, winning the Stanley Cup would be easier than winning the Connor McDavid sweepstakes, especially with our line up. With teams like Flames and Sabres with basically no NHL calibre players, I fail to see how we would even come close to Connor McDavid.
So quit talking about it!! We have a chance at getting into the playoffs, from there who knows what kind of momentum a team can go on. Who knows what kind of injuries will plague the "contenders".
Nobody knows, but we know we won't be as bad as some of the bottom feeding teams!
Would be easier to fall 30 feet than to jump even 1 wouldn't it? So not sure how that works.
I agree with the original post. In the last 3 finals we have seen both the Devils and the Rangers play even if they were in my opinion fairly mediocre teams. Anything can happen in the play-offs. LA could just as well have lost in the first round last year and NYR wouldn't even have been in it if they had played in the West.
To me the difference between the best and the 20th team in the NHL is quite small. However, there are always a couple of teams really struggling at the bottom so the difference between the 20th or maybe even 25th and the 30th can be quite significant.
If we're looking at what we had on paper, it's not going to reflect what happened on the ice because of all the injuries that happened last year. My point is the personnel is similar, and that the injuries that decimated that team could just as easily happen to this one. It's easier to compare the best lineup that you can envision of both teams than it is to guess what an injured version of this lineup is going to look like.I take slight offence to Team A. Jensen and Santo never played together. Santo was on the RW apart from a handful of games where he got some minutes on the 4th line - Richo had the 3C locked down. Kassian was rarely on the 2nd line. Higgins and Hansen were primarily on the 2nd line. Booth was on the 3rd line. Tom Sestito played 77 games. Overlooks the Dalpe/Lain/Archi/Welsh revolving door.
Unless you consider it a depth chart, but even then I don't think it's fairly representing what we had at the start of the year.
How's that? The road to winning should never be considered "easier" than the road to losing. Winning a cup should not be considered "easier" than tanking. It's an insult to how difficult/competitive the game is.no. this analogy is also bad.
Nobody's condemning/predicting how they WILL do, but if we're talking about which they're closer to at this point in time, it's a discussion about how things look at this current moment in time on paper. We're using phrases like "this would be surprising, this wouldn't, this would take a miracle, etc". The on paper argument was just another factor worth bringing up anyways, not the whole picture. How can that bother you?I like how fans use their teams based solely on how they look on paper, as to how well they will do in reality, when obviously the season isn't played on paper or the off-season, it's played for real, which means there are many factors that go into how well a team will actually do.
This too.The NHL is very close to changing the lottery system for the 2015 draft so that all non playoff teams have a more equal chance at drafting 1st.
The Canucks clearly have a much better shot of winning the lottery than the Stanley Cup this year considering that they picked 6th and have traded several key veterans from their lineup since then.
end thread
No way in hell this is true, IMO.
Even if a team is smack dab in the middle of the league, the cup isn't equidistant to them from the bottom. It's difficult to make moves to become good, the chances of making good enough moves to win a cup are really really bleak. The closer you get, each additional hurdle is exponentially tougher to over-come. And we aren't smack dab in the middle of the league-- right now we're crossing our fingers that the moves we've made will skyrocket us back to the middle of the league.
Making moves to get worse is easy. Making mistakes is easy. Having bad enough luck that you screw over your season is far more likely than having good enough luck to fluke your way to a cup.
I don't have any hope of getting McDavid, nor has that even been a factor towards me wanting the team to have a transition year. However, the team finished 6th last last season and while we've made changes, it's questionable whether or not this team even looks better on paper this year. It would not take a miracle for this team to have an awful year. It would take a miracle for this team to win a cup.
It's not even that unlikely that Calgary is better than us this season, IMO.
Isn't there a new rule where even the 17th place team has a shot at McDavid now anyways?
Again, I have no interest in advocating for a tank for McDavid initiative, but the premise of the OP is nowhere near true, IMO.
The difference isn't between a Stanley Cup vs McDavid. I'd take Eichel and the following 4-5 guys over finishing as a 1st round fodder.
Here I thought there may be some statistical evidence to support this.
The NHL is very close to changing the lottery system for the 2015 draft so that all non playoff teams have a more equal chance at drafting 1st.
The actual odds are better to finish last for the Canucks this year and that doesn't even factor in some other variables.
I am surprised I haven't seen a little Mexican girl suggesting we can do both yet
no. this analogy is also bad.
People dreaming of McDavid need to wake up. It ain't happening.
/thread
Hey, show me some science!! Then once you do, make sure you take into account that finishing last will give a team AT BEST a 25% chance of drafting #1. Ask Buffalo and Columbus how it works.
Okay. The vegas odds of the Canucks winning the cup are worse than than those odds.
That was pretty easy.
And who said anything about finishing last? This is a winning the sweepstakes vs winning the cup thread.
The fact that there's a much better chance of a team that's outside of last place landing McDavid just helps the Canucks. You don't get it at all.
I agree with this as well. I'd go as far as saying that any top 10 pick would be worth it, IMO.That is my stance as well. Don't outright try to tank like Buffalo necessarily, but leave spots open for Jensen, Horvat, Corrado and Shinkaruk to take, pair them with our veterans and let the cards fall where they will. Perhaps explore the value of Hamhuis, but only make that move if the value is there.
Alas, we're going to try and claw into 8th.