ESPN lists most dominant champions of last 20 years: 2008 Red Wings come in 9th

[toby91_ca 620]

2 hours ago, kickazz said:

Even so, the 2002 guys were past their primes and slower. Slower than the 98 versions of themselves. 

The 02 team struggled against the Avs. The 08 team blew everyone out and made good teams look like amateur ones at times (including Pitt).

The 02 team was down 0-2 against Vancouver. They got blown out by St Louis 6-1 in game 4 or whatever and were down to the Avs in the series at one point. The 08 never had any of these issues and were dominant throughout each series.

2008 team consisted of a Selke winner, a Norris winner, a playoff leading scorer, Byng winner, and Jennings winners all in one squad. The biggest feat for the 02 squad was Lidstrom’s Norris.

The 2002 team only lost 7 games all playoffs and the 2008 team lost 6....not a big difference.

Having the leading scorer in the playoffs doesn't make you a better team than a team that doesn't have the leading scorer.  It can be a factor, but it can also mean the team isn't very good and you need one guy to score (wasn't the case with the 2008 team and probably would never be the case for a Cup winning team).  However, look deeper, the 2002 team had 5 players in the top 10 playoff scoring, the 2008 team only had 3.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

4 hours ago, kickazz said:

Even so, the 2002 guys were past their primes and slower. Slower than the 98 versions of themselves. 

The 02 team struggled against the Avs. The 08 team blew everyone out and made good teams look like amateur ones at times (including Pitt).

The 02 team was down 0-2 against Vancouver. They got blown out by St Louis 6-1 in game 4 or whatever and were down to the Avs in the series at one point. The 08 never had any of these issues and were dominant throughout each series.

2008 team consisted of a Selke winner, a Norris winner, a playoff leading scorer, Byng winner, and Jennings winners all in one squad. The biggest feat for the 02 squad was Lidstrom’s Norris.

Now you're being picky and hypocritical.  The 2008 team struggled against Nashville and needed a goalie change, an OT goal in game 5, and a center ice goal in game 6 to beat the Preds.  They also struggled in the series against Dallas putting the opposition away.  You could say the same about the Pens series.  The playoffs are tough.  Most Cup winners are challenged by someone at some point.  To say that the 2008 team wasn't challenged is false.  They were in danger of being ousted in the first round and lacked killer instinct in three of the series they played.  Their only dominant series was against the Avalanche, because they had Theodore in net and Franzen went crazy.   

The 2002 team struggled against the Avs because that team was really freaking good.  I believe that team would also beat the 2008 Wings.  The Vancouver series was similar to the Wings struggles in 2008 against Nashville.  The sequence of games was different but that's not the point.  Losing badly to the Blues one game isn't a big deal when you consider how they dominated the rest of that series.  The Blues in 2002 were a team with a lot of talent.  They just had a crappy goalie in Brent Johnson.      

The individual awards are nice, but not as nice as having 10 Hall of Famers on the team.  

Edited March 23, 2018 by GMRwings1983

[LeftWinger 5,130]

This is funny, not sure if y'all serious.

2002 team would have beaten 2008 for sure.

You say the 02 team struggled against the Avs, yet 08 blew out everyone. Not many teams had it easy against that 02 Avs team, The DEFENDING Stanley Cup Champion Avs team I meant to say. NOT ONE of the teams we beat in 08 would've beaten that Avs team from 2002.

When you're talking head to head, there is no way anyone on the 08 team would skate circles around Fedorov. Fedorov in 2008 would still have been one of our best forwards (except Babcock hated him, so he wouldn't get the icetime.) Plus in toughness Aaron Downey couldn't bet Kocur or Shanny IMO. Plus McCarty of 02 would defeat McCarty of 08.  The biggest factor maybe is the G position. Hasek that year blows away Osgood in 2008. He won 41 games in the regular season with 5 SO's, only to better that in 16 wins in the playoffs with 6 SO's. TWO of them against the powerful Avs. Larionov is most definitely an X-factor, he would have dominated Filppula head to head, and if Draper/Maltby of 02 can shutdown Sakic/Forsberg 0f 02, they could absolutely shutdown Z/Datsyuk of 08. Don't read into the fact that Crosby/Malkin couldn't do it in 08, because in 08 Crosby/Malkin wouldn't recognize a Defensive play if it smacked them in the head.

