... on winning your third WHL title over Seattle last night! Good to see Manitoba do well in hockey on the national stage. Kelly McCrimmon has done an amazing job with that franchise for so long, he really deserves a chance at a Memorial Cup!

Edited May 14, 20169 yr by IC Khari

Question for everyone: Would you have liked or preferred a WHL team over an AHL team playing out of MTS Centre?

AHL for sure. I think the fact that the AHL club is Jets prospects helps. WHL would be cool but not sure it would be supported as much as the Moose are. BWK played some games here before and I don't think they drew very well. 

Edited May 15, 20169 yr by Goalie

Sometimes  I think having that old Junior Jets rivalry with the Wheat Kings was cool. Plus with every other Western Canadian team we have a lot in common. Back in the day pre WHA Jets, the old Arena would get 7-9,000 people for every game, sometimes even sell out a 10,000 seat building. The biggest draw back then (late 60's) was the Flin Flon Bombers with Bobby Clarke & Reggie Leach.

Edited May 15, 20169 yr by iso_55

Something non related to this topic just flashed into my mind... Back in the mid to late 60's Winnipeg was home to the Canadian National Hockey "A" team. The B team was either situated in Ottawa or Calgary, I can't remember. It meant that the Arena would routinely see games with Canada against Czechkosovakia, Sweden, United States, Germany, Switzerland & of course the Russians. The A group were the top teams in the world while the B team were teams not quite ready for prime time. Why did Canada have a B team? For developmental purposes. Younger guys who were in university or didn't have a chance at an NHL career. Anyway, it was quite the deal when the Russians came to town as I recall. We were supposed to hold the 1969 World Championships at the Arena but Canada pulled out when we couldn't use professional hockey players. Stupid decision & sad day.

Well that was a very disappointing end to a good season.  0-3 at the Memorial Cup and the1st team eliminated.  

Tough one for sure. They're a better team than the Rebs and maybe even Quebec, but as many have said, this tournament is probably not the best method of determining the best team. 

So, all this does is clear the way for London to win... again.

But London is a stupidly good team. Lots of guys who have either been picked high or will be picked high. Memorial cup is always a bit of a crap shoot as far as who is going to do well and who won't. Just wasn't meant to be for the Wheaties but winning the WHL is a big feather in the cap none the less. 

My Rockets aren't there this year but congrats to the West Kelowna Warriors for taking the RBC Cup.  Great run this year guys!

13 hours ago, Noeller said:

Tough one for sure. They're a better team than the Rebs and maybe even Quebec, but as many have said, this tournament is probably not the best method of determining the best team. 

Best team always wins. Every league. Every playoffs.

1 hour ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Best team always wins. Every league. Every playoffs.

Joe Thornton agrees with you.

Go Sharks, other 2 teams got their cups already.

2 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Best team always wins. Every league. Every playoffs.

What? No...

Best team wins? Every league. Every playoffs?

 

Explain Washington. They were the best NHL team all year. Look at Golden State in the NBA..they lost 9 games all year and are gonna lose to OKC and not even make the finals.

 

This tournament is somewhat of a joke seeing as tho the team that hosts the tournament automatically gets a spot in the tournament.. 

 

Brandon are WHL champs and that's all they really care about. The Memorial Cup is cool and all but... being WHL champs is a bigger deal. 

2 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Best team wins? Every league. Every playoffs?

 

Explain Washington. They were the best NHL team all year. Look at Golden State in the NBA..they lost 9 games all year and are gonna lose to OKC and not even make the finals.

 

You not understand.

Sharks have a 50/50 chance of being the best team in the league. If you win the cup you are the best in the League. Clearly WASH not the best in the league.

That's what i meant.

5 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

You not understand.

Sharks have a 50/50 chance of being the best team in the league. If you win the cup you are the best in the League. Clearly WASH not the best in the league.

That's what i meant.

Again, no. the BEST TEAM does not win every year in every league. Sometimes it's the way playoff systems are designed. The 2 best teams meet early & one is eliminated, a lot of times that being the best team... So, no... winning a championship does not automatically make a team the best team as the best teams don't always win. No offense but I'm surprised that this has to be explained to you by posters here...

Edited May 26, 20169 yr by iso_55

I just don't agree with that. Sometimes, the best teams don't always win. Sometimes it's the teams that get hot at the right time. San Jose is a perfect example of that. They are a good team but even if they win the cup, I still don't think they were the best team. They might be the team that lifts the Stanley Cup, but in my opinion, winning the Stanley Cup doesn't really mean you were the best team in the league. Just like Winning the NBA title or MLB title or any sports title doesn't make you the best team in that league. 

 

I go back to the Grey Cup, was really young but a 14-4 Bomber Team lost to an 8-10 Calgary Team in the finals. To say Calgary was the best team that year when the bombers were 14-4? I just can't do it. 

Goalie, you also have to factor in injuries. A team that is best in their league may dominate the regular season but go into the playoffs missing key players. Or injuries during the playoffs. That has happened in the past as well. We see it all the time...  The 2001 example you used is exactly right.

Edited May 26, 20169 yr by iso_55

In the NHL especially, I'd say it's more about luck and getting on a hot streak than anything else. 8th seeds have made Stanley Cup Finals... it's just so random. 

I mean, Last year did the first round not feature Chicago vs ST Louis and LA vs SJ... I mean that right there are 4 very good teams and 2 didn't make it to the second round last year... It's just so random. Injuries play a role for sure, but definitely the seeding plays a huge role especially in the NHL. 

If being the "best team" is what mattered then everyone would celebrate and clamour to win the Presidents Trophy. But they don't. They clamour to win the Stanley Cup. 

You need to be able to get 16 wins through a gruelling 2 month beat yourself dead marathon. 

The team with the most talent or best players may not win.  But that isn't what a team sport is about.  The team that does win was able to come together as a team, make the whole better then the pieces, able to overcome all the adversity, the pain, the ups and the downs, the emotional roller coaster.

To be the victor in one of the most gruelling playoffs in professional sports.  

The team that does that IS the best team.  They are the champs.  That is what history will show. 

Imagine if, after winning the SC, you had to then go to another city somewhere and play the KHL, Swedish and Finnish Elite League Champs in a week-long tourney...

10 minutes ago, Noeller said:

Imagine if, after winning the SC, you had to then go to another city somewhere and play the KHL, Swedish and Finnish Elite League Champs in a week-long tourney...

That would be insane. The NHLPA would never do it. I don't want to see it either. The NHL players deserve time off. Two months wouldn't be enough.

I can't tell if you've completely missed my point or not... 

17 hours ago, iso_55 said:

That would be insane. The NHLPA would never do it. I don't want to see it either. The NHL players deserve time off. Two months wouldn't be enough.

I don't even like having the WHC.