Quote:
Originally Posted by Ped
|
I tend to agree with this statement;
Quote:
Then there’s the second door. That one also starts with a belief, but this time it’s that the Stanley Cup playoffs don’t necessarily tell us much of anything.
Behind this door, the playoffs are a system that’s designed to produce excitement and drama and conflict and euphoria and lots and lots of revenue, but that also does a terrible job of telling us anything about who was actually the best team. A hot goalie here, some bad luck there, one bounce in overtime, and suddenly a series is over before we ever learned anything. In the end, one team is left. Was that team the best? Maybe, but if so it’s often coincidence.
|
You would think that over the course of a best of 7 series the odds of the higher ranked team coming out should be better than say NFL where it's one game with no 2nd chance to make up for not playing your best. Still in football more than not the top teams win in the playoffs as the wildcard teams rarely even make the Super Bowl. I don't think you can compare the NBA because the star players play the majority of the game and often the teams with the best players win but in the NHL it's more of a team game and it seems if a team from top to bottom plays their best hockey they can beat any team regardless of a talent deficiency. Also the NHL has the issue of the officials calling games different in the playoffs which is also an equalizer. It does seem like it's more about getting hot at the right time and getting the bounces.
Bottom line is that I don't think it's a good thing that the Lightning and Flames did not make it to the 2nd round as no league wants their best teams out of the spotlight at the beginning of the playoffs but both teams have to look in the mirror as for whatever reason they played their worst hockey at the time it mattered the most.