Home Sports Talk

Todays NHL is weaker then cheap coffee

GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited January 17, 2023 8:43AM in Sports Talk

A non Super Star Boston Bruins team is crushing todays “talent”.

Just a few potential HoFamers too.

In times past a team would need 1 Super Star and 4-5 HOFs to dominate like this.

A few teams that dominated like this had 8 HOFamers on it.

Why are the Bruins so dominant with less talent then teams of the past ? Yeah, Bergeron is #90 on the all time points list, but Patrick Elias got more points in less games. Brian Bellows too . Neither are SuperStars.

Imagine Elias, Brodeur, and a few other decent players dominating their league like this.

Inquiring minds want to know 🤔

Comments

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 18, 2023 3:02AM

    Here are facts over the past six years.

    Shots on goal per game are the same.

    GAA is at a 6 year high

    Save percentage is at a 6 year low.

    The Ducks are on pace to have a worse negative goal differential then Gretzky’s Mickey Mouse Devils in 1983.

    Come on hockey guys.
    Explain to me what’s going on in the NHL right now ?

    How is this Bruins team so dominant? 🤔

  • Alfonz24Alfonz24 Posts: 3,101 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Too much expansion

    #LetsGoSwitzerlandThe Man Who Does Not Read Has No Advantage Over the Man Who Cannot Read. The biggest obstacle to progress is a habit of “buying what we want and begging for what we need.”You get the Freedom you fight for and get the Oppression you deserve.
  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,319 ✭✭✭✭✭
    • We have no idea how many HOFers are currently on the Bruins, and we won't know for quite some time.
    • Like the 70's Athletics, who had only one legitimate HOFer yet won three straight WS, it matters much more what your average talent level is than the talent level of your best players.
    • The Bruins are loaded with two-way players who take defense seriously
    • The Bruins have the best goalie in the league.
    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Kinda weird to call a guy on pace to score 60 goals a non-superstar, especially when he's led the league in goals before.

    Bergeron, Pasta, and Marchand are all almost certain HOFers when they retire. Taylor Hall is like the 8th-best player and he's a 31-year old former MVP.

    They have a ton of talent. A TON of talent.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 19, 2023 1:28AM

    Pasternak’s career stats are just like Patrick Elias. Go and check.

    This year is great because the NHL goalies are much weaker.

    Yes the Bruins have the best goalie tandem, but most called Marty Brodeur the best and the Devils didn’t dominate like these Bruins are.

    They had the same TON of talent the past two years and couldn’t do what the Oakland A’s did.

    Pasternak a Super Star lol.
    Let’s put him up there with the Rocket, 66, and 99 . Lol

    Why can’t this league handle the Bruins ? 🤔

    Is the league simply that pathetic 🤔

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 19, 2023 8:29AM

    I’ll give you guys the answer.

    NHL teams that are mid-lower have filled their rosters with poor talent to increase their draft lottery pick for Connor Bedard.

    The NHL is going to stink the rest of this year and decent teams will look great.

    Bedard wasn’t in the draft the past two years and the Bruins weren’t this good.

    Connor McDavid and Pasta are having his best season ever. Now you all know why.

    The league is embarrassing this year and most fans will never recognize it. The lesser teams GMs are doing what the Black Sox did just in order to get the Golden Ticket.

    Bruins are outshooting teams 34-29 per game and getting great goaltending.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    Pasternak’s career stats are just like Patrick Elias. Go and check.

    I see no similarity at all.

    https://stathead.com/tiny/lgGBS

    Would you care to explain exactly where you find them similar?

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 20, 2023 8:21AM

    @daltex said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Pasternak’s career stats are just like Patrick Elias. Go and check.

    I see no similarity at all.

    https://stathead.com/tiny/lgGBS

    Would you care to explain exactly where you find them similar?

    Sure daltex.

    Elias played during the grab and hold, hack and whack, and Trap days.

    Check the NHL goals scored per game during his time compared to the NHL goals per game scored during Pasta’s time, and you’ll see their numbers are very close when adjusted.

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:

    Elias played during the grab and hold, hack and whack, and Trap days.

    I was wondering if you could point me to the season that Patrick Elias led the NHL in goals.

    Check the NHL goals scored per game during his time compared to the NHL goals per game scored during Pasta’s time, and you’ll see their numbers are very close when adjusted.

    Hey, you do understand that different eras can impact stats! Wow!

