New York: The Bell Curve of the VHL

[Victor 11,021]

With 8-season career limits (or 9 for some chosen few in more recent years), the constant churn of players and GMs (with some exceptions), VHL franchises don't necessarily mean much on their own. People or attitudes you may associate with a team in one season are all completely removed 10 seasons later. You can't really be a fan of a VHL franchise, or, with some exceptions perhaps, a bonafide hater of one. On an individual level, most of us have any feelings towards VHL teams based on emotional attachment from previous players and rivalries, even though in many cases those are very much bygone eras.

 

For me, unsurprisingly, the easiest way to distinguish between franchises is their history. Not the day-to-day "who won the most cups" or "who was most successful in a particular decade" but bigger picture. The themes associated with the teams. Are they the villains of the story more often than not? Do they always seem to find a way to stay relevant? Did they go through a rough patch but followed it up with success that feels like it was earned from those years of struggle? Or perhaps like I recently did with Seattle, is the GM more of the star than the players?

 

That Seattle example is what brings me to this article. As one of the "original 7" franchises still standing in the league, the Bears have nearly a VHL century of history to piece together into some kind of theme or trend. There's a few other examples I may get to in due course. But it feels quite opportunistic now to look briefly at the New York Americans. They sit in 6th place in North America midway through S95, on the outside of the playoffs looking in which is a sight we have become accustomed to. If you have been in the league for the last 30 seasons, that's basically the story of their life. If you were in the league in its very first 10 seasons and only came back 30 seasons ago then that's still all you've ever known about the Americans. Yet of course there's the bit in between - the incredible period of success which makes New York the bell curve of the VHL.

 

I visualised New York's successes and failures over the years purely by charting their playoff performances. From a quick glance at the below you can see the spikes (the successes) are bunched in the middle of their existence more or less, especially if you look past the maiden S14 championship. The troughs are either side of that - a fairly miserable start immortalised in a 20 in 20 article and somehow an even more miserable present day.

 

 

 

For those for whom jagged triangular and rectangular lines don't quite do it, I have also created a more artistic version of the above, clearly showing the bell curve itself. Again, it would look slightly better if I started the incline in S24 rather than before S14 but it is what it is. It would also be a bit more evenly spread if I wrote this in S75 but how were any of us to know that New York's drought would still be going 20 seasons later?

 

 

 

Those are the not so pretty pictures but sometimes these things land better with some numbers and stats.

 

In the first 23 seasons of their existence, the Americans made the playoffs 6 times.

In the most recent (through to S94) 21 seasons of their existence, they have made the playoffs 5 times.

In between, more specifically from S24 to S61, New York only missed the playoffs 8 times in 38 seasons.

 

The Americans have 7 Continental Cups, now the least of the active original VHL franchises (and even less than Quebec/Vancouver who joined the league 30 seasons after them).

6 of those Continental Cups were won in 22-season span from S32 to S53 i.e. in 23% of the team's existence.

 

Despite being the last original franchise to win its first championship (S14) and waiting more than twice as long for its second (S32), by the time of the 7th win in S53, the only teams with more cups than New York were Davos (9) and Calgary (8). The Americans worked extra hard to undo all the reputational damage caused by their first two decades in the league but then somehow relapsed harder than before.

 

They are now the owners of the 2 longest playoff droughts in VHL history, 7 seasons from S5 to S11 and a whopping 10 seasons from S79 to S88. Yet in between the Americans went on an 11-season playoff streak (S24-S34), including 7 (seven!) trips to the finals, which set the record then, wasn't beaten for 40 seasons, and is still the fourth longest ever.

 

41 seasons without a Continental Cup (and counting) is by far the longest we have ever seen, a decade longer than Vasteras' last drought (before they were contracted). For the last 34 of those New York hasn't even made the finals (also smashing previous records) and to be honest hasn't even come close. Since that last finals appearance in S60, the Americans have won 5 playoff series, 3 of them in the wildcard round. 2 wins against Seattle (in S72 and S89) enabled New York to get to the conference finals on two occasions in the last 34 seasons. It's not been bad luck in the playoffs either as the Americans' last Victory Cup was also in S60.

 

Is any of this new or ground-breaking information? Not really, although it does help to have it all laid out in one place. Is New York's slump, if that's the right word at this point, anyone's fault in particular? Also no. There were some missteps by some GMs but nothing that you would call catastrophic mismanagement. There's been bad timing, both in terms of who the Americans had to compete against and their GMs maybe not having the right energy for the task at hand. There's been some terrible luck in the drafts at times, particularly when drafting early or accumulating lots of picks in 1-2 drafts. And there's been a sense of self-fulfilling prophecy as the drought extends and as the halcyon days drift further and further away.

 

The only two acceptable outcomes from here on out are as follows. 1) A massive rebound with another 20-to-30 season spell of unprecedented success to make up for all the lost years or 2) indefinite failure. Anything else would ruin the bell curve theory and we can't have that.

[Banackock 8,141]

DA BEARS

 

 

[Frank 5,259]

23 minutes ago, Banackock said:

DA BEARS

 

 

Sir this is a Wendy's. 

[Banackock 8,141]

48 minutes ago, Frank said:

Sir this is a Wendy's. 

[leandrofg 1,180]

Delightful read!

[Victor 11,021]

Week 2 of 2