PDA

View Full Version : Five Teams Have Better Odds to Win Eastern Conference than Rangers



fletch
10-05-2014, 08:49 AM
From vegas insider http://www.vegasinsider.com/nhl/odds/futures/

Odds to win Eastern Conference
Bruins 11/4
Penguins 4/1
Lightning 11/2
Canadiens 8/1
Red Wings 10/1
Rangers 11/1
Capitals 11/1
Blue Jackets 15/1
Maple Leafs 20/1

Vegas not very impressed with the Rangers offseason.

Parsley
10-05-2014, 09:02 AM
Eh.....they should be 3rd on that list. Scoring will be the issue (again).

Pete
10-05-2014, 09:32 AM
My only issue is the Red Wings over the Rangers. Red Wings may not even make playoffs. MSL, Nash, McD, Lundy really assure us of a spot (on paper, right now).

AmericanJesus
10-05-2014, 09:56 AM
Is this to win the conference in the regular season? You have to pretty much run wire to wire to do that. With Stepan missing the first month I get why we would be such a long shot. If these were cup competing odds I would take issue.

Detroit odds are off though. I'd happily bet against them at those odds.

EdMc28
10-05-2014, 10:49 AM
I'd take the Rangers at 11/1 to win the conference again. Especially if Boston has to go through Tampa and or Montreal to get to the ECF.

Morphinity
10-05-2014, 11:30 AM
Washington 11/1? Really? They're not all that good. Their goaltending and defense are still questionable. They seem a little confused about their identity right now under a new coach (similar to the Rangers last year).

Captain Clutch
10-05-2014, 11:41 AM
These are the same guys that gave the Rangers to odd to win the cup

Johnnydollaz18
10-05-2014, 12:16 PM
Good, just prove all the doubters wrong again. Prefer it that way

FleshistheFever
10-05-2014, 12:42 PM
The obvious blip is Detroit. They're off their rocker there. Even Tampa. Im not sold on those guys yet. Not one bit.

fletch
10-05-2014, 12:55 PM
I was shocked that there were five teams ahead of us. It's easy for oddsmakers to throw Boston and Pittsburgh up there with the best odds (just as LA and Chicago in the West) based on recent history. But to lump us in with the Washingtons and the Detroits of the world is a worse outlook than I would expect. I'd wager that we'll advance further than Washington, Detroit, and Montreal in a heartbeat.

It all comes down to who is healthy and playing good hockey in the spring (plus matchups and luck), but I'm excited for this season.

CreaseCrusader91
10-05-2014, 12:57 PM
Not sold on Ben Bishop. DET may miss playoffs. This really is a crap shoot. Pun intended.

RichieNextel305
10-05-2014, 12:58 PM
No way are either the Canadiens or Red Wings better than the Rangers. No shot.

I feel pretty good about this team. I love our depth on the wings. I understand center is a little bit of an issue here, but players like Brassard and Stepan are good players. Again, I really do like the makeup of this team.

JOHN
10-05-2014, 08:50 PM
This is such a crapshoot that I pay it no mind. The NHL, whether you like it or not, has a ton of parity right now and as a result there aren't a lot of "loaded" teams. In order to be loaded, you have to get really lucky in drafts, find excellent value in free agency, and keep your players hungry/buying in. LA and Chicago are the only two teams to really have done that and they're in the west. Boston is still a very good team, but they're no longer loaded, and you can see the retooling happening.

Our roster has holes same as anyone else in the league, and with an injury like Stepan's it is very doubtful we take the East this year. Like Dave mentioned, you have to pretty much go wire to wire for that to happen. We do have a nice team though in my opinion, and while situational face-offs might be an issue we are generally very solid, very balanced and we have the three things winning teams all do in this NHL: a quick transitional game, four rollable lines and everyone has bought in. If we can get the special teams going, we're as good as anyone in the east, and not many western teams scare me either.

Vodka Drunkenski
10-05-2014, 08:52 PM
No way are either the Canadiens or Red Wings better than the Rangers. No shot. I feel pretty good about this team. I love our depth on the wings. I understand center is a little bit of an issue here, but players like Brassard and Stepan are good players. Again, I really do like the makeup of this team.

Canadiens are a good team, don't discount them that easily.

Pete
10-05-2014, 10:55 PM
Canadiens are a good team, don't discount them that easily.