  • georgebailey2georgebailey2 Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭

    I believe the "adjusted" goals, assists and points amounts on hockey reference attempt to compensate for league averages over time.

    The numbers basically confirm the eye test:

    Elias was an all-situation top-line player who is a not quite a HOFer.

    Pasta is a top-line goal scorer and is the trigger man on the powerplay. One of the top goal scores in the league, he is likely on his way to a HOF career.

    Oddly, I now have a craving for a coffee from Dunkin Donuts.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:

    @daltex said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Pasternak’s career stats are just like Patrick Elias. Go and check.

    I see no similarity at all.

    https://stathead.com/tiny/lgGBS

    Would you care to explain exactly where you find them similar?

    Sure daltex.

    Elias played during the grab and hold, hack and whack, and Trap days.

    Check the NHL goals scored per game during his time compared to the NHL goals per game scored during Pasta’s time, and you’ll see their numbers are very close when adjusted.

    Should be obvious department, but Goals/game vs. league is not the sole determination of a hockey player. You just can't say that two players have one stat that is close, they are similar.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @georgebailey2 said:

    Pasta is a top-line goal scorer and is the trigger man on the powerplay. One of the top goal scores in the league, he is likely on his way to a HOF career.

    Oddly, I now have a craving for a coffee from Dunkin Donuts.

    Lol. Enjoy it.

    Pasta is in his prime. He will decline after age 30 like Gretzky did and his numbers will equal Elias.

    Unless he goes to see Ovechkin’s doctor, then you guys could be correct. He will play until he’s 45 and score 600 goals.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 21, 2023 1:03AM

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:

    Elias played during the grab and hold, hack and whack, and Trap days.

    I was wondering if you could point me to the season that Patrick Elias led the NHL in goals.

    I know you love todays NHL.
    Goalies are getting worse.
    You can’t touch anyone or you get penalized.
    It’s like Disney on Ice today.
    Elias and his guys had it much tougher. Much much tougher.

    Pasta equals Joe Nieuwendyk so far. If he declines like Joe did then his ppg will equal Elias over his career.

    So Elias equals Bergeron and
    Pasternak equals Joe is fine also.

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well, Joe is in the Hall so...

  • spacehaydukespacehayduke Posts: 5,741 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage, you don't really seem to have any idea about the NHL, I find all of your comments lacking in substance and no support of your arguments. Sorry to be a Debbie Downer.....................

    My online coin store - https://www.desertmoonnm.com/
  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,923 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 22, 2023 12:15PM

    @dallasactuary said:

    • We have no idea how many HOFers are currently on the Bruins, and we won't know for quite some time.
    • Like the 70's Athletics, who had only one legitimate HOFer yet won three straight WS, it matters much more what your average talent level is than the talent level of your best players.
    • The Bruins are loaded with two-way players who take defense seriously
    • The Bruins have the best goalie in the league.

    Well said. I was gonna say there are a few reasons why a team could be dominating:

    1. Teams have career years where everything 'goes your way' for a season and you walk out with a tremendous record despite not 'seemingly' having the talent that corresponds with that record. This is not rare in sports.

      1. The OP isn't evaluating their talent properly and doesn't see that the players may actually be better than what his opinion is, hence having a record that is better than what his mind believes it should be.
  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The Boston Bruins have basically the same team this year as they did the past three years.

    If you simply google NHL and tanking you’ll find multiple articles about it from guys who suspect it.

  • I’m actually in agreement with Goldenage on this one.

    After years of not watching, I turned on the tube. I started watching a hockey game. I immediately assumed it was a college hockey game. It was an NHL game!!!

    The NHL sucks and it’s getting worse…..

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    The Boston Bruins have basically the same team this year as they did the past three years.

    I mean, they DID change head coaches...

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,923 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    The Boston Bruins have basically the same team this year as they did the past three years.

    If you simply google NHL and tanking you’ll find multiple articles about it from guys who suspect it.

    So then,

    Teams have career years where everything 'goes your way' for a season and you walk out with a tremendous record despite not 'seemingly' having the talent that corresponds with that record. This is not rare in sports.

    Unless you believe the league got worse overnight compared to last year?

  • When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:
    The Boston Bruins have basically the same team this year as they did the past three years.

    I mean, they DID change head coaches...

    And so did the Flyers, who’s new coach was never fired for alcohol abuse like the Bruins coach was with Dallas.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    Nice comparing his player to Gordon Howe.

