• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

NHL Season 2022-23

#641
MJ5150 said:
Should we also rename the Presidents Trophy to something more accurate like the YerNotGonnaWinTheStanleyCup Trophy? Or to simplify maybe just the TakeOffEh Trophy?

-Mike
Click to expand...


There's no problem at all with winning the trophy. In fact, Presidents' Trophy winners are more than 4x more likely to win the Stanley Cup than non Trophy winning teams that make the playoffs.

The Curse of the Presidents' Trophy: Fact or Fiction?

The curse is about touching the Presidents' Trophy during the ceremony when it's presented to the team at the end of regular season, but before the playoffs start.

Hockey players notoriously value tradition, and that includes certain superstitions. An obvious one is the refusal to shave during the playoffs.

For about four decades now, the team that has won the Presidents' Trophy has made a conscious decision to refuse to physically accept or touch the trophy (or even get too close to it) during the ceremony when it's presented by the league representative. They just humbly acknowledge the honor and then make a point of ignoring the piece of hardware as it sits on the presentation table.

The idea behind the taboo is simple. The team cares nothing for honors won during the regular season. Once you've made the playoffs, the only thing that matters is Lord Stanley.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Camaro69
#643
Crawforde said:
Maybe next year the winner will be brave, start a new tradition and touch it.
not touching it hasn't worked for a while.
Click to expand...


I don't know how this myth got started.

Over the past 11 NHL seasons, the Presidents' Trophy winner has won the Stanley Cup four times.

During the past 27 seasons, winning the Presidents' Trophy makes that team more than 4x as likely to capture Lord Stanley's prize
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: zontar and Crawforde
#644
Probably like lots of myths, more repetition than fact checking.
Maybe a lot of it also has to do with a personal/ local bias.
like,
it's not a myth for me.
A long time ago I watched as my team got the president's trophy and then got swept out of the playoffs, they took Stanley home the next year.
.
And then this year I was rooting for Bertuzzi and Boston, and they got knocked out.
So it works out for me, if the team I am rooting for gets it, they lose at the finals.
Obviously my team is the best, so if they lost there must be a curse.
We can ignore the twenty-some years in between except where something similar happened somewhere else and I heard about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hbarcat
#645
hbarcat said:
There's no problem at all with winning the trophy. In fact, Presidents' Trophy winners are more than 4x more likely to win the Stanley Cup than non Trophy winning teams that make the playoffs.

The Curse of the Presidents' Trophy: Fact or Fiction?

The curse is about touching the Presidents' Trophy during the ceremony when it's presented to the team at the end of regular season, but before the playoffs start.

Hockey players notoriously value tradition, and that includes certain superstitions. An obvious one is the refusal to shave during the playoffs.

For about four decades now, the team that has won the Presidents' Trophy has made a conscious decision to refuse to physically accept or touch the trophy (or even get too close to it) during the ceremony when it's presented by the league representative. They just humbly acknowledge the honor and then make a point of ignoring the piece of hardware as it sits on the presentation table.

The idea behind the taboo is simple. The team cares nothing for honors won during the regular season. Once you've made the playoffs, the only thing that matters is Lord Stanley.
Click to expand...

The President's Trophy has been awarded 37 times. Only eight times did the team that won it go on to win the Stanley Cup. The last time was 10 years ago, Chicago.
I'm going to stick with my idea.

-Mike
 
#646
MJ5150 said:
The President's Trophy has been awarded 37 times. Only eight times did the team that won it go on to win the Stanley Cup. The last time was 10 years ago, Chicago.
I'm going to stick with my idea.

-Mike
Click to expand...



Which means that during that time, approximately 22% of the winners of the Presidents' Trophy went on to win the Stanley Cup.
(8 ÷ 37 = 21.6)

Yet the likelihood of any one random team out of the 16 teams starting in the playoffs winning the Stanley Cup is approximately 6%
(1 ÷ 16 = 6.25)

So, winning the Presidents' Trophy statistically increases a team's chances of winning the Stanley Cup from about 6% to around 22%.

Of course, no one knows how touching the Presidents' Trophy affects a team's odds because no team has ever touched the Trophy. There is no data to work with.
:D
 
Last edited:
#647
hbarcat said:
Which means that during that time, approximately 22% of the winners of the Presidents' Trophy went on to win the Stanley Cup.
(8 ÷ 37 = 21.6)

Yet the likelihood of any one random team out of the 16 teams starting in the playoffs winning the Stanley Cup is approximately 6%
(1 ÷ 16 = 6.25)

So, winning the Presidents' Trophy statistically increases a team's chances of winning the Stanley Cup from about 6% to around 22%.

Of course, no one knows how touching the Presidents' Trophy affects a team's odds because no team has ever touched the Trophy. There is no data to work with.
:D
Click to expand...

Those numbers don't factor in the inherit disadvantage of being the President Trophy winner, as born out by the results over the last 37 years.
Numbers tell us that lugging the Presidents Trophy into the Stanley Cup Playoffs puts you at a disadvantage. Aside from the '14-'15 Rangers in the last 10 years, no team that won it even got close to winning the Stanley Cup, losing in the first or second round. This includes two spectacular flameouts by teams that rolled into the playoffs setting the record, at that time, for most points in a season.
Kids, stay in school and don't win the Presidents Trophy. :D

-Mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: dwm74
#652
The usual Free Agency headscratchers...Ryan Reaves gets a three-year deal, while Jason Zucker and Tyler Bertuzzi only sign for one year? Guess they're banking on next year's salary cap increase to help them get better long-term deals. But Zucker signing with the Coyotes is still a 'what the heck is he thinking' move.

More than a handful of long-term deals to very average players, too. Miles Wood, Scott Mayfield, Pierre Engvall and a couple others all signing 6-8 yr deals. Yes, low cap AAV but why tie yourself to middle-of-the-road players for that many years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plake
#654
dwm74 said:
The usual Free Agency headscratchers...Ryan Reaves gets a three-year deal, while Jason Zucker and Tyler Bertuzzi only sign for one year? Guess they're banking on next year's salary cap increase to help them get better long-term deals. But Zucker signing with the Coyotes is still a 'what the heck is he thinking' move.

More than a handful of long-term deals to very average players, too. Miles Wood, Scott Mayfield, Pierre Engvall and a couple others all signing 6-8 yr deals. Yes, low cap AAV but why tie yourself to middle-of-the-road players for that many years?
Click to expand...

I think the cap is having a massive impact on these deals. It seems like very few big-money/long-term deals compared to previous years. Too many teams are right up there with the cap.

I think Lou has lost it, though. Thsoe Isles deals look pretty brutal at the moment.

As a Rangers fan, I'm happy. Glad Drury didn't make any kneejerk trades. We don't have the cap anyway, so Wheeler and Gustafsson are good enough for me. I would've liked a better bottom-6 guy than Nick Bonino, but I see him as insurance. Never know--a rookie might jump him in camp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dwm74 and Plake

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back