Does long lay off give the teams playing first series an edge?

[flyercanuck]

Hey Rick - have they tried to stop this coronavirus thing with Ryan Miller yet? Hey? Huh? 

[WordsOfWisdom]

15 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

The world is a very different place than it was even 5 months ago.

 

I guess for some people it is. I continue to push ahead with mostly the same routine as before. Surprisingly little has changed for me actually lol.   

 

15 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

I hope that this Corona fades away.

 

I think it's a new virus designed to knock down the human population. Sort of a "warning shot fired across the bow" that if countries around the world aren't going to do anything to reign in their nation's population and curb their consumption of natural resources, that the planet is going to reign us in -- personally. 

 

15 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Some look at it and have called it a punishment from God.  Who knows?

 

It's evolution, natural selection, etc. It's the planet's way of defending itself against a species (us) with over 7 billion invasive members that are wrecking everything else on the planet. It's like Mother Nature is saying: "I liked you humans better when there were only 3 billion of you around."

 

15 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Who ever dreamed they would see the day that sports were stopped in their tracks?  Restaurants closed world wide.   All phases of life affected.

 

Well, we've seen strikes and lockouts before in sports. Restaurants have become drive-through affairs now. Work-from-home is now actually a thing rather than the empty promise that every employer makes during the interview process to try and woo candidates.

 

15 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

I still think the Blues are the best team and partly due to their goalie. And the layoff may have actually helped them.  The East is wide open.  Tampa and Boston would have been solid favs but maybe the layoff can help your Leafs?

 

The way things were going, the Leafs were slowly getting back to 100% health and poised to face a Tampa team with an injured Stamkos. The first round would have been shaping up nicely for the Leafs (if you believe the team's somewhat unimpressive record is an indication of the injuries and not the skill level).   

 

As it stands now, it would be a coin toss against Columbus. There's no history between these teams. Neither team has an advantage.

 

 

[Icechipper]

Would-of, could-of......should have...

Edited June 7, 2020 by Icechipper

[Buffalo Rick]

On 6/5/2020 at 9:09 PM, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

I guess for some people it is. I continue to push ahead with mostly the same routine as before. Surprisingly little has changed for me actually lol.   

 

 

I think it's a new virus designed to knock down the human population. Sort of a "warning shot fired across the bow" that if countries around the world aren't going to do anything to reign in their nation's population and curb their consumption of natural resources, that the planet is going to reign us in -- personally. 

 

 

It's evolution, natural selection, etc. It's the planet's way of defending itself against a species (us) with over 7 billion invasive members that are wrecking everything else on the planet. It's like Mother Nature is saying: "I liked you humans better when there were only 3 billion of you around."

 

 

Well, we've seen strikes and lockouts before in sports. Restaurants have become drive-through affairs now. Work-from-home is now actually a thing rather than the empty promise that every employer makes during the interview process to try and woo candidates.

 

 

The way things were going, the Leafs were slowly getting back to 100% health and poised to face a Tampa team with an injured Stamkos. The first round would have been shaping up nicely for the Leafs (if you believe the team's somewhat unimpressive record is an indication of the injuries and not the skill level).   

 

As it stands now, it would be a coin toss against Columbus. There's no history between these teams. Neither team has an advantage.

 

 

I think Leafs will beat them

[Alexandron]

On 6/4/2020 at 6:54 PM, Hockey Junkie said:

Nothing like this has ever happened and hopefully will never happen again.  

I also believe it will never happen again. Hope, with that unique, not common in NHL chance to see the Wild vs Flyers in final.

[Buffalo Rick]

On 6/10/2020 at 10:55 PM, Alexandron said:

I also believe it will never happen again. Hope, with that unique, not common in NHL chance to see the Wild vs Flyers in final.

Ill pretend for a minute my Sabres were in the mix.  This is the one year I would NOT WANT my team to win the Stanley Cup.  Because its going to be "tainted".  There will be an asterik.  And I do not think the winner will be respected unless its the Blues only because they would have overcome all and repeated.  Its not doubted their talent and ability.  All of the other teams, not the case.  