    Are you going to compare Makar to Bobby Orr next ?

    Please think before you speak.

  • @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    That’s exactly my point.

    In todays terms, it would have been Jagr…a couple of seasons ago.

  • georgebailey2georgebailey2 Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    That’s exactly my point.

    In todays terms, it would have been Jagr…a couple of seasons ago.

    Was Jagr the 40 year old you were initially referring to? In particular, his 2015-16 season where he was 21st in the league in scoring with 66 points?

    I am not clear what you're saying here. Sorry, I just want to understand the argument you're making. Thanks.

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 24, 2023 6:35PM

    @Goldenage said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    Nice comparing his player to Gordon Howe.

    Are you going to compare Makar to Bobby Orr next ?

    Please think before you speak.

    Don't be rude.

    Wasn't comparing anyone to anyone. Had no idea who he was talking about since no 40-year old has been a top scorer since, well, Gordie. But, hey, at least you didn't bother trying to refute that Gordie set a career high at age 40.

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    That’s exactly my point.

    In todays terms, it would have been Jagr…a couple of seasons ago.

    Huh? Jagr hasn't put up "very good offensive numbers" since he was 34. Maybe 35 if you really stretch the definition of "very good".

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:
    The Boston Bruins have basically the same team this year as they did the past three years.

    I mean, they DID change head coaches...

    And so did the Flyers, who’s new coach was never fired for alcohol abuse like the Bruins coach was with Dallas.

    And that has nothing to do with Boston and is irrelevant. You can't say that Boston is the same team when they've got a new coach.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:
    The Boston Bruins have basically the same team this year as they did the past three years.

    I mean, they DID change head coaches...

    And so did the Flyers, who’s new coach was never fired for alcohol abuse like the Bruins coach was with Dallas.

    And that has nothing to do with Boston and is irrelevant. You can't say that Boston is the same team when they've got a new coach.

    So are you saying that Jim M who got fired from Dallas for alcohol abuse has magically turned this Bruins team into the 27 Yankees ?

    Please say yes.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    Nice comparing his player to Gordon Howe.

    Are you going to compare Makar to Bobby Orr next ?

    Please think before you speak.

    Don't be rude.

    >

    Sorry if I was rude.
    You know how much I enjoy your posts. You, like I, always contend for what we believe to be true.

    I always respect that in someone.

    🍺

  • @georgebailey2 said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    That’s exactly my point.

    In todays terms, it would have been Jagr…a couple of seasons ago.

    Was Jagr the 40 year old you were initially referring to? In particular, his 2015-16 season where he was 21st in the league in scoring with 66 points?

    I am not clear what you're saying here. Sorry, I just want to understand the argument you're making. Thanks.

    I was referring to both Howe and Jagr. He was ( I believe) 43 and with limited minutes. He led Florida in scoring. That’s basically when I stopped watching hockey. It was becoming unbearable.

  • @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    That’s exactly my point.

    In todays terms, it would have been Jagr…a couple of seasons ago.

    Huh? Jagr hasn't put up "very good offensive numbers" since he was 34. Maybe 35 if you really stretch the definition of "very good".

    See post above.

  • AFLfanAFLfan Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Hey guys... Another reminder to think about what we are posting and how it may be interpreted. This forum is not a sports bar where we can make a snarky comment to someone, while simultaneously laughing and giving them a punch on the shoulder to convey the real emotion. Otherwise, please carry on with the debate. I know nothing about hockey, but it is fun to see knowledgeable fans go toe-to-toe over subjects they are passionate about.

    Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    @georgebailey2 said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:
    When a 40plus player is able to be put up very good offensive numbers. That would be the first indicator of how poor the competition is and what direction a league is headed…

    Like Gordie Howe putting up a career-high 103 points at age 40 in 68/69?

    That’s exactly my point.

    In todays terms, it would have been Jagr…a couple of seasons ago.

    Was Jagr the 40 year old you were initially referring to? In particular, his 2015-16 season where he was 21st in the league in scoring with 66 points?

    I am not clear what you're saying here. Sorry, I just want to understand the argument you're making. Thanks.

    I was referring to both Howe and Jagr. He was ( I believe) 43 and with limited minutes. He led Florida in scoring. That’s basically when I stopped watching hockey. It was becoming unbearable.

    He was 5th on the team in minutes for forwards.

    A few years ago, Henrik Zetterberg led the Wings in scoring with 50 points. Does that count as "very good"?

