you're saying it, not me. I'm just saying an 82 game season is not equivalent to a 48 game season.

Prove to me that it is, or move on.
- Doppleganger

To me (and most) how its determined who gets in the playoffs is not a big issue. 48, 65 or 82 games.. does not really matter, the playoffs determine who is the best team, that system is not changing.

Now I would prefer to have hockey from October-June instead of Jan-June because its more hockey to watch. I would prefer an 82 game season over 48, but we cant have that. But to say the winner of a 48 games season is not "equal" (your words) does not make a lot of sense to me. The regular season is just to determine who gets in to the playoffs.

The fact that the NHL has played 82 games a year the least amount of times in its history would suggest it is.

Guys like Howe and Richard ect never played 82 games a year. Are their wins tainted or somehow less worthy?
- burn

Who suggested anything like " tainted or somehow less worthy"

So you and only you are saying this and I have to prove to you how they aren't equal?

Now I know how the boys in the misc lounge feel when i post nonsense.
- Lahey

Your words, not mine.

Who suggested anything like " tainted or somehow less worthy"
- Doppleganger

Needs an asterisk, not the same as 82 games, looked at differently..... You tell me.


Does the NHL need an asterisk next to 3/4 of their seasons? Is howe's cups looked at differently than staal's?

Needs an asterisk, not the same as 82 games, looked at differently..... You tell me.


Does the NHL need an asterisk next to 3/4 of their seasons? Is howe's cups looked at differently than staal's?
- burn

When you have a 48 game regular season, instead of the now normal 82, then it stands alone.

I can't believe you don't see a difference between the NHL changing the Number of regular season games, as they've done in the past a number of times, and a Strike/lockout shortened season smack in the midst of the current run of an 82 regular seasons.

When you have a 48 game regular season, instead of the now normal 82, then it stands alone.

I can't believe you don't see a difference between the NHL changing the Number of regular season games, as they've done in the past a number of times, and a Strike/lockout shortened season smack in the midst of the current run of an 82 regular seasons.
- Doppleganger

the 95 season was not in any way shape or form considered any different than previous or future seasons. Lindros won Hart and will eventually get into HOF with that as his #1 kudo.

the 95 season was not in any way shape or form considered any different than previous or future seasons. Lindros won Hart and will eventually get into HOF with that as his #1 kudo.
- Feeling_Glucky

Except that it was only 48 games instead of the previous 84, and later 82.

So, in my world 48 is different than 84 or 82...............but I take it that you don't agree.

Also, is a 5 game playoff series any different from a 7 game playoff series?

Except that it was only 48 games instead of the previous 84, and later 82.

So, in my world 48 is different than 84 or 82...............but I take it that you don't agree.

Also, is a 5 game playoff series any different from a 7 game playoff series?
- Doppleganger

The Devils don't consider the rings they wear from that season tainted..

The Devils don't consider the rings they wear from that season tainted..
- Feeling_Glucky

Why should they?

No one has suggested as much.

But it still was only a 48 game season, instead of an 84 or 82.

You can't tell me that the "wear and tear" after an 84 game season is equal to that, of a a 48 game season.

But what about a 5 game series vs a 7 game series???

Why should they?

No one has suggested as much.

But it still was only a 48 game season, instead of an 84 or 82.

But what about a 5 game series vs a 7 game series???
- Doppleganger

I'm not even sure what is being argued anymore. Is it simply over the fact that 48 is not the same number as 82, with no real purpose behind the argument other than that? I mean yeah.. 48 IS a smaller number. And?

lol

Why should they?

No one has suggested as much.

But it still was only a 48 game season, instead of an 84 or 82.

But what about a 5 game series vs a 7 game series???
- Doppleganger

4 more teams are gonna be in playoffs in a 3 game playin in new NHL btw.

I'm not even sure what is being argued anymore. Is it simply over the fact that 48 is not the same number as 82, with no real purpose behind the argument other than that? I mean yeah.. 48 IS a smaller number. And?

lol
- daeth

exactly - all teams in same boat and season will be a high paced sprint not a marathon.

Of course a 48 game season isn't the same as an 82 game season, but really in the end it doesn't matter at all.

Will certain teams peak at a different time in a 48 game season than they would in an 82 game season? More than likely. In that sense it is different but I don't really see why it matters. We could make the season 120 games long and the same could be said about that too. It does not make a cup win any more or less impressive to me either way.

If anything teams might be healthier for the playoffs after a 48 game season (may not be true, just a theory) which could make the playoffs even more entertaining than usual.

When you have a 48 game regular season, instead of the now normal 82, then it stands alone.