[Math]

1 hour ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Ill pretend for a minute my Sabres were in the mix.  This is the one year I would NOT WANT my team to win the Stanley Cup.  Because its going to be "tainted".  There will be an asterik.  And I do not think the winner will be respected unless its the Blues only because they would have overcome all and repeated.  Its not doubted their talent and ability.  All of the other teams, not the case.  

 

Well it depends... I heard some broadcasts that had this debate about "will the winner be legitimate towards other SC winners and the public opinion", most of panelists tend to "no asterisk".

 

I'd say the same because all teams are facing the same extraordinary conditions, everybody in the same boat. You have to get back to training camps, and then to playoffs hockey mode right after that in empty arenas will all the harsh logistics involved. The challenges and adversity might be even bigger than in a normal situation.

 

However, I'll put a big bold red asterisk on a team like Montréal or Chicago if they win because they had almost no chance to make the playoffs. Taking teams ranked 17-24 is a master of unfairness and pure BS.

[radoran]

3 hours ago, Villette/Lavaux said:

I heard some broadcasts that had this debate about "will the winner be legitimate towards other SC winners and the public opinion", most of panelists tend to "no asterisk".

 

Given that the entire exercise is being carried out to appease the broadcast networks, this doesn't surprise me.

 

But your

3 hours ago, Villette/Lavaux said:

However,

 

is exactly why there will be an asterisk.

 

Maybe not in the "official" record - the NHL doesn't have one on 2013, for example.

 

But it will always be there in the back of everyone's mind.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

I don't care what anyone in the media or who works for teams or the NHL itself says....there SHOULD be an asterisk (and there WILL be in the minds of many hockey fans), regardless of who wins this...."tournament".

Seems its a hastily slapped together thing that is extremely short sighted and they are doing it just to be able to say "we crowned a champion in 2020"......for all the asterisks that is worth.

So any team from the "no business being there Wild" to the "might have won again Blues", any one of them, simply cannot be viewed in the same light as past SC champions who actually went through a straight 82-game season and a proper meat grinder 4-rounds of playoffs to get the ultimate prize.

My biggest concern in all this is the status of the proper 2020-21 season.
How will that be affected?
Will there be more significant injuries due to this forced 24-team playoffs followed by a short turnaround for the start of the next season?
Or will we see lackluster play at the END of next season (in time for those playoffs), due to players simply being worn down more than usual?

I guess we will see.
And Covid 19 may not even be done wreaking havoc in the sports world either.

But for this upcoming playoffs, I find it very hard to get excited about it.
Feels like one giant exhibition season before the real season starts in October again.

[SCFlyguy]

On 6/12/2020 at 7:02 PM, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

My biggest concern in all this is the status of the proper 2020-21 season.
How will that be affected?

 

What 2020-2021 season?  When the virus comes back bigger in the fall, I don't see there being a 2020-2021 season.  Perhaps at all.

[SCFlyguy]

Again, people wanting the NHL to shut down this season to "save" the 2020-2021 season are making a huge (and from health experts, an unsupportable) assumption.

 

I could at least understand the argument that the NHL should shut down permanently until a highly effect vaccine is found even if that means sacrificing multiple seasons.

Edited June 14, 2020 by SCFlyguy

[Math]

On 6/12/2020 at 7:02 PM, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

My biggest concern in all this is the status of the proper 2020-21 season.
How will that be affected?

 

Apparently not before Jan. 2021 for a starting point with a Winter Classic being the first game of the season, because there will be training camps again and the need to have a break in between. At that point, either it will be a shortened regular season, or they will go to a full season but with playoffs and SC final later on again. I've heard some people working in sports entertainment businesses, they think that "normality" would occur in two to three years from now, not before.

 

 

22 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

What 2020-2021 season?  When the virus comes back bigger in the fall, I don't see there being a 2020-2021 season.  Perhaps at all.

