HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   '86 Oilers vs '71 Bruins 7 game series (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=779744)

FASTHANDS* 05-24-2010 03:36 PM

'86 Oilers vs '71 Bruins 7 game series
 
Both are notorious for being overwhelming favorites to win the Stanley Cup (Oilers two-time defending champs, Bruins, defending champs) only to be shockingly elimanated. 1986 Oilers 56-17-7 426 goals, 1971 Bruins 57-14-7 399 goals in 78 games. It would have been a high scoring affair thats for sure. I'll take the 86 Oilers in 7 games.

JFA87-66-99 05-24-2010 09:31 PM

I think Boston might win this series, but it would be close

Ogie Goldthorpe 05-24-2010 09:52 PM

As a rule, I would always take a team with (a peak or near peak) Gretzky on it... unless confronted with a team with (a peak or near peak) Orr.

Hmm...

I'd probably still lean towards the Oilers in 7.

FASTHANDS* 05-24-2010 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eastvanmungo (Post 25987231)
As a rule, I would always take a team with (a peak or near peak) Gretzky on it... unless confronted with a team with (a peak or near peak) Orr.

Hmm...

I'd probably still lean towards the Oilers in 7.

Would be one hell of an offensive series, with each team's major superstars at the peak of their offensive powers. It's still shocking to me all these years laters that niether of them took home the cup those years. I think these two teams are the greatest teams to never win the cup. That being said, which was more of an upset, the 1971 Bruins who seemed destined to win back to back or the 1986 Oilers who seemed destined to win a third consecutive cup and earn dynasty status?

vadim sharifijanov 05-25-2010 12:30 AM

two offensive juggernauts. maybe it comes down to cheevers vs. fuhr? i don't know cheevers that well, but some call him one of the weakest modern goalies in the HHOF. game on the line, i've always admired fuhr's ability to step it up.

my other thought is that edmonton needed '86 to effect the culture change to win in '87 and '88, with muckler taking on a bigger role. those last two gretzky teams were very good defensive clubs, whereas in '86 i got the sense that they had not only gotten complacent, but just figured they could turn it on and outscore any opponent. but who knows? maybe they could have outscored any team except that calgary team that was built specifically to beat them.

but i still say oilers, with fuhr being the difference. after all, edmonton lost to a team that matched up against them perfectly while boston arguably lost to a hot goalie.

greatgazoo 05-25-2010 12:58 AM

That Bruins team lost to a Habs team loaded with Hall of Famers. The Oilers were ripe for a take down due to their arrogance.

I'm going with the Bruins on this one.

Canadiens1958 05-25-2010 05:23 AM

Deciding Moment
 
The image of a seventh game, overtime, own goal deciding the series will not go away.

FASTHANDS* 05-25-2010 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 25989181)
two offensive juggernauts. maybe it comes down to cheevers vs. fuhr? i don't know cheevers that well, but some call him one of the weakest modern goalies in the HHOF. game on the line, i've always admired fuhr's ability to step it up.

my other thought is that edmonton needed '86 to effect the culture change to win in '87 and '88, with muckler taking on a bigger role. those last two gretzky teams were very good defensive clubs, whereas in '86 i got the sense that they had not only gotten complacent, but just figured they could turn it on and outscore any opponent. but who knows? maybe they could have outscored any team except that calgary team that was built specifically to beat them.

but i still say oilers, with fuhr being the difference. after all, edmonton lost to a team that matched up against them perfectly while boston arguably lost to a hot goalie.

Agreed, the turning point of the Edmonton dynasty was indeed 1986. Argubaly at the peak of their arrogance, even after Steve Smith created the mother of all gaffes, their seemed no sense of desperation, I guess they felt they 14 minutes left they'll score and then get the game winner. Turns out it didn't exactly work out that way and I'm sure each and every Oiler had one of the longest summers of their lives scratching their heads wondering how they had been eliminated. They would have a long road back to victory in 1987, but became one of the greatest Stanley Cup multiple winners in hockey history.

Psycho Papa Joe 05-25-2010 08:05 AM

While I think the 86 Oilers were the better team, the Bruins were 'upset' against a much better team and still went 7. IMO the Bruins would have crushed the Flames. But on the other hand, I think the 86 Oilers would have beaten the 71 Habs. I also think the 71 Habs beat the 86 Flames in 5 or 6. I can't think of one area where the 86 Flames have an edge on them except coaching.

