[OOT] January 12, with eight games.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The Flames have seen more backups. That's been proven without a doubt.

There is no convincing required.

And the Oilers have seen more teams on a second night of back-to-backs. 19 of them this year, I believe (vs 8 where they are the tired team).

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The Flames have seen more backups. That's been proven without a doubt.

There is no convincing required.

Two different thoughts there though:
1. Flames have seen far more backup goaltenders this season. It is not relevant how this played out in previous seasons.
2. The Oilers have the easiest schedule in the NHL, in terms of back-to-back opposition and/or their own.
Both statements require no further convincing. Interpretation is subject to the individual, but common consensus would be the NHL is doing everything it can to extinguish the decade long out of control dumpster fire, so the league isn't embarrassed again by an Oilers draft lottery win. And, other NHL teams see the Oilers as the more explosive offensive team, and play their starter against them.
YMMV

[Weitz]

I don't really get the argument about rested vs tired. IMO it is more of result of where teams are located and travel required.

This year Edmonton has 19, Calgary has 14.
The 2 previous years Edmonton and Calgary had the same (14 and 10 each)
Then the year before Calgary had 20 to Edmontons 12.

Every year the teams with the most are usually the pacific division. The reason for this IMO is teams come through and play the Canucks/Oilers/Flames in 3 in 4 scenario or the Cali teams in a 3 in 4 scenario.

If anything Anaheim has the advantage as they are either 1st or 2nd in 3 of the last 4 years.

[EldrickOnIce]

Not sure what there is to 'get' though?
In terms of playing teams on back-to-backs, Edmonton has the easiest schedule in the NHL.
This season.
That's it.
Nothing else to get.
What happened last year, or any other year, is of zero consequence.
How one interprets that is open to discussion - geography, random chance, their turn, decade long tire fire - that is open to interpretation.
That they have the easiest schedule in the NHL, in that context, is not.

[Enoch Root]

What is there to get?

19 games where the other team is on a second night.

8 games where they are.

One of the most lopsided distributions of this you'll ever find

[Weitz]

I outlined how these schedules come to being.

People claiming the NHL are doing favours for the Oilers is ridiculous.

Were they doing the Flames favors in 2013-2014 when they had 20 tired teams? With 13 coming from Edmonton? To the Oilers 4 coming from Calgary?

Are they doing Anaheim favors with their 19 tired teams they face this year (same as Oilers)?

No. Its just a factor of how the schedule worked out this year. Same with the other years. Its the benefit of playing in the Pacific division and the way teams travel.

[Lubicon]

What I find interesting about these back to backs regardless of whether we are talking Flames or Oilers is how often Vancouver is involved in one of the two games. It would seem logical that the back to back would be scheduled Oilers-Flames or Flames-Oilers. Instead I am seeing plenty of Van-Calgary/Calgary-Van or Van-Edmonton/Edmonton-Van and then on to the next city. It's still a relatively short flight but not nearly as short as Edm-Calgary and also involves time zone changes.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is funny to hear Oilers fans complain about other teams facing backup goalies when this has been an Oilers tradition for a decade.

I'm not complaining about it, but Cap'n Crunch was talking about it like it was something that wasn't true.

I don't care about the schedule in general. At the end of the day the Rangers leave their time zone about a quarter as much as any team in the west. Every team plays every other team and if you luck out and are in a weaker division, bully for you.

I don't like hearing about back to backs. It seems like they are predominantly something for the media to have talking points about.

We are talking about athletes that have grown up playing back to back games their entire freaking lives. I think any talk of being "tired" on the second half of a back to back is a cop out for anyone that played less than 30 minutes the previous game.

I think overall playing ability, injuries, and luck are all bigger factors than scheduling. I think it's so small of a factor that it's basically a non factor.

Maybe that's just me.

[GioforPM]

A back to back between Edmonton and Calgary versus a travel day between, say, Vancouver and NY (or even in conference Vancouver - Minnie) is probably not a lot different. Plus, no time to go to a club the night before the game.