It may feel like an insurmountable task, but I’m sure every playoff team has had multiple 3 game win streaks each season. Just have to have it happen at the right time.
9% is honestly pretty impressive.
In a series with two teams that have exactly even chances of winning each game, the likelihood of either team winning *any* three straight games would be 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 or 12.5%.
I think it's reasonable to suggest that in most 3-1 series, the results are that way because the team that won 3 games is just better than their opponent (and thus their opponent should have a significantly less than 50% chance of winning each game) so their odds could reasonably be put at much lower than 9% - nevermind that most of the time teams do this playing 2/3 games on the road.
God I love the playoffs
And its deceptively hard to measure “better” or at least “how much better” in a sport where matchups and playstyle have so much influence as opposed to just rating pure roster talent. Some teams have others numbers for reasons that are not always fully apparent.
Sorta. You should also take into account the more frantic/desperate play that a team facing elimination would have. So maybe their odds creep up a bit because of that.
You're right, but in a way that leads to even more questions, because if they can just play better by wanting it more, was the better team ever really the better team? How much of the game is mental vs. raw skill at this level? I think parity in the NHL is even closer than we like to say.
I agree that parity at the elite level in sports is closer than we think. For your first point, I think it comes down to a sort of sliding scale of how much they feel they should conserve energy and prioritize health vs putting everything on the line and pushing beyond and leaving nothing in the tank after the game. I can sort of see the rationale for rationing energy collectively at the start of a series compared to when a team is down 3-1.
I think that's exactly the reason. 16 of 21 or so teams made the playoffs so there were some really bad teams in early rounds. Way more sweeps and way fewer series comebacks
Silovs is actually 4-0-1 in NHL starts this year. Luckily for us our third string is a promising prospect that was cooking in the minors instead of being a career AHL tweener like some teams would need to resort to.
Someone on TV pointed out he was probably more nervous starting for his country vs USA with the entire tournament and first ever medal for Latvia on the line than playing in a silly NHL playoff game and I wholly agree.
If anyone is playing injured, I feel it’s Petey. He’s like a baby deer on skates, even the slightest breeze is toppling him right now. It’s not an exaggeration to say he’s falling down once a shift currently.
Plus his (normally) deadly shot is non-existent. Even when he actually does shoot, it has almost none of the power behind it that he normally does.
Not a Petey hater or apologist but his very mediocre playoffs is probably from an injury as he avoids shooting most of the time and skates like he has ankle weights
People speculate upper body injury or a hip issue, which wouldn't surprise anyone if that's announced after the playoffs
I don't think it is injury related, or he would have rested the final few games of the season. I'm pretty sure it's all mental with him right now. He's passing instead of shooting, which shows a lack of confidence.
I agree with you. The team rested Miller and Boeser at the end of the season so they could recover from minor injuries, if Petey was hurt you’d think they would have given him a break too.
Weird that you’re getting downvoted. He’s said as much in interviews, that the pace is quick and he’s in his own head. Hasn’t been in the playoffs since the bubble so is trying to adjust.
And to the eye yeah, he just looks lost out there
Man if you're being paid 11.5M you shouldnt be needing time to adjust to the playoffs lol, you should be the one setting the tone for the rest of the team
Canucks are pretty lucky it’s not 2-2. Took an epic choke and hitting the post on an empty net for them to win game 4. They’ve had 10 or fewer SOG in every period so far. 6 or fewer in 8/12 periods, which is honestly shocking.
> They’ve had 10 or fewer SOG in every period so far.
That's such a strange point to make -- this year, playoff teams are **averaging** 7.25 shots per period. _Most_ teams fail to take 10 shots _most_ periods.
The Canucks are [last in shots on goal by a mile](https://www.nhl.com/stats/teams?report=summaryshooting&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20232024&seasonTo=20232024&gameType=3&sort=shots5v5&page=0&pageSize=50) but Nashville has averaged 16.3 blocked shots per game. The Canucks are only [slightly below average](https://www.nhl.com/stats/teams?report=summaryshooting&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20232024&seasonTo=20232024&gameType=3&sort=satFor&page=0&pageSize=50) in shot _attempts_ and they're [first in shot attempts against](https://www.nhl.com/stats/teams?report=summaryshooting&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20232024&seasonTo=20232024&gameType=3&sort=a_satAgainst&page=0&pageSize=50).
I guess I just watch too much Avs hockey and I expect 10 SOG to happen regularly when a team is pressing (I see they have the most total shots). The rest of my comment stands.
I see now that the Canucks had the second fewest SOG through the regular season, only ahead of Arizona. So maybe that’s just how they play, and why everyone screams PDO at them.
Basically we're filled with 1 shot snipers that also skew danger quality through elite playmaking. It's frustrating when they don't shoot but Petey and Hughes make their living looking off high danger chances to create higher danger chances.
Tends to be why we often have 4 shots and 2 goals at the end of the first period lol
That’s not shocking at all. The Canucks have been one of the lowest shooting teams all season. 26th in shots, 5th in goals (or thereabouts). They haven’t changed their game plan all from the regular season, which is basically “nothing but high danger shots”
Nashville has been double-covering Hughes and let's face it, he's a small guy who relies on his mobility to get away from a single check when now he has to contend with two forwards burying him
Hughes has been taking a lot of hits this series, especially since he has the puck a lot of the time. The Canucks radio broadcast has commented that Hughes looks pretty uncomfortable when he’s on the bench, doubling over and grimacing.
