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

Why weren't the recent Wings or Devils teams accepted as Dynasties?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-10-2012, 12:23 AM
  #51
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidGenoMario View Post
We'll never see another true dynasty with the league the way it is.
That's the way it is looking, though I am sure some team at some point will do it. It's already been 25 years since the last one... We used to see 3 or 4 in that time period.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2012, 12:34 AM
  #52
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Why don't we ask John Tonelli whether or not he'd want a few extra bucks in his bank account (from the standard of that era) or if he's happy with 4 Cups in a row and always being a part of that. Players certainly had less choices back then, but it still happened that they left the team. Dryden? The 1972 Bruins fled to the WHA. Moog? Coffey? It happened once in a while. But today it's almost as if we already know a young team cannot and will not possibly stay together after they win a Cup. Honestly, do you think L.A. will repeat? I don't know who, but a key player will leave for greener pastures. If I am part of a young team like, say, the Oilers I would do everything in my power as a player to keep that core together whether that means a paycut or encouraging others to do so. If you leave a team with dynasty potential for a team that has no chance of winning just for more money then winning is not your first priority. That was the point I was making.
I understand the point only it's become less relevant in the post Cap era and basically for quite a while as well IMO.

Given the nature of the league and Cap system now I honestly don't even see a team winning 3 of 4 years and repeat winners are quite unlikely as well IMO.

Look at M Hossa 3 different teams in 3 years before he found his winner.

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2012, 01:15 AM
  #53
IcedMaidenDeth
Registered User
 
IcedMaidenDeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Given the nature of the league and Cap system now I honestly don't even see a team winning 3 of 4 years and repeat winners are quite unlikely as well IMO.
The Red Wings were one win away from 2 straight, and 2 wins away from appearing in the SCF the year before. It's still entirely possible that a team can put together a fantastic lineup for a few years in a row. It won't be as common an occurrence, but it's not like we'll never see a dynasty again.

The reason we didn't see any in the 90s is because we had 3 or 4 teams trying to be a dynasty at the same time, cancelling each other out. If even just one of the Avalanche, Devils, Red Wings, or Stars were not as good, we probably see one or two 3-peat champions or at least 3 wins in 4 years.

IcedMaidenDeth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2012, 08:09 AM
  #54
jigglysquishy
Registered User
 
jigglysquishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,406
vCash: 500
I think we're all forgetting that the Wings were 6 wins away from 3peating. If not for the Giguere beast mode in 03 they likely would have repeated again.

A 3peat or a 4 in 7 would have resulted in dynasty status.

jigglysquishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2012, 05:40 PM
  #55
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I understand the point only it's become less relevant in the post Cap era and basically for quite a while as well IMO.

Given the nature of the league and Cap system now I honestly don't even see a team winning 3 of 4 years and repeat winners are quite unlikely as well IMO.

Look at M Hossa 3 different teams in 3 years before he found his winner.
But then again, that falls on the players too. There is more onus on the players than ever before to put winning ahead of everything else. Before it used to be a guy like Pocklington or Jack Adams or Sam Pollock to keep the team together. Not anymore though. If the core of players each took say a $1million a year paycut they could keep the core together more than likely. Like it or not, and I don't, the money the players are making hinders their hunger to win again. If Eric Staal never wins again he is still considered a champion right? How much desire does he have anymore? So yeah, a lot of factors fall on the players now.

Big Phil 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 06:56 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.