I can't believe you don't see a difference between the NHL changing the Number of regular season games, as they've done in the past a number of times, and a Strike/lockout shortened season smack in the midst of the current run of an 82 regular seasons.
- Doppleganger

I'm not even sure what is being argued anymore. Is it simply over the fact that 48 is not the same number as 82, with no real purpose behind the argument other than that? I mean yeah.. 48 IS a smaller number. And?

lol
- daeth

Jump starting a season, after a lockout, with some players who have been playing regularly, some only practising, some not doing much at all, with little or no training camp or exhibition season creates teams with different stages of team chemistry, game conditioning levels............this will have a different outcome (playoff seeds) Than if the CBA was settled last July, and all teams began at the same starting line.

Of course a 48 game season isn't the same as an 82 game season, but really in the end it doesn't matter at all.

Will certain teams peak at a different time in a 48 game season than they would in an 82 game season? More than likely. In that sense it is different but I don't really see why it matters. We could make the season 120 games long and the same could be said about that too. It does not make a cup win any more or less impressive to me either way.

If anything teams might be healthier for the playoffs after a 48 game season (may not be true, just a theory) which could make the playoffs even more entertaining than usual.
- daeth

The leafs who have had (recently) good starts to their seasons, and then seem to fade in the late stages of the regular (82 game) season, might fare well in a 48 game season. Yes, I think the leafs would make the playoffs in a 48 game season.

Jump starting a season, after a lockout, with some players who have been playing regularly, some only practising, some not doing much at all, with little or no training camp or exhibition season creates teams with different stages of team chemistry, game conditioning levels............this will have a different outcome (playoff seeds) Than if the CBA was settled last July, and all teams began at the same starting line.
- Doppleganger

That's just your opinion and proof to back this up?

The leafs who have had (recently) good starts to their seasons, and then seem to fade in the late stages of the regular (82 game) season, might fare well in a 48 game season. Yes, I think the leafs would make the playoffs in a 48 game season.
- Doppleganger

Again pure speculation on your part.

That's just your opinion and proof to back this up?
- Lahey

Go back at look at the teams after the last lockout, teams with more players in game shape (who were playing in the AHL and Europe) started the (48 game) season stronger than those with fewer.

It's my opinion, that some teams will have more players playing in different leagues, than other teams. It's not a stretch to think that IF the NHL jump starts the season, teams with MORE players in game condition will have an advantage over those with FEWER.

Here's a list from November 28, 2012, showing players who are in other leagues.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/st...where-nhl-players-playing

Teams like Boston, Detroit, Montreal & St Louis have upwards of ten players who are playing regular games and would more likely be in "game shape" if the NHL resumes, and would probably be in a better position, team wise, than teams like Denver, L. A., Minnesota, Pittsburgh & Vancouver who only have as few as four players playing regular season games in other leagues.


Also, if the NHL follows the same format as they did in 94/95, there will be no interconference games. This also will skew the teams that make the playoffs, if compared to a regular season where Eastern Teams play Westeren Teams as well as those in their own conference. To Deny that this fact alone will have an impact on who make the playoffs or not, then you're not sure if an apple is an orange.


Is it your contention that ALL players will be at the same conditioning level, if the NHL jump starts a 48 game season??? Where is your proof if this is true.

exactly - all teams in same boat and season will be a high paced sprint not a marathon.
- Feeling_Glucky

so Sprint = Marathon?

Leafs would still miss the playoffs in a 48 game season.

Strangely enough if the season is canceled the leafs will make the playoffs

The leafs who have had (recently) good starts to their seasons, and then seem to fade in the late stages of the regular (82 game) season, might fare well in a 48 game season. Yes, I think the leafs would make the playoffs in a 48 game season.
- Doppleganger

There it is folks, the real reason for this thread. Dopps is worried the Leafs might have a chance to make the playoffs so he is getting a jump on all the other anti-Leafers by discredititing a shortened season. That way, no matter how well the Leafs might perform, he doesn't have to acknowledge their success.

There it is folks, the real reason for this thread. Dopps is worried the Leafs might have a chance to make the playoffs so he is getting a jump on all the other anti-Leafers by discredititing a shortened season. That way, no matter how well the Leafs might perform, he doesn't have to acknowledge their success.
- Keva_Rosenberg

Rise Of The Leafs and Oilers.

The threads on here would be spectacular.

There it is folks, the real reason for this thread. Dopps is worried the Leafs might have a chance to make the playoffs so he is getting a jump on all the other anti-Leafers by discredititing a shortened season. That way, no matter how well the Leafs might perform, he doesn't have to acknowledge their success.
- Keva_Rosenberg

Wow, what an inferiority complex you have. I could care less if the leaf do or don't make the playoff now that the CBA has been worked out. I just know that in recent seasons the leafs have had strong starts, and this would serve them well in this sprint of a season.

I have NOT been discrediting a 48 game season, just pointing out that it is DIFFERENT from the (now) normal 82 game season, and because of these differences, the playoff seeds will be different, than had they started the season on time, with a full training camp and exhibition season.

The last time they had a 48 game season, there was no inter conference play, and that alone should help some teams, and hurt others, leading to playoff teams that would not have been there because of that alone.