HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Best Teams Never to Win the Stanley Cup

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2012, 03:46 PM
  #26
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,520
vCash: 500
I don't think the Canucks are that cut and dried. The AV era's Achilles heel has always been scoring depth, and every team that beat them did it the same way: having the depth to put a strong checking unit against the Sedins, and a legitimate scoring line (IE, not Mike Fisher) against Kesler, while still having superior forwards left over. Those also happen to be the type of teams that actually win Stanley Cups.

Vancouver was incredibly fortunate that Bolland missed the first three games of the Chicago series (each won by the Sedins' offense) in 2011, or else it probably don't get out of the first round.


Last edited by struckbyaparkedcar: 11-26-2012 at 06:02 PM. Reason: accidentally a word
struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 04:38 PM
  #27
Guffaw
Registered User
 
Guffaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Drexel Hill PA
Country: United States
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Kerr was far less important to that team than any of Howe/McCrimmon/Hextall.
Far less? Yeah not sure I agree w that. A 58 goal scorer missing from a team already heavily outgunned makes the Game 7 push vs. the Oilers all the more impressive was my point.

Guffaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 04:47 PM
  #28
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
I love those Leaf teams and I feel they overachieved hugely compared to how they looked on paper just because they played so well together. On paper I'm not sure they were a "best team never to win the Cup" unless you count their chemistry and coaching.
i should have been clearer, they arent my "top team" just one i really liked.

Gilmour and Andreychuk in their prime, Potvin, Clark, and one of my all time favorites, Dave Ellet

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:08 PM
  #29
Guffaw
Registered User
 
Guffaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Drexel Hill PA
Country: United States
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Interesting looking at final series results. In the 13 finals of the three post expansion dynasties only one went seven games, and most of them were either sweeps or 4 to 1 no contests. Proud of my boys in 87'. There are plenty of great teams on this list, but it will be hard to find one that put up a bigger fight against a better team.

Guffaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:12 PM
  #30
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guffaw View Post
Far less? Yeah not sure I agree w that. A 58 goal scorer missing from a team already heavily outgunned makes the Game 7 push vs. the Oilers all the more impressive was my point.
Howe was the 2nd best defenseman in the league, and McCrimmon was also top-ten. Hextall was the league's best goalie.

If you take one of them out and put Kerr in, the Flyers don't get to Game 7, and might not even make the Finals.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:15 PM
  #31
tony d
Thanks for memories
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,717
vCash: 500
It's the 1996 Red Wings. As for the best team that was good for a long period of time without winning a Cup I'm going with the Flyers of the 90's.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:46 PM
  #32
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Just to put a spin on this, the best FRANCHISE to never win the Cup is St. Louis, right?
buffalo has been better than STL.


record
buffalo: 1569-1219-409-83 --- 3630p
STL: 1544-1429-432-101 ----- 3621p

buffalo has more wins and points despite playing 3 fewer seasons.


losing seasons
buffalo: 7
STL: 18

STL made playoffs with a losing record 12 times, once with a record of 25-40-15. in '77, STL won the smythe division, despite being 7 games below .500 and -37. they also won the norris division in '87 despite a losing record and a -12 goal differential.

finals
buffalo: 2
STL: 3

conference finals
buffalo: 6
STL: 6


STL's playoff streak and appearances in finals were based on very weak competition.

STL reached 3 finals by playing only weak expansion teams (all 6 opponents were below .500 with negative goal differentials), whereas buffalo reached 2 finals by beating montreal and chicago in '75 and ottawa and TML in '99. STL was swept in '68, '69 and '70, whereas buffalo was reasonably close in '75 and '99.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:51 PM
  #33
dennilfloss
Yes I love disco!
 
dennilfloss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,946
vCash: 500
Maybe I'm overly picky but I'm a bit confused at many of the teams mentioned for they have indeed won the Stanley Cup at some point in their history. To me, the "Never" in the title means teams that never won the Cup. Coming to mind are the Canucks & Sabres, which had good teams at various times, reaching the final on more than one occasion, but never won the Cup. Senators, Flyers, etc.. don't qualify as they have won the Cup in the past.

dennilfloss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:36 PM
  #34
Kane One
Global Moderator
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,447
vCash: 2650
I don't want to quote the whole post since it's huge, so @nik jr, I guess you're right.

__________________
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<
-]>++++++.>+.+++++++++++++++.>+++++++++.<-.
>-------.<<-----.>----.>.<<+++++++++++.>-------------
-.+++++++++++++.-------.--.+++++++++++++.+.>+.>.