Take away the top 2 forwards on each team (Yzerman & Shanahan, Datsyuk & Z) and take a look at what you still have. There is no way that 08 roster beats the 02 roster. No way Franzen even compares to the players left on that 02 roster. Including younger, better versions of Holmstrom, Lidstrom, Draper, Maltby AND McCarty. You mention losing the 1st two games to Vancouver putting a scare into them, well they were equally scared after losing 2 straight to Nashville in 08. Then after sweeping a shadow of itself Avs team that didn't even belong in the playoffs, they lost two out of 6 game series against the Stars.

They're both great teams, but given all the factors, 2002 beats 2008 in 7 games!

 

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

6 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

This is funny, not sure if y'all serious.

2002 team would have beaten 2008 for sure.

You say the 02 team struggled against the Avs, yet 08 blew out everyone. Not many teams had it easy against that 02 Avs team, The DEFENDING Stanley Cup Champion Avs team I meant to say. NOT ONE of the teams we beat in 08 would've beaten that Avs team from 2002.

When you're talking head to head, there is no way anyone on the 08 team would skate circles around Fedorov. Fedorov in 2008 would still have been one of our best forwards (except Babcock hated him, so he wouldn't get the icetime.) Plus in toughness Aaron Downey couldn't bet Kocur or Shanny IMO. Plus McCarty of 02 would defeat McCarty of 08.  The biggest factor maybe is the G position. Hasek that year blows away Osgood in 2008. He won 41 games in the regular season with 5 SO's, only to better that in 16 wins in the playoffs with 6 SO's. TWO of them against the powerful Avs. Larionov is most definitely an X-factor, he would have dominated Filppula head to head, and if Draper/Maltby of 02 can shutdown Sakic/Forsberg 0f 02, they could absolutely shutdown Z/Datsyuk of 08. Don't read into the fact that Crosby/Malkin couldn't do it in 08, because in 08 Crosby/Malkin wouldn't recognize a Defensive play if it smacked them in the head.

Take away the top 2 forwards on each team (Yzerman & Shanahan, Datsyuk & Z) and take a look at what you still have. There is no way that 08 roster beats the 02 roster. No way Franzen even compares to the players left on that 02 roster. Including younger, better versions of Holmstrom, Lidstrom, Draper, Maltby AND McCarty. You mention losing the 1st two games to Vancouver putting a scare into them, well they were equally scared after losing 2 straight to Nashville in 08. Then after sweeping a shadow of itself Avs team that didn't even belong in the playoffs, they lost two out of 6 game series against the Stars.

They're both great teams, but given all the factors, 2002 beats 2008 in 7 games!

 

Agree with a lot of what you said, however, Draper and Maltby did not shut down Forsberg and Sakic.  I remember Forsberg being a nightmare to play against in that series.  Also, Kocur didn't play on the 2002 team.  

 

[LeftWinger 5,130]

2 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Agree with a lot of what you said, however, Draper and Maltby did not shut down Forsberg and Sakic.  I remember Forsberg being a nightmare to play against in that series.  Also, Kocur didn't play on the 2002 team.  

 

My bad, got too excited.  Yes, Forsberg was not "shutdown" to where he wasn't a factor, but I was using the term to describe the fact they were shutdown enough that we beat them in the series. I still maintain my point that the 2002 Avs also beat every team we beat in 2008. There is no way we struggled against them because we were bad, its that they were great. Plus Defending Champs.

[Barrie 900]

I agree about 2008, it was the most dominate team of the 25 year playoff run. 2002 was a great team, but they were down twice in the playoffs. 2002 probably had the most drama. It was my favorite of the 4 Championships.

