View Single Post
05-25-2010, 06:20 AM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 142
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
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.

FASTHANDS* is offline   Reply With Quote