New and improved Hockey Standings
"A jimmie for a jimmie makes the whole world rustled." -31-
Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:49 PM
  #35
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jroc86 View Post
In 96 Detroit had 62 wins I believe and this was before Nashville and Columbus were around to feast on for gimmee points those first few years.
No loser points or shootout "wins", either.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:55 PM
  #36
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,123
vCash: 500
I should clarify what I meant by stating "best teams that never won the Cup." I meant as the greatest assembly of talent at any given season that people think should have won the Cup. For all the hype that Lindros had coming in and the significant package of assets Philly gave up, that was a team that was supposed to eventual vie for a Stanley Cup. They did get close at one point, but that was it and I'd consider the Lindros era of the Flyers to be one of the most hyped teams and most disappointing due to their failure to deliver.

The record setting Detroit Red Wings in '96 are another terrific example of a team that was expected to carry over their regular season success into the playoffs, but that didn't end up happening until the Wings added Brendan Shanahan into the fold. Prior to '97, the Wings were considered the best team in the NHL for a number of years but were constantly upset in the post season (courtesy of New Jersey in '95 and San Jose in '94).

Of recent years, the 2007 Senators are a good example considering that they had the hottest line in the NHL with Spezza, Alfredsson and Heatley, but they ran into the brick wall that was the Anaheim Ducks with Pronger and Niedermayer on defense. The Sharks after acquiring Joe Thornton have had terrific regular season success but have in large part been a disappointment in the playoffs.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:19 PM
  #37
Guffaw
Registered User
 
Guffaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Drexel Hill PA
Country: United States
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Howe was the 2nd best defenseman in the league, and McCrimmon was also top-ten. Hextall was the league's best goalie.

If you take one of them out and put Kerr in, the Flyers don't get to Game 7, and might not even make the Finals.
That's speculation. Does it matter? It's irrelevant to the thread.

Guffaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:33 PM
  #38
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,728
vCash: 500
For teams that never won - the Canucks take the cake - so much talent and so many opportunities. Buffalo is right there as well.

Not mentioned are the two other pre-lockout teams trying to "buy" a Cup - the Rangers and Leafs had astronomical payrolls with huge names, but never really managed much with it.

The Kariya+Selanne Avs was another shocker how that did not amount to more.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:53 PM
  #39
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
The Kariya+Selanne Avs was another shocker how that did not amount to more.
I think injuries played a big part as to why that team didn't enjoy as much success as they should have. Kariya only appeared in 1 playoff game for the Avs and just 55 games, scoring a measly 36 points. Selanne was also pretty banged up at that point in his career despite appearing in 78 games that season. He only scored 32 points in 78 games and that had to be the worst season of his NHL career. Selanne wasn't any better in the playoffs, scoring only 3 points (all assists) in 10 games.

To add to the lackluster performances from that duo, Forsberg was limited to only 39 games that season and missed the rest of the year and the playoffs. That was also the Avs' first year after Patrick Roy retired. Although Aebischer had put up decent numbers, he was no Patrick Roy, and that hurt them immensely.

On paper they looked great, but in reality, that team just had too many holes and that was in large part due to injuries.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:58 PM
  #40
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
For teams that never won - the Canucks take the cake - so much talent and so many opportunities.
hmmm, the past few years i can see this, but not in past history.

when they went to the finals in 94, they finished 1 game over .500 for the season, then went on a cinderella run.

when they went to the finals in 82, they finished 3 games under .500, then again, went on a cinderella run.

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:02 PM
  #41
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
lets not forget those great Calgary Flames teams in the mid-late 80's as well. The only reason they did not win more than one cup, was because they had to go through Edmonton just about every year.

I would put the Red Wings of 94-95 and 95-96, on top, with the Calgary Flames of 85-87 right behind.

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:09 PM
  #42
Evincar
Your Final Judgement
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Of recent years, the 2007 Senators are a good example considering that they had the hottest line in the NHL with Spezza, Alfredsson and Heatley, but they ran into the brick wall that was the Anaheim Ducks with Pronger and Niedermayer on defense. The Sharks after acquiring Joe Thornton have had terrific regular season success but have in large part been a disappointment in the playoffs.
The 2007 Senators were not as good as the 2001, 2003 and 2006 teams.

