Best Current Era Red Wing Team

[Hiei 192]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

HE BLINDED ME WITH SCIENCE!!!

[Offsides 21]

...please explain to me how that team was BOUGHT? Luc signed here when noone else wanted him. Brett signed here when noone else wanted him (he even took less money to come here) Olausson, well nobody wanted him. Dom Hasek was TRADED for, we traded Kozlov and pick(s) for him, just how was he bought? Pretty much the rest of the team had been around for a while... 2002 Cup was NOT bought, it was earned...

...1996 was not stacked, it was bought...

...lest we forget the team that started this entire Hockeytown, the 1995 team that lost to the Devils. They won 33 out of 48 games and won the Presidents Trophy that year... I think of all the teams since, this was the most important one because they learned how to lose...

Have a touched a sensitive nerve

I feel, that the 2002 Cup was bought. It just felt like we pulled in some ringers...I know many don't feel like that, but after all this time I can't see it any other way. Sorry. It doesn't mean I'm right (even though I usually am )

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

I really like the 95'96 team and the 96'97 team. They both had everything, I agree that without all the injuries we win in 96.

Have a touched a sensitive nerve

I feel, that the 2002 Cup was bought. It just felt like we pulled in some ringers...I know many don't feel like that, but after all this time I can't see it any other way. Sorry. It doesn't mean I'm right (even though I usually am )

I think you didnt like them as much because Ozzie wasent on the team anymore .....

[Offsides 21]

I really like the 95'96 team and the 96'97 team. They both had everything, I agree that without all the injuries we win in 96.

I think you didnt like them as much because Ozzie wasent on the team anymore .....

You might be right about that. I definitely didn't like that team, but you have to remember that Fedorov is my favorite player too. I hated getting Hasek and I hated getting Hull...two players I didn't like. Also, losing Osgood and Kozlov...two of my favorite players...so I am biased. I'll admit. But biased doesn't always equate to wrong.

I had to defend the team from 95-98 for being 'bought' and we never were...we'd drafted all our good players and so on...but in 2002 it was too much of a bought thing. I suppose there were different things behind it..but that's how I still feel. That team was probably the most stacked team. Not the best imo, but stacked definitely.

[puckloo39 5,686]

I really like the 95'96 team and the 96'97 team. They both had everything, I agree that without all the injuries we win in 96.

I think you didnt like them as much because Ozzie wasent on the team anymore .....

dang, OS, at least you admit you're biased. That is more than most would do.

2002 was a concerted, planned effort to win the Cup, there's little doubt about that. Winning the Cup is money in the Red Wings' organizations' pockets, so that gamble paid off big. In my mind, buying players would mean they were paid more than they were worth, which they were not, relative to the pre-cap times.

The players were in on it, at any rate, as I recall. Hasek played for half of what he was contracted for in Buffalo, even though I don't know that the team had the money or could have afforded the last year of his contract anyway. Stevie, Shanny, and I believe a couple of other guys actually gave up salary to get Hull on board.

I guess we'd have to blame the players for stacking their own roster, then. But it sure was fun to watch. At least for me, it was.

Taking nothing away from the 97 team, of course. Different times, different circumstances.

Edited November 15, 2007 by puckloo39

[Offsides 21]

But I like Hasek now, Loo, he's grown on me.

[puckloo39 5,686]

But I like Hasek now, Loo, he's grown on me.

seriously, OS? Cool!

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I'd have to say '97.

I may get flack for saying this, but honestly the 2002 team was the least interesting of the three to me. I don't think it was necessarily "bought" in that high payroll doesn't necessarily equal the Cup, but it certainly didn't hurt.

That team was like an all star team. And the main reason it could be was because of the massive payroll Ilitch could afford to take on.

I mean, think about that roster and the line combinations Bowman could throw out there.

Shanahan, Fedorov, Hull, Yzerman, Robitaille, Larionov, Datsyuk, Draper, Maltby, Homstrom, Lidstrom, Chelios, Fischer, Olausson, Duschene, and then Hasek in net.

It's great they won, but wasn't really as fun to watch because with the level of talent on that team, anything short of the Cup would've been failure.

[Offsides 21]

It's great they won, but wasn't really as fun to watch because with the level of talent on that team, anything short of the Cup would've been failure.

That's exactly how I felt. It was extremely anticlimactic compared to the other years.

[Izzy24 44]

1996-97

Konstantinov and Murphy?

[Copenhagen848 58]

The 97 team for sure IMO. That team had it all.

Agreed 100% I've never had as much fun watching hockey as I did that playoff run.

Edited November 16, 2007 by Copenhagen848

[Yzerfan1999 81]

The 2002 team was the most talented IMO. Sure, it may not have been the most exciting cup win, seeing as anything less would have been a failure - but the question is 'Which season had the best team' and I think with Hull, Robataille, Hasek, Chelios, Lidstrom, Yzerman, Shanahan, Federov, and Larionov...that a hard group of talent to top.

For me the 97 cup win was the exciting for obvious reasons, but reaching the goal in 2002 after everyone said we would be a failure if we lost...there's something to be said about the 'relief factor' in winning a the cup that year. Comparable to the Red Sox this year...

Edited November 16, 2007 by Yzerfan1999

[eva unit zero 271]

Ok, strength of schedule modification:

Take the playoff opponents for each Wings team. Multiply the Wings' goal differential ratio (GF/GA) by the opponent's total against all other opponents. This will yield a value greater than 1 if the Wings played better than the team's other opponents, and a value lower than 1 if the Wings played worse. For example; if the Wings scored 14 goals and gave up 13 against St.Louis in six games in round 2, and St.Louis had advanced against Phoenix despite giving up 14 and scoring 13, Detroit would score a 1 for the series. Take the average of each 'series' score to determine the updated 'clutch' modifier. Obviously, no 'strength of schedule' modifier can be applied to first round opponents with this method.