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Today's NHL is MUCH stronger than it's ever been.
    Not only do we have more teams, but those teams have better talent from top to bottom than ever before. You see three and even four lines playing regularly.
    In the past, most teams had one strong scoring line, a checking line they tried to match up with the opponents top line, and the rest of the players were not very good.
    There will always be a shortage of "superstars", but now there's a lot of very skilled skaters out there and very few "goons".
    Not too many knowledgeable hockey fans here imo.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • @JoeBanzai said:
    Today's NHL is MUCH stronger than it's ever been.
    Not only do we have more teams, but those teams have better talent from top to bottom than ever before. You see three and even four lines playing regularly.
    In the past, most teams had one strong scoring line, a checking line they tried to match up with the opponents top line, and the rest of the players were not very good.
    There will always be a shortage of "superstars", but now there's a lot of very skilled skaters out there and very few "goons".
    Not too many knowledgeable hockey fans here imo.

    You’re not wrong about more skilled players (total). You’re not wrong about depth(total). The old NHL had a 4th line to protect the skilled players on the team. It was a different time. There are only so many players to choose from each year….

    Where you’re wrong is the overall quality of each team. You take away 2 or 3 teams. Imagine how skilled the remaining teams would be? That would be fun to watch!!!

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    @JoeBanzai said:
    Today's NHL is MUCH stronger than it's ever been.
    Not only do we have more teams, but those teams have better talent from top to bottom than ever before. You see three and even four lines playing regularly.
    In the past, most teams had one strong scoring line, a checking line they tried to match up with the opponents top line, and the rest of the players were not very good.
    There will always be a shortage of "superstars", but now there's a lot of very skilled skaters out there and very few "goons".
    Not too many knowledgeable hockey fans here imo.

    You’re not wrong about more skilled players (total). You’re not wrong about depth(total). The old NHL had a 4th line to protect the skilled players on the team. It was a different time. There are only so many players to choose from each year….

    Where you’re wrong is the overall quality of each team. You take away 2 or 3 teams. Imagine how skilled the remaining teams would be? That would be fun to watch!!!

    I am not wrong about anything here.

    Hockey is more fun to watch now than it has ever been.

    In the past half the players in the NHL could barely even skate. What they could do was hold, slash, crosscheck, fight and trip.

    The original post is ridiculously incorrect.

    You could say the same thing about every sport; get rid of a few teams and overall quality would be better. That's not the point.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • georgebailey2georgebailey2 Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭

    To paraphrase Forrest Gump:
    Stanley Cup winning is tough!

    In the cap era, it is difficult to accumulate the right mix and maintain it. You need to keep/pay your stars, which eats up a lot of cap, while drafting at the end of the round. When your stars get old and/or retire, you may find yourself in no man's land. The ability to have 2nd-5th round picks pan out is imperative as well as judiciously managing the cap hits on the bottom half of the lineup.

    I think you'll always have a couple weak teams due to necessary retooling and/or mismanagement. It's kinda unavoidable.

  • @JoeBanzai said:

    @Raptormaniacs said:

    @JoeBanzai said:
    Today's NHL is MUCH stronger than it's ever been.
    Not only do we have more teams, but those teams have better talent from top to bottom than ever before. You see three and even four lines playing regularly.
    In the past, most teams had one strong scoring line, a checking line they tried to match up with the opponents top line, and the rest of the players were not very good.
    There will always be a shortage of "superstars", but now there's a lot of very skilled skaters out there and very few "goons".
    Not too many knowledgeable hockey fans here imo.

    You’re not wrong about more skilled players (total). You’re not wrong about depth(total). The old NHL had a 4th line to protect the skilled players on the team. It was a different time. There are only so many players to choose from each year….

    Where you’re wrong is the overall quality of each team. You take away 2 or 3 teams. Imagine how skilled the remaining teams would be? That would be fun to watch!!!

    I am not wrong about anything here.

    Hockey is more fun to watch now than it has ever been.

    In the past half the players in the NHL could barely even skate. What they could do was hold, slash, crosscheck, fight and trip.

    The original post is ridiculously incorrect.

    You could say the same thing about every sport; get rid of a few teams and overall quality would be better. That's not the point.

    ^^^^This has got to be the best answer in the history of the internet ^^^^

    In what world is “watered down” better and more exciting ??? LOL. I can’t stop laughing….

Sign In or Register to comment.