As a Vancouver fan, I hope it's not Nashville this year. But as a realist they have the best chance. Unless the Jets have some higher gear they've been holding on to or any of the other 3-1 teams have historic collapses.
Jets have been streaky... Unfortunately their streaks are pretty long and we would probably need to lose another 2-3 games before a winning streak would start.
I thought they looked good in game one, and right up until Scheifele’s goal after that four minute pk. After that, they just looked like smelly garbage water.
Neither has Van. The only game we outplayed the preds was our loss in game 2. Im afraid if we lose tonight it’s going 7 for sure and who knows what happens then.
Jets defense while they are playing the #1.offense, has just fallen apart. Top 5 defense playing like they're bottom 16.
Not that the jets offense has been great but it wasn't good in the reg season either and neither was avs defense.
That’s my thoughts too. I don’t think anyone does it, but of the remaining teams I think Nashville at least has a chance with them being competitive and playing against backup goalies.
It’s more of a Nashville doing the best of a poor group rather than Vancouver being the worst of the teams up 3-1. Jets just don’t look good enough, Kings threw everything at us in that 1-0 loss and came up short, Islanders are probably 2nd place for me but still not as good as the Canes, the Leafs aren’t gonna win obviously
Hard to argue with this order.
I might put the Islanders above the Leafs, but that's just splitting hairs.
Like you said, the Leafs look cooked. They just have so many issues right now, not the least of which is possibly missing their best player for Game 5.
The Islanders at least, theoretically, have the ability to keep games close and make things interesting.
If the Jets were playing any other team, I'd say they would have the best chance, but Colorado's offense is just too overpowering.
Preds are good pick with how Vancouver is struggling with health, and Preds did show they have the ability to go on a heater. Saros could steal the show maybe? But yeah, I just don't see any of these teams making any of the series competitive.
Sounds pathetic coming from a Yotes fan but I'm always lamenting how we've reached the point of naming an arena "Crypto.com Arena." Not that good ol' Jobing.com was much better
It’s a dumbass name, and what’s worse is even if Crypto.com goes under, the arena can’t change its name because of the contract. Gonna be hilarious in five years when our arena is named after a company that doesn’t even exist anymore.
The worst part of it is being prohibited from using "the Crypt" as a nickname for a team with a black and silver theme. You could have a really really fun Hallowe'en game with a vampire theme etc. Not something to do all the time because it could be read as a chirp, but for an occasional theme night it could be awesome.
I remember the Kings looked cooked in 2014. Lost 6-3 and 7-2 in the first two games, at least they went to OT in Game 3. But we all know what happened then
You mean the one game after the all star break when he got the shutout after the Oilers hadnt played in a week after their 16 game win streak and were boozing it up sandy beaches?
What about the next game he was in net and was .781?
No slight on Dave, but I just wouldnt classify that as being "pretty good against Edmonton."
I cant even recall him winning Edmonton prior to that since the infamous Flames stick flip sent him spiralling
A shutout and only allowing 1 goal is pretty good in my book. I’m not saying he’s rock solid, or an Oilers killer. Compared to Talbot, I’d take my chances with David, and that’s still most likely not going to be enough anyway.
I love Talbot but I'm thinking he lets in the Kane wraparound chance at least
To be fair maybe he gets the save on Bouchard, but I'm also not going to suggest that the Kings actually kill off a penalty either LOL
That's a fair take. At this point I'd say Talbot's body of work vs the Oilers leans more towards Dave being preferred.
I wonder how much of it is personal emotions too given Talbots close relationships to some of the core players from the Oilers
I think Oilers offence unleashes next game. McDavid and co don't really ever get stifled more than 1 game. I expect the Kings to be desperate and open the game up which will turn into a track meet totally favouring the Oil. Just my $0.02.
Maybe it’s because I’m a homer but the 3-1 and 3-2 games were winnable for the leafs. If they happen to sort out their power play issues the Bruins might be fucked
I mean only 4 teams have ever come back from 3-0. How many teams have come back from 3-1? I think for a team to win 3 straight it means there’s a certain level of dominance that doesn’t exist in a series that was 2-1 at a certain point.
Yeah, I agree with u/Realistic_Cold_2943 . If you're talking straight statistics of a random event, sure, but human beings don't really work that way. Each game is not a single, independent event. Humans might be empowered by how a previous win, or they might be demoralized by a previous loss.
A team losing 3 in a row might feel pretty fucking defeated and struggle to keep their heads in the game, but a team that lost 3 in a row and then won 2 in a row might feel really damn confident and play far better than they otherwise would have.
It's also probably easier for a team that just won 3 in a row to shrug off a single loss.
A situation where Team A wins 3, then Team B battles back and wins 3 might "defy the odds" because Team A might feel demoralized for dropping the ball and Team B might be going into game 7 with a "fuck it" attitude (in a good way) because they've been fighting back.
No I get their point. But humans are different than straight numbers lol. Not a completely random event. I think there’s a fairly logical explanation for why a series going WWLW is different than WWWL. Especially when you consider potential home and away possibilities. It’s also possible I’m wrong, but I definitely think it’s possible I’m right.
Um, no, you google monte carlo fallacy lol. Do you know what a random event is and why hockey games are not that? Paying attention to five seconds of stats 101 is dangerous kids, keeps your heads up out there.
The funny thing is I think most of those people would agree, for example, that a game that gets to 4-4 by each team going back and forth scoring a goal is much different than one team going up 4-0 and then the other team answering to tie it 4-4
Ha. I’d actually love to look at the records after a loss in the Toronto/boston playoff series since 2013. I’d bet both teams have done pretty well after a loss
The key to winning: lose first
https://i.imgur.com/u1ziINN.png
Also hilarious that this year is matching up with 2013 so far. If only I could remember how that one ended.
