R3 - Series Thread - Jets (C2) vs Golden Knights (P1) Vegas Wins 4-1

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by nik-

If they swept the finals it would be the second best record in the history of all best of 7 rounds.

http://www.puckreport.com/2009/04/nh...anley-cup.html

Also, the mantle of the earth may open up and swallow us all.

Fleury is currently sporting a GAA of 1.68 and a save % flirting with .950. In the cap era, three teams (Nashville 2017, Boston 2013, Pittsburgh 2009) have lost in the Stanley Cup Finals when their goalies allowed less than 2 goals per game. In all three series, the winning team (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit) also has sub-2.00 goaltending.

Andrei Vasilevskiy gives up well over 2.5 goals a game, and his save percentage is one point better than Jonas Hiller's first regular season as a Flame.

Braden Holtby's 2.29/.914 is better, but not enough to overcome 1.68 in the Stanley Cup Finals.

In the cap era, no team with a sub-2.00 GAA has ever lost a Finals series to team without one. The Vegas Golden Knights are going to win the Stanley Cup.

[Mathgod]

This is on the GMs and not the draft rules IMO.

They gave Vegas the chance to get teams 6th or 7th best forwards, or 4th or 5th best dman.

But then teams made mistakes or didnt evaluate the talent on their team properly.

Why did Florida give up Smith and Marchessault...they could have protected both of them. Better protect Alex Petrovic or Mark Pysyk instead.

And really it’s that one deal that completely changed the path of the Knights. Instead of getting a #5 dman from Florida they received not one but two top line forwards that were 25 goal guys previously.

Honestly if you want to blame anyone blame Dale Tallon.

When you force teams to make difficult decisions and only protect certain players, mistakes are inevitably going to be made by some teams. There were 30 GMs forced into this dilemma, so to think that all 30 were going to going to be flawless in their assessments of which players to protect, is naive at best.

The protection format should have been, at the very least, 12 skaters and 2 goalies per team. That way the Knights would not have been given all kinds of leverage to pick quality players and acquire more through trades. They also wouldn't have been likely to get their hands on a goaltender who had a proven track record of being capable of providing superb goaltending on any given night.

Originally Posted by Igottago

The whine is incredible, funny, and sad all at the same time. Its completely illogical. I cant remember the post but one guy even said the NHL put together a "juggernaut" in Vegas. Its a team that has had everything come together in near miraculous fashion, not a team loaded with hall of famers. That's why things like intangibles matter -- its the chemistry that gets weaker teams to outperform supposedly stronger teams.

You can't make up the level of irrationality with some of these posts. Not sure how the NHL is supposed to just stop teams from winning because you don't think its fair. In no way was this team constructed to go this far. Get a grip.

The fact that they won their division with 109 points, and are poised to win the Stanley Cup, is proof that they absolutely were. The fact that not many predicted this outcome is beside the point.

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

Did you happen to catch LeBron destroy the Raptors? It happens.

I don't watch basketball for that reason.

[icecube]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Fleury is currently sporting a GAA of 1.68 and a save % flirting with .950. In the cap era, three teams (Nashville 2017, Boston 2013, Pittsburgh 2009) have lost in the Stanley Cup Finals when their goalies allowed less than 2 goals per game. In all three series, the winning team (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit) also has sub-2.00 goaltending.

Andrei Vasilevskiy gives up well over 2.5 goals a game, and his save percentage is one point better than Jonas Hiller's first regular season as a Flame.

Braden Holtby's 2.29/.914 is better, but not enough to overcome 1.68 in the Stanley Cup Finals.

In the cap era, no team with a sub-2.00 GAA has ever lost a Finals series to team without one. The Vegas Golden Knights are going to win the Stanley Cup.

If Fleury can keep up this level of play then yes. Every series is a clean slate.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Quote function not functioning.

Fleury - any team could have had him for a decent pick/prospect and a decent eligible backup goalie.
Riley Smith - not chosen in the expansion draft, was acquired from Florida for a 4th round draft pick.
Marchissault - it is beyond bizarre why Florida didn't protect him, they could have easily.
Theodore - pretty sure he was a throw in so that Vegas would take Stoner instead of Vatanen. Then they traded Vatanen.
Engelland - Huh? he was a free agent. He was going there anyway and didn't cost us anything.

So that leaves
Neal - legitimate good player who Nashville probably wished they could keep.
Perron - a 28 year old veteran 40-50 point guy, with 1 year left on his contract, who is comparable to guys regularly available in free agency. Not exactly a young star player to build a franchise on but a good solid player.
McNabb - Seemed to be good before Vegas but had a rough 2016-17

Wow, that deck was stacked.

