HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Expansion Franchises Better than O6...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2012, 12:52 AM
  #26
Peter9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
The problem with the Habs is terrible drafting during the '90ies and average drafting during the '00ies. '80ies weren't great either, except for that terrific '84 draft.
Well yes, terrible drafting is part of the incompetence I mentioned as the reason for the Canadiens' fall. There have been many other incompetencies as well, among them getting rid of some very good players when they still had much to give--Rod Langway, Chris Chelios, Patrick Roy, Guy Carbonneau, Eric Desjardins, John LeClair, Mike Ribeiro, Darcy Tucker, Jyrki Lumme, Vince Damphousse, Doug Jarvis, Pierre Turgeon. The Canadiens' trading over the past three decades has been atrocious.

Peter9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 07:19 PM
  #27
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
This thread inspired me to update a spreadsheet I did a few years ago just for fun. I basically compared all the current franchises success in 5 categories (Cup, Cup appearances, President's Trophy/#1 in league points, playoff appearances, and regular season record) to how they should have done. (So for the O6 era, each team should have won a Cup once per 6 years, made 2 appearances per 6 years, and made the playoffs once every 4 years).

It has a few issues (EDM and NYI are probably too high, and NYR and CHI are too low), but this is what comes out:

Top 10: MTL, EDM, DET, PHI, NYI, ANA, COL, TOR, NJD, BOS
Next 10: PIT, CAL, DAL, OTT, TBY, BUF, SJS, STL, CAR, NSH
Bottom 10: MIN, WSH, VAN, FLA, NYR, CHI, PHX, LAK, CLB, WPG

(Note: History moves with the franchise, so WPG has ATL history.)

The Rangers and Hawks are really penalized for their poor results in the O6 era. (They "should" have around 8 cups and 16 appearances each ... instead it is 4 and 10 for NYR and 4 and 11 for CHI.

The Flyers get most of their ranking from the 8 Cup finals ("should have had" 4) and 36 playoffs in 42 years (should have about 26).

MountainHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 07:52 PM
  #28
saskganesh
Registered User
 
saskganesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the Annex
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,273
vCash: 500
It's a 30 team league now. Not winning a cup for a few decades is only mediocre, not appalling.

saskganesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 08:13 PM
  #29
Peter9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskganesh View Post
It's a 30 team league now. Not winning a cup for a few decades is only mediocre, not appalling.
I think institutional experience--an organization that knows what it is doing--should count for something. So I don't buy that for the Montreal Canadiens or even the Toronto Maple Leafs. They let things slide. Mediocre for them is appalling.

Peter9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 09:06 PM
  #30
Kane One
Global Moderator
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,001
vCash: 1425
Edmonton is an expansion team? Mergers count as an expansion?

__________________


Glass from Girardi is practically a mathematical impossibility. I'm glad to have witnessed this great Rangers moment. -Bob Richards
I'd hate to know what the toilet facilities look like after a game with the way this team aims... -Megustaelhockey
Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 09:13 PM
  #31
Kane One
Global Moderator
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,001
vCash: 1425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Just curious, how do you rank the Rangers over Chicago? New York has only played for the Stanley Cup four times since 1940 and was an absolute doormat for the entire Original Six era.
History started in 1940? The Rangers have the same amount of Cups as Chicago and they just won their fourth two years ago. The Rangers also have more wins. Obviously the Rangers haven't been good, but I wouldn't call them a doormat. During the O6 era, how good were the Bruins? It seemed every year they would both miss the playoffs. Were they also a doormat during the O6 era?

Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:03 PM
  #32
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
History started in 1940? The Rangers have the same amount of Cups as Chicago and they just won their fourth two years ago. The Rangers also have more wins. Obviously the Rangers haven't been good, but I wouldn't call them a doormat. During the O6 era, how good were the Bruins? It seemed every year they would both miss the playoffs. Were they also a doormat during the O6 era?
No, the Bruins were awful for most of the 60's, but this is really the only significant low point the franchise has suffered. They made it to five Cup finals during the O6 era. They were clearly below the dominant Montreal/Toronto/Detroit triumverate, but clearly above the sad-sack Rangers and Hawks.

The Rangers were one of the league's strongest franchises in 1940, but WWII gutted them. It took them nearly 30 years to recover. They only made the playoffs 7/25 seasons in the O6, losing in the first round six of them. Forcing Detroit to Game 7 OT in the 1950 final was their lone highlight during the era.

And no, history didn't begin in 1940, but when it reaches the point where most of the people who enjoyed an era of success are dead, how much does it really still count for in this sort of comparison? Given that the Rangers seem to have done little to celebrate their early history doesn't help. I could be wrong, but I doubt many of the people at MSG even know who Frank Boucher or the Cook brothers are.

On WHA merger teams: Yes, basically they were expansion teams. The NHL (spearheaded by Harold Ballard and the Leafs) pretty much gutted the four merging WHA teams upon their entry. I believe they were allowed to protect just two skaters and two goalies, and the rest of their rosters were made available in a waiver draft to the existing 17 teams. Any players who were drafted by or were property of NHL teams in the past and chose to play in the WHA instead had their rights re-assigned back to their NHL club. Furthermore, the merger teams were given the last four picks in the 1979 entry draft, which just happened to be the deepest in history.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:17 PM
  #33
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Blues are pretty much the definition of mediocre though. Have only even made the semi-final twice in 40 years, despite being in the playoffs almost every year. Chicago by contrast has made it that far at least 10 times by my count, so I can't see an argument for the Blues over the Hawks. Rangers have a Cup, so I think that puts them above St. Louis as well.

