Avalanche Fluke Watch: The Experts Are Still Unconvinced
by Joe Dunman on Oct 29, 2009 7:07 AM MDT
in NHL News
Email
PrintDespite beginning the season with a historical best 10-1-2 record, which includes wins over strong teams including Calgary, San Jose, Boston, Edmonton and Detroit, much of the hockey media remains unconvinced about the Colorado Avalanche.
There's been a lot of talk about "drinking the Kool-Aid" and "smoke and mirrors." The experts argue that Colorado fans are wearing blinders to the grim statistical reality that awaits the Avalanche just past the next opponent. They'll cool off. They'll hit a wall. The wheels will fall off.
As recent as yesterday, John Buccigross at ESPN was arguing that the Avs won't just cool off, but will collapse completely before the season ends. While arguing that Colorado should have sent the red hot rookie Ryan O'Reilly (2-9, 11 points in 13 games) down to the AHL back to Erie, Bucci says:
And that's why O'Reilly is so valuable and why I would have sent him back to Erie to continue his development so the Avs can slide that cap number another year when they are closer to an elite team. The Avs probably will not make the playoffs this season. If they do, they probably won't win a playoff series.
Maybe his position has something to do with this:
I did pick the Avs to finish 15th in the West. They still might end up there once the young guys hit the wall and if the team can't stay healthy.
"Once the young guys hit the wall." As if that was a foregone conclusion. Lots of rookies never "hit the wall," but that doesn't matter to Buccigross. The reason it doesn't matter is because he picked the Avs to finish 15th and any other result won't jive with his unquestioned predictive insight.
James Mirtle chimes in again on this subject with a post this morning warning that he's still "waiting for the clock to strike midnight on this plucky team." Why? Because it's happened before to other teams:
We've seen teams like the 2006-07 Senators come out of the gate 15-2-0 and disintegrate by the all-star break. Heck, even last year, in mid-January, the Habs were riding high with a 27-11-6 record and the Coyotes were in fifth in their conference.
Both imploded soon after.
No doubt about it, teams that start off strong sometimes collapse. Some teams that look great at the end of October get weaker as the year goes on. That's undeniable.
But that's not always the case, and it's interesting that none of those predicting the eminent collapse of the history-making 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche ever cite any other examples of teams that get off to strong starts.
At the end of October last season, the San Jose Sharks had a record of 9-2-0. They went on to win the Presidents' Trophy with 117 points. In 2007-08, the Detroit Red Wings had a 10-2-1 record at the end of October. They went on to win the Presidents' Trophy with 115 points. In 2006-07, the Buffalo Sabres ended October with a record of 10-0-1. What happened to them? They won the Presidents' Trophy with 113 points. Anaheim started that same season at 9-0-3 and finished with 110 points. Dallas started 9-2-0 and finished with 107.
The point in citing these examples is not to "prove" that the Avalanche won't implode and miss the playoffs (or even barely get in). The point is that examples for both scenarios are plentiful. Just because some teams start strong and fall apart doesn't mean every team will. In fact, lots of teams start strong and never cool off.
Mirtle concedes that Avalanche fans are allowed to be excited about their early success (thanks!), but warns:
Absolutely, Avs fans should enjoy this run and shout down anyone who says otherwise, but if I'm pressed to make a prediction, it's that Colorado still has a real fight on its hands to make the playoffs come April.
Perhaps Mirtle feels so "pressed" to make such a dire prediction now because he already made a dire prediction that seems to have less and less connection to reality with every passing Avalanche game.
Why, exactly, is there any need to make a prediction at all? Even with the amazing start, you'd be hard-pressed to find an Avalanche fan predicting a Presidents' Trophy or a Stanley Cup win. Even a deep playoff run seems unreasonable to assume after just the first month of the season. Though some of us may be "drinking the Kool-Aid" by acknowledging that come-from-behind wins against strong teams and the best start in franchise history might indicate that the Avalanche are actually a really good team, we're not blind to a possible return to earth. Anything could happen.
Instead of trying to predict the future as part of some bizarre "I told you so" gotcha game so many hockey writers like to play, why not focus on what is happening now? As George Johnson writes in the Calgary Herald this morning:
They're only off to the best start in franchise history. Yes, better even than those halcyon days of Saint Patrick and Quoteless Joe and Peter the Great and Ray Bourque and Pepe Lemieux. Heady salad days of President's Trophies and Stanley Cup glory.
We all keep waiting for them to run face-first into a wall. You can argue that they're doing it with smoke and mirrors and a bit of old-fashioned sleight of hand.
But, hey, they're doing it. Somehow.
And that's all that matters.
348 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bucci does know that. He said Erie in his quote. I screwed it up.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Smoke and Mirrors huh....
All I have to say is “Yes they are doing it” how hard work and no quit and we as fans are loving it. Do I see a President’s Trophy this year or a Stanley Cup in our future?? i can hope but hey i hope every year. No matter what happens whether we hit a wall or not this is our team and we love them and will support them!!!
But hey let all these nay sayers keep saying it won’t last just gives us more reason to rub it in their faces…. ie The Red Wings!!! LOL
They should nail all these articles to their lockers
Buccigross needs to open his eyes and ears.
"I always believe there's a reason why you go through everything." -John Elway
This pisses me off
We all know Duchene will be amazing. He’ll be putting up 90 points a year in his career. But this O’Reilly crap is pissing me off. How is he any different than Jordan Stall? He might be better. No one questioned Stall’s legitimacy as an NHL player when he came on the scene at 19. Oh wait, was that because his last name was Stall. Ok, lets try this again, how is Ryan O’Reilly-Stall, any different than Jordan Stall. HE ISN’T. Also, reading the Edmonton blog on Tuesday, there was a good point. They started two 18 year olds last year. No one questioned their ability to play. Or what about Lucic, he wasn’t ever sent back down to the minors. Or Semin, or Backstrom, or the myriad of players who proved to their coach and team they could play. 18, 19, 20, 21. These ages don’t matter when you are good.
Who the fuck do we have to beat to prove we are good. The Penguins? Bring on December 3rd. Washington? December 15th.
Avalanche 2009-2010: We fend off 7 man power plays? Do you?
In fairness to Bucci, I don’t think that his point was that O’Reilly wasn’t capable of playing well in the NHL, his point was that if you are looking longer term at the cap it would be beneficial to leave O’Reilly in Erie so that his cheaper rookie cap hit would last longer. His logic really seemed to be that the Avalanche could be elite in 3-4 years and that using up a “Cheap” year on Ryan when they may make the playoffs but probably won’t be serious cup contenders isn’t the right way to look at the big picture. The key part is where he said this:
You just can’t take the best players on the team all the time, as stupid as that sounds. In the cap world, you have to manage with nuance.
I’m not saying Bucci doesn’t make a good financial point. My problem was his assumption that 1) the Avs will miss the playoffs and 2) O’Reilly and Duchene will “hit the wall.”
Other than that I don’t think he’s necessarily wrong about the long-term. But from where I’m sitting 10-1-2 suggest the Avs just might already be elite. Maybe.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I agree with you about the assumptions. I was just saying that he didn’t exactly attack O’Reilly, which is what I assumed c6hor8 was getting at, but I may have misunderstood him.
I assumed he was talking about the general anti-O’Reilly sentiment expressed in other places like the Official Avs board and at Dater’s blog, and had a problem with Bucci because he seems to be justifying it.
As an aside: there’s a big difference between arguing that O’Reilly isn’t ready and needs more time to develop in the juniors/minors, and arguing that sending him down benefits the team cap hit in the long run.
There’s always the risk that sending a good young player down will have the opposite effect, and will stifle their development. You never really know.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
While i slightly agree with the idea of sending him down for financial reasons; I can’t in sound mind say that you should have sent O’Reilly down and not done the same with Duchene. Right now O’Reilly is the better player on paper. Sure we all think Duchene will get better, and he is doing a lot of things that aren’t ending up on the score sheet. But O’Reilly is kicking ass and taking names and is a big part of this team early success; probably more so than Duchene. He has given the team a third line to be feared (something they haven’t had in a while).
Hopefully they make the playoffs and even if they don’t win a series, it will be good for both these kids (as well as Galiardi, Jones, Stewie, and anyone else on the roster by then) to experience the playoffs. That in of itself will probably be worth keeping them.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 10:29 AM MDT up reply actions
Arnason's reaction..
To your comment on the third line:
by Rather Dashing on Oct 29, 2009 10:32 AM MDT up reply actions
I really wish
he would stumble upon this site someday and happen to see this meme.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:33 AM MDT up reply actions
I was going to go ahead and post the picture, but unfortunately can’t do it at work.
And no it hasn’t gotten old.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 10:57 AM MDT up reply actions
I not only think that O’Reilly is playing better on paper, I think he is playing better in fact. I do believe that Duchene is the more talented of the two, and he is certainly has had more moments of brilliance, but O’Reilly seems to be making fewer mistakes and playing his role better. I think that Duchene is starting to press a little too much and trying to do things on his own too much to really be successful. I think most of where I see Duchene struggling could be fixed by getting him a line mate that he really clicks with. I don’t hate Svatos, I just don’t think he is really the best match for Duchene, and the line mate that Duchene really needs to click with is his RW (I base this on Duchene being a lefty, therefore the better passing set up is to his RW, not his LW)
In fairness,
Radar has been provided more stable and talented linemates too.