-Engelland was 100% picked by Vegas
- Fleury could not be had by anyone that wanted him, he was actively using his no trade clause which even further hurt his value to Pittsburgh
- every other player you named while maybe not drafted directly arrived in. Arrived as a direct result of the expansion process and being able
To eat salary, player protection, etc.

It’s quite amazing what they’ve done, but this whole “they are bunch of Players from the thrash bin no one wanted” is total BS. There’s not a Player on that team that woudnt have cracked an NHL roster with or without Vegas this year. Vegas was handed an NHL caliber hockey team and with the parity in the league now anyone Can win if the stars align Which they clearly have in Vegas.

Honestly if someone offered me the chance to blow up the current Calgary roster in exchange for an expansion draft process similar to Vegas, I’d probably take it.

[Flashpoint]

Team reminds me so much of the 04 Flames.

It’s all about the TEAM! So much more than the sum of its parts. They’re playing for each other so hard.

Nice that it won’t be Winnipegpuck.com around here any more.

[Jimdon]

Is this what you get when you have an entire team made up of players that their original teams deemed expendable and felt whats it's like to not be wanted.

No egos, no entitlement, nobody getting a long leash because they were the coaches or gms "guys". Just a bunch of talent that was lumped together because they weren't viewed as an important asset by the teams that they played for.

There's plenty of skill there for sure, but if hockey is 90% mental I think they found the right buttons to push.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

-Engelland was 100% picked by Vegas

He was signed by Vegas as a free agent which meant they couldn't choose a roster player from the Flames. They could have just waited to sign him and taken one of our players also.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

- Fleury could not be had by anyone that wanted him, he was actively using his no trade clause which even further hurt his value to Pittsburgh

Fleury had a 12 team no trade and it was reported that he was willing to waive anyway. Do you have a source that he wasn't willing to waive? Even if that's true they could have moved him to 18 teams.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

- every other player you named while maybe not drafted directly arrived in. Rags as a direct result of the expansion process.

Did Vegas have an unfair trade advantage we don't know about?


I don't think most fans feel the players available were "trash bin" players that nobody wanted but they clearly weren't a bunch of all stars that Vegas was gifted so they could win the cup. I laughed with friends about the stupid selections they made at the expansion draft, everyone thought they would be a bottom dweller. Maybe McPhee did a good job and the players have embraced the underdog role and are playing better as a team than the sum of their parts.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

The "Bent out of shape about Vegas" phenomenon has been the most interesting story of this season.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The fact that they won their division with 109 points, and are poised to win the Stanley Cup, is proof that they absolutely were. The fact that not many predicted this outcome is beside the point.

Actually, that is precisely the point. Did you want the NHL to guarantee that Vegas would not be a winning team?

[カナダ人です]

I gotta give it up to Vegas. No one had them going to the Stanley Cup Finals, let alone the playoffs, and all of a sudden people are whining? Gimmie a break.

People want parity in the NHL; well, this is it!

[browna]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

The "Bent out of shape about Vegas" phenomenon has been the most interesting story of this season.

It has been. Propogated by eastern biased "established" media types who got embarrassed with being so wrong. Never mind their Oilers annual love in, but in this case, whose usually vague generic analysis before the season and then during the season, that usually can be spun after the fact, was blown out the water. The fact that many called the early season a blip because they looked at box scores, not caring enough to stay up to watch WC games. Calling them still a blip at Christmas and all star break. Starting to write the obits when they list the league lead in points. The smug analytics types also had no way to see this coming or measure it as the season rolled.

Nobody in the media likes getting things dead wrong, and most did, multiple times since the preseason, when it came to Vegas, so that embarrassment and trying to cut Vegas down, time and again, to make them feel better about themselves, and less foolish, seeps it way to their columns blogs and network sites, which many people still lap up like dogs as gospel.

From the end of October to basically game 4 of this series, desperate journalists and have eagerly types up the first few paragraphs of the "well I told you so BACK in September that this was going to happen" column, and they've never got to finish it.

[Inferno]

Wasn't a big reason that Fleury wasn't traded is Rutherford was asking way too much so teams like Dallas and Calgary moved onto other options? I know he wanted 6th overall the year before but I thought I remember it being reported his demands were just as steep last season.

[alnigi]

I think it's fantastic that Vegas have done the seemingly impossible throughout this season and playoffs to this point. I think it's great for the sport of hockey and will only expand the awareness of how amazing this game is. They are such a fun, exciting team to witness. And have that magic spark and chemistry that comes with cohesion, discipline, management, coaching staff and I'm sure a number of other factors.
How sad to go through life as a whiner or a hater. I wish them the very best in the finals and would love to see them play Washington.
As an aside , I think Gerard Gallant looks a bit like Anthony Hopkins - something in their eyes and gaze.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Inferno

Wasn't a big reason that Fleury wasn't traded is Rutherford was asking way too much so teams like Dallas and Calgary moved onto other options? I know he wanted 6th overall the year before but I thought I remember it being reported his demands were just as steep last season.