It really only got scary once in 2008, the 1st round in Game 5 when it went to OT. I know after Dallas went down 0-3 in the Conference Final, they forced a Game 6, but we still were in control of that series. Plus Game 6 wasn't much of a game.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

16 hours ago, Barrie said:

I agree about 2008, it was the most dominate team of the 25 year playoff run. 2002 was a great team, but they were down twice in the playoffs. 2002 probably had the most drama. It was my favorite of the 4 Championships.

It really only got scary once in 2008, the 1st round in Game 5 when it went to OT. I know after Dallas went down 0-3 in the Conference Final, they forced a Game 6, but we still were in control of that series. Plus Game 6 wasn't much of a game.

Based on that, the 2012 Kings were the best team of the last 30 years in the NHL, since they started every series up 3-0. You have to look at other factors than whether they were down in the playoffs at some point.  The playoffs aren't meant to be easy.  I don't think the 2008 Wings had a particularly easy run compared to other Cup winngers.  Do you think the 2008 Wings could possibly go down in a series against the 2002 Avalanche?  Most likely.    

Edited March 27, 2018 by GMRwings1983

[LeftWinger 5,130]

It's Official:

https://www.nhl.com/news/2001-02-red-wings-were-the-best-team-of-the-decade/c-510720

 

Quote

Here are our top five teams for the first decade of the 21st century:

1) 2001-02 Detroit Red Wings
Regular season: 116 points; First in Central Division, First in Western Conference, Won Presidents' Trophy
Playoffs: Won Stanley Cup (beat Carolina 4-1 in Final)

Talk about a team awash in talent. The '01-02 Red Wings were swimming in Hall of Famers (present and future), from goal (Dominik Hasek) to defense (Nicklas Lidstrom, Chris Chelios) to the front line (Steve Yzerman, Brendan Shanahan, Luc Robitaille, Brett Hull, Igor Larionov, Sergei Fedorov) and even behind the bench (Scotty Bowman).

Those Wings were so good that Pavel Datsyuk, a star in the later part of the decade, was basically a spare part (13:39 average ice time in 70 games).

Under Bowman, the Wings blew through the regular season, finishing 15 points ahead of the next-best team (Boston) despite having no player score more than 75 points. They had to go to seven games to beat archrival Colorado in the Western Finals, but routed the Avs, 7-0, in the deciding game. Carolina stunned the Wings by winning the opener 3-2 in overtime, but Detroit allowed just four goals in winning the next four games, capped by a 3-1 win in Game 5.
 

"We really had balanced scoring. I think at the end of the day, that was the difference playing Colorado in the semis, then ultimately against Carolina. Despite winning in five, they were relatively close games. We were able to generate, get more production from all four of our lines." -- Steve Yzerman

"We really had balanced scoring," Yzerman said during last month's Hall of Fame induction, when he, Robitaille and Hull were all inducted. "I think at the end of the day, that was the difference playing Colorado in the semis, then ultimately against Carolina. Despite winning in five, they were relatively close games. We were able to generate, get more production from all four of our lines."

Yzerman, who led the Wings in playoff scoring despite playing on one healthy leg, carried the Stanley Cup for the third and final time in his career. Lidstrom, who won the first of his six Norris trophies as the NHL's best defenseman, received the Conn Smythe Trophy as playoff MVP. Bowman, who had decided earlier in the season that he would retire, stunned everyone by putting on skates and joining in the on-ice celebration.

With as many as 10 current or future Hall of Famers on the roster (plus Bowman, who was inducted a decade earlier), the Wings have a solid claim as the best team to take the ice during this decade.

2) 2000-01 Colorado Avalanche
Regular season: 118 points; First in Northwest Division, First in Western Conference, Won Presidents' Trophy
Playoffs: Won Stanley Cup (beat New Jersey 4-3 in Final)

Ray Bourque spent 20 seasons in Boston doing just about everything a player can do in a career -- except win the Stanley Cup. The Bruins, then in a down cycle, sent Bourque to Colorado in 2000, and he needed only one more season to cap his Hall of Fame career with the one thing that was missing.