 

We don't know, I think we have to remain rational and pragmatic to this. For now, there's no evidence so far for the media's favorite "second wave" that would wipe everything out. There's measures and protocols in place that will remain in place, the situation is very different compared to March where the crisis was widely underestimated. The League and the economy in general cannot afford further cancellations and shut-downs.

 

22 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

I could at least understand the argument that the NHL should shut down permanently until a highly effect vaccine is found even if that means sacrificing multiple seasons.

 

We still can't count on a possible vaccine. Maybe an efficient vaccine will be found this fall or a bit later, maybe not. The plan is to blend the current SRAS-Cov-2 virus with the 2003 SRAS to broader the spectrum of actions. One thing is sure: the League will never cancel multiple seasons. That would mean the death of the NHL.

[SCFlyguy]

2 minutes ago, Villette/Lavaux said:

The League and the economy in general cannot afford further cancellations and shut-downs.

Be sure to let COVID-19 know.

[Podein25]

13 hours ago, Villette/Lavaux said:

there's no evidence so far for the media's favorite "second wave"

 

Did not age well so far. Likely won't age well on the go forward.

[WordsOfWisdom]

On 6/12/2020 at 7:02 PM, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

So any team from the "no business being there Wild" to the "might have won again Blues", any one of them, simply cannot be viewed in the same light as past SC champions who actually went through a straight 82-game season and a proper meat grinder 4-rounds of playoffs to get the ultimate prize.

 

Given that the NHL season used to be a lot less than 82 games, I would have been happy if they just started the regular 16-team playoffs using points percentage as the final standings. We had a big enough sample size to know who was going to make the playoffs and who wasn't. 

 

If they had just done that, they would have likely escaped without an asterisk. By allowing teams like Montreal or the New York Rangers in, they're opening themselves up to disaster because it's quite possible that Montreal could win the whole thing after such a long layoff and they shouldn't be here. They didn't earn a spot. If that happens, it proves the NHL regular season and the entire seeding structure is meaningless. 

 

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

14 hours ago, Villette/Lavaux said:

For now, there's no evidence so far for the media's favorite "second wave" that would wipe everything out.

 

I'm no doctor/expert.... but from what I see, I think the virus is going to "run its course" through the entire world population and kill off whoever it's going to kill. In other words, the only "vaccine" for this thing is going to be herd immunity: the hope that people can only catch this virus once before building an immunity to it -- an immunity that is hopefully passed onto their children. The COVID-19 survivors will be able to carry on with their lives as normal and see the virus die out.

 

[radoran]

8 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

I'm no doctor/expert...

 

Truer words never spoken

 

8 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

the hope that people can only catch this virus once before building an immunity to it

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/sailors-sidelined-uss-theodore-roosevelt-get-virus-second-time-n1208076

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2020/06/how-sweden-s-herd-immunity-strategy-has-backfired

[SCFlyguy]

Put aside the fact that we don't even know if herd immunity is possible, herd immunity will likely take even longer than a vaccine and would take the death of millions to get it.  Per the The Mayo Clinic:

 

Quote

"Even if infection with the COVID-19 virus creates long-lasting immunity, a large number of people would have to become infected to reach the herd immunity threshold. Experts estimate that in the U.S., 70% of the population — more than 200 million people — would have to recover from COVID-19 to halt the epidemic."

 

For instance, Sweden, which took a much more lax approach to the virus in an effort to foster herd immunity, has a long way to go:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/21/health/sweden-herd-immunity-coronavirus-intl/index.html

 

 

Quote

 

Sweden has revealed that despite adopting more relaxed measures to control coronavirus, only 7.3% of people in Stockholm had developed the antibodies needed to fight the disease by late April.

The figure, which Sweden's Public Health Authority confirmed to CNN, is roughly similar to other countries that have data and well below the 70-90% needed to create "herd immunity" in a population.

 

 

The US would be looking at well over a million deaths at that point.