2009-2010 Colorado Avalanche - See what can happen if you like, you know, try and stuff?
It's stupid.
What happens if we send O’Reilly back down and immediately lose a couple games? People are going to say “Why would you send down a player who has statistically been one of the top rookies and one of your crunch time studs?? It makes no sense!”
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:17 AM MDT up reply actions
Nobody will believe in the Avs until they win the Stanley Cup
How many of those “experts” are actually experts?
"I always believe there's a reason why you go through everything." -John Elway
Most important thing here is that the Avs are a harder working, faster, and stronger team then they were last year. Combine that with good goal tending and you get what we have here. Seems simple enough to see, right?
Who cares what the “experts” say, this team is fucking fun to watch. Why do people have to “put them” somewhere, why can’t they just “be”. The best part is, we still have tons of upside and the team is gaining great experience. Lets ride this thing!
Mr. Anderson - THE ONE
I don’t blame the media pundits for their doom and gloom predictions. All they do is look at last years results and move teams up or down a spot or two.
I never actually understood this until Down Goes Brown pointed it out. After watching hockey for so many years I feel like an idiot for not seeing it myself. See http://www.milehighhockey.com/2009/9/2/1010323/do-not-despair-avs-fans-hockey
I wrote that before the season started and it’s more true than I could have hoped for.
What’s encouraging about the logevity of this Avalanche success is that we’ve seen them in all situations now. In division games. Back to back games. Long road trips. Playing from behind. Playing with a short bench. Playing with injuries. They have strong goaltending and very good special teams. They are strong up the middle and have great chemestry. Isn’t that the antithesis of last year?
NHL Live yesterday
was talking about the Colorado Avalanche and how they have completely blown everyone away. The discussion was about how during the summer they hired an inexperienced GM, an inexperienced coach, and are playing with a bunch of rookies. But, inexplicably, it is working.
Sacco’s interview after the Oilers game: he was asked what he thought about how everyone is doubting the team. His response: we’re not listening. LOL!! Love that. He said that he and the team don’t worry about that stuff. They just prepare for each game as it comes.
This is what I tell my son when kids say a lot of negative defeating things about him and his team: The best revenge is success. Go Avs!!!
Colorado Avalanche: Please excuse the mess while we are under construction.
The discussion was about how during the summer they hired an inexperienced GM, an inexperienced coach
That sounds a lot like the Broncos, too. Strangely enough, that experiment is working out so far, as well.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:20 AM MDT up reply actions
Two Colorado Coaches Same Answers
Wow sounds like Sacco and McKid are stealing lines from each other.
Reporters to McKid “and what do you think of everyone saying the Broncos would be 2-3 right now?”
McKid “We don’t pay attention to anyone outside our locker room because they just don’t know.”
Reporters to Sacco, “What do you think of everyone that said you guys would finish dead last?”
Sacco “We don’t pay attention to anyone outside our locker room because they just don’t know.”
LOL
by BryceLeo on Oct 29, 2009 2:11 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
What is it with Denver teams
and sports “experts”? The Rockies, Broncos and Avs can all got to the playoffs and all the “experts” are completely surprised. They never saw it coming!
“I mean this is Denver, after all…”
“Can anything good come out of Denver?”
Denver: the NEW City of Champions!
me too.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 2:27 PM MDT up reply actions
Alright, Mr. photoshop
How about John Bucchigross’s head on a horse’s body?
"I clearly miscalculated how popular it would be to show Calvin urinating on a Ford logo"--Bill Watterson
by frightened inmate #2 on Oct 29, 2009 8:59 AM MDT up reply actions
Alright
But as soon as Buccigross says the Braves are going to make the playoffs over the Avs, you’re on it.
"I clearly miscalculated how popular it would be to show Calvin urinating on a Ford logo"--Bill Watterson
by frightened inmate #2 on Oct 29, 2009 9:03 AM MDT up reply actions
It really doesn’t even matter to the nay-sayers if we actually do pull it out and win the cup. They’ll say it wasn’t a real win, a blow off year, just as they did in 96. No respect from them, no matter what. This is the hardest working group of rookies we have seen in years here, and I think their praises should be sung!
Regardless, I go into every game knowing we’re due to lose, and have been very plesantly surprised with almost every game! Yeah, we have some things to work on, but we’re getting the puck in the net, even if it’s ugly. In the end, isn’t that what really counts?
After 1:10 last night I was certain they were going to lose…I have no problem eating crow with this team.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 10:40 AM MDT up reply actions
Should be 1:10 into the game
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 10:40 AM MDT up reply actions
Sup Guys and Gals Keep Truckin
Feels really good to be sitting in 1st in the conference. Mainly because we have had many doubters. But people fail to realize how banged up we were last year. I’m really excited for the future and NOW. Lets keep TRUCKIN!!!
Smoke & Mirrors
They’re right about the smoke and mirrors, so I’ll agree with them. Wolski smoked those two Calgary defensemen like cigars, and he fired that puck through Kipper’s net so quickly, that the Flames could see themselves…crying in the locker room.
by AlexanderH on Oct 29, 2009 9:41 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Does Anyone Care HOW We're Doing it?
The point is…WE’RE FUCKING DOING IT!!!!!!!!!!!
This is putting confidence in the younger players.
Will we hit a slump at some point in the season? Without question, every team does…but do they not understand how much learning Radar, Dutchy and the young ones are getting? I mean it’s not like we’re feasting on the Atlanta’s and the Florida’s in the world…look at who we have beaten so far Boston, Detroit, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, San Jose….not exactly chopped liver here.
Mile High Mayhem just another ho-hum Avs blog.
Remember, you can’t judge a team by what they’re doing now, you have to judge them by what they did last year. Duh!
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Correct
The penguins already have the cup. They might as well keep it.
Avalanche 2009-2010: We fend off 7 man power plays? Do you?
I care HOW the team is doing it. Because I’s like to find a way to bottle it a give it to a few select teams in other leagues. And also keep a few bottle handy for the future (say 15-20 years when this team starts retiring),
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 10:42 AM MDT up reply actions
All predictions
are based on last years results. No one’s suprised if the Sharks go 10-1-2 during the season at any point. They’ve done it before. So don’t be surprised about the critics. They’re only going off of what they know: past behaivior. Regardless of the fact that Joe Sacco wasn’t handed a team bare of talent, or that as recently as two seasons ago the Avs were a second round playoff team before half the starting line-up succumbed to injuries, experts are going to go off of last years results because they were so dramatic.
And because experts are often lazy. And because predictions are somehow elevated to a high status in sports media for whatever reason.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
To be fair
this start is FUCKING INSANELY AWESOME.
I can’t even believe it, and I have been watching every game.
So basicly what we’re learning here is that next year we should be much better ranked and respected, right?
No, that’s impossible, because the Avs are destined to implode in order to prove the pundits correct. No teams ever really improve or worsen. They do exactly the same they did the year before. We all know that.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Yeah! Just like the Miami Dolphins from two years ago and last year! Oh…. wait…
by Rather Dashing on Oct 29, 2009 12:37 PM MDT up reply actions
For a week, sure
I can understand picking the Avs dead last after last season, but after the first week of this season, the “power rankings” should have started to reflect the change. The fact that the Avs aren’t No. 1 or No. 2 in all power rankings now is nothing more than stubborn “experts” not wanting to admit they were dead wrong.
Even in the latest ranking, the posters have to come up with lame excuses as to why the Avs aren’t higher.
I can understand that though
I said earlier this week that power rankings in my opinion are a list of the best teams if the playoffs started. Honestly, i can see choosing Chicago in a playoff series over us or something. That’s ok with me. But we should be top 6 at least.
Avalanche 2009-2010: We fend off 7 man power plays? Do you?
Wall
I don’t post on team blog sites usually, but I have to take issue with these so-called pundits saying Duchene especially will hit the wall. He has already. Just look at it: he has one goal in 13 games on a great team as the 3rd overall pick. If I were an opposing team’s coach, I would be more worried that he of all players was going to break out of it than anything else. Is he trying too hard? Who knows. But it seems like the Avalanche can only improve from an individual player standpoint. Good day to you all.
That is the best handle ever.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:22 AM MDT up reply actions
Who did you main?
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:30 AM MDT up reply actions
I'm a Terran man, myself.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:31 AM MDT up reply actions
After Brood War
’Toss were crazy overpowered. Super bad ass and easy to mass units that teleport and destroy everything in sight? Ugh.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:35 AM MDT up reply actions
<3 Penny Arcade.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:39 AM MDT up reply actions
Bugs Me
This game was as much a statement as you could make.
You play the team everyone called to win the NW and possibly the West.
You play in their house.
You play them rested after having to play the night before.
You play them basically handicapping them a 2-0 lead.
You win 3-2. Frankly it really wasn’t even that close. Maybe they can’t keep this form the whole season but what team responds the way this team did and wins? Talk about a gut check.
BTW first time posting here, go AVS!
How do you keep the Broncos Humble?
