So the exact same 16 teams that would have made the playoffs if the season had started as usual, will make the playoffs with the now 48 game season.

So, after reading Cam Cole's column, you don't see any advantages the Oilers may have over the Canucks?
- Doppleganger

Proof that it won't be?

Proof that it won't be?
- Lahey

I know it will take a little bit of common sense and some thinking for you, but it's possible that you could grasp the point I've been trying to make.

It's not "normal" to have a team with a lot of their core players, playing competitively (in a league) prior to the beginning of a short (one week) training camp, before jump starting a season, and another team with virtually no core players, playing competitively (in a league) prior to the beginning of a short (one week) training camp, before jump starting a season.

The only time this happens, is because of a lockout/strike.

Between seasons when there is no lockout/strike, there are no NHLers playing playing competitively (in a league) during the summer, prior to the beginning of training camp, the exhibition season & the regular (now) 82 game season.


It does not take a rocket surgeon to see that there is a difference between these two scenarios, and that there is good probability that some teams (with more players playing competitively ) will have an advantage over those with fewer core players in mid season form.

If you don't get it by now, then you never will.

I know it will take a little bit of common sense and some thinking for you, but it's possible that you could grasp the point I've been trying to make.

It's not "normal" to have a team with a lot of their core players, playing competitively (in a league) prior to the beginning of a short (one week) training camp, before jump starting a season, and another team with virtually no core players, playing competitively (in a league) prior to the beginning of a short (one week) training camp, before jump starting a season.

The only time this happens, is because of a lockout/strike.

Between seasons when there is no lockout/strike, there are no NHLers playing playing competitively (in a league) during the summer, prior to the beginning of training camp, the exhibition season & the regular (now) 82 game season.


It does not take a rocket surgeon to see that there is a difference between these two scenarios, and that there is good probability that some teams (with more players playing competitively ) will have an advantage over those with fewer core players in mid season form.

If you don't get it by now, then you never will.
- Doppleganger

Still not proof that the teams that make in 48 games wouldn't if we played 82.

Still not proof that the teams that make in 48 games wouldn't if we played 82.
- Lahey

exactly

One constant thread through the last few months, is that the NHL would want to at least salvage a 48 game season.

I don't know about you, but I would not equate a team that wins the Stanley Cup after a 48 game season, with one that was won in the (now) traditional 82 game season. To me it wouldn't mean as much, and I suspect the players would not regard it (a Stanley Cup Win) in the same light either.

An asterisk would be there, regardless if it was visible or not.
- Doppleganger

I disagree
I think the Stanley cup winner of a 48 game season plus playoffs is just as deserving as an 82 game season.

I disagree
I think the Stanley cup winner of a 48 game season plus playoffs is just as deserving as an 82 game season.
- senstroll

I tend to agree. You are going to have an incredibly intense level of competition in all games. Teams will go into the playoffs with lots of energy still in the tank.

The cream will rise to the top. Watch for Pittsburgh to run away with the East. In fact, I think Pittsburgh will be so dominate within the Division that it will make it very hard for teams like the Flyers (goaltending and defensive questions) to make the playoffs.

Still not proof that the teams that make in 48 games wouldn't if we played 82.
- Lahey

Then please provide proof that the same teams will make the post season, If they had played 82.

Then please provide proof that the same teams will make the post season, If they had played 82.
- Doppleganger

provide proof of the opposite

provide proof of the opposite
- nightmare3020

That's was already asked.

Look I get it, some of you think a regular 82 games season, with all players arriving in training camp in great shape, participating in practises and exhibition games......so all teams starting the season with their best possible team (conditioning and timing) is EXACTLY the same as a 48 game season, with some players ready to go because they've been playing all along, some players needing a number games to get up to speed, with greater chances of injuries because of the lack of timing and conditioning etc, and no inter-conference play.

I just happen to think these two types of seasons are different, and because they're different the results will be different. And if you read Helen Branswell's & Cam Cole's articles, they and I are on the same page.

http://metronews.ca/sport...injuries-loom-for-nhlers/

http://www.vancouversun.c...+their/7786597/story.html

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

It's "expected" tho not official yet that the 10-game rule for called up juniors will become the six-game rule.

That's was already asked.

Look I get it, some of you think a regular 82 games season, with all players arriving in training camp in great shape, participating in practises and exhibition games......so all teams starting the season with their best possible team (conditioning and timing) is EXACTLY the same as a 48 game season, with some players ready to go because they've been playing all along, some players needing a number games to get up to speed, with greater chances of injuries because of the lack of timing and conditioning etc, and no inter-conference play.

I just happen to think these two types of seasons are different, and because they're different the results will be different. And if you read Helen Branswell's & Cam Cole's articles, they and I are on the same page.

http://metronews.ca/sport...injuries-loom-for-nhlers/

http://www.vancouversun.c...+their/7786597/story.html
- Doppleganger

At the end of the day who cares? it is what it is and the Stanley Cup winner will be just as worthy as any other. Just see 1995 New Jersey Devils. Nobody cares they won in a shortened season.

At the end of the day who cares? it is what it is and the Stanley Cup winner will be just as worthy as any other. Just see 1995 New Jersey Devils. Nobody cares they won in a shortened season.
- sens rock

All I'm saying is that it is different circumstances that lead to the Devils Cup win. No one will ever know if that season, if it started on time, will have produced a different Cup Champion.

