2017-2018 NHL Thread
- Thread starter Kin
- Start date
Kin
New member
I wasn't entirely sure where to put this but because it seems to be a semi-enduring topic for good reason the ongoing remarkable Vegas season continues to puzzle to people and as I was thinking about it maybe a semi-obvious thing occurred to me.
I, like everyone else, was wrong about how good Vegas would be. Likewise, I was very much wrong about how long it would take for the Leafs to go from the bottom of the league to respectability.
But does it seem to anyone else that there's maybe a connection there? Along with things like Colorado's crazy bouncing around and Columbus last year...doesn't it kind of seem like crazy one season point gains for teams is actually somewhat regular these days? True, Vegas technically gained infinity points but there seems to be a commonality to all of these things. Namely a bad team goes from getting bad goaltending to good goaltending and gets a few surprising offensive contributions and instant-playoff team. Vegas didn't do it with draft picks and/or UFA signings, they just had the opportunity to add a goalie like Fleury and some legitimate scorers and the effect was the same.
So I don't think I'm saying anything too profound here but for all of the "Holy Shmoley, how did Vegas do it?" it seems to be pretty straightforward in how teams come together these days.
I, like everyone else, was wrong about how good Vegas would be. Likewise, I was very much wrong about how long it would take for the Leafs to go from the bottom of the league to respectability.
But does it seem to anyone else that there's maybe a connection there? Along with things like Colorado's crazy bouncing around and Columbus last year...doesn't it kind of seem like crazy one season point gains for teams is actually somewhat regular these days? True, Vegas technically gained infinity points but there seems to be a commonality to all of these things. Namely a bad team goes from getting bad goaltending to good goaltending and gets a few surprising offensive contributions and instant-playoff team. Vegas didn't do it with draft picks and/or UFA signings, they just had the opportunity to add a goalie like Fleury and some legitimate scorers and the effect was the same.
So I don't think I'm saying anything too profound here but for all of the "Holy Shmoley, how did Vegas do it?" it seems to be pretty straightforward in how teams come together these days.
Bullfrog said:
Not in the way that past teams were aberrations (i.e. teams that won with crappy possession numbers but sky-high PDOs). But from a more individual look their two MVPs were Karlsson and Fleury and I wouldn't bet on either repeating the seasons that they've had.
Coco-puffs
New member
Bullfrog said:
In terms of success for an expansion team, yes, its an aberration. However, the expansion draft was MUCH more friendly for Vegas in terms of how much each team in the league could protect compared to previous expansion drafts. So Vegas was more than likely going to be better than previous expansion teams.
Even with the parameters of the expansion draft being more Vegas friendly, you were still expecting them to end up with mostly second pair d-men and third-line talent up front. If anything, goaltending would likely be the easiest spot for them to find someone really good since teams could only protect one goalie and some teams had two very good goalies.
With that said... Florida, Columbus, and a few other teams had other motives that helped spur Vegas into an even better team:
1. Columbus wanted to shed Clarkson's contract. So they offered Wild Bill be left unprotected. Wild Bill definitely showed us that sometimes your talent doesn't dictate your point totals, but your opportunity does.
2. Florida wanted out of Rielly Smith's contract AND wanted to protect their d-men for getting poached, so they offered Marchessault and Smith as sort of a package. And, boom, you've got an NHL caliber top line.
3. Secondary scoring: James Neal+ was given up by the Predators who wanted to protect their stable of great D-men. The rest of the forwards were chosen with speed in mind. Also, see again about production and opportunity. Lots of career years in Vegas.
4. Vegas weakness is still probably their D after the draft. But if your forwards are fast enough to support you on the backcheck, and you generally drafted (expansion drafted) d-men who can skate you are probably not in as much trouble as you think.
In terms of what Nik said... I agree. How quick teams can turn their fortunes around from season to season depends a whole lot on goaltending performance (see: Edmonton and even Arizona first half vs second half) and surprise offensive contributions. There is not a whole lot separating the bottom from the middle, and really, not even that much separating the middle and the top teams.
For the Leafs, going in to last year we all expected things to improve vastly offensively from the year before, but with so many rookies you weren't sure just how much improvement you'd get. And #fredex, for all his ups and downs over the past two years, has given good enough goaltending to make the leaky leafs (defensively) a playoff team.
herman
Well-known member
We know PDO makes for fun results and subsequently fun personnel decisions. Coupled with the 3-point system's false parity, I think it makes it pretty easy to hit the playoffs if you have some good 1-goal game luck.
Which, if anything, makes Buffalo so much more funny.
Which, if anything, makes Buffalo so much more funny.
Coco-puffs said:
There's actually more to the Columbus thing that makes it look even worse for the Blue Jackets. Dumping Clarkson's contract wasn't really the priority for them in the expansion draft. They had a number of players that they were forced to leave unprotected and as part of their dealings Vegas agreed to NOT select a few of them. They included back-up goalie Joonas Korpisalo (.897 Sv% this season), winger Josh Anderson (30 points in 63 games), and Jack Johnson (is awful, and an UFA this summer). Not included in that list of guys was of course William Karlsson.
So the moves that they made actually steered Vegas towards taking Karlsson.
edit: Of course in Columbus' defence nobody on the planet could have predicted that Karlsson would have the season that he did.
bustaheims said:
https://twitter.com/KurtLeavins/status/988469262888026112
Because the Oilers professional scouts have never been wrong about anything before.
herman said:
Did they? Marner's still in the playoffs and he isn't.
https://twitter.com/darrenrovell/status/989656987800498176
Darren Rovell is such a tool.
Darren Rovell is such a tool.
Nik the Trik said:
I don't want Detroit or Chicago to win it because they had enough success that was at least partially due to getting lucky at the draft and I don't want that to happen again. I don't want Edmonton, Ottawa, Montreal, or Vancouver to win it because they're all terribly run teams that shouldn't be rewarded for it. I could stomach Buffalo getting it and I wouldn't mind if they rose to a level of relevance because I think that'd be a fun rivalry... although it'd be hilarious if they had to draft 2nd again.
So I'm rooting for Arizona to win, Buffalo to pick 2nd, and then the Rangers or one of the teams in the bottom-6 for odds to get the 3rd pick and bump everyone else down.
Kin
New member
I have to admit, there's a bit of the anarchist in me that kind of wants Edmonton to win it but only because I genuinely think that if Edmonton wins enough draft lotteries then rather than focusing on my fun/sort-of jokey hatred on them enough people might come around to the fairly serious point I'm making re: them and the inherent ridiculousness of the draft lottery to begin with.
Frank E said:
I was just thinking about how good Arizona's future would look with Dahlin involved when I wondered... would they make sense as a potential Tavares landing spot? Amazingly bright future, tons of cap space, a need for a big name/franchise player to sell some tickets. From what we know it sounds like Tavares might be a guy who would prefer playing in a smaller market... well you don't get much smaller than this.