Serious. They took us to 6 without a goalie.

Hornet
10-06-2014, 05:54 AM
The Red Wings seem a mess (Datsyuk hurt, Zeta not 100% etc.), but they always somehow manage to play well. Nevertheless, I think we have a better team than Tampa and Montreal. If only Nash finds his scoring touch, we could be dangerous. Home-ice in the 1st round should be the minimum expectation, IMO.

Slobberknocker
10-06-2014, 12:04 PM
ill take some of that at 11/1. haven't followed closely but did the pens upgrade their defense this off season? their still shaky between the pipes as well.

phillyb™
10-06-2014, 12:59 PM
i watched a little bit of two detroit preseason games - turnovers GALORE!
turnovers in their own zone.
turnovers in front of their own net.
just garbage.

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 02:31 PM
Canadiens are a good team, don't discount them that easily.

Where did I discount them? Just said they're not better than us.

Vodka Drunkenski
10-06-2014, 04:35 PM
You said there was no way they're better than us, that would be dismissing them to me.

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 05:10 PM
Well, thats to you. It's not that to me. And since I wrote it, I'd appreciate it if you didn't try tweaking my words.

Theres no way, IMO, the Red Wings are better than the Kings. Is that me dismissing them? Nope.

Just said I think one contender is better than the other. All those teams on that list are good teams that shouldn't be dismissed.

Vodka Drunkenski
10-06-2014, 05:35 PM
Which part did I tweak? No way or no shot?


No way are either the Canadiens or Red Wings better than the Rangers. No shot.

Pete
10-06-2014, 05:38 PM
I mean they took us to 6 without a goalie. Hard to say they are "no way" better than us...

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 07:12 PM
Which part did I tweak? No way or no shot?

I said they're no way better than the Rangers. Not "no way" they're good.

I mean you can think I'm discounting them there. I'm not. If you want to take what I said and manipulate it, you can I guess. But, you're making it seem like I said those teams suck. I don't think they do, and I'm certain my post doesn't illustrate that. But again, you can manipulate for your own fun if you want.

I just don't think they're better than us.

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 07:13 PM
I mean they took us to 6 without a goalie. Hard to say they are "no way" better than us...

I think they're a case where they got a little jolt out of their rivalry with Boston. I don't think they're better than the Bruins. I think they rose up to the challenge and basically treated those games like they were their Stanley Cup Final. I'm not disputing we got hot at the right time, but I think of the 2 teams, we were better then and are better now.

JOHN
10-06-2014, 07:14 PM
I said they're no way better than the Rangers. Not "no way" they're good.

I mean you can think I'm discounting them there. I'm not. If you want to take what I said and manipulate it, you can I guess. But, you're making it seem like I said those teams suck. I don't think they do. I just don't think they're better than us.

I think his point is that "no way" means that we are on a different plain of play as a team compared to them, a higher tier. From what we've seen over the course of last season however, that isn't the case. They're a very good team, just as we are.

Pete
10-06-2014, 07:15 PM
I think they're a case where they got a little jolt out of their rivalry with Boston. I don't think they're better than the Bruins. I think they rose up to the challenge and basically treated those games like they were their Stanley Cup Final. I'm not disputing we got hot at the right time, but I think of the 2 teams, we were better then and are better now.

One can say we also got an emotional jolt coming out of the Pittsburgh series. I think they are very evenly matched. Any given night sort of thing.

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 07:16 PM
I think we're better than the Habs. I don't think they suck. I don't think they're not a very good team. I just don't think they're better than us.

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 07:20 PM
One can say we also got an emotional jolt coming out of the Pittsburgh series. I think they are very evenly matched. Any given night sort of thing.

Which is true. It's obvious we each got a jolt out of something in the semi's, with us it being MSL's mother and the Habs playing their biggest rival.

I don't know though. The Habs just don't scare me. Of the 3 series we had, I felt probably most comfortable playing them, even before the Price injury. That isn't a knock on them. I just think we matchup well with them.

And I do think that we're better. I mean, is it that big of a deal that one guy believes one good team is better than another good team? I'm not saying they're gonna be a lottery team here. I just think the Rangers are the better of the 2.