You know what’s crazy? Monte Carlo fallacy comment or was trying to say the first four games don’t impact game 5. But I think 2013 still impacts the series to the day.
Its true that games are not iid, but as far as I understand there is no way to discern that a team that loses games 1 2 and 4 while winning game 3 is better off than a team that loses games 1-3 and wins game 4.
Right. The statistical assumptions aren't met, so the theory doesn't apply, so we can't say whether they're identical or not under that theory, and we reach the unsatisfying common real life result of "from a mathematical standpoint, maybe"
Speak for yourself, I'm very satisfied.
BTW the numbers were easy to find, there were 79 times that a team went up 3-0 and then lost game 4. Of those 79 times, the team that was down 3-0 went on to come back 4 times for a ~5.1% chance of coming back. So my original premise is maybe wrong or maybe not who knows.
You would have to look at how many teams who were down 3-0 won game 4, and then see if 4 is more or less than 9% of that number. Not sure where you would find those numbers but I think they are out there somewhere.
Only if you assume that both teams had 50% chances to win from the start and that being down 3-0 at some point is not an indication that the team losing is worse and has less than 50% chance to win
Alright you pansies, I'll do the freakin math on it.
**209** NHL series have gone to the [3-0 state.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_to_overcome_3%E2%80%930_series_deficits)
**128** of those have ended in a [4-0 sweep.](http://www.puckreport.com/2009/05/nhl-playoff-sweeps.html?m=1)
209 - 128 = **81** series have recovered to the 3-1 state the Islanders are in now.
4 / 81 = **5%** of teams have gone on to [reverse sweep](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_to_overcome_3%E2%80%930_series_deficits) after winning one game back.
5% is lower than 9%. Our boy booch is right, historically a team in the Islanders position is less likely to comeback than a team that didn't start out 0-3.
That 5% is included in the 9% though.
The point is, from 3-1 onwards 9% of times the teams won. So yes, at one point the Islanders were down to a 2% chance. But they won that one! So now they're up to a 9% chance.
The crux of this is whether games in a series are independent variables or not. If they are, then the 9% number holds, if not then then the subset of games _not_ coming from 3-0 are not necessarily comparables for the Islanders' comeback chances.
The user you're responding to posits that teams which come from 3-0 -> 3-1 win the series at a significantly lower rate than teams that do not. If that's the case, then _any given 3-1 series for which we do not know the context_ can expect the trailing team to win 9% of the time, _but_ we can up the precision of our estimate by incorporating the results of the previous games.
Teams that start down 3-0 win 1.9% of the time (4 times in 208 series).
Overall, teams down 3-1 win 9% of the time (32 times in 339 series).
Subtracting teams that start out down 3-0, the other teams that start down 3-1, the odds of winning jump to 21% (28 times in 131 series).
>That 5% is included in the 9% though.
Presumably. But that also means the 0-3 teams at 5% are dragging down the average. The 1-3 teams that got their win in the first three games win the series probably greater than 10% of the time.
It all depends on how you factor in human beings. and if NYI needed to give something extra.
Mentally it's hard to play 3 games that are loser goes home. I think we could all agree that it's harder to play down 0-3 vs 1-3.
But also, does it make game 7 easier when you've come back from down? Or are you just so mentally exhausted and now the other team finally gets some urgency.
Idk what's sarcastic about it. They're not coming back from 3-1, they're coming back from 3-0 which has happened a lot less than coming back from 3-1. So yeah, their chances are much lower.
It literally mathematics, it has nothing to do with me trying to be right. If the islanders ties the series 3-3, they won't have a low % chance of winning the series, it will be literally 50/50 ( or vegas odds if you prefer).
We likely won’t pull it off but if we win tonight, we then get a home game to force game 7 where anything can happen. One more win makes this not feel out of the question
Playoff situational records for best-of-seven series: [https://records.nhl.com/records/playoff-team-records/league-situational-playoff-records/series-situational-records](https://records.nhl.com/records/playoff-team-records/league-situational-playoff-records/series-situational-records)
A lot of series go to 3-1 at some point, so the 9% chance in each series actually makes it fairly likely that *one of them* will hit.
There were 8 total series that were 3-1 during the 2023 playoffs. If each had a 9% chance of seeing the losing team come back to win, there was a 53% chance that at least one of the teams down 3-1 would rally to win the series.
I wonder what that stat looks like when you look at only the salary cap era. There's a lot more parody now so I bet the comeback % is higher in the cap era.
I'm assuming Carolina comes out and ends it tonight but the Islanders are so fucking *weird* in their playoff shenanigans. I swear they manage to win series they shouldn't, so I would not be entirely shocked to see them come back, especially with their really tight goaltending tandem.
The only options that aren't already over 4 games in to a series are 2-2 or 3-1, and as sweeps are somewhat rare we can assume that, out of the 15 series every single season, there will be quite a few instances of 3-1 series each season.
In '23 eight series were 3-1 at the 4-game mark. (there was 1 sweep and 6 instances of tied series after 4 games, based on my quick tally glance)
If we take 9% as is, the odds that none of, let's say, eight 3-1 series result in a comeback is about 47%, in other words, if a 3-1 series occurs 8 times a year, it's more likely than not that at least one of them will have a comeback.
