Is Minnesota for real?
#1
Posted 18 December 2011 - 09:28 AM
And All-Stars don't cook, but...
What other reasons explain their success? And are they for real?
#2
Posted 18 December 2011 - 10:57 AM
Both of those things combined with consistent play at home and on the road will lead to points. The main test will come after the AS game and trade deadline during the final stretch to the playoffs when everyone has settled their lineups. If they can continue with their consistency then they can make the playoffs. After that, like every other team, it will be up to goaltending and depth in the lineup.
- T.Low likes this
"I think a tough team, a team that sticks together, is a lot better than leaving the onus on one guy to take care of business." - Brendan Shanahan
It still would be nice to have that one guy. (Jordin Tootoo, wish granted)
#3
Posted 18 December 2011 - 11:01 AM
#4
Posted 18 December 2011 - 11:11 AM
Sure they are great defensively but they are 29th worst in the league in Shots against/game.
So they are poor in offense and give up tons of shots. They are depending totally on goaltending and have gotten 4 "extra" points for shootout wins plus they have played more games.
You have to look beyond the headlines especially in a league that gives points for losing as well as extra points for a skills competition if the game is tied.
As far as Danny Heatley, he has 22 points in 33 games. That's not exactly great.
Minnesota has historically been good defensively and most of that has been with great goaltending tandems. This year they have a few more offensive weapons available and it shows with their record.
Both of those things combined with consistent play at home and on the road will lead to points. The main test will come after the AS game and trade deadline during the final stretch to the playoffs when everyone has settled their lineups. If they can continue with their consistency then they can make the playoffs. After that, like every other team, it will be up to goaltending and depth in the lineup.
Uh. Sorry but No. They are near the bottom of the league in scoring.
#5
Posted 18 December 2011 - 11:15 AM
New e-book: The Spanish-American War: A Brief History. Relatively short, introductory read for casual history buffs and people who want to learn more about a forgotten war that changed America. Available at BN.com, Smashwords, Kobo, and Diesel E-Books right now. Same link as above.
#6
Posted 18 December 2011 - 12:15 PM
Have to give them credit so far, though. They play a very boring style of game, but it has been effective. Solid defense and very strong goaltending.
Edited by GoWings1905, 18 December 2011 - 12:16 PM.

#7
Posted 18 December 2011 - 12:39 PM
They have a no-name defense.
They've never done squat in the playoffs.
I don't think they're a threat to the top teams in the West. And it would be a disaster to the NHL if this boring ass team was a threat and somehow made the Finals.
#8
Posted 18 December 2011 - 12:54 PM
- redwings4life likes this
Pavel Datsyuk > x (where x is the name of any active hockey player)
#9
Posted 18 December 2011 - 01:25 PM
#10
Posted 18 December 2011 - 01:37 PM
They must just have a lucky streak going. It will eventually pass.
They may not sustain this level of winning, but I think over two months of playing well is more than just a lucky streak. Their division is definitely weak, but they did beat the Red Wings twice within a couple days and only lost in OT the other meeting.

#11
Posted 18 December 2011 - 02:46 PM
They may not sustain this level of winning, but I think over two months of playing well is more than just a lucky streak. Their division is definitely weak, but they did beat the Red Wings twice within a couple days and only lost in OT the other meeting.
2 games doesn't mean anything. The standings are artificial because of the shootouts and loser points. If you take away the loser points (OT and shootout loses) and the extra point for winning in a shootout (the game should end in a tie after OT with 1 point to each team), the Wild have 39 points in 33 games which is a .591 percentage. Not bad but not so impressive. Incidently, the Wings are at .629
My point is that they aren't doing that great now. It's all part of Bettman's smoke and mirrors...
- dobbles likes this
#12
Posted 18 December 2011 - 03:59 PM
"Mess up tomorrow, don't mess up now".
- Harry James Benson, CBE.
#13
Posted 18 December 2011 - 08:00 PM
2 games doesn't mean anything. The standings are artificial because of the shootouts and loser points. If you take away the loser points (OT and shootout loses) and the extra point for winning in a shootout (the game should end in a tie after OT with 1 point to each team), the Wild have 39 points in 33 games which is a .591 percentage. Not bad but not so impressive. Incidently, the Wings are at .629
My point is that they aren't doing that great now. It's all part of Bettman's smoke and mirrors...
You can hate the point system all you want, but it doesn't change the results. Head-to-head does mean something considering the Wild have picked up 5 of a possible 6 points against the Red Wings so far.
The Wild are sitting near the top of the conference. Using your own formulas doesn't change that. If the Wild aren't doing that great, then no one in the NHL is either. I even stated I don't think they will keep their current pace, but as of now it's hard to say they haven't been impressive.