"Just show them the film. Show them the film." - Josh McDaniels
This Avs team is just like the Goonies
Young overachievers thrown into a situation that is completely over their heads.
Instead.
Goonies Never Say Die!
Who is going to do the truffle shuffle?
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 2:30 PM MDT up reply actions
I can imagine that….I don’t want to see it mind you, but I can imagine that.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 2:30 PM MDT up reply actions
I really just mentioned Koci so I had a reason to post this picture. Definitely something I never imagined:
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Have any of the naysayers mentioned that 9 of our 13 games have been on the road?
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 10:07 AM MDT reply actions
That never seems to come up.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Have any of the yaysayers mentioned that they used to be naysayers?
Bob wasn’t always so optimistic. In July he wrote an email talking about season ticket options, including trying to add another pair of tickets closer to the ice and sell our original upper-level seats each game:
My initial thought was that I would try to unload our entire package of regular tickets to another group of buyers … but frankly, that would probably be pretty tough, given today’s economy and the awful product we will surely see on the ice this season.
Another option was more drastic:
3. Cancel our season tickets. Face it, the team is horrible right now. Not only are they bad, but last season, they were fairly horrible to watch. Now they trade Ryan Smyth, one of the few guys who at least showed up most of the time last season. And Super Joe is retiring.
It’s not just the experts who got it wrong. A lifelong Denver native and rabid Avs fan seems to have gotten it wrong, too.
by Dan Winkler on Oct 29, 2009 11:40 AM MDT up reply actions
I don’t think anyone is mad because pundits picked the Avs to be bad, I think people are upset because people are trying to find ways to continue to hold their beliefs rather than changing their mind based on what’s actually happened.
The New Improved Avalanche. Now with Real Coaches!
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 29, 2009 12:33 PM MDT up reply actions
I agree
I didn’t renew my ticket package this year after sitting through last season, often sitting next to people who got their tickets at a much lower price. That burned me a bit.
But this year, It’s not just the two rookies that are different. This whole team is hungrier, faster, stronger and more interesting to watch. I haven’t been this entertained by an Avs team in a long, long time, and I’m really kicking myself for getting tickets last season but not this season.
It’s almost as though they are being coached.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 2:32 PM MDT up reply actions
I've got excellent news!
I bet there are still plenty of great seats available.
by Dan Winkler on Oct 29, 2009 4:18 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
I’m mostly mad because it seems like the Avs just never get any respect from the Analysts. Even when they are good, you can tell that they don’t like it. They want to see Detroit on top. However, I’ve grown to disrespect their opinions because I think they are biased. Right now, it doesn’t bother me so much but it will feel even sweeter if the Avs continue to prove them wrong. So, I hope the pundits and the Avs keep it up. It’s also really nice to see the Avs fans defend their team on this topic. It’s a major change from a couple months ago. When I see the fans putting down their own team, that makes me much more upset then the pro pundits putting them down.
I don’t think that it’s what they ‘want to see detroit on top’ they just have always been on top and it’s hard to see change.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:56 PM MDT up reply actions
Nah, they do. Detroit’s evilness has poisoned the media.
by Rather Dashing on Oct 29, 2009 3:58 PM MDT up reply actions
I don’t know. It seems to me that most of the Analyst will openly admit that they are Detroit fans. It was pretty obvious to me in the finals last year and the year before. They almost never have anything negative to say about them even when they aren’t playing well. However, they will always critisize the Avs even when they are awesome. I guess I can’t blame them for being a fan but it seems a little unbalanced for their position.
I freely admit that I was wrong initially.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I proudly admit I was wrong, Danno
Unlike others, who are basically saying “we’re still going to be right, 10-1-2 record including 6-1-2 on the road be damned.” I also proudly acknowledge our huge upgrade behind the bench. And you?
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 1:49 PM MDT up reply actions
A .935...
… save percentage can make many coaches look like geniuses.
I think it’s smart to look at this team with caution, still. The “Sacco Effect” will wear off after awhile (although it’s a pretty young team, so his hardass ways might have a longer shelf life with this group, so maybe we won’t hear how he’s “lost the locker room” for a year or two or, hopefully, three). Anderson, the number-one- with-a-bullet reason for our start, will come back to earth. Young players will make mistakes, veterans will slow down, rivals will go on hot streaks…it’s all part of a long season.
I’ve had more fun watching the first 13 games this season than I’ve had in the last 2 years combined. Love the effort, love being pleasantly surprised by players I’d written off, and I love the promise shown by the next generation. I just don’t think we’ve proven anything yet except that we’ll play much harder this year than last, and that we have 22 points through 13 games.
Bob, give Mirtle and Bucci and everyone else a break. You’ve been watching hockey for around 30 years. You’re a die-hard fan. You’ve watched at least 95% of the team’s 1200+ games. Who’s more of an Avs expert than you? But you were absolutely convinced this team would suck. Please forgive them, who don’t know nearly as much about the team as you do, for getting it wrong in the first place, and for still being skeptical.
by Dan Winkler on Oct 29, 2009 4:49 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
I wish people would actually HEAR what we're saying...
we’re not villifying anyone for getting it wrong. hell, we all did too. we’re fucking pissed off that few media types and others around the league are not saying…“shit, i think we got this wrong. they’re rocking it right now. they might fall off this pace, but for now, wow. they’re impressing the hell out of us.” i mean..really…is that so hard???
Beachie: Injuring hottie Avs players' almighty groins since 1996
by BeachNSnowGirl on Oct 29, 2009 6:51 PM MDT up reply actions
I think we're doing this all wrong.
We should stop trying to stand on our soapbox and hollerin’ about how everyone else is wrong. No more fighting the power. We should just run with the Fluke Watch. Daily updates of standings with some basic schedule analysis (Hi, we’re the Avalanche and we’ve played 25373465 games on the road against quality opponents) and just enjoy fresh pictures of us at the top of the standings everyday. If we crash, hell, it was fun. If we keep on rollin’ along, joke’s on them. Bitches.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:27 AM MDT reply actions 7 recs
Count me in with the naysayers
Look, I love the Avs. They are vaguely confusing but strangely likeable, much like “Pulp Fiction.” However, we are rebuilding and as much as I’d love to think that our team is one that will have real success this year, I’m inclined to agree with experts that we are more likely overachieving behind a fabulous goaltending run and some confident, exciting, and talented but very young players.
And let’s reign in the homerism a little. The team is somewhat talented, but at its current level of ability and seasoning—especially considering that a lot of our depth players are overachieving—it is disingenuous to compare them to last year’s Sharks in ability or potential.
Now the Sharks never realized that potential, and I think there is a mental toughness component in that failing, and I also think right now, Joe Sacco is doing a great job coaching—better than the Sharks got last year.
We are better served as fans to be excited for the future and excited about what we are seeing now, but I feel that this post is a little more homerism than I’m used to from MHH.
I WILL BE HAPPY TO BE PROVEN WRONG! GO AVS!
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 10:38 AM MDT reply actions
Homerism? I think I couched all of my statements pretty well. I’m not arguing the Avs will keep this up, or that they’ll even win another game at all. I don’t know. I’m simply criticizing the biased and self-serving pundits who are finding any and all reasons to shoot down the Avs’ early accomplishments.
And who compared the Avs to last year’s Sharks? I only cited their strong early run and their eventual Presidents’ Trophy as an example of a team that never cooled off to illustrate the fact that “hitting the wall” is not the only possible scenario for any team that has a good October.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
No offense intended
We are all homers from time to time. Everyone—even hardened hockey analysts. I know I am. So I didn’t mean any offense to call this homerism, but i still believe that there is an element of that in what I’m reading here.
“And who compared the Avs to last year’s Sharks? I only cited their strong early run and their eventual Presidents’ Trophy as an example of a team that never cooled off to illustrate the fact that "hitting the wall" is not the only possible scenario for any team that has a good October.”
Yeah but, given that you are discussing the Avs’ strong starts, sounds like a comparison to me. No need to argue over semantics—I think my point was clear. Just because other teams have done it doesn’t mean that the Avs are more or less likely to do it. Just that such a thing is possible, and I doubt anyone would debate that it is possible for a team to have a strong October and finish strongly as well. Obviously it is possible.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 10:53 AM MDT up reply actions
Just because other teams have done it doesn’t mean that the Avs are more or less likely to do it.
Which is EXACTLY MY POINT.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Yes, I’m aware that’s your point. And MY point is: so? It’s such an obvious statement and carries no weight.
So in other words, comparing the Avs to the very strong regular seasons of the Sharks or Wings of years past is sorta pointless, because yes, we know such a thing is possible, and that’s not under debate. It’s also possible for Anderson to be elected governor of Colorado as another athlete has in the past been elected to that position in his state.
The question is, is it likely? If not, then the comparison is a bit faithless.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 11:28 AM MDT up reply actions
I don’t think you understood my post at all.
So in other words, comparing the Avs to the very strong regular seasons of the Sharks or Wings of years past is sorta pointless, because yes, we know such a thing is possible, and that’s not under debate.
Yes, it IS pointless, and that was my point. Mirtle was citing strong starts by other teams that eventually imploded to bolster his point that the Avs will do the same, and I merely pointed out that other teams had strong starts and never imploded.