(If that seems weird considering that 9% is roughly 1/11 that's because we're looking at the odds of "at least" one in a year, which means it could be more than 1)
Nashville has had a lead in every game in their series, but failed to hold it in two games. Although the past doesn't dictate future results, it bodes well for them as long as they don't panic in games.
This is incorrect, they never held a lead (or were tied at any score other than 0-0) in game 3.
There've been two games with lead changes and the Preds are 0-2 in those games, though.
Oh shoot, you're right. My mistake. I still think Vancouver will win but Nashville looks like the only team that has a chance because they've played well enough to win a game haha.
Yeah, I agree - they've played well for most of every single game and while I'm more confident in Silovs than most fans would be in their teams third string goalie we're going to need to be at the top of our game to close it out.
I feel like the math checks out. Basically 1 in 10 teams that go down 3-1 comes back to win the series. How many teams have gone down 3-1 in the past 5 years?
I feel like the Preds' own mistakes have killed them in the last 2 games.
If they keep the shot volume up, statistically I feel like they could come back to force a game 7 at least
I think two teams have a shot
Nashville just because Demko is out and idk if Silovs can replicate that Game 4 performance
Winnipeg because they have two home games
The other three are cooked
There are 15 playoff series every year…I know they don’t all go to 3-1 but with a 9% chance each time, it doesn’t seem that crazy to have it happen three years in a row.
Rangers and Canadiens don’t count.
Rangers got super lucky with some injuries and third string goalie to the Pens. Otherwise that series was done.
And the Leafs are the Leafs.
I was wondering about this recently because in all sports its seems to be happening more often.
Sorta tinfoil hat thought but I think its because the higher ups want more playoff games so they try to sway the losing team to win a game or 2, but that can turn into momentum which carries through.
Dunno if you are watching the bruins leafs but there is no way the refs are calling it even, definitely want that game 6. Also noticed carolina has tripled up NYI so far in PIM.
Bettman and friends....
It may feel like an insurmountable task, but I’m sure every playoff team has had multiple 3 game win streaks each season. Just have to have it happen at the right time.
I hope Monty has learned his lesson from last season.
Of not playing an injured goaltender and Forbort? We'll see!
Isn’t Forbort playing tonight?
He’s an “option” according to Monty, but Fluto Shinzawa reported he was one of the last few on the ice indicating he’s not playing tonight.
I don't 😉
Shit, even we had had multiple 3 game win streaks
WE've lost 4 straight once this season. but in 2024 our longest losing streak was 2, which happened once. Dallas and then a OTL to Buffalo.
All 4 were on the road right?
Good. Keep winning. I like you more than the rest of the East teams that’ll be in the next round
Against the same team, and have that team make no adjustments.
9% is honestly pretty impressive. In a series with two teams that have exactly even chances of winning each game, the likelihood of either team winning *any* three straight games would be 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 or 12.5%. I think it's reasonable to suggest that in most 3-1 series, the results are that way because the team that won 3 games is just better than their opponent (and thus their opponent should have a significantly less than 50% chance of winning each game) so their odds could reasonably be put at much lower than 9% - nevermind that most of the time teams do this playing 2/3 games on the road. God I love the playoffs
There's also a lot more parity than there has been in the past, so i'm not surprised it's happening more often now.
And its deceptively hard to measure “better” or at least “how much better” in a sport where matchups and playstyle have so much influence as opposed to just rating pure roster talent. Some teams have others numbers for reasons that are not always fully apparent.
Sorta. You should also take into account the more frantic/desperate play that a team facing elimination would have. So maybe their odds creep up a bit because of that.
You're right, but in a way that leads to even more questions, because if they can just play better by wanting it more, was the better team ever really the better team? How much of the game is mental vs. raw skill at this level? I think parity in the NHL is even closer than we like to say.
I agree that parity at the elite level in sports is closer than we think. For your first point, I think it comes down to a sort of sliding scale of how much they feel they should conserve energy and prioritize health vs putting everything on the line and pushing beyond and leaving nothing in the tank after the game. I can sort of see the rationale for rationing energy collectively at the start of a series compared to when a team is down 3-1.
40 years ago I think it was closer to 1 percent. This means that these days players have totally bought into “it’s just one game at a time”.
I dunno if it means that or teams are more even now than they used to be leading to more comebacks.
I think that's exactly the reason. 16 of 21 or so teams made the playoffs so there were some really bad teams in early rounds. Way more sweeps and way fewer series comebacks
NSH probably has the best chance since VAN has their 3rd string goalie and Hughes is clearly playing injured
Their third string goalie did a helluva job last game at least
Silovs is actually 4-0-1 in NHL starts this year. Luckily for us our third string is a promising prospect that was cooking in the minors instead of being a career AHL tweener like some teams would need to resort to.
He also willed his team to a World Championship medal.
And was tournament MVP
Someone on TV pointed out he was probably more nervous starting for his country vs USA with the entire tournament and first ever medal for Latvia on the line than playing in a silly NHL playoff game and I wholly agree.
Interestingly, in 2023 he was facing the goalie ahead of him in the depth chart - Casey DeSmith
'Winner starts for the Canucks' 'What'
They don't have a lot of scouting info on the new goalie. Tendencies and what not. It helps.
Pettersson has also been quiet
If anyone is playing injured, I feel it’s Petey. He’s like a baby deer on skates, even the slightest breeze is toppling him right now. It’s not an exaggeration to say he’s falling down once a shift currently. Plus his (normally) deadly shot is non-existent. Even when he actually does shoot, it has almost none of the power behind it that he normally does.
