Also, "Fundamentally"? Is that this year's "visually" or something? So "fundamentally" they are good despite having a mediocre record where one player has had a hand in nearly half of the goals produced, and the top pairing are still arguably a middle pairing on most other teams.
And Calgary is "fundamentally" not better than them because they win a lot of one goal games, and use their strong play of their goaltender to their advantage. Even though the team stats indicate players are contributing by committee. I guess having a legitimate top pairing and the team depth to compensate for the absence of their top player, and subpar play of their other top player over the first two months is less of a "fundamentally" sound model than having lots of supposedly game-breaking talent up front that ironically can't break close games lol.
|