Led by Joe Sakic's 54-goal, 118-point season, the Avs won their division by 25 points and finished seven points ahead of Detroit in the race to be best in the West. They had a scare in the Western semifinals, needing seven games to beat Los Angeles, but routed St. Louis in five to earn a crack at the defending champion New Jersey Devils.

It was a back-and-forth series, with the teams splitting the first four games before New Jersey shocked the crowd in Denver by winning Game 5, 4-1. Undaunted, the Avs headed East and returned the favor with a 4-0 victory at the Meadowlands, then came home and captured the Cup with a 3-1 victory.

 

 

 

Goaltender Patrick Roy earned the Conn Smyth Trophy as playoff MVP, but the star of the night was Bourque, who was given the Cup by Sakic immediately after the Avs' captain got it from Commissioner Gary Bettman and allowed the honor of the first skate.

"To allow me to grab it like that says it all," said Bourque, who had played more games than anyone who hadn't had his name engraved on the Cup.

He kissed the Cup, skated with it and later skated off into retirement with the one honor that had eluded him.

3) 2007-08 Detroit Red Wings
Regular season: 115 points: First in Central Division, First in Western Conference, Won Presidents' Trophy
Playoffs: Won Stanley Cup (beat Pittsburgh 4-2 in Final)

Like most good teams, the Wings were more than the sum of their parts -- and those parts were awfully good.

With Dominik Hasek and Chris Osgood in goal, the Wings were assured of top-caliber netminding every night. Nicklas Lidstrom led the defense by winning his sixth Norris Trophy in seven seasons. Pavel Datsyuk (31-66-97, plus-41) and Henrik Zetterberg (43-49-92, plus-30) led a deep, diverse attack that also knew how to be responsible without the puck.

The Wings won their division by 24 points and the conference and Presidents' Trophy by seven over San Jose.

Coach Mike Babcock made the biggest move of the playoffs in Game 4 of the opening round against Nashville, replacing a struggling Hasek with Osgood -- who played so well that Hasek never got his job back. The Wings went on to beat Nashville in six games, swept Colorado, beat Dallas in six and knocked off the young Pittsburgh Penguins in six games to bring the Cup back to Hockeytown for the first time since 2002. Zetterberg won the Conn Smythe Trophy as playoff MVP after finishing tied for first in goals and points -- and shutting down Sidney Crosby in the Final.

Lidstrom became the first European to captain a Stanley Cup winner.

"Nicklas Lidstrom, in my opinion, is a phenomenal leader and captain with his poise and his skill," Babcock said. "And then the support group in (Chris) Chelios and (Kris) Draper. And (Pavel) Datsyuk and (Henrik) Zetterberg, for their leadership. "we have a very special team, and we're thrilled to be in this situation."

4) 2003-04 Tampa Bay Lightning
Regular season: 106 points: First in Southeast Division, First in Eastern Conference
Playoffs: Won Stanley Cup (beat Calgary 4-3 in Final)

 

 

 

For the first decade of their existence, the Tampa Bay Lightning usually spent the spring somewhere other than the St. Pete Times Forum. But by 2003-04, the Lightning had turned into the class of the Eastern Conference. With an attack featuring six 20-goal scorers and led by NHL scoring leader Martin St. Louis and centers Vincent Lecavalier and Brad Richards, the Lightning finished third in the NHL in scoring. A defense led by Dan Boyle and playing in front of goaltender Nikolai Khabibulin was one of the NHL's best.

The Bolts ran away with the division title and edged Boston by two points for the top spot in the East. They blitzed the Islanders and Montreal in the first two rounds and got past Philadelphia in seven games to advance to the Stanley Cup Final for the first time.

Though the Detroit Red Wings had won the Presidents' Trophy with 109 points, they were knocked out by Calgary in the second round. The Flames then beat San Jose in six games in the Western Finals to make the Final for the first time since winning it in 1989.

The teams split the first four games before Calgary won Game 5 in OT at Tampa. Game 6 went into double overtime before St. Louis' goal 33 seconds into the second extra period to push the series to the limit. In Game 7, Ruslan Fedotenko scored twice and Khabibulin held off a late charge by the Flames for a 2-1 win and the first championship in franchise history.