I’m not arguing that either outcome is more likely, just that either outcome is POSSIBLE. There is no foregone conclusion either way.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Meaning we are what our record says we are.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 11:36 AM MDT up reply actions
Maybe we are not understanding each other.
“I’m not arguing that either outcome is more likely, just that either outcome is POSSIBLE. There is no foregone conclusion either way.”
Yeah. And follow me here. See, this is what I was addressing above where I said that such a statement is basically pointless. If something is neither impossible or possible the logical thing to do is examine the likelihood when making a prediction about how a team is going to do. That’s what the “experts” are doing. They’re saying it’s NOT LIKELY.
Stay with me. For you to say, “I’m sick of people saying it’s not likely! It IS possible!” is baffling because I don’t think anyone means to say that it is IMPOSSIBLE. Just very unlikely and that’s why they use words like “probably” and “if I’m pressed to make a prediction.”
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 11:46 AM MDT up reply actions
Erin, that’s the thing, they’re NOT using the words “probably.” Buccigross aid that the rookies WILL hit a wall. And Mirtle, in an earlier post, said that Anderson CAN’T maintain his current level of play.
The gist of many of the naysayers’ arguments is precisely that it is IMPOSSIBLE for 1) the Avs to be this good down the road, and/or 2) to be this good now. Their reasons for these conclusions vary.
My problem is the very act of prediction itself. Statistics or no statistics, there’s no reason to try to predict how the Avs will do either way, because nobody really knows.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I just wish I could see the day when the Cubbies win the World Series.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
That was a movie, ain’t happening. LOL
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 1:38 PM MDT up reply actions
I am willing to bet that if you asked John Buccigross or Mirtle direction, “Do you think it’s flat-out impossible for the Avs to make the playoffs? Absolutely zero-chance impossible?” They would say, “No…not impossible. But very close to it. Very unlikely.” Do you disagree?
I mean, we can settle this by emailing Buccigross, if you do think he would say “it’s 100% impossible.” He checks his email. But I’m fairly sure he wouldn’t say that, based on…
“The Avs probably will not make the playoffs this season. If they do, they probably won’t win a playoff series.”
In other words, there is a possibility, in his eyes, that they will not only make the playoffs but advance in them.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 1:48 PM MDT up reply actions
I have asked Mirtle directly. See above and below.
And Bucci said “probably” about the playoffs, but that’s not what I criticized him for saying. I criticized him for saying the rookies WILL hit the wall.
You really didn’t read my post very thoroughly.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
OK. Let’s call it a day. You’re right, and I retract my suggestion that you are being a homer. I see now that you are simply angry because Buccigross thinks there is a 100% chance that the Avs rookies will hit a wall.
I simply thought you were making a larger point than that, I suppose. But if all you are saying is that you believe Buccigross would say that there was a 100% chance that the rookies would hit a wall if pressed, and that angers you…then OK.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 1:55 PM MDT up reply actions
Who is angry? I don’t understand why you keep projecting anger, homerism and other apparent faults onto me. I think I’ve been pretty calm and reasonable here.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Are you the Erin who used to post on the Av newsgroup?
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 2:01 PM MDT up reply actions
Yes! Hi Bob. Haven’t changed your SN I see. :-)
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions
Yep
I seemed to remember that you went to CU, then up to the NW? Having lived in Seattle for 12 years prior to moving back home to CO, I can relate.
I’ve found this to be a better forum to share our obsession. Good folks around here. Even Joe.
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 3:07 PM MDT up reply actions
I really have never looked much at this site because the Avs have been displeasing me for years, even when they were predicted to do more, because I could see only doom and gloom in the future. I watch most every game, and I would get very depressed at what I saw as their continual decline.
Now that the doom and gloom has come (supposedly anyway!) and we’re rebuilding, the future looks bright to me and it’s exciting enough to read fan sites again. :-)
Yup, I graduated from CU in 2003, moved to Eugene, OR early 2004 as my now-husband was in school there, and we moved to Portland a little over a year ago. We love it here. Less rain than Seattle gets, but just as much grey.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 3:11 PM MDT up reply actions
Also I ran into Thomas on facebook. Apparently he’s a friend of a friend of a friend (seriously).
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 2:44 PM MDT up reply actions
THE Thomas?
Internet Troll Extraordinaire?
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:44 PM MDT up reply actions
Yes. Let’s just say it was easy to recognize him. I don’t mean to disparage him, but to depict the situation, he found out that he knew me from ASHNCA, friended me on Facebook (we have never met), and then unfriended me in a fit of anger later, over something silly (I can’t recall what, but I believe it was related to the presidential election or something).
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 2:45 PM MDT up reply actions
I have a feeling I know who Thomas voted for.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Himself, of course.
* Insert Henry Hatsworth laugh *
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:48 PM MDT up reply actions
Well, considering he referred to McCain as “a left-leaning moderate,” yeah, I would say it’s pretty apparent. :-)
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 2:54 PM MDT up reply actions
Ahaha
Good to know things haven’t changed much.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:46 PM MDT up reply actions
Speaking of Ban Hammers, Thomas is the only MHH member to have received it at least three times. He should get a replica to hang over his fireplace.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
What happens when you're banned?
How do you know it happened? Does a message pop up with a sad face saying “lolz sry”? I feel like I should create a second account strictly for trolling purposes so I can figure this out.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:49 PM MDT up reply actions
Yeah, you get a message (if I choose to write one) and you’re unable to re-join or comment to whichever blog you’ve been banned by. There is also an SBN-wide ban available to the big dogs. It’s a hammer approximately 50 feet long that weighs 450 tons.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
That's kind of cool.
I was thinking maybe it’d be a lot more amusing if nothing happened at all and the person started losing their shit trying to figure out how to post an angry response to someone.
Also, do their previous posts disappear or does their name just get grayed out where you can’t click on their profile anymore but previous posts remain?
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:56 PM MDT up reply actions
The Ban Hammer allows the wielder to erase all evidence of the banned person’s existence.
I love it so.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Wow
He relinquished his Av fandom, supposedly, when they rehired Granato. In some ways Thomas was smart. Not that I would ever cease being a fan.
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 3:08 PM MDT up reply actions
I don’t think I could cease being an Avs fan, even had I wanted to (and there are times I have wanted to). Then again, I’m married to a devout Sharks fan, and I feel obliged to keep up appearances because he has to remember how inferior his Cupless team is, regardless of their current record.
I always suspected Thomas was a repressed Wings fan. But then again I’m a therapist and I have to see repression everywhere (it’s in the code of ethics).
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 3:13 PM MDT up reply actions
My apologies, I did not mean to project anger onto you. I felt that I was hearing frustration. Maybe that’s the word I should’ve used.
I don’t see how I’m “projecting” homerism; I admit I still feel that your assessment is colored by the fact that you are an Avs fan.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions
Considering that I’m the editor in chief of this Avalanche fan blog, I’d say pretty much everything I write here is colored by the fact I’m an Avs fan. Maybe we just have a different definition of “homer.” Fair enough.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
You know...
Now that I’ve actually looked at it a little bit, it’s insane to me that the Calgary guys were pushing so hard to call our start “smoke and mirrors”. I’ve just been browsing their schedule and some stats. For a team that’s considered so talented defensively, do you know they’ve been outshot in all games but 3 (one of which they tied)? Their goaltending has been mediocre with Kipper having a sub-.900 SV% and a GAA over 3. Of their 7 wins, 5 have come against Edmonton/Vancouver, whom the Avs each beat 3-0 in their only matchups thus far. The Calgary guys can talk all they want about us being fluky, but just from 10 minutes of basic research, they look a lot more fluky, especially considering their whopping 4 road games (which has 1 regulation win, 1 SO win, 1 SO loss, and 1 regulation loss).
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 10:59 AM MDT up reply actions
No, see, you’re missing the point. Calgary was good last year, so they’re good this year.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
My bad!
I forgot that paying $30 million for a blueline getting routinely outshot while playing in the comfy confines of home in front of a goaltender that’s been in obvious decline over the last several years constitutes being good. Or maybe they’re considered good because they win? Hmm….
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 11:06 AM MDT up reply actions
Heh, what’s the bias? That I hate the Avalanche?
I’ve had predictions be right and wrong a million times… that’s not much of a motivator. The fact is, it’s widely established what top teams in the NHL look like, statistically, and the Avs are not winning that way.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:03 AM MDT up reply actions
The bias is you don’t want your prediction to look stupid. There’s nothing wrong with that.
But you assume that there can be no outliers. Sure statistics are useful in general, but outliers always exist, and some teams defy the odds. Acknowledging that won’t kill you, and it doesn’t make us shameless homers for recognizing that sometimes a team gets a good combination of skill, coaching and luck to fall together all at once.
This good run could end tomorrow or it could go all year, but none of us knows for sure, statistics or no statistics.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
The prediction already looks stupid. Who cares? Everyone’s in the same boat anyway.
I’m comparing Colorado to the outliers JD. We’re already looking at the extremes of what has ever occurred in the NHL and they’re currently outside that.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:10 AM MDT up reply actions
You seem to care a whole lot. This is the second “the Avs will suck before long, don’t worry” post in a week from you. Instead of focusing on how incredible their success has been (and that’s not homerism, you said it yourself they’re outside the extremes of success), you keep reassuring your readers that it’s all going to come crashing down eventually.
