Long-Layoff in a Short Season

In most cases, teams may dread a long layoff in the playoffs. It's too much time between series for them to get rusty to the game action and for them to lose an important game to start, which could kill their hot streak. Yet, in a truncated season like this-- it could actually go on to help the San Jose Sharks.

The grind of a short season is something that affected all the teams, most of which had to have a playoff mentality through the midway point of the short season to make it to the playoffs. For the Sharks, this would also help in the healing of players like Martin Havlat, Tommy Wingels, Jason Demers, and Adam Burish, who heal up from their wounds from Round One. Luckily for the Sharks is that they ranked 21st in Man Games Lost (249), which should just allow a small breather for players like Patrick Marleau, Joe Thornton, Antti Niemi, and Joe Pavelski.

But can the momentum be regained quickly?? With the hot hands of Pavelski and Logan Couture; the thought that if they don't get out there sooner rather than later would lose the magic touch is out there, regardless of the grind they went through during the season. Also, with the Sharks as a 6-seed, they'll start on the road unless Red Wings and Wild pull of upsets. The lack of home-ice advantage would be rough in order to shake the rust off for a long-layoff, but at least knowing their destination ahead of time will leave great time for them to travel to either Chicago or Anaheim.

Throwing to the comparison of the 1995 Playoffs; the Devils, Flyers, and Red Wings won their first round match-ups in five games; their second round match-ups had the Flyers and Wings sweep with the Devils winning in five; then the Devils over the Flyers in six, with the Wings beating the Blackhawks in five, then the Devils sweeping the Wings. All the early movers in the first rounds used the rest to their advantage, and maybe the Sharks can draw off of that tidbit of short-seasons past.

Whether or not the rust will be there for a minute, a period, or a game-- the Sharks do have some time to actually breathe and rest up and regroup-- as they luckily didn't get hurt by losing three of their last four regular season games, they just need to not get too rested or else they could get caught in the first couple games against their opponent who may have weaker legs, but more recent game-play experience.

On the Topic Of Prorating the Shortened Season

As we see teams clinching left and right, the shortened season is showing it's effects to teams that were prepared for this sprint and those who stumbled out of the gates and it cost them. The Islanders and Leafs show the teams who knew the role the short season played and stepped up to take a playoff spot, while the Devils and Predators saw their success from previous seasons fall by the wayside.

While the 48-game season has proven exciting, with some wondering if there should be a short season every few years (or every year); you have to wonder if the panic button of a 48-game season was hit too early for most teams. With little time to adjust or let a slump adjust your team's personality, the coaching staff probably tried to do too much, too soon, with guys who may have not adjusted back to the game if they hadn't been playing elsewhere during the Lockout.

But, is there a way to accurately prorate were a team would be if there were 36 games added to the schedule?? It's a very out there ideal because to adjust the schedule in that extreme and give them more time,  because most of the teams would have done things differently in those extra games in knowing that they were going to have time to make up the ground they lose. Conversely, you could have surprising teams who probably would have dropped off-- like if the Leafs and Islanders hadn't clinched, could they have kept up with the pace of other teams who would get those other games to improve??

There are many out there with their "fancy stats" who could probably break it down a little more with a little more time, trying to make people believe that hockey is in the exact realm of baseball where all the outside influence actually add to a players worth-- but I don't have that kind of time, patience, or care for such a thing.

My basis for things is that when you look towards a middle of the season, which where we'd be at in a normal NHL season, you always have a team who was surprising in the first half get screwed over by the second half and buying into their own hype too much. Not only that, but it would have drastically changed the trade market and what teams would have needed or wanted for their certain situations. To that, you wonder if Marian Gaborik would have accepted a deal to the Blue Jackets if they were in a free fall rather than a rally in the second half of their season.

Part of me would love to be able to get into trends of what could have happened in the season should it be a full 82-game slate, but the circumstances don't allow for that. The ebbs and flows of certain teams and the travel schedule, injury happenings, and general disarray that a longer season would create almost make it impossible to properly predict how some of the teams on the bubble would react to their position and how their mentality would work. But, it's always fun to banter back and forth as we look back at this season.

On the Topic Of Slow Starts to a Shortened Season

While the shortened season does leave little room for error, the fact that some fans and some teams are hovering their hands over the panic buttons may be a little too premature. Sure, the fact some teams have gotten into slumps in the early five-days for play, you just have to look back into history to see that getting off to a slow start isn't a horrible thing....if you have the right parts, of course.

Looking at the last shortened season in 1995, you just have to look at the Stanley Cup champions of that year to see that as long as you get into the playoffs-- it's perfectly fine and you have a shot at winning the whole thing. In fact, the Devils were the 5th seed in the East, having to defeat the 4th, 3rd, and 2nd seeds in the East to win that conference in a total of 16 games before the Finals.

Yet, the bigger thing is that it wasn't until March 30th (Game 33) when they went over .500 for the season and leading to their 22-18-8 record; in a time where the OT loss didn't account for a point. More over than that, after tying their first game, the Devils went to lose three straight and were 3-5-2 in their first 10 and their longest unbeaten streak was seven games It wasn't a cause for overpanic, but I'm sure it was there after the quick losing streak.

Conversely, the Western Conference representitve that year was the Detroit Red Wings, who won the Presidents' Trophy for best record of the league (33-11-4) and played in 14 games before the Finals, to be swept by the Devils in four games. Comparing the stats for the Red Wings to the Devils, the Wings never dipped below .500 after January 24th in their third game of the year, went 7-3-0 in their first ten games with a long-unbeaten streak of 11 games.

Interestingly enough, both teams went 5-4-1 in their last ten games.

What does it all mean?? Well, it's an issue of conservation and patience. While the beginning may look grim to some fans, owners, GMs, etc.; the fact remains that in the last short-season, it didn't really matter the quick start you got off to or not; just making the playoffs was enough to give a team hope. Of course, with the game changing in conditioning and technology; teams may want to not wait as long as March 30th to finally crack the .500 mark.