"We are winners," St. Louis said. "We're going to walk together forever. Nothing can describe how it feels to be the last team standing."

5) 2005-06 Carolina Hurricanes
Regular season: 112 points: Won Southeast Division, Second in Eastern Conference
Playoffs: Won Stanley Cup (beat Edmonton 4-3 in Final)

The resumption of play after the work stoppage that cancelled the 2004-05 season saw a change in fortune for a number of teams. One of the biggest upward moves was made by the Carolina Hurricanes, who went from a non-playoff team in 2003-04 to a division title in '05-06.

The 'Canes got a big lift from the arrival of Eric Staal, the No. 2 pick in the 2003 Entry Draft who had been forced to spend the 2004-05 season in the minors. He turned into a 45-goal, 100-point scorer and gave the Hurricanes a major offensive boost. So did the addition of two veterans, center Doug Weight and winger Mark Recchi, who came over in in-season trades.

 

"I just kept thinking there is no way we can let this go. There's too many guys that deserve this." -- Hurricanes captain Rod Brind'Amour 

Carolina won the Southeast Division title, beat Montreal in the opening round and New Jersey in the second before outlasting Buffalo in seven games to win the Eastern Conference Finals. It looked like they might have an easy time in the Stanley Cup Final after winning three of the first four games against the Edmonton Oilers, a surprise finalist. But the Oilers won Games 5 and 6, sending the series back to Raleigh for Game 7. The 'Canes took an early 2-0 lead, survived a third-period surge by Edmonton and locked up the first NHL title in franchise history when Justin Williams' empty-netter secured a 3-1 victory.

Team captain Rod Brind'Amour had tears streaming down his face after he hoisted the Cup.
"I just kept thinking there is no way we can let this go," the 35-year-old center said. "There's too many guys that deserve this."

Honorable mention (best team that didn't win the Cup)
2005-06 Detroit Red Wings
Regular season: 124 points: Won Central Division, Won Western Conference, Won Presidents' Trophy

The arrival of the "new NHL" following the work stoppage didn't keep the Detroit Red Wings from doing what they had done the previous season -- finishing ahead of everyone else during the regular season. The Wings piled up 58 victories and 124 points, making them the favorites for the Stanley Cup.

But it wasn't to be. The Wings faced the eighth-place Edmonton Oilers in the opening round of the playoffs, and it was apparent immediately that the series wouldn't be the cakewalk many had expected. After the teams split the first four games, Edmonton came into Joe Louis Arena, scored three goals in the second period and made them stand up for a 3-2 win. Back at Rexall Place, Ales Hemsky tied the game with 3:53 remaining and scored again with 1:06 to play to give the Oilers a stunning 4-3 victory -- sending the Wings home with nothing to show for the decade's best regular-season record.

It's wonderful that the NHL gives us 2 of the top 5 PLUS the honorable mention as the best team that didn't win the Cup.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

30 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

It's wonderful that the NHL gives us 2 of the top 5 PLUS the honorable mention as the best team that didn't win the Cup.

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dominant

dominant

adjective  dom·i·nant  \ -nənt \

 

1a : commanding, controlling, or prevailing over all others 

b : very important, powerful, or successful

2: overlooking and commanding from a superior position

 

 

[BigWillieStyle 662]

No one's seems to remember that Dallas did a lot of the heavy lifting for us in 2008. They took out Anaheim in the 1st round in 6 games, then The Sharks in the 2nd round in 6 games. Both of those series we're brutal physical series. By the time we got to play Dallas, they were too beat up to give us a fight. 

 

If we would have had a series like we did with Anaheim in 2009, in the first 2 rounds in 2008, we probably wouldn't have beat Dallas to get to the finals. 

 

That's just my take on 2008 team being so dominant. 

 

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

LOL at anyone mentioning the 2004 Lightning and 2006 Hurricanes as two of the five best teams in this century.  Those are the two weakest Cup winners in my lifetime.  Any Cup winner in the last 15 years would likely beat those teams in a 7 game series.

Please tell me that list above is just an early April Fools Day joke.    

