Edmonton is No Good VIII: There's Still Something in the Water!

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by stang

They are on pace for 105 points over 82 games. Flames had 107. That’s pretty close.

In a season where they only played 6 teams all year in a weak division and avoided the good American teams. The two aren't even comparable.

[stang]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Hell, I didn't see much of a gap between the Flames and Oilers at all in the last set. An extra save by Smith here and there the difference, partly cause he got fortunate flopping around like a moron and partly our depleted confidence in putting pucks in open nets. But that in what is supposed to be our nightmare season. .

I get that you can’t just take this season and say this is where you’d fit in. But this is all the info we have. Maybe you pull out the senators and insert Vegas, and the flames might go .500 against them and be in the playoffs. You can play that game all day. My point is that it’s not like the pacific is some powerhouse division anyways, and I think the pacific is weaker then the North.

I’m glad you didn’t see much of a gap in that 2 game set. Funny how you can’t prorate 56 games to 82 games, but those 2 games are key for you.

[Cambardi]

Originally Posted by stang

I get that you can’t just take this season and say this is where you’d fit in. But this is all the info we have. Maybe you pull out the senators and insert Vegas, and the flames might go .500 against them and be in the playoffs. You can play that game all day. My point is that it’s not like the pacific is some powerhouse division anyways, and I think the pacific is weaker then the North.

I’m glad you didn’t see much of a gap in that 2 game set. Funny how you can’t prorate 56 games to 82 games, but those 2 games are key for you.

The most difficult thing about this season for me on a personal level is - A teams success is measured against 6 teams in a 31 team league. Then the playoffs take place and ultimately the team that will hoist the cup this year will only have played 9 teams. It's a product of the pandemic but still not an good representation of a typical season.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by stang

I get that you can’t just take this season and say this is where you’d fit in. But this is all the info we have. Maybe you pull out the senators and insert Vegas, and the flames might go .500 against them and be in the playoffs. You can play that game all day. My point is that it’s not like the pacific is some powerhouse division anyways, and I think the pacific is weaker then the North.

I’m glad you didn’t see much of a gap in that 2 game set. Funny how you can’t prorate 56 games to 82 games, but those 2 games are key for you.

Cool, then let's look at the full series.

10 games. Flames 4-6 Oil, with a few one goal games in there.

You had 2 blowouts before we brought in Sutter, credit where due, we were ####. Then we had one against you after we brought in Sutter. Aside from that, everything played pretty close. I'd argue in a couple of your narrow wins we had a pretty significant advantage in play, including the last game where you had a 10 minute flurry in the first, and were hemmed by our forecheck much of the rest of the night. In a career season for a Smith and career clip for McDavid. And our worst season in years.

Massive gap.

As an oiler fan, I'd have hoped for better, especially in those last three games with the Flames under their new head coach, which is probably the most indicative of where the two clubs are at presently.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Inferno

In a season where they only played 6 teams all year in a weak division and avoided the good American teams. The two aren't even comparable.

I think the Oilers would have potentially had an easier schedule this year if the divisions and schedule had remained unchanged.

Yeah they had games this year against the non playoff teams in Cgy, Van and Ott, but if they had stayed in the Pacific they would have had 29 games against Vegas, Cgy, Van, Ari, SJ, Ana, LA.

One of those teams is so not like the others. And I'd argue that Ari, SJ, Ana, and LA are all worse than the worst team in the North.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I think the Oilers would have potentially had an easier schedule this year if the divisions and schedule had remained unchanged.

Yeah they had games this year against the non playoff teams in Cgy, Van and Ott, but if they had stayed in the Pacific they would have had 29 games against Vegas, Cgy, Van, Ari, SJ, Ana, LA.

One of those teams is so not like the others. And I'd argue that Ari, SJ, Ana, and LA are all worse than the worst team in the North.

That's still only 6 teams and 29 out of 82 games. You're not taking into consideration they would have to play everyone.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by stang

So you guys went
1-1
1-1
0-2
0-2
1-2


A .375?

What’s your point?