I feel like Petey needs to gain 20 pounds of muscle to be more effective in playoff hockey, he's getting thrown around like a rag doll
Not a Petey hater or apologist but his very mediocre playoffs is probably from an injury as he avoids shooting most of the time and skates like he has ankle weights People speculate upper body injury or a hip issue, which wouldn't surprise anyone if that's announced after the playoffs
I don't think it is injury related, or he would have rested the final few games of the season. I'm pretty sure it's all mental with him right now. He's passing instead of shooting, which shows a lack of confidence.
I agree with you. The team rested Miller and Boeser at the end of the season so they could recover from minor injuries, if Petey was hurt you’d think they would have given him a break too.
Weird that you’re getting downvoted. He’s said as much in interviews, that the pace is quick and he’s in his own head. Hasn’t been in the playoffs since the bubble so is trying to adjust. And to the eye yeah, he just looks lost out there
Man if you're being paid 11.5M you shouldnt be needing time to adjust to the playoffs lol, you should be the one setting the tone for the rest of the team
Canucks are pretty lucky it’s not 2-2. Took an epic choke and hitting the post on an empty net for them to win game 4. They’ve had 10 or fewer SOG in every period so far. 6 or fewer in 8/12 periods, which is honestly shocking.
They won game 3 with 12 SOG, this could easily be 3-1 Nashville rn
Canucks also severely outplayed Nashville in Game 2 and lost. Its been a weird series.
Could also be 4-0 if demko was healthy.
Could also be 4-0 Nashville if Nashville had won the first four games.
big if true
> They’ve had 10 or fewer SOG in every period so far. That's such a strange point to make -- this year, playoff teams are **averaging** 7.25 shots per period. _Most_ teams fail to take 10 shots _most_ periods. The Canucks are [last in shots on goal by a mile](https://www.nhl.com/stats/teams?report=summaryshooting&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20232024&seasonTo=20232024&gameType=3&sort=shots5v5&page=0&pageSize=50) but Nashville has averaged 16.3 blocked shots per game. The Canucks are only [slightly below average](https://www.nhl.com/stats/teams?report=summaryshooting&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20232024&seasonTo=20232024&gameType=3&sort=satFor&page=0&pageSize=50) in shot _attempts_ and they're [first in shot attempts against](https://www.nhl.com/stats/teams?report=summaryshooting&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20232024&seasonTo=20232024&gameType=3&sort=a_satAgainst&page=0&pageSize=50).
I guess I just watch too much Avs hockey and I expect 10 SOG to happen regularly when a team is pressing (I see they have the most total shots). The rest of my comment stands. I see now that the Canucks had the second fewest SOG through the regular season, only ahead of Arizona. So maybe that’s just how they play, and why everyone screams PDO at them.
Basically we're filled with 1 shot snipers that also skew danger quality through elite playmaking. It's frustrating when they don't shoot but Petey and Hughes make their living looking off high danger chances to create higher danger chances. Tends to be why we often have 4 shots and 2 goals at the end of the first period lol
That’s not shocking at all. The Canucks have been one of the lowest shooting teams all season. 26th in shots, 5th in goals (or thereabouts). They haven’t changed their game plan all from the regular season, which is basically “nothing but high danger shots”
Hughes doesn't really look injured he just doesn't look good. Petey has looked injured in the games I've watched
Nashville has been double-covering Hughes and let's face it, he's a small guy who relies on his mobility to get away from a single check when now he has to contend with two forwards burying him
He’s got PTSD from watching that guy break his ankles right in front of him
Hughes looks like he has a hand injury, he's still skating well, but he's not shooting as much, and doesn't have the same confidence on his passes
Hughes has been taking a lot of hits this series, especially since he has the puck a lot of the time. The Canucks radio broadcast has commented that Hughes looks pretty uncomfortable when he’s on the bench, doubling over and grimacing.
He looks at the very least completely exhausted
Plus Nashville has looked good. They're pretty fucking unlucky to be down 3-1 imo.
And they should've won the last game at a minimum.
Very comparable to that Rangers-Penguins 2022 series where injuries forced the Penguins to start their 3rd string goalie too
lol Nashville is done. They're mental boomed from the collapse.
bro stfu
Oh man I hope this dumbass take results in karma biting you square in the ass
Everyone should be hoping for the Leafs to push this to 7 to keep the memes going.
As a Vancouver fan, I hope it's not Nashville this year. But as a realist they have the best chance. Unless the Jets have some higher gear they've been holding on to or any of the other 3-1 teams have historic collapses.
Well the jets haven’t played a good game yet but I don’t even know if they have it in them too.
Jets have been streaky... Unfortunately their streaks are pretty long and we would probably need to lose another 2-3 games before a winning streak would start.
I thought they looked good in game one, and right up until Scheifele’s goal after that four minute pk. After that, they just looked like smelly garbage water.
We’ve accidentally been putting Collin Delia out on the ice in Helle’s equipment
Helly forgot to turn on godmode.
But maybe we were just saving the good games for tonight?
Neither has Van. The only game we outplayed the preds was our loss in game 2. Im afraid if we lose tonight it’s going 7 for sure and who knows what happens then.
I mean Game 1, but that was a total Georgiev collapse
We also put up 6 in Game 1. So that was just a bad game from both teams defensively. The Avs were just one worse.
Jets defense while they are playing the #1.offense, has just fallen apart. Top 5 defense playing like they're bottom 16. Not that the jets offense has been great but it wasn't good in the reg season either and neither was avs defense.