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

32 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

LOL at anyone mentioning the 2004 Lightning and 2006 Hurricanes as two of the five best teams in this century.  Those are the two weakest Cup winners in my lifetime.  Any Cup winner in the last 15 years would likely beat those teams in a 7 game series.

Please tell me that list above is just an early April Fools Day joke.    

Agreed. They beat an 8 seed in 7 games. OOOOOOOh! Had the Wings not choked in the first round, that would have been Cup #4 in ten years.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Agreed. They beat an 8 seed in 7 games. OOOOOOOh! Had the Wings not choked in the first round, that would have been Cup #4 in ten years.

Not just that, but they were lucky in the first round when down 0-2 to Montreal.  Michel Therrien blew that series with his stupidity.  In the Conference Finals, they only got past Buffalo because the Sabres had like 3 or 4 defensemen injured toward the end of that series.  In the Finals, they almost blew a 3-1 series lead against an 8 seed that had a backup goalie.  If you remember, Roloson got hurt in that series.  The 2006 Hurricanes may be the most fortunate Cup winner in history.        

[LeftWinger 5,130]

2 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dominant

dominant

adjective  dom·i·nant  \ -nənt \

 

1a : commanding, controlling, or prevailing over all others 

b : very important, powerful, or successful

2: overlooking and commanding from a superior position

3: see Detroit Red Wings c 1994-2011

 

 

fixed!  

2 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

LOL at anyone mentioning the 2004 Lightning and 2006 Hurricanes as two of the five best teams in this century.  Those are the two weakest Cup winners in my lifetime.  Any Cup winner in the last 15 years would likely beat those teams in a 7 game series.

Please tell me that list above is just an early April Fools Day joke.    

it is just referring to the first 10 years of the 2000's.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

16 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

fixed!  

it is just referring to the first 10 years of the 2000's.

They still wouldn't make the top 5.  

[Izzy24 44]

Has anyone mentioned the most important factor?

 

Also, what's to stop 2008 Chelios from being better than 2002 Chelios, while simultaneously 2002 Chelios being better than 2008 Chelios?

[kliq 3,763]

On 3/27/2018 at 4:13 PM, GMRwings1983 said:

LOL at anyone mentioning the 2004 Lightning and 2006 Hurricanes as two of the five best teams in this century.  Those are the two weakest Cup winners in my lifetime.  Any Cup winner in the last 15 years would likely beat those teams in a 7 game series.

Please tell me that list above is just an early April Fools Day joke.    

It doesn't say century, it says decade.

That means 2000-2009 meaning the choices are:

2000 - NJ

2001 - Colorado

2002- Detroit

2003 - NJ

2004 - TB

2005 - None

2006 - Carolina

2007 - Anahiem

2008 - Detroit

2009 - Pittsburgh

So with the missed year they are really just saying these are the top 5 of 9 teams.

Why do you feel Carolina and TB were such weak teams? 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, kliq said:

It doesn't say century, it says decade.

That means 2000-2009 meaning the choices are:

2000 - NJ

2001 - Colorado

2002- Detroit

2003 - NJ

2004 - TB

2005 - None

2006 - Carolina

2007 - Anahiem

2008 - Detroit

2009 - Pittsburgh

So with the missed year they are really just saying these are the top 5 of 9 teams.

Why do you feel Carolina and TB were such weak teams? 

Not to speak for GMR, but those teams listed in order from best to worst would be:

1. 02 Wings

2.08 Wings

3. 09 Pens

4. 01 Avs

5. 00 Devils

6. 07 Ducks

7. 03 Devils

8. 04 Lightning

9. 06 Canes

You could make an argument for swapping 3 and 4, and rearranging 5 thru 7, but the Lightning and Canes were by far the weakest winners of that decade IMO. There were much better teams in 04 and 06 who choked, and both of them beat overachieving teams who ran out of steam in the Finals.

 

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

2 hours ago, kliq said:

It doesn't say century, it says decade.