These updated modifiers, round by round and yearly average, are as follows:

1996: Col 1.16; StL 1.93; Wpg 2.0, Avg 1.70

1997: Phi 4.17; Col 2.51;Ana 1.63;StL 1.08; Avg 2.35

1998: Wsh 2.76; Dal 2.01; StL 3.54; Phx 1.33, Avg 2.41

2002: Car 2.76; Col 2.04; StL 3.31, Van 1.38, Avg 2.37

Now divide by two and add this modifier to the 'clutch' modifier from earlier, and apply the resulting total to the normalized output from earlier; basically replace the initial step involving the clutch modifier.

95-96 Wings playoffs: 1.7/2+0.36=1.21

96-97 Wings playoffs: 2.35/2+1.47=2.65

97-98 Wings playoffs: 2.41/2+1.79=3.0

01-02 Wings playoffs: 2.37/2+1.40=2.59

Final scores

95-96 Wings: 131 x 1.21=159

96-97 Wings: 53 x 2.65=140

97-98 Wings: 57 x 3=171

01-02 Wings: 70 x 2.59=181

So the most dominant Wings team of recent memory is the 2001-02 team, having performed well against strong opponents.

The 2002 team managed to step up well over a strong regular season performance, and to do it against strong competition.

[Offsides 21]

I'll still go with my gut and say 95-96 but your stats astound me haha.

[Vladinator 0]

I think that the 94-95 team that made it to the Stanley Cup Finals for the 1st time in many years is getting dismissed far too easily, but overall I would go with the 96-97 team. No team since then had a counter to Vladdy.

[puckloo39 5,686]

There really was only one Vladdy.

And there is but one Eva Unit Zero too... your knowledge of stats really is amazing. My brother is an actuary, and I think he would be in awe of you!

[Offsides 21]

Yeah, what exactly are you in real life Eva? A mathmatician? statistician? rent-a-genius?

[eva unit zero 271]

Yeah, what exactly are you in real life Eva? A mathmatician? statistician? rent-a-genius?

As a child, I was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. I am also epileptic. From my understanding of the two disorders, my behavior patterns an unusual type of focus on certain areas of interest as well as a sort of social isolationism fro mthe Aperger's. My brain also functions at a different rate than normal due to the epilepsy. It's an interesting combination...with some unfortunate downsides, but some nice upsides.

[puckloo39 5,686]

As a child, I was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. I am also epileptic. From my understanding of the two disorders, my behavior patterns an unusual type of focus on certain areas of interest as well as a sort of social isolationism fro mthe Aperger's. My brain also functions at a different rate than normal due to the epilepsy. It's an interesting combination...with some unfortunate downsides, but some nice upsides.

I believe you're very gifted, Eva. I admire your abilities. Thanks for sharing!

looooooo

[Barrie 900]

I may get flack for saying this, but honestly the 2002 team was the least interesting of the three to me. I don't think it was necessarily "bought" in that high payroll doesn't necessarily equal the Cup, but it certainly didn't hurt.

That team was like an all star team. And the main reason it could be was because of the massive payroll Ilitch could afford to take on.

I mean, think about that roster and the line combinations Bowman could throw out there.

Shanahan, Fedorov, Hull, Yzerman, Robitaille, Larionov, Datsyuk, Draper, Maltby, Homstrom, Lidstrom, Chelios, Fischer, Olausson, Duschene, and then Hasek in net.

It's great they won, but wasn't really as fun to watch because with the level of talent on that team, anything short of the Cup would've been failure.

Funny how everyone has their own feelings and opinions. For me the 2002 Cup was the most satisfying. I knew what winning 3 cups in 6 years meant for our team in the history of the NHL. If a team can win 3 cups with the same core, that seperates the men from the boys in my opinion.

With the Salary Cap, we may not see a team win 3 cups in 6 years or less for a very loooooong time.

[Offsides 21]

I believe you're very gifted, Eva. I admire your abilities. Thanks for sharing!

I agree, and I don't know what you are talking about sometimes

[WingNutt 12]

tough one here, 96-97 team was amazing good and played as a complete unit, a perfect machine.

however 2001-2002 was argubly one of the best teams ever, it was sort of a Cash team but none the less stacked full of best, young and old players. The roster read almost like a all star teams

[rick zombo 3,739]

Funny how everyone has their own feelings and opinions. For me the 2002 Cup was the most satisfying. I knew what winning 3 cups in 6 years meant for our team in the history of the NHL. If a team can win 3 cups with the same core, that seperates the men from the boys in my opinion.

With the Salary Cap, we may not see a team win 3 cups in 6 years or less for a very loooooong time.

Yzerman said in an interview that the 02 cup win was his most satisfying.

[puckloo39 5,686]

Yzerman said in an interview that the 02 cup win was his most satisfying.

I remember that, too. Couldn't find a reference or link, but I know I heard him say that, as well. I can't remember his explanation, though. I think it was maybe in the tribute show when he had his number retired...

[BeeRYCE 2]

Definitely 96/97.

From top to bottom we had everything, all lines were unstoppable. I really think the absence of Vladdy and Fetisov made 97/98 the weaker team out of the back-to-back cups, but with that said, they were the most determined and inspirational team. 01/02, you can say was the better team on paper, but by comparison, I just considered the 96/97 team more lethal, and had more chemistry.

Edited November 16, 2007 by BeeRYCE