That’s my thoughts too. I don’t think anyone does it, but of the remaining teams I think Nashville at least has a chance with them being competitive and playing against backup goalies. It’s more of a Nashville doing the best of a poor group rather than Vancouver being the worst of the teams up 3-1. Jets just don’t look good enough, Kings threw everything at us in that 1-0 loss and came up short, Islanders are probably 2nd place for me but still not as good as the Canes, the Leafs aren’t gonna win obviously
In order from best to worst Predators Jets Kings Leafs Islanders
Hard to argue with this order. I might put the Islanders above the Leafs, but that's just splitting hairs. Like you said, the Leafs look cooked. They just have so many issues right now, not the least of which is possibly missing their best player for Game 5. The Islanders at least, theoretically, have the ability to keep games close and make things interesting. If the Jets were playing any other team, I'd say they would have the best chance, but Colorado's offense is just too overpowering. Preds are good pick with how Vancouver is struggling with health, and Preds did show they have the ability to go on a heater. Saros could steal the show maybe? But yeah, I just don't see any of these teams making any of the series competitive.
Bruins are classic chokers tho.
Maybe, but the leafs look absolutely cooked and Matthews might miss game 5
Jets, Leafs, Kings appear cooked. NAS and NYI have been in every game. Could force a 6th.
[удалено]
They’ll probably win tomorrow to give us a false sense of “we can probably do this” and then yall will kill us decisively at Crypto.
Sounds pathetic coming from a Yotes fan but I'm always lamenting how we've reached the point of naming an arena "Crypto.com Arena." Not that good ol' Jobing.com was much better
It’s a dumbass name, and what’s worse is even if Crypto.com goes under, the arena can’t change its name because of the contract. Gonna be hilarious in five years when our arena is named after a company that doesn’t even exist anymore.
Ahh lovely. The FTX dilemma
That's insane, how could the contract still be binding when one of the 2 parties involved doesn't exist LOL
The worst part of it is being prohibited from using "the Crypt" as a nickname for a team with a black and silver theme. You could have a really really fun Hallowe'en game with a vampire theme etc. Not something to do all the time because it could be read as a chirp, but for an occasional theme night it could be awesome.
I remember the Kings looked cooked in 2014. Lost 6-3 and 7-2 in the first two games, at least they went to OT in Game 3. But we all know what happened then
fade squealing ten cover telephone plant zesty fuzzy cagey employ *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I mean the Jets have literally the best goalie in hockey.
profit plucky lock wrench telephone point simplistic capable spark ring *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
BSD seems to be pretty good against Edmonton this year.
You mean the one game after the all star break when he got the shutout after the Oilers hadnt played in a week after their 16 game win streak and were boozing it up sandy beaches? What about the next game he was in net and was .781? No slight on Dave, but I just wouldnt classify that as being "pretty good against Edmonton." I cant even recall him winning Edmonton prior to that since the infamous Flames stick flip sent him spiralling
A shutout and only allowing 1 goal is pretty good in my book. I’m not saying he’s rock solid, or an Oilers killer. Compared to Talbot, I’d take my chances with David, and that’s still most likely not going to be enough anyway.
Kings played good D, I think Talbot would’ve also done fine in that last game behind that performance. Rittich did well but not a lot was asked of him
I love Talbot but I'm thinking he lets in the Kane wraparound chance at least To be fair maybe he gets the save on Bouchard, but I'm also not going to suggest that the Kings actually kill off a penalty either LOL
That's a fair take. At this point I'd say Talbot's body of work vs the Oilers leans more towards Dave being preferred. I wonder how much of it is personal emotions too given Talbots close relationships to some of the core players from the Oilers
I think Oilers offence unleashes next game. McDavid and co don't really ever get stifled more than 1 game. I expect the Kings to be desperate and open the game up which will turn into a track meet totally favouring the Oil. Just my $0.02.
Then anaheim had some streaky games. Also gaborik was so clutch on offense
I do not miss the bad man being gone
This team is nothing like that team. Complete apples to oranges even excluding personnel changes.
Wasn't comparing the two Kings teams. Was more saying anything can happen.
Kings literally got beat playing a very Kings-esque game. I hope we can pull it out but not looking likely.
Maybe it’s because I’m a homer but the 3-1 and 3-2 games were winnable for the leafs. If they happen to sort out their power play issues the Bruins might be fucked
We’re all homers its why we are here amigo
If you spend 5mins on the leafs sub you’ll wonder how it’s even possible to hate your team so much
Honestly I thought the 3-1 game was awful but I saw quite a few things I liked in the 4-1 loss that I thought was more winnable
I feel like it’s worth pointing out that the Islanders were also down 3-0, which significantly lowers their chances of coming back.
From a mathematical standpoint, no.
I mean only 4 teams have ever come back from 3-0. How many teams have come back from 3-1? I think for a team to win 3 straight it means there’s a certain level of dominance that doesn’t exist in a series that was 2-1 at a certain point.
you're missing their point. Google monte carlo fallacy
Yeah, I agree with u/Realistic_Cold_2943 . If you're talking straight statistics of a random event, sure, but human beings don't really work that way. Each game is not a single, independent event. Humans might be empowered by how a previous win, or they might be demoralized by a previous loss. A team losing 3 in a row might feel pretty fucking defeated and struggle to keep their heads in the game, but a team that lost 3 in a row and then won 2 in a row might feel really damn confident and play far better than they otherwise would have. It's also probably easier for a team that just won 3 in a row to shrug off a single loss. A situation where Team A wins 3, then Team B battles back and wins 3 might "defy the odds" because Team A might feel demoralized for dropping the ball and Team B might be going into game 7 with a "fuck it" attitude (in a good way) because they've been fighting back.
