Table formatting sucks! :)
I noticed today that lots of people like to point at the first 48 games from last season as indicators of how this shortened season might go. But what about the last 48 games? Aren't those more current and thus potentially more indicative of the future?
Obviously there's lots of caveats, but still -- I ran the numbers anyways. Here's how the standings would look, only using the last 48 regular season games for each team from last season.
| Seed | Team | GP..... | W - L - O........ | Pts...... | GF...... | GA...... | GD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | VANCOUVER | 48 | 30 - 11 - 7 | 67 | 128 | 111 | +17 |
| 2 | ST LOUIS | 48 | 29 - 12 - 7 | 65 | 119 | 85 | +34 |
| 3 | LOS ANGELES | 48 | 24 - 13 - 11 | 59 | 116 | 89 | +27 |
| 4 | NASHVILLE | 48 | 30 - 14 - 4 | 64 | 141 | 113 | +28 |
| 5 | DETROIT | 48 | 27 - 16 - 5 | 59 | 129 | 122 | +7 |
| 6 | PHOENIX | 48 | 24 - 14 - 10 | 58 | 122 | 107 | +15 |
| 7 | ANAHEIM | 48 | 25 - 17 - 6 | 56 | 122 | 115 | +7 |
| 8 | COLORADO | 48 | 25 - 18 - 5 | 55 | 114 | 116 | -2 |
| 9 | CHICAGO | 48 | 24 - 17 - 7 | 55 | 132 | 133 | -1 |
| 10 | CALGARY | 48 | 22 - 14 - 11 | 55 | 115 | 124 | -9 |
| 11 | SAN JOSE | 48 | 24 - 18 - 6 | 54 | 124 | 123 | +1 |
| 12 | DALLAS | 48 | 21 - 22 - 4 | 46 | 114 | 123 | -9 |
| 13 | COLUMBUS | 48 | 20 - 25 - 3 | 43 | 116 | 143 | -27 |
| 14 | EDMONTON | 48 | 17 - 24 - 7 | 41 | 115 | 144 | -29 |
| 15 | MINNESOTA | 48 | 15 - 27 - 6 | 36 | 86 | 144 | -58 |
| Seed | Team | GP..... | W - L - O........ | Pts...... | GF...... | GA...... | GD |
| 1 | PITTSBURGH | 48 | 32 - 14 - 2 | 66 | 166 | 130 | +36 |
| 2 | OTTAWA | 48 | 25 - 17 - 6 | 56 | 140 | 121 | +19 |
| 3 | WASHINGTON | 48 | 25 - 17 - 6 | 56 | 119 | 123 | -4 |
| 4 | NEW JERSEY | 48 | 29 - 14 - 5 | 63 | 129 | 107 | +22 |
| 5 | NY RANGERS | 48 | 29 - 16 - 3 | 61 | 121 | 113 | +8 |
| 6 | PHILADELPHIA | 48 | 26 - 17 - 5 | 57 | 142 | 128 | +14 |
| 7 | CAROLINA | 48 | 23 - 15 - 10 | 56 | 126 | 123 | +3 |
| 8 | BUFFALO | 48 | 23 - 17 - 8 | 54 | 121 | 123 | -2 |
| 9 | BOSTON | 48 | 25 - 20 - 3 | 53 | 142 | 136 | +6 |
| 10 | TAMPA BAY | 48 | 24 - 19 - 5 | 53 | 144 | 164 | -20 |
| 11 | FLORIDA | 48 | 20 - 16 - 12 | 52 | 108 | 134 | -26 |
| 12 | NY ISLANDERS | 48 | 23 - 20 - 5 | 51 | 121 | 142 | -21 |
| 13 | WINNIPEG | 48 | 21 - 22 - 5 | 47 | 127 | 144 | -17 |
| 14 | MONTREAL | 48 | 18 - 21 - 9 | 45 | 121 | 127 | -6 |
| 15 | TORONTO | 48 | 18 - 24 - 6 | 42 | 125 | 151 | -26 |
Note this is not a prediction or anything -- just a view at some more recent results than the first 48 games each team played last year. Feel free to freak out, Sharks fans. :)
Go weak retirement discipline.
There are 76 Comments. Load Now.
Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.
C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read
R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next
Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read
Comment Settings
Live comment alert: Hide it!
Comments for this post are closed.