Yes Rutherford probably didn't want to trade Fleury to a good team and have them become a contender and win the cup, or have to face Fleury in a final.

He thought like everyone else that he was sending Fleury to purgatory and choosing Murrray over Fleury would never come back to bite him. Well it has kind of now.

Should have just traded Fleury to Calgary for a 2nd cause Gulutzan and the Flames probably would have screwed it up!

[I_H8_Crawford]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Actually, that is precisely the point. Did you want the NHL to guarantee that Vegas would not be a winning team?

I have a feeling that if Vegas were a perennial 45-point 31st place bottom dweller being given numerous top-4 picks, the same people complaining now would be calling the NHL a joke because the expansion team sucks so much.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

This "we didn't think they would be good at the time and it looked like they'd got a bunch of spare parts and would only be marginally better than other expansion teams, but it turns out they're good so obviously the draft rules weren't fair" take is hilarious. No, the rules weren't unfair. On paper, this is still a mediocre team. By the metrics, they're a pretty good team, but they aren't this good. There is no explanation for this. It is not that the players we thought weren't very good are actually superstars (other than Karlsson, apparently). Every player on the team is more or less who they always have been, but have been playing the best hockey they're capable of in an incredibly tight, efficient system that yields few mistakes and extracts mistakes from others.

They aren't making a mockery of the league because the deck was stacked in their favour. This is an insane thing to even suggest. They are making a mockery of the league because:
1. The coaching strategies used around the league can be beaten by an inferior roster of players who do what Vegas is doing, which is a black eye on hockey coaches;
2. Star players aren't as crucial to success as the league wants you to think, which is a black eye on the league and the media for trying to push narratives around those players for marketing purposes;
3. Our ideas about what makes players good and bad at hockey apparently needs to be adjusted because Luca Sbisa just put an NHL team in the cup final;
4. For the most part, it appears that Vegas is just out-working every team they come up against, which is a black eye on the players who appear complacent; and
5. The analytics people who thought they were getting to a point where they could offer some compelling explanations about what produces goals and wins can't explain why Vegas is so successful, so it's a black eye on them too.

Everyone was completely and utterly wrong. Everyone. And they can't even go back and explain why they were wrong by saying "well, we didn't count on X", and if they try it still won't explain how wrong they were. No one can satisfactorily account for this. Anyone who says they can is lying, or trying to create an explanation out of whole cloth and force it onto the situation. It turns out no one really knows how to build a good team, or how to win a hockey game or what types of players you should be trying to acquire. There is no explanation for this that actually holds any water. I'm sure teams will try to imitate Vegas next season, especially the teams we think are bad. But they can only do so at a superficial, "let's get a bunch of faster players and try to play a high-pressure forechecking game" sense, and surprise, it won't work as well as they hope.

[442scotty]

After all of this, I look at the Flames and say, boy we’ve got a long way to go. Bennett would have been great in the playoffs as would Chucky while players like Gaudreau and Hamilton would probably be completely neutralized. It’s not a time when “soft” players shine.

[N-E-B]

Why is it okay to say "we were wrong about Vegas, they're a good team" but as soon as someone suggests "we were wrong about the expansion draft rules, maybe they were too lenient" they get lambasted and called a whiner and a hater (both terms used in this thread)? I think it's a valid criticism. Teams could protect the fewest players in any expansion draft and Vegas was the only team picking. In hindsight, it does seem a bit excessive. Seattle will have the same rules, so I don't think we can say for sure if that's the case but I don't see the harm in questioning it.

Now, having said that, it's also not fair to take away from what the players have done. Regardless of what you think about the expansion draft, it's impressive to watch this team play. They seem to have a sense of purpose. Add in just the right amount of luck and they really had the perfect storm. I'm not even confident they'll make the playoffs next season, but right now, this season, they're legit and they're on a mission.

I don't like Vegas. I don't like any division rivals of the Flames. I hope they lose. But it's really one of the most intriguing stories in the history of not only hockey but professional sports. Kind of cool to be witnessing this.

[FireGilbert]

The draft rules were fine. Vegas needed better players to meet the salary floor which didn’t exist for previous expansions.

I attribute the Knights success to three things:
1. Picking big and fast players who fit the coaches system
2. Getting career breakout years out of their forwards, especially the first line.
3. Having a Stanley Cup winning goalie available who then engaged god mode.

Two out of three are complete luck and I cannot see Seattle or any future teams having the same sucess.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Honestly if someone offered me the chance to blow up the current Calgary roster in exchange for an expansion draft process similar to Vegas, I’d probably take it.

No you wouldn't.