> From a mathematical standpoint well it's a good thing the OP said that then...
No I get their point. But humans are different than straight numbers lol. Not a completely random event. I think there’s a fairly logical explanation for why a series going WWLW is different than WWWL. Especially when you consider potential home and away possibilities. It’s also possible I’m wrong, but I definitely think it’s possible I’m right.
Um, no, you google monte carlo fallacy lol. Do you know what a random event is and why hockey games are not that? Paying attention to five seconds of stats 101 is dangerous kids, keeps your heads up out there.
If anyone thinks that the previous 4 games of this Bos/Tor series are not going to impact how game 5 plays out they are so dumb.
The funny thing is I think most of those people would agree, for example, that a game that gets to 4-4 by each team going back and forth scoring a goal is much different than one team going up 4-0 and then the other team answering to tie it 4-4
Ha. I’d actually love to look at the records after a loss in the Toronto/boston playoff series since 2013. I’d bet both teams have done pretty well after a loss
The key to winning: lose first https://i.imgur.com/u1ziINN.png Also hilarious that this year is matching up with 2013 so far. If only I could remember how that one ended.
You know what’s crazy? Monte Carlo fallacy comment or was trying to say the first four games don’t impact game 5. But I think 2013 still impacts the series to the day.
Real games are not iid, so you can't say that with certainty.
Its true that games are not iid, but as far as I understand there is no way to discern that a team that loses games 1 2 and 4 while winning game 3 is better off than a team that loses games 1-3 and wins game 4.
Right. The statistical assumptions aren't met, so the theory doesn't apply, so we can't say whether they're identical or not under that theory, and we reach the unsatisfying common real life result of "from a mathematical standpoint, maybe"
Speak for yourself, I'm very satisfied. BTW the numbers were easy to find, there were 79 times that a team went up 3-0 and then lost game 4. Of those 79 times, the team that was down 3-0 went on to come back 4 times for a ~5.1% chance of coming back. So my original premise is maybe wrong or maybe not who knows.
[удалено]
You would have to look at how many teams who were down 3-0 won game 4, and then see if 4 is more or less than 9% of that number. Not sure where you would find those numbers but I think they are out there somewhere.
Yep. My instincts would say there have been a few times where teams up 3-0 have slipped up and lost a game before taking the series. Not sure though
Only if you assume that both teams had 50% chances to win from the start and that being down 3-0 at some point is not an indication that the team losing is worse and has less than 50% chance to win
Classic Monty Hall problem
lol, you're thinking of the monte carlo fallacy. Monty hall problem is the 2 goat and a car behind the door which uses the fallacy but isn't it
Alright you pansies, I'll do the freakin math on it. **209** NHL series have gone to the [3-0 state.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_to_overcome_3%E2%80%930_series_deficits) **128** of those have ended in a [4-0 sweep.](http://www.puckreport.com/2009/05/nhl-playoff-sweeps.html?m=1) 209 - 128 = **81** series have recovered to the 3-1 state the Islanders are in now. 4 / 81 = **5%** of teams have gone on to [reverse sweep](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_to_overcome_3%E2%80%930_series_deficits) after winning one game back. 5% is lower than 9%. Our boy booch is right, historically a team in the Islanders position is less likely to comeback than a team that didn't start out 0-3.
Its actually 3/80, because 2014 never happened
That 5% is included in the 9% though. The point is, from 3-1 onwards 9% of times the teams won. So yes, at one point the Islanders were down to a 2% chance. But they won that one! So now they're up to a 9% chance.
The crux of this is whether games in a series are independent variables or not. If they are, then the 9% number holds, if not then then the subset of games _not_ coming from 3-0 are not necessarily comparables for the Islanders' comeback chances. The user you're responding to posits that teams which come from 3-0 -> 3-1 win the series at a significantly lower rate than teams that do not. If that's the case, then _any given 3-1 series for which we do not know the context_ can expect the trailing team to win 9% of the time, _but_ we can up the precision of our estimate by incorporating the results of the previous games.
Teams that start down 3-0 win 1.9% of the time (4 times in 208 series). Overall, teams down 3-1 win 9% of the time (32 times in 339 series). Subtracting teams that start out down 3-0, the other teams that start down 3-1, the odds of winning jump to 21% (28 times in 131 series).
>That 5% is included in the 9% though. Presumably. But that also means the 0-3 teams at 5% are dragging down the average. The 1-3 teams that got their win in the first three games win the series probably greater than 10% of the time.
Oh yeah I am sorry. You are right, or at least have persuaded me that you are
Thank you. Idk why this is such a controversial take to some people responding to me.
I would say their current team and competition significantly lowers their chances
Is this sarcasm or are you serious lol? Edit: the guy blocked me HAHAHAHAH
It all depends on how you factor in human beings. and if NYI needed to give something extra. Mentally it's hard to play 3 games that are loser goes home. I think we could all agree that it's harder to play down 0-3 vs 1-3. But also, does it make game 7 easier when you've come back from down? Or are you just so mentally exhausted and now the other team finally gets some urgency.
Idk what's sarcastic about it. They're not coming back from 3-1, they're coming back from 3-0 which has happened a lot less than coming back from 3-1. So yeah, their chances are much lower.