#14
Posted 18 December 2011 - 08:56 PM
Coaching has a pretty big part in the game of hockey as well, you know.
- Doggy and DatsyukianDangles122 like this
#15
Posted 18 December 2011 - 09:10 PM
You can hate the point system all you want, but it doesn't change the results. Head-to-head does mean something considering the Wild have picked up 5 of a possible 6 points against the Red Wings so far.
The Wild are sitting near the top of the conference. Using your own formulas doesn't change that. If the Wild aren't doing that great, then no one in the NHL is either. I even stated I don't think they will keep their current pace, but as of now it's hard to say they haven't been impressive.
My point is that though they may currently be near the top of the conference, it is only smoke and mirrors. By the end of the year, the shootouts and loser points will even out. The shootouts and extra points are spread almost evenly among the teams by the time they play 82 games. Right now Minnesota is on the positive side of that and it makes it look like they are a better team than they are.
And no head-to-head games in the regular season mean nothing in the playoffs. Minnesota is not a better team than the Wings, not by a long shot but yes, they beat us. It doesn't prove anything except that they beat us.
#16
Posted 18 December 2011 - 10:08 PM
Heatley is doing as expected, but he's not much of a playoff performer for the money, unless he's got a chip on his shoulder from being ditched by the Sharks.
It seems like being toward the bottom of the league in goals for and having a mediocre power play will catch up with them eventually.
#17
Posted 18 December 2011 - 10:31 PM
2 games doesn't mean anything. The standings are artificial because of the shootouts and loser points. If you take away the loser points (OT and shootout loses) and the extra point for winning in a shootout (the game should end in a tie after OT with 1 point to each team), the Wild have 39 points in 33 games which is a .591 percentage. Not bad but not so impressive. Incidently, the Wings are at .629
My point is that they aren't doing that great now. It's all part of Bettman's smoke and mirrors...
Please explain this. I am so tired of hearing about this Bettman conspiracy to ruin this game that I could puke. Further, what on earth does Gary Bettman (or Sid Crosby -- kidding!) have to do with MN's success? If someone could please direct me to data that ties Gary Bettman to MN winning a bunch of games, I'd love to read it. Seriously, I'd eat that s*** up. Until then, hats off to the WIld for exceeding expectations.
Go Wild, unless you're playing the Wings.
Edited by Uncle Danny, 18 December 2011 - 10:35 PM.
- 55fan, Z and D for the C, HadThomasVokounOnFortSt and 2 others like this
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC
-- Kurt Vonnegut
#18
Posted 18 December 2011 - 10:45 PM
Heatley is doing as expected, but he's not much of a playoff performer for the money, unless he's got a chip on his shoulder from being ditched by the Sharks.
"Yeah. f***, you know-Whatever f***. I'm Dany f***in' Heatley and I'm sittin' here, I'm the f***in' all-star and I deliver in the f***in' playoffs better than anybody. You don't know what the f*** you're talking about. I mean, f***, you a f***in' all-star?-I didn't f***in' think so. Shut the f*** up with your non-all-star opinion there talking but me ditched by the f***in' Sharks that's totally not how it f***in' happened. I'm the all-star - I f***in' made the trade demand you little *****."
Go Wild, unless you're playing the Wings.
I don't know if I particularly like the Wild enough to hope they win when they don't play the Wings. Although I can't wait for Granlund to make the move to NA. It'd be cool to see Koivu and Granlund lead the Wild top six.
#19
Posted 18 December 2011 - 10:56 PM
the wings have been looking up at chicago all season long and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon.Another team with a fluke record a la s***cago.
yeah, real "fluke", those hawks. LOL
- haroldsnepsts and greenrebellion like this
LOLHelm is a perennial Selke candidate
#20
Posted 19 December 2011 - 05:37 PM
Similar Topics
| Topic | Forum | Started By | Stats | Last Post Info | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Looking for the 2009 Series VS Ducks |
Tradin' Post | paul19010 |
|
|
|
looking for rare edmonton oiler games1984 series |
Tradin' Post | puckhead103 |
|
|
|
People who don't "buy in" to Corey Crawford |
General Discussion | unsaddleddonald |
|
|
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users














