MN Wild 2016-17 – Official thread.

Man, that whole East is very tough to call. Lots of teams coming on strong and then… As much as we Wild fans have a Blackhawks Complex, well, we’re not alone. The Caps have a monkey on their back as well.

Here’s my bracket, but I have just about zero confidence in my ability to pick the winner in the Rangers v Montreal and the Boston v Ottowa series. I just see either series going either way or they could turn into 5 game wins for one side or the other. Also, who knows about Columbus? They could make it really hard on the Pens if the got it all together. I have this series in 6 for the Pens, but I’d be not surprised at all for that one to go 7 if the Blue Jackets had things go thier way.

Hawks over Preds in 7
Wild over Blues in 6
Ducks over Calgary in 5
Oilers over Sharks in 6

Rangers over Montreal in 7
Boston over Ottawa in 7
Caps over Leafs in 4
Pens over Columbus in 6

Wild over Chicago in 7
Ducks over Oilers in 6
Rangers over Boston in 6
Pens over Caps in 7

Wild over Ducks in 7
Pens over Rangers in 7

Wild over Pens in 7[/quote]

Grouse

CaptainMusky wrote:

You mean 3 pts for a win right? They already do have “a 3 pt system” with their lame loser pt in OT/Shootout.
Id rather they just let games end a tie and only award 1 pt each, then 2 pts for a win in OT, it counts the same as a regulation win (except for tie-breakers).
I think this stupid rule actually allowed Toronto to make it in vs TB. I didn’t confirm by checking myself, but I just heard it on NHL Network Radio.

Win in regulation = 3
Win in ot or shootout = 2
Loss in ot or shootout = 1
Loss in regulation = 0

This would’ve put the Wild in first in the west and Chicago in second. They took a ton of games to OT and won. The Wild won like 5 or 6 more games in regulation.

This just means that Chicago is better in the shootout and the 3 on 3. But we all knew that already.

biggill wrote:

Win in regulation = 3
Win in ot or shootout = 2
Loss in ot or shootout = 1
Loss in regulation = 0

This would’ve put the Wild in first in the west and Chicago in second. They took a ton of games to OT and won. The Wild won like 5 or 6 more games in regulation.

This just means that Chicago is better in the shootout and the 3 on 3. But we all knew that already.

I have advocated for that pt strategy for a number of years now, but I don’t think it will ever happen. The NHL has gotten exactly what they wanted with the current structure which is close/tight races.
I do think that if there were 3pts vs 2pts on the line at the end of regulation you would have more teams fighting for that extra point vs just heading to OT.

CaptainMusky wrote:

I do think that if there were 3pts vs 2pts on the line at the end of regulation you would have more teams fighting for that extra point vs just heading to OT.

Yup. I won’t hold my breath either.

Stanley Cup >>>>> Blackhawks over Capitols in 6

I think most fans would be for 3pt games. It makes the most sense, especially since OT is 3-3. And it’s the most fair system for the teams.

Here’s are my picks:

Preds over Hawks in 6
Wild over Blues in 6
Ducks over Calgary in 7
Oilers over Sharks in 5

Rangers over Montreal in 5
Boston over Ottawa in 5
Leafs over Caps in 7
Pens over Columbus in 6

Wild over Preds in 7
Ducks over Oilers in 6
Boston over Rangers in 6
Pens over Leafs in 7

Wild over Ducks in 6
Pens over Boston in 6

Wild over Pens in 7 in a State of hockey rematch of 1991 North Stars vs Pens.

I take exception to the order. #6

I thought Panik, Arvidson, Radulov, Hornqvist and Spurgeon were top 5 material. Notice the names of the top 4 player whose tires are being pumped, but I will agree with Spud’s #1. A One handed backhander is just dirty.

Love the effort by Malkin on #8, lol

Spurgeon should have been much higher than #6, Syd deserves #1

I’d like to see the 3 point system, but as others have mentioned, the reason we have the present system is because the league wants playoff races to be close because it sells more tickets. Or at least that’s the theory.

I guess I’d argue that the league would sell a lot more tickets overall if they would yank teams out of Banana Belt cities that have horsesh!t attendance and put them in real hockey cities where the fans actually live. I mean did you guys see the last Wind game vs AZ? It is entirely possible that Wild fans made up 33% or more of the attendees AND the arena was only 70% full still. That’s a freaking embarrassment to the league and now we’re going to add a team in Vegas? Awesome idea.

Shut down the Coyotes and move them to Quebec and let’s be done with that hot mess. Then tell the Florida and Carolina teams to get the seats full or one of them’s heading for southern Ontario or freaking Nova Scotia for all I care.

Grouse

I’d be willing to bet that the Vegas Golden Knights will draw a large attendance from tourists and never aquire an identity.

By the way, some high school in Kansas called, they want their team name back.

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

Then tell the Florida teams

I think you meant team. Tampa is a big draw.

Arizona has been in the toilet for so long there is little chance of recovery. Nothing boosts attendance like a winner.