That means 2000-2009 meaning the choices are:

2000 - NJ

2001 - Colorado

2002- Detroit

2003 - NJ

2004 - TB

2005 - None

2006 - Carolina

2007 - Anahiem

2008 - Detroit

2009 - Pittsburgh

So with the missed year they are really just saying these are the top 5 of 9 teams.

Why do you feel Carolina and TB were such weak teams? 

Yes.  They're the two weakest Cup winners of that decade.  Honestly, they may be the weakest Cup winners ever.  How many Cup winners were weaker than those two teams?  

30 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Not to speak for GMR, but those teams listed in order from best to worst would be:

1. 02 Wings

2.08 Wings

3. 09 Pens

4. 01 Avs

5. 00 Devils

6. 07 Ducks

7. 03 Devils

8. 04 Lightning

9. 06 Canes

You could make an argument for swapping 3 and 4, and rearranging 5 thru 7, but the Lightning and Canes were by far the weakest winners of that decade IMO. There were much better teams in 04 and 06 who choked, and both of them beat overachieving teams who ran out of steam in the Finals.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I think the 2008 Wings were a great team.  However, they're not better than the 2001 Avalanche.  They may not be as good as the 2000 Devils either.  A lot of people rank that as the best Devils team ever.  The 2003 Devils aren't far off either.  I also think you're overrating the 2009 Penguins.  I can't see them beating the 2007 Ducks or 2003 Devils in a series. 

We agree on Tampa and Carolina.  They were both #1 seeds, but as I said above, they're great candidates for the weakest Cup winners ever.  Neither of those teams ever accomplished anything else and won the Cup against relatively weak opposition and fortuitous circumstances.    

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

1 hour ago, F.Michael said:

I think what gets overlooked is that Osgood replaced Hasek in game 4 against the Preds in the 1st round in '08.

Dom was running on fumes at that point in his career.

Didn't Osgood outplay Hasek the entire season?  It was only a matter of time, unfortunately, for Hasek to be replaced that year.  

[kliq 3,763]

35 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Yes.  They're the two weakest Cup winners of that decade.  Honestly, they may be the weakest Cup winners ever.  How many Cup winners were weaker than those two teams?  

I'm just asking you why you think that? Were you not a fan of the players? coaches? 

Carolina I get, but TB I dont see it. They had a great goaltender, 3 superstars in LeCavalier, Richards, and St. Louis (who did win the Hart that year), and they beat a team that kicked our ass despite how loaded we were. Not to mention, they werent just a team that went on a run, they #2 to only us in the overall standings.

I think people marginalize TB because back then they had such a bad history, plus they just don't get the type of attention from the media that teams like us, Colorado, Pittsburgh, Chicago etc. get.

I'm willing to listen to your reasons though.

[LeftWinger 5,130]

The 09 Penguins do not beat the 00 or 03 Devils. I would have loved to see Crosby play his career against Scott Stevens.

You may call me a homer, or whiner, but the 09 Penguins don't beat the 09 Wings in another 7 game series, nor do they beat them the first time if Malkin's suspension would've (and should've) happened.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

20 hours ago, kliq said:

I'm just asking you why you think that? Were you not a fan of the players? coaches? 

Carolina I get, but TB I dont see it. They had a great goaltender, 3 superstars in LeCavalier, Richards, and St. Louis (who did win the Hart that year), and they beat a team that kicked our ass despite how loaded we were. Not to mention, they werent just a team that went on a run, they #2 to only us in the overall standings.

I think people marginalize TB because back then they had such a bad history, plus they just don't get the type of attention from the media that teams like us, Colorado, Pittsburgh, Chicago etc. get.

I'm willing to listen to your reasons though.

They actually didn't beat Calgary fairly, as that Gelinas shot looked to be a goal.  It was a tainted Cup in some ways.  You're right that they had a good regular season and had some very talented forwards, including the MVP that season in St. Louis.  Khabibulin had one of the best playoffs a European goalie ever had up to that time.  

They're one of the weakest Cup winners for several reasons.  For one, can you even name five teams in the last 40 years that were weaker Cup winners?  Hey, there's no shame being a weak Cup winner, as you're still a Cup winner.  It's like the doctor who finishes last in his Harvard class.  Someone has to finish last and they're near the bottom for me.