Vodka Drunkenski
10-06-2014, 08:23 PM
I said they're no way better than the Rangers. Not "no way" they're good. I mean you can think I'm discounting them there. I'm not. If you want to take what I said and manipulate it, you can I guess. But, you're making it seem like I said those teams suck. I don't think they do, and I'm certain my post doesn't illustrate that. But again, you can manipulate for your own fun if you want. I just don't think they're better than us.

I'm not manipulating anything, you were very emphatic about them not being better which to me seemed like you were writing them off when we play them. But as Pete said, they took us 6 games with an AHL goalie. They are certainly in the mix for one of the best in the east IMO. We may be better but not by much, if at all at this point.

RichieNextel305
10-06-2014, 08:45 PM
Not writing the Habs or any team on that list off. I do however have an opinion of who we are and who we aren't better than. That's all.

fletch
10-07-2014, 08:00 PM
At least Barry Melrose and Steve Levy have the Rangers getting back to the ECF in their picks.
http://espn.go.com/nhl/preview2014/story/_/id/11629537/stanley-cup-awards-predictions

RichieNextel305
10-07-2014, 08:08 PM
In my opinion, and this is not homer based at all, but I believe that the East used to be the home of 2 heavy favorites (Boston, Pittsburgh) followed by a 2nd group of competitors who were not equal to them, but could skate with them. I believe thats where teams like us, the Canadiens, the Red Wings, Tampa, Philly, etc. were a year ago.

Right now, I believe the Rangers graduated from that class and are now lumped with Boston and Pittsburgh. I really do. I think we're the 3 best teams in the Conference. And when it comes down to it, if I were a betting man, I believe that it'll wind up being us and Boston battling it out for the Conference crown.

Pete
10-07-2014, 08:22 PM
In my opinion, and this is not homer based at all, but I believe that the East used to be the home of 2 heavy favorites (Boston, Pittsburgh) followed by a 2nd group of competitors who were not equal to them, but could skate with them. I believe thats where teams like us, the Canadiens, the Red Wings, Tampa, Philly, etc. were a year ago.

Right now, I believe the Rangers graduated from that class and are now lumped with Boston and Pittsburgh. I really do. I think we're the 3 best teams in the Conference. And when it comes down to it, if I were a betting man, I believe that it'll wind up being us and Boston battling it out for the Conference crown.

That's generous and overly optimistic, IMO. There are far too many question marks to say that right now, without bias.

Boyle, and therefore Staal are question marks. The entire bottom 6 aside from Moore and maybe Glass, as well. They're re-treads and unproven rookies.

Special teams is a question mark, losing Callahan, B.Boyle, Stralman and Stepan being hurt.

I'm not saying all the additions will perform poorly. I doubt that is the case. But it's impossible to count a team with so many question marks as a favorite.

Miked1958
10-08-2014, 04:33 PM
Good, just prove all the doubters wrong again. Prefer it that way

We came so close last year against LA. Really thought we would pull it out. Seemed like a team of destiny but LA wanted it more. Now we start from scratch. So hatd to get all the way back there

fletch
10-08-2014, 05:30 PM
In my opinion, and this is not homer based at all, but I believe that the East used to be the home of 2 heavy favorites (Boston, Pittsburgh) followed by a 2nd group of competitors who were not equal to them, but could skate with them. I believe thats where teams like us, the Canadiens, the Red Wings, Tampa, Philly, etc. were a year ago.

Right now, I believe the Rangers graduated from that class and are now lumped with Boston and Pittsburgh. I really do. I think we're the 3 best teams in the Conference. And when it comes down to it, if I were a betting man, I believe that it'll wind up being us and Boston battling it out for the Conference crown.


That's generous and overly optimistic, IMO. There are far too many question marks to say that right now, without bias.

Boyle, and therefore Staal are question marks. The entire bottom 6 aside from Moore and maybe Glass, as well. They're re-treads and unproven rookies.

Special teams is a question mark, losing Callahan, B.Boyle, Stralman and Stepan being hurt.

I'm not saying all the additions will perform poorly. I doubt that is the case. But it's impossible to count a team with so many question marks as a favorite.

I still think we're behind Boston (although you never know in any given series) - I won't believe in Pittsburgh until they get a different goaltender. Lots of uncertainty with this team so I could see us as the 2nd best team or the 7th best team in the East. Just depends on how everything comes together.