I for one know that the Devils won fair and square..............BUT it was only a 49 game season. You may equate that with all other Cup wins, but to me it was a Cup Win after a gimmicky 48 game season. Older players were sat out from time to time becasue of a compressed schedule, more players suffered injuries because of a jump started season with less than adequate time (training camp / exhibition games) to get ALL players into shape and no inter conference play. All these factors affected the results of games and the playoff seeds to some extent.

And because, as you say, "no one (aka fans) cares" then the NHL will not hesitate to pull this lockout crap again and again.

You can choose to roll over and accept a 48 game season as "normal" and the same if you wish, but perhaps you'll think differently after (for example) Alfredsson has to be sat out for few games here and there because of to many back to back games, or three games in four nights.

You can forgive and forget, but not all fans will, and the NHL is taking most fans for granted and know this every time CBA negotiations roll around.

"Hey we threw together a 48 game season back in 95, so let's go that route again, the fans came back then, and they'll come back again"

All I'm saying is that it is different circumstances that lead to the Devils Cup win. No one will ever know if that season, if it started on time, will have produced a different Cup Champion.

I for one know that the Devils won fair and square..............BUT it was only a 49 game season. You may equate that with all other Cup wins, but to me it was a Cup Win after a gimmicky 48 game season. Older players were sat out from time to time becasue of a compressed schedule, more players suffered injuries because of a jump started season with less than adequate time (training camp / exhibition games) to get ALL players into shape and no inter conference play. All these factors affected the results of games and the playoff seeds to some extent.

And because, as you say, "no one (aka fans) cares" then the NHL will not hesitate to pull this lockout crap again and again.

You can choose to roll over and accept a 48 game season as "normal" and the same if you wish, but perhaps you'll think differently after (for example) Alfredsson has to be sat out for few games here and there because of to many back to back games, or three games in four nights.

You can forgive and forget, but not all fans will, and the NHL is taking most fans for granted and know this every time CBA negotiations roll around.

"Hey we threw together a 48 game season back in 95, so let's go that route again, the fans came back then, and they'll come back again"
- Doppleganger

your right, they should of just cancelled the season to protect the integrity of it all....

your right, they should of just cancelled the season to protect the integrity of it all....
- sens rock

OR, because as you suggest, "no one cares" they should always start the season in January, and go with a 48 game season with no inter-conference play, compressed schedules and all, from now on.

OR, because as you suggest, "no one cares" they should always start the season in January, and go with a 48 game season with no inter-conference play, compressed schedules and all, from now on.
- Doppleganger

i didn't say no one cares. Im saying at the end of the season and in future years when looking back at the SC winner they aren't going to say "ah but it was only a 48 game season so its not the same as a 82 game season SC winner".

Everyone is under the same pressures, and ya some teams are better prepared already based on their team makeup but thats the way the cookie crumbled.

OR, because as you suggest, "no one cares" they should always start the season in January, and go with a 48 game season with no inter-conference play, compressed schedules and all, from now on.
- Doppleganger

I would be fine with a 48 or 50 game season as the norm

But I think the players and owners want more of our money..so they make longer seasons

i didn't say no one cares. Im saying at the end of the season and in future years when looking back at the SC winner they aren't going to say "ah but it was only a 48 game season so its not the same as a 82 game season SC winner".

Everyone is under the same pressures, and ya some teams are better prepared already based on their team makeup but thats the way the cookie crumbled.
- sens rock

Sorry, you did say "Nobody cares" & "who cares" and technically not no one cares.

At the end of the day who cares? it is what it is and the Stanley Cup winner will be just as worthy as any other. Just see 1995 New Jersey Devils. Nobody cares they won in a shortened season.
- sens rock

.

Sorry, "who cares"

.
- Doppleganger

if you read after that you will understand what i meant. hopefully.

if you read after that you will understand what i meant. hopefully.
- sens rock

Yeah, Nobody cares, is what you said.

At the end of the day who cares? it is what it is and the Stanley Cup winner will be just as worthy as any other. Just see 1995 New Jersey Devils. Nobody cares they won in a shortened season.
- sens rock

.

Yeah, Nobody cares, is what you said.

.
- Doppleganger

yes i think there are very few people who care that the devils won in a shortened season.

yes i think there are very few people who care that the devils won in a shortened season.
- sens rock

And that's why the NHL can pull this crap (lockout, shortened season)

If you're happy, go buy your tickets but I'm not going to join you.

And that's why the NHL can pull this crap (lockout, shortened season)

If you're happy, go buy your tickets but I'm not going to join you.
- Doppleganger

yes i am happy that there is some nhl hockey this year then none at all.

yes i am happy that there is some nhl hockey this year then none at all.
- sens rock

None at all?? I thought it was a 10 year CBA?

None at all?? I thought it was a 10 year CBA?
- Doppleganger

yes if they didn't sign a cba then there would be no hockey

yes if they didn't sign a cba then there would be no hockey
- sens rock

But you said there will be hockey this year "then none at all"

yes i am happy that there is some nhl hockey this year then none at all.
- sens rock

edit: oh I see you don't know the difference between the meanings of than & then..................sorry.