The other reason they didn't impress me is they were relatively thin on defense.  It wasn't a strong group of names on the blue line.  I don't remember them having good forward depth either.  Lastly, I do give more respect to teams that went to multiple Finals or even came close.  That team never did much of anything else before or after that season.  I know the lockout didn't help, but they still kept their core forwards together after the lockout and still not much came of it.    

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

21 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Yes.  They're the two weakest Cup winners of that decade.  Honestly, they may be the weakest Cup winners ever.  How many Cup winners were weaker than those two teams?  

Don't get me wrong.  I think the 2008 Wings were a great team.  However, they're not better than the 2001 Avalanche.  They may not be as good as the 2000 Devils either.  A lot of people rank that as the best Devils team ever.  The 2003 Devils aren't far off either.  I also think you're overrating the 2009 Penguins.  I can't see them beating the 2007 Ducks or 2003 Devils in a series. 

We agree on Tampa and Carolina.  They were both #1 seeds, but as I said above, they're great candidates for the weakest Cup winners ever.  Neither of those teams ever accomplished anything else and won the Cup against relatively weak opposition and fortuitous circumstances.    

Admittedly, I did allow bias to affect my rankings a little bit. You definitely could rank the 01 Avs higher (not that I want to) and  I suppose you could switch the 03 Devils and 07 Ducks (although they were really good too). I hate the Pens, but that 09 Wings team they beat was loaded. It was not an easy thing to do to make the Cup Finals 2 years in a row and beat that team. That's why I ranked them higher.

[kliq 3,763]

3 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

They actually didn't beat Calgary fairly, as that Gelinas shot looked to be a goal.  It was a tainted Cup in some ways.  You're right that they had a good regular season and had some very talented forwards, including the MVP that season in St. Louis.  Khabibulin had one of the best playoffs a European goalie ever had up to that time.  

They're one of the weakest Cup winners for several reasons.  For one, can you even name five teams in the last 40 years that were weaker Cup winners?  Hey, there's no shame being a weak Cup winner, as you're still a Cup winner.  It's like the doctor who finishes last in his Harvard class.  Someone has to finish last and they're near the bottom for me.

The other reason they didn't impress me is they were relatively thin on defense.  It wasn't a strong group of names on the blue line.  I don't remember them having good forward depth either.  Lastly, I do give more respect to teams that went to multiple Finals or even came close.  That team never did much of anything else before or after that season.  I know the lockout didn't help, but they still kept their core forwards together after the lockout and still not much came of it.    

Don't agree on the Gelina's goal, to overturn that you needed 100% indisputable evidence that it did not go in, and that was not there. Based on the angle, had that puck been on the ground, its a goal. If it's in the air which it likely was, its not a goal. Either way, had that gone it, its not like the series is over. Calgary had a chance in OT to win and they failed, they also had a chance to win game 7, and they failed. Blaming it on that goal is an excuse, we're not talking Dallas/Buffalo/Hasek/Hull here where the series ended by a blatant BS call.

If we are talking the last 40 years (so 1977-2017), of course they are low on the list. With teams like the Habs, Wings, Oilers, Penguins, Islanders etc. dominating like they did, any team with one Cup win will rank near the bottom. 

If we are talking 2000-2009 I think the Wings, Avs, and Pens are better.

I think they are better then the Canes, possibly the Devils, and Ducks. I think the Devils are a bit overrated, they had a great goalie and played a good system, but the team was not that talented. You don't allow Scott Stevens to attack the head and they come down big time. Not the most skilled team out there. They were more so a product of the rules. I feel like teams now a days with today's rules would kill them.

TB had good forwards, they ran with the big 3, as well as Stillman who had a great year that year scoring a point per game, Modin, Fedotenko (who was great in big games), and of course "The Chuck".

On D they weren't super strong, but they weren't bad. You had Boyle and Kubina at their peaks who were very good, then the rest was OK.

Either way, we are talking cup winners here. They are all good.