A few hockey notes…

A few pundits have made noise about how the Red Wings have “caught” the Sharks. In reality, it’s not quite that easy. The Red Wings have played 3 more games than the Sharks, and while games in hand have to be won, the Sharks have generally won them this season.

That’s why I prefer to compare records using “points per game” rather than total points, because it factors this variable out of the standings. If you’re interested in that data, this site does a good job of showing the results.

And what do you see? San jose’s on pace for 130 points, while Detroit is on pace for 119. That’s a larger difference than you would notice just looking at wins or points — which is why I like doing it this way. Looking at those numbers, it also indicates to me that both teams are likely to slow down, because 115 points for a season is an amazingly high number, and 130 is basically impossible. Some “coming back to earth” is expected here.

Which reminds me: I had a few people ask me about the Sharks recent “slump” and whether we, as fans, ought to be worried. Well, “slump” is relative — 6-2-2 in the last ten isn’t exactly bad, so the answer is no. But more important than that, if we all say “hey, what matters is how they do in the playoffs” when they’re doing well, well, the same goes when they cool off a bit. A little bump or dip doesn’t really matter, if they’re ready for the playoffs.

The Boston game tells me the Sharks in the playoffs won’t be a problem. The recent losses — the team dominated early and then seemed to more or less get bored, allowing the other team back in the game. It almost seems at times like the TEAM is playing the “only work hard enough to win the division and worry about it in the playoffs”, which isn’t fair to them, but they do tend to level out their work ethic to the other team’s talent level. That, and add in the injuries and bumps and bruises (Roenick out, Blake’s face, in-game injuries to Murray and Goc causing short benches, etc…) — it just doesn’t seem like a big deal. The Sharks aren’t playing to their full potential against lesser teams, but then, it seems to know that, and when the top teams arrive, so does the A game. It’s kind of a dangerous habit to get into, but nothing I’m seeing is worrisome. And heck, a couple of games here and there? It happens. I also have to remember that I simply don’t see the Sharks running to 130 points, so there should be more losses between here and the end of the season.So I’m committed to relaxing and just not over-reacting to the occaisional loss or “B” effort. It’s not like they’re not showing up or stinking up the arena…

Back to the playoffs for a bit. If you go back to ranking teams by points per game, who’s in? who’s out?

In the easy, it’s Boston, Washington, NJ, Philly, Montreal, Rangers, Buffalo and Florida, with Carolina and Pittsburgh in spitting distance. Making the playoffs in the easy looks to need 93 points, and there are basically six teams playing for those last four spots. I tend to think the Rangers will sneak their way to the golf course, and I’m guessing Pittsburgh will sneak in. Barely.

In the West, things are funky enough that with the Sharks and Wings dominance and the parity among the rest of the conference that it will only take 87 points to make the playoffs. As of today, the playoff teams are San jose, detroit, Chicago, Calgary, Dallas, Minnesota, Vancouver and LA, with Edmonton, Columbus and Anaheim right on the bubble. Effectively, any of 7 teams can take those four final spots, and whoever does could raise some hell in the first round. I’m not sure who I’d want as the first round opponent for San Jose, but I’m sure hoping that someone like vancouver finishes in 7th and gets Detroit… Or LA. Detroit/LA would be a lot of fun, especially for Sharks fans.

You might also want to read:

  1. 2011 playoff picks (and some notes on the season) As is my tradition, I am now going to embarrass myself by picking the playoff winners in the first round and my choices for Stanley...
  2. game 5 pregame notes I apologize for the lack of hockey posting the second half of the season. I think maybe my (relative) lack of enthusiasm this season is...
  3. sharks notes: sharks 4 vs. Los angeles 3 The sharks have finally (suddenly?) figured out gritty. three really good, gritty games in a row, If they keep this up, they’re in the playoffs...
  4. 2002-2003 hockey season: western conference prediction The hockey season is starting (finally!), so it’s time for the annual predictions, so everyone can laugh at me again at the end of the...
  5. Reffing Notes > in football even with seven guys on the field they still are pretty > consistent. In large part because each ref has a specific...

  • Josh

    normally I'd agree about the 130 points, but the funny thing is, the Sharks had been on pace for over 140 for a while, so they already have “fallen back to earth” some. I don't think they'll get to 130, but 125 is feasible, even if it would require them to get 44 points in 31 games. That still requires playing .710 hockey, but it would be almost 10% worse than their current clip.

    Speaking of which… Dallas caps at 119 if they go 30-0-0 the rest of the way. 120 points for the Sharks would require 39 points in the Sharks remaining 31 games, which is .630, or something to the tune of 16-8-7. For reference, the Sharks could drop more points over the last 31 games (15) than they did over the first 51 (14), and win the division, even if Dallas ran the table over the last 30 games of the season.

    Numbers like that just show how insane it is to have a game in mid February between a pair of teams that both are still single digits in the loss column. To put that in perspective, division leaders Calgary (18), Washington (16), and New Jersey (17) each have as many regulation losses as San Jose and Boston combined (7+9 == 16).

  • Josh

    normally I'd agree about the 130 points, but the funny thing is, the Sharks had been on pace for over 140 for a while, so they already have “fallen back to earth” some. I don't think they'll get to 130, but 125 is feasible, even if it would require them to get 44 points in 31 games. That still requires playing .710 hockey, but it would be almost 10% worse than their current clip.

    Speaking of which… Dallas caps at 119 if they go 30-0-0 the rest of the way. 120 points for the Sharks would require 39 points in the Sharks remaining 31 games, which is .630, or something to the tune of 16-8-7. For reference, the Sharks could drop more points over the last 31 games (15) than they did over the first 51 (14), and win the division, even if Dallas ran the table over the last 30 games of the season.

    Numbers like that just show how insane it is to have a game in mid February between a pair of teams that both are still single digits in the loss column. To put that in perspective, division leaders Calgary (18), Washington (16), and New Jersey (17) each have as many regulation losses as San Jose and Boston combined (7+9 == 16).