Edited June 16, 2020 by SCFlyguy

[Buffalo Rick]

On 6/12/2020 at 10:36 AM, Villette/Lavaux said:

 

Well it depends... I heard some broadcasts that had this debate about "will the winner be legitimate towards other SC winners and the public opinion", most of panelists tend to "no asterisk".

 

I'd say the same because all teams are facing the same extraordinary conditions, everybody in the same boat. You have to get back to training camps, and then to playoffs hockey mode right after that in empty arenas will all the harsh logistics involved. The challenges and adversity might be even bigger than in a normal situation.

 

However, I'll put a big bold red asterisk on a team like Montréal or Chicago if they win because they had almost no chance to make the playoffs. Taking teams ranked 17-24 is a master of unfairness and pure BS.

You must have seen that guy that said he would take Chicago at long odds.  I do not see it.  But shortened seasons might even give my once mighty Orioles a chance.  Now if they win the World Series, if there is one, do you think they would be respected?  No way.  Not that it is going to happen even with their proposed 50 game schedule  But it does give teams that are dogs a bigger shot in a sport like Baseball for sure.  I hope they can pull this off but it looks shaky.

[Podein25]

10 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

an immunity that is hopefully passed onto their children.

 

I have to assume you mean by this that parents will get their kids vaccinated once their is a vaccine.

 

 

10 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

the virus die out.

 

Most viruses don't die out. They mutate, usually toward a less deadly strain. There will be a vaccine, likely within the year. The issue will be how effective it is at a virus that has mutated by the time the vaccine is ready.

 

 

10 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

from what I see,

 

Where do you get your news? Honest question. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 16, 2020 by Podein25

[Math]

42 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

I have to assume you mean by this that parents will get their kids vaccinated once their is a vaccine.

 

It depends if they manage to find a vaccine that is also able to cause autism.

 

43 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

Most viruses don't die out. They mutate, usually toward a less deadly strain. There will be a vaccine, likely within the year. The issue will be how effective it is at a virus that has mutated by the time the vaccine is ready.

 

Exactly what I heard from epidemoilogists.

 

10 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

I'm no doctor/expert.... but from what I see, I think the virus is going to "run its course" through the entire world population and kill off whoever it's going to kill. In other words, the only "vaccine" for this thing is going to be herd immunity: the hope that people can only catch this virus once before building an immunity to it -- an immunity that is hopefully passed onto their children. The COVID-19 survivors will be able to carry on with their lives as normal and see the virus die out.

 

 

You're right, and that was the purpose of the curve flattening: to slow down the virus not to have everybody sick at the same time and not overflowing the health system. Not to stop it.

 

That being said, there's a need to be cautious about numbers cited here and there, they depend on hundreds of factors, they are not always counted in the same way, it depends of the number of tests performed, etc. etc.

 

Living in QC, Canada's province most affected by the virus and for now, there's not a statistically significant increase in the number of deaths of adult people compared to last year at the same period and the same observations have been made in other European countries. Here, almost 95% of cases are within living facilities and about 80% of the deaths are 60+ year old people that already had other major health issues. We have the impression that the virus grasps everybody and kills regardless of the age and condition but it's these outlying casualties (healthy young persons dead of Covid) that are highlighted everywhere in the media. You can say and twist everything out of numbers if not treated and interpreted as they should be.

 

I usually have opinions on that subject that are quite unpopular, but I'm trying as much as possible to coldly stick to the facts and the numbers while obtaining reliable information through professionals and not through Facebook, Twitter and other information sources whose goal is to create a psychotic and irrational environment. I still believe Sweden took the right decision (for them), and we will see by the end of next year at the soonest if they were right, they decided to go that way because they were able to do so (Sweden has by far one of the best health care system in the world and its population is well educated)

 

Nothing is certain and built out of concrete, but there's one thing that every health professional across multiple countries know and came to the same conclusion so far: children under 12 are not virus transmitters, and they are not affected by it. If they catch Covid, it's asymptomatic for a huge majority, otherwise it's like a cold. I'm curious to know why, but there's a wide and large consensus about it.