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:15 PM
  #43
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
hmmm, the past few years i can see this, but not in past history.

when they went to the finals in 94, they finished 1 game over .500 for the season, then went on a cinderella run.

when they went to the finals in 82, they finished 3 games under .500, then again, went on a cinderella run.
Fair points - I'd probably put the Senators ahead of them, and maybe the Blues.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:19 PM
  #44
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
lets not forget those great Calgary Flames teams in the mid-late 80's as well. The only reason they did not win more than one cup, was because they had to go through Edmonton just about every year.

I would put the Red Wings of 94-95 and 95-96, on top, with the Calgary Flames of 85-87 right behind.
I recall hearing/reading about that as well, that the only reason the Flames didn't want Cups during that time frame was due to them having to face Edmonton in the playoffs. From 1983 to

1983: Lost Division Finals (4-1) versus Edmonton Oilers
1984: Lost Division Finals (4-3) versus Edmonton Oilers
1986: Won Division Finals (4-3) versus Edmonton Oilers (lost to Canadiens in Finals in 5).
1988: Lost Division Finals (4-0) versus Edmonton Oilers
1991: Lost Division Semi-Finals (4-3) versus Edmonton Oilers

They won a Stanley Cup in 1989, where they were spared from playing Edmonton due to LA's upset win in 7 games. The Flames would sweep the Kings, take out the Hawks in 5 games in the Conference Finals and then beat the Habs in 6 to win their first Stanley Cup. In meetings between 1983 and 1991, the Flames were victorious on only one occasion. As you suggested, those Flames certainly could have been Cup contenders had it not been for the dominant Oilers.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:20 PM
  #45
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
I think injuries played a big part as to why that team didn't enjoy as much success as they should have. Kariya only appeared in 1 playoff game for the Avs and just 55 games, scoring a measly 36 points. Selanne was also pretty banged up at that point in his career despite appearing in 78 games that season. He only scored 32 points in 78 games and that had to be the worst season of his NHL career. Selanne wasn't any better in the playoffs, scoring only 3 points (all assists) in 10 games.

To add to the lackluster performances from that duo, Forsberg was limited to only 39 games that season and missed the rest of the year and the playoffs. That was also the Avs' first year after Patrick Roy retired. Although Aebischer had put up decent numbers, he was no Patrick Roy, and that hurt them immensely.

On paper they looked great, but in reality, that team just had too many holes and that was in large part due to injuries.
No arguments - just a rotten luck season - but still just a potentially great team on paper that fell far short of expectations. 2009 Red Wings had similar rotten luck with injuries in the playoffs.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 09:57 PM
  #46
Hammer Time
Registered User
 
Hammer Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,544
vCash: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
For teams that never won - the Canucks take the cake - so much talent and so many opportunities. Buffalo is right there as well.

Not mentioned are the two other pre-lockout teams trying to "buy" a Cup - the Rangers and Leafs had astronomical payrolls with huge names, but never really managed much with it.

The Kariya+Selanne Avs was another shocker how that did not amount to more.
Considering that the Canucks were a fairly pathetic organization for most of their history, I'd probably put at least the Blues, and possibly the Senators or Sabres, ahead of them. Vancouver has had a grand total of one Hall of Famer in 41 years, not counting those that were in Vancouver before or after their primes, and the only time they were a serious Cup contender in that time was the last three seasons (2010-2012).

Hammer Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 11:13 PM
  #47
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 21,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meteor View Post
...Vancouver before or after their primes, and the only time they were a serious Cup contender in that time was the last three seasons (2010-2012).
... 1982 granted, no chance, swept by the Islanders in the finals. But 94? Pushed
New York to the full 7 games, an excellent team and IMO a "very serious contender".

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2012, 12:10 AM
  #48
I Hate Chris Butler
Backlund Fan Club
 
I Hate Chris Butler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,211
vCash: 50
2006 and 2009 Red Wings come to mind.

I Hate Chris Butler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2012, 11:05 AM
  #49
McGuillicuddy
Registered User
 
McGuillicuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony d View Post
It's the 1996 Red Wings. As for the best team that was good for a long period of time without winning a Cup I'm going with the Flyers of the 90's.
If we're narrowing it down to a single-season version of a team, then I'd take the 86 Oilers for sure.

McGuillicuddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2012, 12:38 PM
  #50
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
... 1982 granted, no chance, swept by the Islanders in the finals. But 94? Pushed
New York to the full 7 games, an excellent team and IMO a "very serious contender".
82 was a cinderella run
94 was as well. the Canucks finished one game over .500 that year, and right at .500 the following year. hardly one of the "best teams ever" not to win a cup.

i know they didnt make the playoffs in 96, but what about the 96 Devils?

jack mullet 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 09:12 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.