Why try to predict anything at all? I guess I just don’t get the point.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Analysts generally analyze. People like reading it.
The first post was an early season look around the league, in which I wrote about three sentences about the Avs and why they were playing over their heads. Since it was so thoroughly ripped apart here, I felt more justification would be worth putting together, and the latest post focuses on these hot starts and what they mean.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:35 AM MDT up reply actions
You mean some hot starts and what they sometimes mean.
And you’re not analyzing, you’re projecting. Trust me, I know people like to read analysis, but what you’re doing is analyzing with a set conclusion already established. You’re just finding stats that support your assumption. Obviously, you can do whatever you want, and I’ll keep on reading every word of it, but don’t be surprised if we keep disagreeing with you.
I appreciate your willingness to contest my take on your writing, by the way. I think, disagreements aside, you’ve earned yourself a lot of respect among Avalanche fans. Thanks, James.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I have to say that Mirtle definitely has earned some respect here. Many people disagree with what you posted, but you have come in and taken on your challengers with good, honest, polite debate.
That’s part of what makes MHH so much fun to read on a daily basis.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 1:36 PM MDT up reply actions
Let’s put it this way: With the Avs, you can easily spot the things that point to it being unsustainable. With the Kings, I haven’t found those.
I was almost certainly wrong about L.A. I’m still highly, highly skeptical that the Avs are what they are right now.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 1:37 PM MDT up reply actions
I’m still highly, highly skeptical that the Avs are what they are right now.
If you say so.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
regarding the kings...
that’s interesting because i distinctly recall you saying they couldn’t keep up they’re scoring trend either. in fact, you lumped them in the same discussion as the avs. i remember this because i’m from LA and all my friends are kings fans and we’ve been discussing it.
i do respect you defending your position. i still want you to say “they’re doing incredibly well right now” without qualifying that statement with “it won’t last.” is that so hard, james? reall?
Beachie: Injuring hottie Avs players' almighty groins since 1996
by BeachNSnowGirl on Oct 29, 2009 7:07 PM MDT up reply actions
I think it’s pretty self-evident and not worth stating that they’ve played well after 13 games.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:00 PM MDT up reply actions
some really great points. I think the single greatest thing this team is proving however is how real effort can overcome talent on a consistent basis. Teams like the Sharks, and even previous iterations of the Avs have proven time and again, that all the talent in the world counts for nothing, if the efforts not there, and that teams with less talent can make you look silly if you’re not out there working hard.
Can the Avs keep it up? Can Anderson keep up this pace? Will all these injuries break us down? who can say. I have no expectations for this team other than they better at least continue with the hard work, beyond that, it’s all gravy for me. I’m sure I’ll be a little more dissapointed if they go on an extended slump at this point, as compared to earlier in the season, to be honest.
Yup
I would never disagree that effort overcomes talent. But talent doesn’t go away barring catastrophic injury or age, whereas superhuman effort and motivation is hard to sustain over the course of an 82 game season.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 10:55 AM MDT up reply actions
strange thought...
i’m being totally serious when i say this. but what if we aren’t rebuilding this year?
here’s my logic:
the only major changes of the on-ice staff are loss of entire coaching staff, loss of sakic, loss of laperriere, relegation of budaj, addition of duchene, addition of o’reilly, addition of mr. anderson, addition of entire coaching staff. yes there were some other changes, but those are the ones that stand out to me. suppose, just suppose, that instead of losing most of the offense to crazy injuries that those guys played most of the season. does anyone really believe that we finish DFL in the west last year? i say that we finish somewhere 10-13, in other words not all that far from the playoff qualifiers.
so with that being my base of reasoning, with a better goaltender and better offensive players and healthy returning offensive players and a better coach, who is to say this would have happened regardless? keep in mind, the core of this team has remained the same (exception sakic) over the last 3 years including this one. this core was a point out of winning the division against minnesota two seasons ago and a point out of the playoffs the year before that. i’m not calling this a fluke, i’m calling this the legit outcome of a perfect storm that played out in our favor. i think it is fairly obvious that the major thing holding us back last year was coaching. the leftover talent was good enough to not be DFL and 10 points behind 14th place.
i firmly believe last year was the fluke and this season is an improved continuation of the previous seasons of cap era hockey played in denver.
I like the gist of this. Without the injuries to Sakic and Stastny, the team should have made the playoffs last year. Not much beyond that, but they could have been a fair to middling team and no one would have put them so low to start this season. Smyth was probably the biggest loss, but a power forward like him always seemed a bit out of place on a team that was supposed to be about speed and skill. We’ve got more of that now, plus a legitimate starting goalie and a coach committed to the system, so I don’t know how it would have been unreasonable to predict at the beginning of the year that the Avs would make the playoffs. Even the elite teams don’t predict being on the kind of pace that the Avs are on now, but a prediction of an improved season and a playoff appearance seems more than reasonable.
At the end of October last season, the San Jose Sharks had a record of 9-2-0. They went on to win the Presidents’ Trophy with 117 points. In 2007-08, the Detroit Red Wings had a 10-2-1 record at the end of October. They went on to win the Presidents’ Trophy with 115 points. In 2006-07, the Buffalo Sabres ended October with a record of 10-0-1. What happened to them?
All three of those teams had well over 100 points the season before. They had a sustained level of excellence that carried over into a hot start the next season, and they didn’t do it while being outshot heavily every game.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
Sens
were good the year before they collapsed. In short:
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” -Benjamin Disraeli
Come on, James, tighten your game. You can’t say “outshot heavily every game” as if it adds weight to your argument.
Shots For/Against this year for the Avs:
20-40
27-35
24-37
19-26
22-32
28-31
23-31
29-31
35-26
36-36
23-49
33-25
14-32
Without nitpicking too much as to what “heavily” means, we’ll assume that 10 shots against more than shots for qualifies as “outshot heavily.”
That means, out of 13 games, the Avs have been outshot heavily just five times. They’ve outshot their opponents twice and tied once. In two games they were outshot by three or less.
I’ll concede that many teams with strong starts had good years before, but so what? Many teams with good years before get off to lousy starts the next (see: DETROIT). Your argument is (and has been all along) that the Avs are destined to fail in the long run, citing only examples that bolster that point without acknowledging that lots of contrary examples exist.
It’s not like I’m arguing that the Avs won’t implode. They could. No doubt about it. But I’m not predicting that they will or won’t cool off as if I actually know for sure. As Panda acknowledges above, you can cite any statistics you want to justify any position you want, but that doesn’t shed any light at all on what’s the team is actually accomplishing NOW.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Hahaha
That exact part of his post is what caused me to look into Calgary’s results because I saw this idea we’ve been heavily outshot was just false. While we’ve had some games that weren’t pretty, this perception is just, well, wrong.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 11:03 AM MDT up reply actions
Also
Shot totals do not tell us how good those shots are. Or how many are secondary chances, as opposed to 50 footers. Shots =/= great scoring chances every time. The Avalanche are trapping well, and avoiding getting trapped in their own zone it seems. Intangibles. By all looks, they should be performing just like Minnesota is right now.
Exactly. You can point to any single, simplistic stat line and say “the Avs aren’t really that good because…” but that doesn’t really tell you anything. So what if the stats don’t make sense compared to long-term trends? Ever heard of outliers?
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Very few of those shots this season are second and third chances, unlike last season.
The Defense has done a pretty good job of not just letting Anderson see the shots, but then clearing out any rebound he may leave an/or making the opposition forwards life miserable down low.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 1:10 PM MDT up reply actions
The Avs have been outshot by an average of 7.5 per game, which is enormous in the NHL. The worst team in the league last season was at 5.3. Only one team postlockout, out of all the most awful teams out there, has had an average worse than what the Avs are currently putting up in that category.
That’s just wrong Joe. I’ve given many, many reasons supporting my argument, all along. They are destined to fail because they are out shot heavily, are getting unsustainable goaltending and are relying on scoring goals on a per shot basis that they can’t keep up.
Your argument is (and has been all along) that the Avs are destined to fail in the long run, citing only examples that bolster that point without acknowledging that lots of contrary examples exist.
Every one of the statistics I’ve used relates to what the Avs are currently doing.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:08 AM MDT up reply actions
Let me get this straight.
Craig Anderson’s SV% will go down because history says it will, so the Avs will stumble, but while citing them being outshot at a historic pace you give no credence to the idea that particular pace likely won’t continue. It looks an awful lot like nit-picking to support your case.
Yes, it is fair to assume Anderson’s SV% will drop. It’s also fair to assume that the shot differential will also go down.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 11:15 AM MDT up reply actions
There’s a very, very expansive body of work on this sort of thing on the blogosphere, and it’s all pretty interesting (and persuasive). Things like shooting percentage and save percentage follows the trends much closer than other statistics.
