When the score was 1-0 last night in the Capitals game against Winnipeg, I stated that it was over and the Capitals had won the Southeast Division. The next thing I heard was a snort at my early call of the game, only to have someone eat his snort later in the evening when the score was a 5-3 final. Someone should really learn to have more faith in me, shouldn't he?
And I have an annoyance with some of the professional hockey analysts. I saw a goal breakdown between Steven Stamkos and Alex Ovechkin, with Ovechkin being criticized for most of his goals coming against the Southeast Division, which is apparently filled with pansy teams. (Of course, they fight hard against the pansy designation, but they should all realize now that they're pansies and roll over and play dead. Besides, it isn't like the Southeast has ever produced one Stanley Cup winner, let alone two, right? Oops, forgot about Carolina and Tampa Bay.) Stamkos was praised for the majority of his goals coming against the remainder of the Eastern Conference while, once again, Ovechkin is a pansy goal-scorer.
My curiosity is this: Stamkos and Ovechkin are both in the Southeast Division. If the Southeast Division is such a cakewalk (yeah, try playing Carolina and Tampa six times a year), why doesn't Stamkos have even more goals than he does. After all, if Ovechkin scores 56% (or whatever his percentage is) of his goals against the Southeast, shouldn't Stamkos have a similar, if not higher percentage? Since scoring against the Southeast is such a piece of cake, after all, and Stamkos is far superior to Ovechkin, why is Ovechkin's percentage of Southeast goals higher than Stamkos? I love it how the analysts like to compare apples and oranges and actually occasionally make it sound reasonable to someone who isn't able to think for him or herself.
Okay, 'nuf said. I'm done whining now.