The Habs and Flames largely rose to the occasion because they were facing a rival and caught that rival when they were most over-confident.

Oilers in 6 or 7 over the Bruins because IMO Fhur>Cheevers and Moog>Johnson. That is the one area where the Oilers have a big edge.

tony d 05-25-2010 09:36 AM

The 1971 Bruins in 6

Big Phil 05-25-2010 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FASTHANDS (Post 25987353)
Would be one hell of an offensive series, with each team's major superstars at the peak of their offensive powers. It's still shocking to me all these years laters that niether of them took home the cup those years. I think these two teams are the greatest teams to never win the cup. That being said, which was more of an upset, the 1971 Bruins who seemed destined to win back to back or the 1986 Oilers who seemed destined to win a third consecutive cup and earn dynasty status?

For sure the 1986 Oilers was more of an upset. They lost to a team that they should have beaten in about 6 games. The Bruins, while still being favoured, lost to the Habs who aren't as bad as their record suggested in the season. Mahovlich and Dryden were two late additions to the team and let's face it that team was loaded with HHOFers to begin with. It was a shock to lose to Montreal, but come to think of it as time has gone on, I don't think the 1971 Habs get their due. That was a great, great, team

Big Phil 05-25-2010 09:53 PM

I still think the Oilers win in 7 games. I agree, you are hard pressed to bet against a prime Gretzky. Of course we all know Orr is almost, if not equally, intimidating at that time. When you look at it, those teams were BOTH offensive juggernauts. The Bruins had 399 goals that year the most ever from a non-Oiler team. The '86 Oilers had 426 so give them the slight edge.

But like another poster said I think it comes down to goaltending. We witnessed Fuhr rise to the occasion in a high scoring affair (1987 Canada Cup) and that's exactly what this would be. I'm not sure we've ever seen Cheevers rise to the occasion at a time when he was peppered with shot after shot and dangerous scoring chance after dangerous scoring chance. The Boston defense was good, but would not be able to contain the Oilers. I think Cheevers would be more likely to cost the Bruins a game than Fuhr. Another poster asked if he is the worst goalie in the HHOF. Hey look, I have no problem with Cheevers in there but yeah I think he might be the worst in there and that isn't a knock either since the HHOF is very strict on goalies.

But Fuhr would help be the difference. He was more clutch. And let's not forget the top end talent. While Gretzky and Messier are pretty much the equivalent of Espo and Orr at that time, who do the Bruins have that can match up to Kurri? Their next best is an older Bucyk and a prime Hodge. Not sure that's good enough. Plus there is Anderson. Also the wild card is Coffey. If we're assuming Orr is matched up with Gretzky who stops Coffey? No one, I don't think.

Oilers in 7

cam042686 11-09-2012 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil (Post 26002675)
I still think the Oilers win in 7 games. I agree, you are hard pressed to bet against a prime Gretzky. Of course we all know Orr is almost, if not equally, intimidating at that time. When you look at it, those teams were BOTH offensive juggernauts. The Bruins had 399 goals that year the most ever from a non-Oiler team. The '86 Oilers had 426 so give them the slight edge.

But like another poster said I think it comes down to goaltending. We witnessed Fuhr rise to the occasion in a high scoring affair (1987 Canada Cup) and that's exactly what this would be. I'm not sure we've ever seen Cheevers rise to the occasion at a time when he was peppered with shot after shot and dangerous scoring chance after dangerous scoring chance. The Boston defense was good, but would not be able to contain the Oilers. I think Cheevers would be more likely to cost the Bruins a game than Fuhr. Another poster asked if he is the worst goalie in the HHOF. Hey look, I have no problem with Cheevers in there but yeah I think he might be the worst in there and that isn't a knock either since the HHOF is very strict on goalies.

But Fuhr would help be the difference. He was more clutch. And let's not forget the top end talent. While Gretzky and Messier are pretty much the equivalent of Espo and Orr at that time, who do the Bruins have that can match up to Kurri? Their next best is an older Bucyk and a prime Hodge. Not sure that's good enough. Plus there is Anderson. Also the wild card is Coffey. If we're assuming Orr is matched up with Gretzky who stops Coffey? No one, I don't think.