If the Avs radically alter how badly they’re getting out shot and out chanced, then this doesn’t mean anything. That rarely happens — but it could.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:37 AM MDT up reply actions
do any of those stats qualify from where the shots are taken? are they high percentage shots or “hail mary” type shots? if you look at the shots on goal vs. goals scored for the avs, would it be reasonable to think the avs are getting off fewer yet higher quality shots?
i don’t know these answers. that’s why i’m asking you as you seem to know a lot about these kinds of stats. folks here at MHH talked a couple of days ago about wanting to see graphs showing from where the shots were taken but i don’t think anyone found any.
Beachie: Injuring hottie Avs players' almighty groins since 1996
by BeachNSnowGirl on Oct 29, 2009 7:16 PM MDT up reply actions
Averages don’t mean anything when you have huge outliers. Game one, in which they were outshot by 20 and game eleven, in which they were outshot by 26, are going to yank the average way up.
Even so, your assumption is that the Avs will maintain this deficit throughout the year. As you said, the worst team last season was 5.3. So, statistically, we can assume that the Avs won’t continue to be outshot so dramatically.
I’ve given many, many reasons supporting my argument, all along.
We don’t disagree. You just don’t cite any reasons that contradict your argument even though they’re out there. Which is fair, of course, because who really wants to weaken their own argument when they’ve already come to a conclusion they’re comfortable with?
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I already outlined why pointing out that the top teams in the NHL had hot starts isn’t relevant to the situation. They out shot their opposition and didn’t win based on a .940 save percentage.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 11:39 AM MDT up reply actions
Every team that’s ever had a hot start out-shot their opposition? Every team that’s had a hot start and carried it to the end of the year has out-shot their opposition? Every single one? I’m not being a dick, I’m asking because I don’t know. I’d love to see the data.
I’m going to assume, however, that there have been teams that have maintained shot deficits (perhaps not as drastic as Colorado’s) and managed to win many more games than they’ve lost.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
It’s pretty rare. It happens with a Hasek or Brodeur type goaltender (although, as you say, not as drastic as what the Avs are currently doing).
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 1:38 PM MDT up reply actions
Jibbles cites some examples below of teams that maintained excellent records despite being consistently out-shot.
And I have to say, looking at Anderson’s stats from the last three years and the start of this year, I think he’s starting to make a case for his inclusion in the same sentence as “Hasek or Brodeur.” He’s not there yet, but he’s building a very strong argument.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
To Mirtle
Sir, the fact that the Av’s have scored more points with fewer shots means they’re better shooters. Am I not right? I don’t give a damn about what other teams have done. If this SOG thing you’re mentioning ISN’T irrelevant, I don’t know what is…
I dunno about that
It seems very talented “shooters” fill up the rosters of every team. I don’t think there’s any denying Wolski isn’t going to maintain a shooting % of 30.8. At the same time, while he’s dropping off, you’d think a guy like Duchene who has a shooting % of something absurdly low like 4 would pick up some of the slack.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 11:45 AM MDT up reply actions
Ovechkin basically obliterates all players in shots on goal. I don’t know what that does for his shooting percentage—I suspect he’s nowhere near the top—but I wouldn’t mind having that kind of “bad shooter” on my team.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 11:50 AM MDT up reply actions
The fact is that it depends on whether or not the player feels comfortable shooting, and if you can accomplish the same thing without shooting as much, there’s no point in wasting your energy. If the only way Ovechkin can score so much is by firing the puck every chance he gets, congratulations to him. That’s great. It’s just that I’m pretty sure Sacco and everyone else on the team is well aware of this, and if they wanted to shoot more often, it wouldn’t really be very hard. Quality shots, up-close, or more timely shots on goal are harder, but not shots on goal, and there’s no stat for good shots on goal. So, how do you sort out that mess? You really can’t. If Ovechkin fires 20 sloppy shots on goal, that’s just wasted energy. That’s all there is to it. He just gave the goalie a higher save percentage…
I sorta disagree with you and sorta not. I don’t think shooting for shooting’s sake is a great idea all the time, but I don’t think sloppy shots are necessarily wasted effort, either.
I do disagree with the statement “if they wanted to shoot more often, it wouldn’t really be very hard.” It’s harder than it seems to get a shot on goal.
However, Ovechkin is a special player, so using him as a comparison was somewhat of a joke :-) not really fodder for serious discussion.
Your point, that shooting is not always an indicator of success, is well taken, and I hope mine, that a high shooting percentage is also not necessarily a great thing, is also understood.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 12:02 PM MDT up reply actions
Oregon. :-) From Loveland originally.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 12:31 PM MDT up reply actions
I know this will surprise you greatly. It’s grey and raining. I know, try to control your shock…
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 1:43 PM MDT up reply actions
If this SOG thing you’re mentioning ISN’T irrelevant, I don’t know what is…
I’m amazed that the reams of work guys have put into this has been disproven so handily.
I’ll get more into why these things indicate what they do in a future post. It’s definitely needed.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 12:02 PM MDT up reply actions
Didn’t the Flyers suck hard core one year and then get to the top of the conference the following season. And last year’s Blues made the playoffs as a 6-seed when everyone predicted them to be 15th.
Granted neither team started the way the Avs did this season, but I don’t understand why people can’t just say “The Avs have been lucky to go 10-1-2, but behind that is evidence that they have substantially improved from last years pathetic club. They will cool off, because their current pace is unsustainable, but they won’t return to the depths of last year, and could be a force to contend with”
The New Improved Avalanche. Now with Real Coaches!
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 29, 2009 12:38 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
That's too logical
Stop that logic. Stop that right now.
Avalanche 2009-2010: We fend off 7 man power plays? Do you?
What? Some gray area. No that hurts my head. I want it Black or White…don’t confuse me.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 1:14 PM MDT up reply actions
I’m pretty sure that’s what I did say.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 1:38 PM MDT up reply actions
i personally don’t recall you ever saying “evidence that they have substantially improved” without adding all your stats to show why it’s all not really improvement but a temporary surge of luck and crash and burn type of failure is imminent. perhaps i missed a post or something.
Beachie: Injuring hottie Avs players' almighty groins since 1996
by BeachNSnowGirl on Oct 29, 2009 7:21 PM MDT up reply actions
Others too ya know
I think the Avalanche playing so well is also taking the spotlight away from other teams that “shouldn’t” be doing well either. Sabres have a better Points/PG stat than Colorado. Ottawa is defying their supposed lack of talent. Phoenix could, and probably should be the worst team if activities off the ice during summer are any indicator, but they aren’t. There are also teams that are performing badly as expected (Toronto, NYI, Minn?) I’m not 100% up to snuff with the Avalanche’s actions being as I don’t live in Colorado, but has Anderson been seeing all the shots? Does the team look like it will gel defensively? I remember watching one game where I saw Adam Foote go straight for the man on a down low 2 on 1 twice. Which means they might be letting shots get through…? I dunno, someone with more watching experience chime in. Center Ice means I flip a lot.
Hey, let’s just call the teams with more hacks on goal the better teams. I guess all the Av’s have to do is start firing the puck 20 times per period, and they’ll win the Cup. YESSS!!! I’ve figured it out! Quick, give me Sacco’s number, ‘cause he’s gonna want to hear this…
Or most Penalty minutes
I saw a documentary on that once, some team pummeled their way to a league title
Just feed of of media bull crap...
playing great guys…its better for the team to feed of of this national negativity.
International!
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 29, 2009 12:14 PM MDT up reply actions
Just a thought
The shots last night were crazy uneven. But, I remember a few times i was worried but really Calgary had little penetration in our zone. A few good shifts, all my Iginla basically, but ill take 30 shots like last night. Anderson saw all of them, they were from far way, and really Calgary did not seem to be a threat, especially after we scored the 3rd goal.
Avalanche 2009-2010: We fend off 7 man power plays? Do you?
Also
The Boston Bruins last season were out shot in more than 1/2 of their games, and they went a whopping 32-6-5 in those games. Philly were outshot in 1/2 their games and went 26-12-4 (and they were outshot by almost 3 shots per game). Anaheim was outshot in 37 and went 25-12-3 in those games. Vancouver went 20-13-6 in games they were outshot in. There were plenty of teams that had bad records when being outshot.
The point being that the correlation between out-shooting and winning is pretty tenuous at best.
In fact 6 of the playoff teams from last season came from – side of SF/SA side of the equation, so I don’t think “The Avs are being outshot” is all that much evidence that they are going to drop off.
The New Improved Avalanche. Now with Real Coaches!
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 29, 2009 12:56 PM MDT reply actions
I think this is just a classic example of mistaking correlation for causation.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
To summarize...
The Avs have a phenominal record right now. They probably won’t maintain their pace, but whatever. They could still be good. Yeah, they’re being outshot, but they’re still winning. Blah…. blah…. blah.
Let’s just enjoy the good times while they last, eh?
i think this whole media thing is overblown
The Avs are very likely to come back to earth to some degree just looking at statistics. Most national media guys are using absolutes to describe this likelihood because that generates good copy. They also want to believe the Avs are bad because of their predictions to start the year, a perfectly understandable reason too. And again, these predictions were cast as absolutes.
There’s little point to debating this because that’s what national experts do: speak ex cathedra when there’s no absolute certainty to be found. they’re not going to change because we don’t like them glossing over the good things this team has done. The Avs will have to prove it longer term, and THEN we can make fun of the predictions. Or the Avs will come back to earth, and they can make fun of us. Right now it’s too early either way.