Buffalo has quietly been one of the better regular season franchises in league history, they've just rarely been elite. Chicago's recent Cup would prevent me from putting the Sabres ahead of them, but it's pretty close with the Rangers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SealsFan View Post
St. Louis has gone to the playoffs 35 times, and 12 of those seasons were with a losing record. There were 5 more seasons where they were at .500 or up to 3 games over .500. So half for of those playoff appearances, they were a below-average to mediocre team.

The more I think about it, Philly and Buffalo have had a remarkable run of competitive seasons. They may not have a long string of Cups, but year in and year out they give their fans a reason to show up, without going through a rough span of a few years where the team is winning 20 games and fans are jumping ship.
agree with these

buffalo has a better history than STL. STL benefited very much from weak divisions. expansion division in its early history, and norris division in late '70s and '80s.

buffalo is 344 games above .500, while STL is only 99 games above .500. buffalo also had better finals appearances.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2012, 10:01 AM
  #34
Couturier Post
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Pittsburgh Penguins deserve consideration. Peak or valley history but 3 SCs since 1967 would rank them ahead of Toronto, the Rangers, the Blackhawks, on a par with Bruins.
The Penguins have been within a hair's breadth of relocating or disbanding FOUR TIMES in their history. That is really difficult to overlook.

Couturier Post is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2012, 11:52 AM
  #35
wildthing202
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Douglas, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wildthing202 Send a message via Yahoo to wildthing202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Couturier Post View Post
The Penguins have been within a hair's breadth of relocating or disbanding FOUR TIMES in their history. That is really difficult to overlook.
And Colorado, New Jersey, Calgary, and Dallas have actually relocated and yet it didn't harm them a much.

wildthing202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 12:03 PM
  #36
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Edmonton is an expansion team? Mergers count as an expansion?
They did go through sort of expansion draft.

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-28-2012, 12:26 AM
  #37
NYRSchrute217
Registered User
 
NYRSchrute217's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post

Buffalo has quietly been one of the better regular season franchises in league history, they've just rarely been elite. Chicago's recent Cup would prevent me from putting the Sabres ahead of them, but it's pretty close with the Rangers.
Buffalo has no cups. Anywhere near NY or CHI? Ridiculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Just curious, how do you rank the Rangers over Chicago? New York has only played for the Stanley Cup four times since 1940 and was an absolute doormat for the entire Original Six era.
Three cups during the Original 6 era is hardly doormat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Philadelphia, Edmonton, and the Islanders all have good cases to be ranked above the Rangers, Blackhawks, and Leafs.


The Rangers have been around over 80 years, and have honestly been no threat whatsoever in about 60 of them. I'd rank Edmonton, Philly, and Isles ahead of them without a second thought. I think I'd actually put the Devils ahead of them too.
Aside from the late 70s, early 80s, and '93, the Islanders have been basically irrelevant too. How are they 'ahead' of the Rangers?

They've been a complete doormat for the last 20 years other than the few years before the lockout. You act as if the Rangers were a last place team for years, which is not the case. And I know how good Tavares is, but you can't tell me the Islanders will be better than the Rangers in the 2010s. We may see a 5th NYR Cup within the next few years.

NYRSchrute217 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2012, 10:41 PM
  #38
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRSchrute217 View Post
Buffalo has no cups. Anywhere near NY or CHI? Ridiculous.
I wouldn't rank Buffalo over either of them, but the Sabres are probably the best franchise that's never won a Cup. Giving your fans a competitve team year after year isn't something I just cast aside, even if they haven't won the Cup.

Quote:
Three cups during the Original 6 era is hardly doormat.
They actually won 0 Cups during the Original Six era, which spans 1943-1967. And yes, they were unarguably a league doormat during this time span.

Quote:
Aside from the late 70s, early 80s, and '93, the Islanders have been basically irrelevant too. How are they 'ahead' of the Rangers?
Well, they have the same amount of Cups in less than half the time span, and they out-Cup the Rangers 4-1 since they've been in the league. Most people will also give some extra credit for being a dynasty, and producing all-time great players that formed that dynasty.

Quote:
They've been a complete doormat for the last 20 years other than the few years before the lockout. You act as if the Rangers were a last place team for years, which is not the case.
The Islanders have definitely been trending downwards during a disastrous 20 year stretch, which is why they are probably ranked lowest amongst franchises that produced a dynasty. Nonetheless, the Rangers can bring their Original Six stretch to the table to match and likely exceed the hapless Islanders' last two decades in terms of suckage.

And lets not pretend the Rangers have been some model franchise during Islanders swoon. They didn't win a playoff game between 1997 and 2007. Aside from 1994, what great successes do the Rangers have to speak of in the post-dynasty Islanders time frame?

Quote:
And I know how good Tavares is, but you can't tell me the Islanders will be better than the Rangers in the 2010s. We may see a 5th NYR Cup within the next few years.
Well, why not use that crystal ball to tell us who will be better in the 2030's and 2040's too? Maybe by 2100 the Blue Jackets will be the most revered franchise of all.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2012, 10:59 PM
  #39
njdevils1982
Hell Toupée!!!
 
njdevils1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North of Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
If it wasnt for lack of cups Blues and Sabres are also in consideration. Two teams that always been stable and had contender potential.

The New Jersey Devils might aswell have a case but only because they won cups. Theyve only went to the playoff 65% of the time.

Blues, have gone to the playoffs an incredible 80% times of their existance and Sabres, 71%. Now in a weaker conference but Rangers and Hawks only manage to get 62% and 65% of playoff exposure.
zero cups. im sorry, but win ONE and then be in the conversation. after all, it is the ultimate prize.

njdevils1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.