Oilers in 7

I think you may be forgetting that Boston had 2 of the best ever defensive forwards in Derek Sanderson and Ed Westfall. Don Marcotte was also pretty good. The Oilers had nobody who could play defense like these guys. The Bruins also had a nasty edge to them that the Oilers lacked. Ted Green, Wayne Cashman, Derek Sanderson were very good players - and as nasty as anyone that has ever played. If messier and/or Anderson tried some of their cheap stuff someone like Sanderson would have handed their heads to them.

Bruins in 6. The Oilers defense would have been swamped by the Bruins. They never faced a team with 2 lines as good as Bostons and a 3rd line that was not only great defensively - but very dangerous offensively as well. And we have not even touched on a certain Mr. Orr yet.

Craig Wallace

DisgruntledGoat 11-11-2012 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cam042686 (Post 55658811)
I think you may be forgetting that Boston had 2 of the best ever defensive forwards in Derek Sanderson and Ed Westfall. Don Marcotte was also pretty good. The Oilers had nobody who could play defense like these guys. The Bruins also had a nasty edge to them that the Oilers lacked. Ted Green, Wayne Cashman, Derek Sanderson were very good players - and as nasty as anyone that has ever played. If messier and/or Anderson tried some of their cheap stuff someone like Sanderson would have handed their heads to them.

Bruins in 6. The Oilers defense would have been swamped by the Bruins. They never faced a team with 2 lines as good as Bostons and a 3rd line that was not only great defensively - but very dangerous offensively as well. And we have not even touched on a certain Mr. Orr yet.

Craig Wallace

No offense to Mr. Sanderson but Anderson and Messier survived and thrived in the height of the Battle of Alberta, so I doubt there's much even the big, bad Bruins can throw at them that would slow them down.

And the 1986 Oilers had McSorley AND Semenko on the roster. I'm not sure dragging that game down into the alley would be a good strategy for Boston.

cam042686 11-11-2012 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat (Post 55687571)
No offense to Mr. Sanderson but Anderson and Messier survived and thrived in the height of the Battle of Alberta, so I doubt there's much even the big, bad Bruins can throw at them that would slow them down.

And the 1986 Oilers had McSorley AND Semenko on the roster. I'm not sure dragging that game down into the alley would be a good strategy for Boston.

Keep in mind that Sanderson, Cashman, etc were very good players as well as being nasty. Semenko and McSorley were marginal NHL players at best.

Craig Wallace

BubbaBoot 11-12-2012 12:07 AM

BRUINS
Cashman - Esposito - Hodge
Bucyk - Stanfield - McKenzie
Marcotte - Sanderson - Westfall
Carleton - Walton - Leach
Bailey

Orr - Dallas Smith
Green - Awrey
Rick Smith

Cheevers
Johnston

The Montreal team had 8 future HoFers as well as JC Tremblay, Terry Harper, Marc Tardiff, John Ferguson, Pete Mahovlich and Rejean Houle.


OILERS (?) Can't remember the line combos.
Semenko - Gretzky - Kurri
Krushelnyski / Hunter - Messier - Anderson
Tikkanen - MacTavish - Napier
McClellend

Coffey - Gregg
Lowe - Huddy
Fogolin - Smith / Jackson
McSorley

Fuhr
Moog

The Flames had 4 future HoFers as well as Paul Reinhart, Doug Riseborough, Dan Quinn, Joel Otto, Gary Suter, Jamie Macoun, Colin Paterson, Jim Peplinski, Hakan Loob, Mike Vernon and Reggie lemelin.

Hardyvan123 11-12-2012 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cam042686 (Post 55698291)
Keep in mind that Sanderson, Cashman, etc were very good players as well as being nasty. Semenko and McSorley were marginal NHL players at best.

Craig Wallace

Semenko and McSorely weren't any less marginal than Dave the Hammer Schultz who had a bit of a career in the 70's either.

I think what should be mentioned is that the Oilers core was all around 25 and their goaltending was probably better as well.

Probably the Oilers in 6 or 7 but these types of comparisons are so subjective that they almost have no meaning.

In the hypothetical matchup and meeting of these 2 teams who knows if Leach and Walton develop chemistry?