 

Now I'm ready for the napalm shower ! 

[WordsOfWisdom]

2 hours ago, radoran said:

Truer words never spoken

 

 

2 hours ago, radoran said:

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/sailors-sidelined-uss-theodore-roosevelt-get-virus-second-time-n1208076

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2020/06/how-sweden-s-herd-immunity-strategy-has-backfired

 

Well so much for that strategy.....  

[WordsOfWisdom]

1 hour ago, Podein25 said:

I have to assume you mean by this that parents will get their kids vaccinated once their is a vaccine.

 

I thought it was also possible to pass an immunity/tolerance to it through to your children genetically as part of evolution?  

 

(Again, no doctor/expert...)  

 

Otherwise wouldn't you have an ever-increasing list of viruses that have occurred since the beginning of mankind? If we have to create a vaccine for each one of them, doesn't that mean we need to maintain a collection of vaccines that approaches infinity as time moves on?

 

1 hour ago, Podein25 said:

Most viruses don't die out. They mutate, usually toward a less deadly strain. There will be a vaccine, likely within the year. The issue will be how effective it is at a virus that has mutated by the time the vaccine is ready.

 

Seems like some viruses mutate and others don't. A vaccine can grant full immunity to chicken pox but no immunity to influenza for example. (Me getting the flu shot doesn't prevent me from getting the flu.) Will be interesting to see what the case is with COVID-19. 

 

1 hour ago, Podein25 said:

Where do you get your news? Honest question. 

 

I haven't been watching much news lately honestly. The COVID-19 news has become repetitive and boring (and there's nothing anyone can do about it other than what we've been doing) and the other lead story as of late has a clear premise/agenda behind it that I don't agree with. In my opinion, the media wants to create fear, anger, and division among the general public and they're doing more harm than good with their recent reporting.

 

I've spoken with neighbours who have done the same thing: flipped off the news, changed the channel, etc.

 

I find that it's actually toxic for my health and well-being to watch the stuff being reported on the news today. It just brings my mood down.   My two cents.  

[SCFlyguy]

56 minutes ago, Villette/Lavaux said:

Living in QC, Canada's province most affected by the virus and for now, there's not a statistically significant increase in the number of deaths of adult people compared to last year at the same period and the same observations have been made in other European countries. Here, almost 95% of cases are within living facilities and about 80% of the deaths are 60+ year old people that already had other major health issues. We have the impression that the virus grasps everybody and kills regardless of the age and condition but it's these outlying casualties (healthy young persons dead of Covid) that are highlighted everywhere in the media. You can say and twist everything out of numbers if not treated and interpreted as they should be.

 

I usually have opinions on that subject that are quite unpopular, but I'm trying as much as possible to coldly stick to the facts and the numbers while obtaining reliable information through professionals and not through Facebook, Twitter and other information sources whose goal is to create a psychotic and irrational environment. I still believe Sweden took the right decision (for them), and we will see by the end of next year at the soonest if they were right, they decided to go that way because they were able to do so (Sweden has by far one of the best health care system in the world and its population is well educated)

 

Nothing is certain and built out of concrete, but there's one thing that every health professional across multiple countries know and came to the same conclusion so far: children under 12 are not virus transmitters, and they are not affected by it. If they catch Covid, it's asymptomatic for a huge majority, otherwise it's like a cold. I'm curious to know why, but there's a wide and large consensus about it.

Citation(s) needed.

 

I personally know two people affected: 

• 50 year old, no prior conditions, dead.
• 24 year old got so oxygen deprived so suddenly he ended up in a coma and has been in rehab for 2 months trying to regain the use of his right side.

So GTFOH with your bull$hit.

[Podein25]

49 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

Me getting the flu shot doesn't prevent me from getting the flu

 

I think I know what you are trying to say here, but you are wrong: vaccines prevent people from getting sick, prevent people from dying, etc