Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurs
Yes I think they were and they are a good example of the difference between a team having one good regular season and nothing else and a team that had a bad play-off performance.
Looking at the Flames seasons before the supposed contending year they had:
Lost in First Round 4-1
Lost in the First Round 4-2
No Play-offs
Bruins:
Lost in Second Round to SC Champions
Lost in the Second Round
Lost in first Round 4-3
To me you can see the Bruins had more seasons where they were closer to the top, not amazing but the success they had last year wasn't a one off they had more sustained success. Where the Flames had been ok or bad in the 3 seasons before the great regular season.
After the season the Flames followed it up missing the play-offs and the Bruins followed it up by leading the East. So again more reason to think that the success they had was sustainable not just a good regular season.
If the Bruins go out in the first round or even second again I think it is fair to ask questions likely around if their forward group is good enough to get it done in the play-offs or maybe if the goaltending as good as it is has the mentality of the play-offs depending on what happens, but you can clearly see the two teams have much different results when looking at them.
|
How many fourth overall teams in the recent history of the league not been widely considered contenders?
Pekkerhead has it right. Claiming teams were not contenders in retrospect is a flimsy position to take.
The Flames, unfortunately, were a much different team in 22/23 than they were in 21/22. Had Gaudreau resigned as well as Tkachuckwho knows what happens. They could have maintained their status as a contender or perhaps they would have still tuned out Sutter and missed the playoffs.no one knows.