I’m just going to enjoy this run no matter what happens later in the year.
And because people just talk in absolutes. I say “it is gonna rain tomorrow” even when there’s only a 98% chance of rain.
by Erin in Portland on Oct 29, 2009 1:55 PM MDT up reply actions
I know this doesn’t have to be said, but I’m gonna say it: No one knows what’s gonna happen. It’s the ultimate reality show. That’s what makes it so awesome. That’s what keeps Cubs’ fans hanging on. And no one, not me, BiB, doc, JD, or Mr. Mirtle can say for sure. The funnest part about this season is just seeing how this team writes its’ own story. I’m content to hearing all prognosticators, but even more content to letting the Avs tell us how the season will end.
Good Point
As a hockey fan, it would be just as thrilling if Toronto or the Isles were in the same position. And just as much fun to see how it plays out.
and even better if the Wings were winless. A RW death watch would almost be as fun as this. Almost.
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 2:00 PM MDT up reply actions
I don’t think it would be “just as thrilling” because although I’m an Hockey fan, I’m still and Avs fan first.
Good hockey is fun and thrilling, but when it’s “your” team, that’s like getting a banana split while all the other kids are just getting an ice cream cone.
We all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline, and effort. - Jesse Owens -
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 2:02 PM MDT up reply actions
Note to Duchene and O’Reilly: IF you win the Cup this year, and IF you happen to win it in a US city, since you’re not allowed to drink alcohol out of it, please eat a banana split from it instead!
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I assume so. Just like setting a 10-1-2 early-season record with a 7.5 shots-against deficit.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
+1
Beachie: Injuring hottie Avs players' almighty groins since 1996
by BeachNSnowGirl on Oct 29, 2009 7:24 PM MDT up reply actions
Wanna Lick?
Psyche! You can’t have no ice cream…. cuz you are on the welfare, and you’re daddy is an alcoholic…. Ah, Delerious FTW
Get rid of the loser point
09-10 Avs- Nowhere to go but up!
Jibbled, and if the Avs win the Cup this season, I’m only eating banana splits for the rest of June.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
That’s going to one heck of a tummy ache, as well as a soggy mid section.
The 2009-10 Avalanche: It's like having a banana split while all the other kids are getting an ice cream cone.
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 2:44 PM MDT up reply actions
now my question, is this “Wall” banter being thrown around about Tavares and Hedman and Kane and Del Zotto? Or is it just because we actually have a winning record?
The only people who seem to be using it are popular hockey writers who boldly predicted a disaster for the Avs and now look completely wrong for having done so.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I don't want to start a blog war. . .
But the Flames blog truly condescends to a new level. http://www.matchsticksandgasoline.com/2009/10/29/1106488/paying-the-devil-his-dues-g11
That’s what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object (i.e. Flames offense vs. Avs defense
um… i’d stay they were pretty stoppable.
I guess
it’s not so bad after reading it again. I just don’t like the implication that the Avs won out of dumb luck. Or that the Flames did us some kind of favor by not playing to their abilities. Or that it wasn’t really a four point game. Would be against the Canucks, but not the Avs. Am I over-reacting? Cos’ I’ll shutup if I am.
oh, i fully agree, we won that because we didn’t give up, not because the flames didn’t show up or some other completely asinine excuse. I love to see other fans’ that are just as delusional about their teams as a lot of us are. It’s part of what makes the sport fun though.
I don't know
I thought the Flames were a lot better than the Avs last night.
The New Improved Avalanche. Now with Real Coaches!
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 29, 2009 2:27 PM MDT up reply actions
I did too, except in the third period. Their defense completely gave up on that Wolski goal. It was really sad.
Other than that, the Flames outplayed them pretty consistently.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
yup…the first words out of my mouth when the clock ran out (you’ll love this james) “well, mirtle, you were right on this one. anderson just fucking won that game and i will be shocked if he can do this game after game.”
so you got one on me, JM! = )
Beachie: Injuring hottie Avs players' almighty groins since 1996
by BeachNSnowGirl on Oct 29, 2009 7:26 PM MDT up reply actions
Wow.
The special teams last night were simply sublime.
0 for 3 on the PP is not exactly my definition of sublime, but to each their own. Looks like we’re not the only ones who’ve been drinking some Kool-Aid.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Calgary can keep all the moral victories this year.
Jones outworking the defense didn’t happen.
Wolski turning two defenders and their highly paid goaltender inside out… didn’t happen.
At least one fortunate bounce of a goal (maybe 2) for Calgary to even get on board…. didn’t happen.
The Avs playing with a short bench due to an injury… didn’t happen.
The Avs playing back to back on the road and winning …. didn’t happen.
Calgary being 9-0 in the last two years with three days rest is still in effect because last night… didn’t happen.
Good job Calgary, you win where it counts.. your mama’s heart.
Orange slices and a pat on the head.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
They got to watch the Mighty Ducks on the way home in the minivan.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I’m going to have to disagree. Except I had a huge crush on The Cat for most of middle school. I think it was middle school.
I hope it was middle school.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Maybe not a better movie
but I had the same crush. Oh, and Iceland was a terrifying team.
Made in 1994, you do the math.
The Iceland coach was totally modeled after Crawford.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
He was really intimidating.
Crawford is just a little bitch. He strikes me as the guy who would talk mad shit when he had 15 people around him but when he was alone just keep his mouth shut. A real Bravey McBraverson. Courage Wolf is ashamed he exists.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions
One of Granato's few shining moments
Imo, was when he wanted to go beat that smirking bastards ass after the Bertdouchie assault on Moore. Imagine what Granato and Tochett could have done to poor little Crow.
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 2:45 PM MDT up reply actions
No joke.
More than his incompetence, I’ll remember him freaking the hell out on the bench. Crawford was clearly super pleased with himself and Granato just wanted to rip his face off.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:46 PM MDT up reply actions
I was wondering when Courage Wolf would start showing up over here.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I've tried to pull back the reigns a bit
on some of the internet meme-ing. Courage Wolf/Insane Wolf are absolutely hysterical though.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:47 PM MDT up reply actions
I will say this picture fits the thread very well...
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 3:01 PM MDT up reply actions
I was 15 in 1994, so I was either in 8th grade or a freshman in high school.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Here’s the real question, why didn’t Foote shake Iginla’s hand after the game last night?!!
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I don’t want to start a blog war. . .
I’d never even think of doing such a thing.
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 2:31 PM MDT up reply actions
Don’t bring that mess over here. I have a strict “out of sight, out of mind” policy when it comes to EZ.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
But a2y himself
seems fairly well behaved when he pops over here. I don’t think any of the other toothless 19 can figure out how to navigate the internets to anywhere else. And when a2y does pop over, nobody here says they are going to rape his sister. Yes, a few of the toothless thought that was a funny yesterday. Funny in Detoilet, I guess.
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 2:36 PM MDT up reply actions
Bill behaves himself because he’s pretty much all talk anyway. And he rightly fears the Ban Hammer.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Hockeychic
was on MHH way back when. I think she was around during the stretch where nobody was allowed to say Theodore’s name and the Banhammer was being wielded like a pissed off Thor looking for bloodshed.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:39 PM MDT up reply actions
Oh man, she got the Hammer hard. I let her back in later but she hasn’t been around for a while now.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Avs' Theme Song for the year....
The 69 Eyes – NEVER SAY DIE!!!
Mile High Mayhem just another ho-hum Avs blog.
Yeah, I like ’em both too. Especially Mirtle, believe it or not.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Arny
My friends were playing NHL 10 and one was playing the Hartford wolfpack and Arnason is on that team and got a penalty, the picture that showed up was the one you guys always post on here, I almost died laughing
Hahahaha
I am firing up NHL 10 IMMEDIATELY to re-enact that situation.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 2:49 PM MDT up reply actions
That has to be an urban myth, I’m pretty sure without checking that TA has a checking rating of 0 and an agression rating of the same…
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:18 PM MDT up reply actions
On a completely unrelated note, I haven’t jumped from NHL 09 to NHL 10 yet. Is there anything spectacularly improved enough to make it worth doing immediately and starting over my Be A Pro and Dynasty? I played the demo and the main difference in game seemed to be board play, which is nice but I can probably wait until the used price drops a little bit for it.
The Be A GM Mode
kicks all kinds of ass if you’re interested in team management aspects of the game. The gameplay itself probably doesn’t warrant an immediate buy in terms of on-ice nomnomz, but th dynasty modes are pretty different.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 29, 2009 8:30 PM MDT up reply actions
AWESOME. Somebody post a screenshot.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
We have the support of The Mullet
In his chat today, he says this about the Avs:
They’re having an unbelievable run. I can’t see them continuing at this pace, but they are a good hockey team with great goaltending, and I can’t see them going into a prolonged slump.
The Mullet has seen the light!
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I give up.
