CanKnucklehead89 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 We've all heard it before, the Canucks have such a good regular season because of the weak division that they play in. Obviously we do play in a weak division since we're the only team in the playoffs from the division to make the playoffs but I thought I'd look at the divisional records around the league to see how this theory pans out. So here are the top five divisional point totals in the league: 1. Boston - 39 2. Vancouver - 37 3. Nashville - 35 4. Chicago, Calgary, LA - 33 5. Rangers - 32 So obviously the Canucks do very well in their divisions but my suggestion is that your record against the rest of the league largely determines how well you do in the standings even if you play in a weak division and here are my reasons. 1. Despite taking two more points from their divisional opponents than the Canucks, the Bruins finished with nine less points and seven places back in the league standings. 2. Nashville finished with only two less points than the Canucks but are seven points and four places behind us in the league standings. 3. Calgary managed to finish with 33 divisional points, only four less than the Canucks and even with playoff bound teams LA and Chicago, and more than many playoff teams, and yet they missed the playoffs this year. 4. Buffalo finished with 31 divisional points as, like Boston, they were able to feed off of Toronto, Montreal, and Ottawa (I know Ottawa is decent but they did badly in their division with only 21 points) but they missed the playoffs 5. Out of the 10 teams with 30 or more divisional points four of them aren't going to the Playoffs, all of those teams are in the weaker divisions: the Northwest, Northeast, and Southeast. So even if you're in the top third of the league for divisional points, it is far from a guarantee of making the playoffs, you must rack up the points against teams outside of your division. To Conclude, it is undeniable that the Canucks position in a weaker division definitely helps (I would say that their 5 point divisional point cushion over the Rangers was the difference in the race for the Presidents Trophy) however, it is not as big a factor as people often suggest, even in the example with the Rangers it is not too big a factor as 5 points really isn't that much. Look at the Bruins, their divisional record accounted for 38% of their point total compared to 33% for the Canucks, yet they finished with 9 less points. Chicago and Nashville both also finished with 33% of their points coming from their divisional opponents and LA finished with 34% of their points coming from the Pacific division. Bottom line, high divisional point totals are not as dicisive as they are often made out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Marchand Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
originalcanucksdude Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Agreed...the eastern conference teams we played this year say hello Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mookie Wilson Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Getting to the bottom of it is simple: 1) Calculate the Canucks' point % against teams within the same division 2) Calculate the Canucks' point % against teams outside of their own division 3) Compare the above numbers Further option: project the Canucks' point % against teams outside of their own division over an 82-game span, and then compare that number to the number of points the Canucks accumulated this year. I remember doing that last year and found that the Canucks still would've won the Presidents Trophy by a significant margin if they played all their games against teams outside their own division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DutchieBang Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 interesting, nice work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Agreed - the wead division argument is a weak argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Agreed - the wead division argument is a weak argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 STL and NYR deserve alot of credit for making it out on top of their division, they are tough as hell. On top of that, they were projected to be borderline playoff teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkpoet Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 This only gets brought up because it's Vancouver and people hate the Canucks. I don't recall this getting brought up when Colorado was winning Cups. What division do they play in again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spencer Drew Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 oo oo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uber_pwnzor Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbcpanel Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 The theory of the weak division is a bad one. Canucks record against the rest of the league is very good as well and over an 82 game span if they never faced the NW at all they would still finish 1st in the division and 2nd in the conference. So it certainly helped them win the prez trophy but didn't matter as far as making the playoffs or finishing so high. Also it's believed the Sedins were only able to put up 100 point seasons because they play in a "weak division" and light up the north west and that would pad their stats. Not the case at all...I have all the numbers but that's for an entire thread in its own. If the Sedins never played the NW they would finish with nearly the same numbers. In fact the one division they light up more than the NW is the central division. The division they struggle with(the Sedins and the Canucks in general) is the pacific division. Interesting since many people were pleased we were playing a pac division team in the 1st round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I would love to see the Canucks trot out Mason Raymond and a Kesler/Booth combo that refuse to show up for dozen games if we played in the Atlantic Division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5minutesinthebox Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 To add to this we only play a total of 4 more games (at most) in the NW than any other team in the Western Conference. So in reality every playoff team in the West benefits playing against the NW, unless you are Chicago or LA who are barely over .500, and the Sharks who won 6 shootout games to go with a 9-5 record. And I certainly dont see the SE or NE as being that much stronger than the NW. The weaker division argument is simply drivel spouted off by uneducated fans, and passed from moron to moron like a hipster fashion trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canIcrytoo Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 This only gets brought up because it's Vancouver and people hate the Canucks. I don't recall this getting brought up when Colorado was winning Cups. What division do they play in again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariWanna Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Funny to think that only a while ago we were considered one of the strongest divisions. As soon as we start to dominate, our division suddenly becomes easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancanwincup Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Haha wead division. The NW is awful. The lack of strong teams and rivalries works in our favour big time. Back when Calgary, Colorado and Minnesota were good (and we played 8 games against each) it made a huge difference on where we ended up in the standings. Not just in points, but energy in playing and beating those teams in hard fought division battles. Now they are cake walks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canIcrytoo Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 the only division in the league to have only 1 team make it to the playoffs for the last 2 years now and its NOT a weaker division then say one that has multipe teams make it year in and out? lol the excuses on here are pretty funny, just because the nucks play in that division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkpoet Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 When they were winning, it wasnt a weak division. Multiple teams from the division made the playoffs....now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canIcrytoo Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Really? Colorado won a cup in 2000-2001 They won the division by 25 POINTS over 2nd place Edmonton, who had 93 points. That was not an isolated incident, only an example. In 2003 Colorado set an NHL record by recording their 9th Consecutive Division Title They ran away with that division for nearly a freaken DECADE. So as good as we think our team is, they were just as good for TWICE as long (so far) As I said, I didn't hear anyone saying Colorado was winning all those years because the "division was weak". It's just a stat that Canuck haters like to use because it's convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.