The point is those are all probable losses for Edmonton, so you can’t extrapolate a 105 point season. Calgary got to 107 WITH those losses. Edmonton is on track for 105 without having to play any top teams.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I think the Oilers would have potentially had an easier schedule this year if the divisions and schedule had remained unchanged.

Yeah they had games this year against the non playoff teams in Cgy, Van and Ott, but if they had stayed in the Pacific they would have had 29 games against Vegas, Cgy, Van, Ari, SJ, Ana, LA.

One of those teams is so not like the others. And I'd argue that Ari, SJ, Ana, and LA are all worse than the worst team in the North.

But again, you're just assuming you'd roll over all of them.

When each of those teams employs a style and unique personnel specific to them, some that may be more or less effective against your style and top heavy nature of your roster.

I simply don't know how you can jump to the conclusion that it would be a walk in the park for your team when you're also a club that was eliminated and out-special teamed by the 12th place post-apex Blackhawks who are very much in the same class as a number of those teams.

I'd employ a wait and see approach given how many asterisks your season has. I think you're understating the, frankly, massive difference between facing 6 teams over a half season vs 31 over a full season with intra-continental travel.

It's strange because you guys acknowledge the validity of the points we're making here but then you just go back to your pro-oilers logic that is pretty far removed from objectivity or reality.

You can't even find a middle ground here, you're just going back to the assumption that the Oilers are better than a whole pile of teams by default and won't have any trouble beating them despite every normal season demonstrating with overwhelming evidence that it's never that black and white and literally any team can beat you or have your number over the course of a season and that all of it is quite fluid and ever-changing from year to year, including the output of your top players whom your team relies particularly heavily upon.

Try to get on my level here, man. This isn't purely rivalry-fueled oilers slighting here.

You'll need to step outside of the bubble of reality distorted propaganda you're getting fed on the daily up there.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

But again, you're just assuming you'd roll over all of them.

Where did I say that?

I just said that the Pacific division as it stood last year is a much weaker collection of teams than the North this year. And it wouldn't hurt the Oilers chances to play a larger share of their games against weaker teams.

I've read that the NHL is considering a division heavy schedule for next season similar to the schedule in 05/06 when they were coming out of the lockout. Gone will be Arizona and in will be Seattle. Everyone is expecting them to be good immediately like Vegas, but I'm not so sure. Vegas made some really smart pickups. Might be hard to replicate that success.

[Manhattanboy]

Holy crap that Principe Star Wars opening was a new level of amateur hour.

[Ferarri]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Holy crap that Principe Star Wars opening was a new level of amateur hour.

Embarrassing for a professional sports network.

[Icon]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Holy crap that Principe Star Wars opening was a new level of amateur hour.

They have to realize how cringeworthy bad it always is... Right?... Maybe not... Lol

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Ferarri

Embarrassing for a professional sports network.

Someone should send the video to the CEO of Rogers and to Gary Bettman.

Just embarrassing.

[BMStrikesAgain]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1389803123489730562

https://twitter.com/user/status/1389816807293288451

[Tkachukwagon]

Uggg.... shut up about McDavid and his quest to 100 points. They should be focusing on playoffs and resting their players, but all the power to them if they want to risk injuring a player for 'the quest'

[CroFlames]

Staples weeping over McDavid's 100 points.

What does he do when they make the playoffs? Gross.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Tkachukwagon

but all the power to them if they want to risk injuring a player for 'the quest'

And if something did happen all we would hear is about how it's the league's fault.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by BMStrikesAgain

https://twitter.com/user/status/1389803123489730562

[direwolf]

That post by Staples is next level embarrassing.

[Erick Estrada]

Dictionary

em·bar·rass·ing
/əmˈberəsiNG/

adjective
causing embarrassment.
"an embarrassing muddle"

verb
gerund or present participle: embarrassing
cause (someone) to feel awkward, self-conscious, or ashamed.
"she wouldn't embarrass either of them by making a scene"

Similar: shame, humiliate, David Staples, mortify, horrify