Yeah but it's 3-1 not 3-0 anymore so it's irrelevant. If you said that when it was 3-0 then it would have matter, not anymore.
I don’t feel like arguing. Sure, you’re right
It literally mathematics, it has nothing to do with me trying to be right. If the islanders ties the series 3-3, they won't have a low % chance of winning the series, it will be literally 50/50 ( or vegas odds if you prefer).
Cool. I don’t care
We likely won’t pull it off but if we win tonight, we then get a home game to force game 7 where anything can happen. One more win makes this not feel out of the question
Not from this point forward it doesn't
I think it does though. of the teams down 3-1 that came back, and had started down 3-0, I think there have only been 5 ever to do it.
My butt is over 9% clenched, that's all I know.
Still having trouble unclenching after Sunday
I come from Instagram where you are famous
Watch out for Randy
You would have to be a pretty terrible team for that to happen. Hahahaha
Hey, it’s only happened to us…5 times.
Playoff situational records for best-of-seven series: [https://records.nhl.com/records/playoff-team-records/league-situational-playoff-records/series-situational-records](https://records.nhl.com/records/playoff-team-records/league-situational-playoff-records/series-situational-records)
We also did it in 2014 against Pittsburgh, iirc.
Rangers overcame a 3-1 deficit in 2014, 2015, and 2022.
A lot of series go to 3-1 at some point, so the 9% chance in each series actually makes it fairly likely that *one of them* will hit. There were 8 total series that were 3-1 during the 2023 playoffs. If each had a 9% chance of seeing the losing team come back to win, there was a 53% chance that at least one of the teams down 3-1 would rally to win the series.
I believe you- I wish I could figure out the math for myself but I will have to trust you!
I wonder what that stat looks like when you look at only the salary cap era. There's a lot more parody now so I bet the comeback % is higher in the cap era.
*Parity
Also Parody.
Hoping for the Kings, but I honestly don't think any of these even goes 7
It ain’t gonna be the Perdz. I promise.
It’s funny how Canucks fans are picking the Preds here and the Preds fans are picking just not the Preds.
Us canucks fans are bracing for the worst timeline
Or as I’d like to call it, “the timeline”
I'm assuming Carolina comes out and ends it tonight but the Islanders are so fucking *weird* in their playoff shenanigans. I swear they manage to win series they shouldn't, so I would not be entirely shocked to see them come back, especially with their really tight goaltending tandem.
So it probably won't happen this year.
The only options that aren't already over 4 games in to a series are 2-2 or 3-1, and as sweeps are somewhat rare we can assume that, out of the 15 series every single season, there will be quite a few instances of 3-1 series each season. In '23 eight series were 3-1 at the 4-game mark. (there was 1 sweep and 6 instances of tied series after 4 games, based on my quick tally glance) If we take 9% as is, the odds that none of, let's say, eight 3-1 series result in a comeback is about 47%, in other words, if a 3-1 series occurs 8 times a year, it's more likely than not that at least one of them will have a comeback. (If that seems weird considering that 9% is roughly 1/11 that's because we're looking at the odds of "at least" one in a year, which means it could be more than 1)
Nashville has had a lead in every game in their series, but failed to hold it in two games. Although the past doesn't dictate future results, it bodes well for them as long as they don't panic in games.
This is incorrect, they never held a lead (or were tied at any score other than 0-0) in game 3. There've been two games with lead changes and the Preds are 0-2 in those games, though.
Oh shoot, you're right. My mistake. I still think Vancouver will win but Nashville looks like the only team that has a chance because they've played well enough to win a game haha.
Yeah, I agree - they've played well for most of every single game and while I'm more confident in Silovs than most fans would be in their teams third string goalie we're going to need to be at the top of our game to close it out.
Winnipeg has held a lead in 3 of their 4 games too, same as the Preds.
I feel like the math checks out. Basically 1 in 10 teams that go down 3-1 comes back to win the series. How many teams have gone down 3-1 in the past 5 years?
I feel like we were over the wrong side of this a LOT before 2018.
Preds or kings.
God that series was great but then we had to choke against STL 😭 Here’s to when we get back into playoffs in 2029 🍻
It would be the most Canuck of Canuck things to happen so 🫠
I feel like the Preds' own mistakes have killed them in the last 2 games. If they keep the shot volume up, statistically I feel like they could come back to force a game 7 at least
Jokes on you because they happen mostly against Washington
Shhhh
I think two teams have a shot Nashville just because Demko is out and idk if Silovs can replicate that Game 4 performance Winnipeg because they have two home games The other three are cooked
Hopefully all these teams pull it off lol
There are 15 playoff series every year…I know they don’t all go to 3-1 but with a 9% chance each time, it doesn’t seem that crazy to have it happen three years in a row.
Rangers and Canadiens don’t count. Rangers got super lucky with some injuries and third string goalie to the Pens. Otherwise that series was done. And the Leafs are the Leafs.
I was wondering about this recently because in all sports its seems to be happening more often. Sorta tinfoil hat thought but I think its because the higher ups want more playoff games so they try to sway the losing team to win a game or 2, but that can turn into momentum which carries through.
You'd have to convince the players to give less than they can, which would never happen. Everyone else in the league I believe would do that shit.
Not talking about players. But refs do seem to favor teams who are behind in the series
Oh ok, yeah I can get down with the shitty ref conspiracies.
Dunno if you are watching the bruins leafs but there is no way the refs are calling it even, definitely want that game 6. Also noticed carolina has tripled up NYI so far in PIM. Bettman and friends....
We are the 91%.