I don’t see vegas ever cracking the top 10 in attendance, even if they had a stanley cup caliber team. But on the flip side I don’t ever see them being in the bottom 10 just because they will draw the tourists.

belletaine wrote:

…and never acquire an identity.

They will be known as the Harlem Globetrotters of the NHL…or the Generals

I think I might just plan a trip to Vegas to watch the Wild play there some time. I know others as well. You sure see a lot of Wild fans at road games. Denver was pretty dang loud the other night with the Wild chants.
I think Vegas is going to be almost as loud for the opposing teams as it will for the hometown 20.

mplspug wrote:

I think you meant team. Tampa is a big draw.

I meant to say tell the Florida and Carolina teams to get butts in seats or one of them will be the new franchise somewhere else. I believe I heard that in Feb Carolina was averaging less than 10,000 a game. That’s a freaking embarrassment to the league and the sport. I’ve said it before, but Halifax NS could put more than that in the seats year in and year out. It’s stupid to continue with cities that large that can’t put people in seats, the interest is obviously not there.

There’s no way that Carolina, Florida, and Arizona are sustainable franchises over the long haul. This strategy for a Vegas expansion while other teams are drowning is looking dumber every day. This is going to look really bad if there’s a league contraction 2 years after an expansion.

Grouse

Bettman is and will go down as the worse commissioner in professional sports. I have no faith that he could call a coin flip correctly more or less do anything to benefit the NHL. I would divide the league into the Canadian division vs the American division. Having no Canadian teams in the finals would be like having only Canadian teams playing in the World Series.

The good thing is I don’t need to listen to Greenlay butcher the first couple of play-off games.

Oh lord Greenlay and what’s his nut are unlistenable. I always choose the opposition announcers down here.

Sorry guys. It appears as though fsn will pickup the first round. Those of us in the market will have to suffer.

Of course I’ll be on the rainy river starting tonight so it won’t matter much. I wasn’t looking forward to game one anyway. The Wild might show up for game 2.

Attachments:

1. 

   IMG_3506.png
   

biggill wrote:

Sorry guys. It appears as though fsn will pickup the first round. Those of us in the market will have to suffer.

Of course I’ll be on the rainy river starting tonight so it won’t matter much. I wasn’t looking forward to game one anyway. The Wild might show up for game 2.

Unless of course you have Charter and if the squabble they have with Fox doesn’t get settled you may not get the games period.
I don’t overly mind Lapanta and Greenlay. They are homers, of course, but I think for the most part Lapanta does a serviceable job. Sure, there are many superior Play by Play guys out there, but it works. Ideally we could have Bob Kurtz. He is great to listen to.

NBC sports is also carrying the first 2 games along with Fox Sports North.

Dutchboy wrote:

NBC sports is also carrying the first 2 games along with Fox Sports North.

NBC will be blacked out if you are in mn.

biggill wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Dutchboy wrote:</div>
NBC sports is also carrying the first 2 games along with Fox Sports North.

NBC will be blacked out if you are in mn.

Not what I heard on the radio. We will see.

Wth? It’s nationally televised, FSN should not be carrying it. They never did this before, right?

mplspug wrote:

Wth? It’s nationally televised, FSN should not be carrying it. They never did this before, right?

I’m pretty sure I had this same disappointment last year and that wasn’t because of their first round performance.

Theres a few during the regular season that are both national and local. Every time the national is blacked out.

We’ll see. One can only hope that we’ve heard the last of lapanta and greenlay. At least for a few months.

I only got Sling this year to watch the Wild. Of the games are not on FSN I won’t be able to watch them at home.
DT

mplspug wrote:

Wth? It’s nationally televised, FSN should not be carrying it. They never did this before, right?

I don’t recall FSN carrying them either, but that was a year or more ago and MANY beers ago.
Come on boys! Not many of the “pundits” are picking the Wild. I take that as a good thing. Whenever the National talking heads are all over one of our teams they collapse.
It should be an electric atmosphere at least until Dubnyk lets in 2 goals on 2 shots tonight. Ugh.

Most pundits are picking Hawks v. Caps…way to go out on a limb.

If you go to NHL.com and the predictions, you can find the predictions from other years and they are all way off. I did see 2 people pick the Wild in the finals. Of course, none of it matters.

I’m still weary about picking the Hawks over the Preds. The Preds seem to have gotten their stuff together and the Hawks have skated through the season, pun intended. But also when you are as good as them, sometimes the regular season doesn’t really do much for you and you turn it on in the playoffs.

Hold on, not so fast.

Sportsnet’s analytics experts share their Stanley Cup Playoffs brackets

A grain of salt, however these aren’t the analysts, these are the ANALYTICS people…from Canada.

mplspug wrote:

Hold on, not so fast.

Sportsnet’s analytics experts share their Stanley Cup Playoffs brackets

A grain of salt, however these aren’t the analysts, these are the ANALYTICS people…from Canada.

Geez, now we are doomed. LOL
Its funny how some experts say the Wild have a deep D-Corps, while others say the Blues have a more impressive D-Corps even after losing Shattenkirk.

Well, you know what they say about opinions!?

I’ve also seen people giving the Blues F the edge. What? Sure, they have tank, but come on.