I encourage all of you to do the same. Teams are limited to how they ended the year before. The avs will be lucky…lucky…I tells you to finish any higher than they did last year. It doesn’t matter what they do on the ice, it’s how they are on paper that counts…and this team SUCKS. Does it matter that the avs lost 19 games by 1 goal (incl. shoot outs) and decided to get a new goalie and add a defender coming into his own last year (KQ). Hell no, are you all idiots, changing tallent is as useless as changing coaches, which they also did and obviously screwed up by not hiring Patrick Roy. The avs suck. Why do you all bother to watch the games when you know they are just going to lose every game or at least every other game from here on out? You are all fools.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:07 PM MDT reply actions
You don’t have to want, it’s pre-determined.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:13 PM MDT up reply actions
this team is just that bad.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:18 PM MDT up reply actions
There are no words to describe how poor this team is or how lucky they are.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:33 PM MDT up reply actions
We should start a petition to disband them.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 4:07 PM MDT up reply actions
SEND THEM BACK TO CANADA!
The 2009-10 Avalanche: It's like having a banana split while all the other kids are getting an ice cream cone.
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 29, 2009 4:21 PM MDT up reply actions
LOL
That just reminded me of last season. My 11 year old niece was over when the Avs were having an absolute melt down against the Rangers. She said “The Avs are going to be out of the NHL after this game”. I lol’d
An ounce of confidence can carry you a mile toward winning. Oh, and Red Wings suck.
"Hitting the wall"
WARNING: WALL OF TEXT INCOMING
There’s been a lot of argument around here as to whether the Avalanche are going to “hit the wall”. I think the answer to that depends on what you mean by hit the wall.
A lot of people are pointing to the goaltending as an area where the Avs will fall off. It is extremely unlikely Craig Anderson is going to continue to post a .940 save percentage all year. That would be like the second best season a goaltender has ever posted in the modern era. It’s not going to happen. On the other hand, I don’t really see any reason to believe he’s going to suddenly turn into 08/09 Andrew Raycroft. I think it is fairly likely the Avalanche will continue to get above average to very good goaltending, and Budaj will probably be a perfectly serviceable backup.
Defensively, the team has generally played better than the shots totals would show. Most of the shots they’ve allowed seem to have come from the outside, not produced rebounds, and the rebounds that were produced they’ve done a pretty good job of clearing. Still, ALLOW FEWER SHOTS.
The special teams are going to fall off. The power play already is, really. I still think from watching the team it’s likely they’ll have a pretty good PK and the PP won’t be a complete embarrassment the way it has been the last few years.
There are problems and concerns with this team they’ve been able to overcome so far, though. it’s been beaten into the ground, but they give up too many shots (although they do seem to do a good job of keeping them to the outside) and don’t take enough. They have a tendency to take the kind of stupid penalties young players are prone to taking. Svatos may be the worst defensive player I have ever seen. Flailing your stick around randomly is not the same thing as playing defense. We have no idea how they’ll react to any kind of a losing streak. They are getting scoring from every line right now, but I think in the long run they will probably have to rely too heavily on the Stastny line unless Duchene or Svatos really gets going offensively. Stastny sometimes disappears for a few games at a time, and there are going to be stretches this year where he CAN NOT do that. These are not inconsequential problems.
This is too long already, so quick hits: The olympic break will help with the “rookies playing a long season” problem, and the fact that the team seems to have a system and play within it is a positive. Overall, my guess is that this is a team that finishes somewhere between 5th-10th in the West. If this team makes the playoffs, it’s the kind of team where if Anderson gets hot and everyone plays well defensively, they could surprise some people, and I am pretty happy with that right now. Ask me again the day after we finish 9th, though.
Most of the shots they’ve allowed seem to have come from the outside, not produced rebounds.
I was thinking this also – is there anything that quantifies this, as this could confound the general relationships found by others that the Avs’ are being heavily ‘outchanced’ due to chances for – chances against – as not ever chance is likely to be a goal.
I think that inevitably the dispute in these posts is one of quality of convert chances (which indicates talent) versus gross quantity of chances (which indicates luck)…
I know there is a guy that charts scoring chances, but I’m not familiar with exactly what that covers. Subjectively from watching all the games this year, it seems like when they are playing well defensively, AUD is right, with some notable exceptions (mostly on the PK) the other team gains the zone, has a scoring chance, the puck gets pushed to the outside and cleared.
It’d be interesting to see how big a difference there is, given an equal number of chances, between giving up once chance at a time a LOT of times and giving up clusters of chances a smaller numbers of times in terms of goals allowed. But I don’t have any idea how you would even begin to analyze that.
I'll be more concerned about the shots on goal when
when Anderson and the Defense start to give up rebound shots, it seems to me, that the other team shoots, anderson makes the save and either he or a defenseman push it to the corners or out of the zone.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 3:37 PM MDT reply actions
http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?fetchKey=20102ALLAAAAll&sort=minorPenalties&viewName=penalties
the avs are 26th out of 30 in minors taken, change that and those SOG become a lot more even. That is where they need to improve the most—stop cheatin’
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 4:44 PM MDT reply actions
And look at the “squeaky clean” wheel near the top. And the jokers at EZ still whine about officiating?
Hey Peter McNab, I'm starting to see sunshine and rainbows here.
by Bob in Boulder on Oct 29, 2009 4:47 PM MDT up reply actions
it’s still a conspiracy though, they probably think they shouldn’t have any.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 5:41 PM MDT up reply actions
But in all honesty, even with the good pk they’ve been getting, they can’t keep giving up more PP then they get.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 8:08 PM MDT up reply actions
Incredible.
The ignorance of the so called professionals (especially the ones at ESPN) in unbelievable. But as I have come to accept the consistent disrespect towards Denver sports teams for what it is, I still appreciate the them for the sole fact that it keeps the Avs under the radar for that much longer. This years team is as balanced as I have seen in quite some time. Every line provides provides different assets that are needed to go far in this game with a great work ethic. Not to mention Anderson is the best Goalie we’ve had since St. Patrick. This should be a fun YEAR.
If we cannot find a way, we will make a new one. -Hannibal
by AvalancheRescueDog on Oct 29, 2009 5:01 PM MDT reply actions
Seattle is freezing and the heat isn’t working in my suite!! More wine should help. And yeah… let them keep hating while we keep winning.
I’ll assume you’re just pretending to be an idiot for Halloween.
by Pinchy The Lobster on Oct 29, 2009 5:15 PM MDT reply actions
I like having Mirtle on here. I get off work, jump on MHH and see some epic debates going on with him recently. Sometimes it gets a little silly (semantics in using absolute phrases), but a good read nonetheless.
Hopefully #9 is not ten less than #19
Cut me some slack. I’m a lawyer in training. Semantics is my business.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Yeah. I guess in legal documents there is no such thing as figures of speech, metaphors, or analogies. That stuff is literal.
Hopefully #9 is not ten less than #19
As for the debate with Mirtle, my rule of thumb is that if you don’t mean something absolutely, don’t use absolute phrases. But that was my rule before I ever started school.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
I see both sides after reading it.
For example, saying Anderson can’t keep up those numbers isn’t the same as saying “very, very unlikely” it pretty much is in looser language. Like saying a meteor will not fall on me tomorrow. You know what I mean despite it technically not being accurate since there is a possibly, however remote, that a meteor could crash down on me tomorrow.
Hopefully #9 is not ten less than #19
I would have given him the benefit of the doubt if he hadn’t used less-than-absolute language to discuss other teams. From my reading—-and his subsequent statements—-it was very clear he meant to say “can’t” to mean “not possible.” Which he’s perfectly entitled to believe, of course. I just didn’t like his reasoning.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Joe,
I absolutely love the beer I’m drinking while reading this back and forth.
This team will make the playoffs and upset the Sharks in the first round...it's our turn.
by An Unmitigated Disaster on Oct 29, 2009 8:10 PM MDT up reply actions
Some more
Behind the net has some really good analysis on teams with comparable starts.
Now there’s a voice of reason.
The New Improved Avalanche. Now with Real Coaches!
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 29, 2009 7:10 PM MDT reply actions
Uggghhhhh
Ok, I love how everyone says we might be ok if we can stay healthy. Ummmm hello we have more injuries than anyone else in the league. It’s rather hard to stay healthy when you have not been healthy at any point this season.
The fact that the Avs have already suffered significant injuries yet continue to win never seems to get factored into the negative predictions.
Mile High Hockey: Hoping for the best, expecting the worst, hating the Wings.
Neither does the significant amount of road games played.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Oct 30, 2009 8:10 AM MDT up reply actions
Most road games played so far this season:
10 games:
Avs = 6-2-2
9 games:
San Jose = 5-4-0
8 games:
LA = 4-3-1
Minny = 0-8-0
7 games:
7 teams….
I’m sure any one who has ever spent a lot of time on the road (in sports, for business, or even for fun) knows that at some point it begins to wear on you. The Avs have one of the best road records in the league, but it seems to have started catching up to them last night. And even though it’s getting better, it’s not over yet as the Avs play half of their games in November on the road (7 of 14), the first being Sunday as the final game of this 4 game trip. Unfortunately the Avs also have a road back to back on the 17th and 18th against Division foes Flamers and Oil, and then a back to back “away and home” series on Nov 27th and 28th against the Mild.
The 2009-10 Avalanche: It's like having a banana split while all the other kids are getting an ice cream cone.
I'm The Canary - but I'm not cute nor cuddly, and I don't sing.
by Americanario on Oct 31, 2009 10:34 AM MDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
