Quote:
Originally Posted by SixtySix
Rangers were in the cup finals and conference finals the past 2 years. The Lightning were in the cup finals just last year. The Capitals are the runaway President's Trophy winner as the top team this season. That sounds like one hell of a road to the finals to me.
Kings and Rangers both got ousted for free in 5 games. Is it worth arguing that the Sharks' 5 game series was harder? Why?
I don't think you can argue that Nashville is a better team than Washington. Why does the fact that the Caps "dropped the ball" make it any easier on the Pens? Both teams played a 6 game series and the Pens beat the better team.
I agree that Blues > Lightning, but it's close. Both series went to 7 games. Again, not sure why it's worth arguing that the series which had a blowout in game 7 was more taxing on the Sharks.
Both teams have played the same number of games. Neither team had it easy, but if you think it was "far tougher" for the Sharks then I think it just comes down to a Western Conference bias more so than logic and reason.
|
In the grand scheme of things, theirs no way of arguing that a road to the final is tougher per say - too many intangibles, but the calibre of the teams the Sharks had to get through based on those teams history of actually showing they can win and not be pretenders is a good measure of a teams true ability.
The Kings have two rings this decade. Sharks beat them. Hawks have 3 rings this decade, Sharks beat the team that beat them. What have the Lightning and Rangers and Capitals done? Squat. They can keep beating each other all they want until they reach the finals and once again show why the
West plays the winning style these days. Like it or not, the proofs in the pudding - no bias here. You are only the best if you take out the best, and the Sharks have. Thats why i think they'll win. But anything is possible when you have Sidney Crosby on your team.