Or any other of 100s of variables that we have no way of measuring?

That and the only real measurable variable that is not to be taken in these comps makes it a fun exercise but not much more.

Sticks and Pucks 11-12-2012 07:16 PM

I would go with the Bruins on this one. The teams in the early 70s were better because back then there were only 12 teams in the league and 6 of them were terrible expansion teams. This meant that it was harder to make the NHL's Original Six teams as there were only six teams so the bottom players on those teams would be better than the bottom players of a team in the 80s since there were 21 teams in the league at that time (so it was not as hard to make the NHL). It is for that reason that I am picking the Bruins as it would have been easier to score on the lesser players on the 86 Oilers than the lesser players on the 71 Bruins.

Mats86 11-12-2012 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FASTHANDS* (Post 25979480)
Both are notorious for being overwhelming favorites to win the Stanley Cup (Oilers two-time defending champs, Bruins, defending champs) only to be shockingly elimanated. 1986 Oilers 56-17-7 426 goals, 1971 Bruins 57-14-7 399 goals in 78 games. It would have been a high scoring affair thats for sure. I'll take the 86 Oilers in 7 games.

Certainly would be an interesting series to see. So close, hard to predict winner. Whoever was hot be the winner.

JuniorNelson 11-13-2012 12:49 AM

Does Gretzky get protection? If this is officiated by people who do not know Gretzky gets special treatment, the Bruins win in four games.

Soundwave 11-13-2012 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FirstOverallLine (Post 55722541)
I would go with the Bruins on this one. The teams in the early 70s were better because back then there were only 12 teams in the league and 6 of them were terrible expansion teams. This meant that it was harder to make the NHL's Original Six teams as there were only six teams so the bottom players on those teams would be better than the bottom players of a team in the 80s since there were 21 teams in the league at that time (so it was not as hard to make the NHL). It is for that reason that I am picking the Bruins as it would have been easier to score on the lesser players on the 86 Oilers than the lesser players on the 71 Bruins.

Maybe the 80s Oilers are the exception to the rule though ... a freak fluke of exceptional talent all coming together at once.

Lets not forget, the Oilers basically won another Stanley Cup with their best player and no.1 center (Gretzky), no.1 d-man and arguably second best player (Paul Coffey), and their no.1 goalie (Fuhr) gone in 1990.

I don't think you the 1971 Bruins or even any of the Habs could pull that off.

whatsupcomrade* 11-13-2012 04:23 AM

fascinating poll

Orr vs. Gretzky? I dislike janet immensely, but she is hard to bet against. I think it's a saw-off between these two, but I think gretzky might do better against boston than orr against edmonton since she uses her teammates better and has more world-class talent around her. Boston is somewhat of an over-rated team: they had Orr and they had esposito, but there wasn't a lot of really great talent on that bruins team; it was a club that won because of Orr and the presence he brought. I say edmonton wins in 6.

Scott1980 12-07-2012 06:24 PM

Gotta go with 86 Oilers on this one. What if it's a seven game series and Orr plays like he did in games 2, 6, 7 of '71? Was that 40 year old Jean Beliveau I just saw TWICE scoring with Orr just standing there? Then centering to Ferguson, and Orr just does nothing? My neighbour was right, Orr WAS terrible in that Series. My gawd!

Supreme King 12-08-2012 08:20 AM

The thought of seeing a prime Orr and a prime Coffey with their end to end rushes. Imagine the speed on the ice with these two powerhouses. I'll take '86 Oilers.

Redscotter 12-29-2012 03:25 AM

Boston in five.

Think about it, and I am asking you to really think here. The '71 Bruins lived in a league without the "third-man-in" rule.

When The Bruins fought, it was a genuine melee. A full-on donnybrook. No one was spared. No one.

Gretzky would be beaten down, or injured - likely by Derek Sanderson or Ted Green.

Who on the Oilers would cover Bobby Orr ? Semenko or McSorely could try and sucker him after the whistle, but Orr could beat both of them. On top of that, the Bruins would gang-up and scare Dave and Marty into submission.

Spare me the Cheevers is weak argument. Compare Fuhr's GAA against Cheesy's.

Have you ever seen what Wayne Cashman or Johnny Mackenzie did in the corners ?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.