Our Ducks currently have 40 pts and 44 games remaining from which they can earn  88 pts. Many say it will take 100 pts to earn a playoff spot in the West this season.

To reach 100 pts our Ducks must win at a .681 rate the rest of the way. Their current P% is .526.

I realize reality and probability theory won’t convince the Kool Aid drinkers. After all, who says 100 pts is accurate. We never know. The East could suddenly rise and win some conference games.

Fair enough. Let’s work with the same 95 pts it took Colorado to win the eight and final playoff spot last season. Our Ducks still need to win at .625 rate.

To be in playoff contention our 18-16-4 Ducks need to go at least 27-16-1 the rest of the way. Doable you say? Consider our Ducks don’t need to just win, they need to win convincingly. In the past three seasons no team with a minus goal differential has made the Western Conference playoffs. Our Ducks are currently minus -13.

Just where is that competitive team Bob Murray and Randy Carlyle  promised?

Advertisements
Comments
  1. czhokej says:

    Robert Picarello at FOXSport.com does his power ranking based also on P% formula – points earned divided by the amount of points possible (same as NBA). That’s much more accurate evaluation than the point system when some divisional rivals have 3 or even 5 games in hand.
    The Ducks are currently ranked 22nd in the league and 13th in the Western Conference (behind us are only Edmonton and Calgary).

    I was surprised how many people at OCR blog were happy with Carlyle’s contract extension. These people do not argue with facts, they do not see the game analytically, they do not scrutinize the problems, and they accept Carlyle’s (or Murray’s or Getzlaf’s) meaningless rhetoric and lame excuses.

  2. bbdux93 says:

    If I were the owner that’s a question I would have asked at least a month ago, instead RC is given a one year extension… hard to understand.

    I agree with the comments here and on the register blog – maybe Carlyle had the team listening, believing and delivering at one time – that time has past and it’s time, actually it’s past time, to make a change.

    I wouldn’t pretend to know all of the sources of the team’s revenues, but a loosing team will certainly have a negative impact on ticket sales. During 06-07 and even during 07-08 a sell out crowd was common place, now it is unusual… Put a team on the ice that competes – every game – and we’ll be there, you don’t and we won’t!

  3. czhokej says:

    You are right bb, I do not want to spend money (not a small amount these days) and a lot of time in traffic, just to go and see my team losing, or producing mediocre hockey.

    And another thing about Pronger deal which was approached with sarcasm by a fan on OCR blog: besides his hockey skills, Chris Pronger was a marketable commodity, attracting spectators to the arena (like Teemu, Scotty).

  4. BackCheck says:

    When Murray traded Pronger, we stopped being the Big Bad Ducks. We became a team of whiners, blamers and excuse makers.

    You don’t need an advanced degree in hockeyology to see the deterioration in our Ducks since the Clarence Campbell Bowl and Stanley Cup winning years.

    I had thought Henry Samueli was smarter.

  5. czhokej says:

    When you mentioned deterioration of the team (and loss of toughness) : I just came across an article about O’Donnell. He is now sixth in the NHL in plus/minus with a plus-16 rating, and he is a leader in career penalty minutes with 1,731 (among active players), playing almost 17 minutes a game. (Actually Chris Pronger convinced O’Donnell to try Philadelphia.)

    We lost so many players – shouldn’t we ask why?

    • BackCheck says:

      Why? Three reasons cz and IMO in this order; (1) The cost of keeping Scott Niedermayer at all costs, (2) tagging issues and (3) free agency.

      The first two were self-inflicted. Free agency, specifically Beauchemin, Pahlsson and Moen and attrition in Rob Niedermayer is just part of the business.

  6. czhokej says:

    I used my rhetorical question to implicate that so many departures were connected to players revolts against Carlyle. However I do not know who left because of money (or some other reasons) or who left because of these disagreements. Most players keep silent about it.
    I know it’s the past and we should not dwell on it, but for me it became almost an obsession. I really loved that team of 2007. (Of course part of it was Burke’s fault.)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s