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.

Ranking Dynasties

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-13-2013, 02:33 AM
  #1
saskriders
Can't Hold Leads
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Auckland
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 21,378
vCash: 750
Ranking Dynasties

How would you rank them? What you consider a dynasty is up to you

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 08:18 AM
  #2
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,349
vCash: 500
Habs late 50's
Habs late 70's
Oilers 80's
Isles 80's
Leafs 60's
Habs late 60's
Leafs 40's

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 09:32 AM
  #3
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Habs - 70s
Isles -80s
Oilers - 80s
Habs - 60s
Leafs - 40s-50s
Leafs - 60s
Habs - 50s-60
Wings - 50s
Sens - teens

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 11:21 AM
  #4
Leafsdude7
Stand-Up Philosopher
 
Leafsdude7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,642
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Leafsdude7 Send a message via MSN to Leafsdude7 Send a message via Yahoo to Leafsdude7
Late 70s Habs
Late 50s Habs
Late 90s/early 00s Wings
80s Oilers
80s Isles
60s Leafs
70s Bruins


Leafsdude7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 03:39 PM
  #5
DLR1970
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 43
vCash: 500
I'll rank only the three i've seen:

1.Late 70's Montreal
2.80's Islanders
3.80's Oilers

DLR1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 04:43 PM
  #6
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,407
vCash: 500
1. Habs late 50s easily - 5 straight Cups, never having to even play a game 7? They were actually pretty unlucky with injuries in the playoffs to key players and still accomplished this.

2. Late 70s Habs - They feasted on an unbalanced league, but they were still very dominant.

3/4. 80s Islanders and Oilers. I still refuse to pick

5: 50s Red Wings - possibly the 2nd most talented dynasty, but underachieved somewhat in the playoffs.

6. 20s Senators - during this era, every game of the Cup finals was played at the home of the same team due to travel. The finals alternated between being hosted by the NHL and PCHA finalist every year. The Senators are the only team of the era to win the Cup on hostile territory (along with a couple on home ice).

7/8/9 (I have trouble choosing between them)

60s Maple Leafs - the ultimate "greater than the sum of its parts" team. The weakest group of forwards of any of the dynasties.

40s Maple Leafs - feasted on a war-weakened league in 1945, then won 3 in a row from 47-49 while the 4 American teams were still recovering from the war. But they still managed to steal a Cup from Detroit as late as 1951. The weakest group of defenseman of any of the dynasties.

60s Canadiens - the weakest goaltending of any of the dynasties. Great depth players, but less star power than any other dynasty.

In the 1950s, Montreal and Detroit had a near-monopoly on elite talent, but by the 1960s, top talent was spread over Montreal, Toronto, Detroit, and Chicago, which is why I think the 2 60s dynasties were less stacked than the two 50s ones.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 12:01 AM
  #7
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
1. Habs late 50s easily - 5 straight Cups, never having to even play a game 7? They were actually pretty unlucky with injuries in the playoffs to key players and still accomplished this.

2. Late 70s Habs - They feasted on an unbalanced league, but they were still very dominant.

3/4. 80s Islanders and Oilers. I still refuse to pick

5: 50s Red Wings - possibly the 2nd most talented dynasty, but underachieved somewhat in the playoffs.

6. 20s Senators - during this era, every game of the Cup finals was played at the home of the same team due to travel. The finals alternated between being hosted by the NHL and PCHA finalist every year. The Senators are the only team of the era to win the Cup on hostile territory (along with a couple on home ice).

7/8/9 (I have trouble choosing between them)

60s Maple Leafs - the ultimate "greater than the sum of its parts" team. The weakest group of forwards of any of the dynasties.

40s Maple Leafs - feasted on a war-weakened league in 1945, then won 3 in a row from 47-49 while the 4 American teams were still recovering from the war. But they still managed to steal a Cup from Detroit as late as 1951. The weakest group of defenseman of any of the dynasties.

60s Canadiens - the weakest goaltending of any of the dynasties. Great depth players, but less star power than any other dynasty.

In the 1950s, Montreal and Detroit had a near-monopoly on elite talent, but by the 1960s, top talent was spread over Montreal, Toronto, Detroit, and Chicago, which is why I think the 2 60s dynasties were less stacked than the two 50s ones.
That's about how I'd have it. Tough picking between the 50s and 70s Habs, 80s Islanders and Oilers.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 12:12 AM
  #8
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
1. Habs late 50s easily - 5 straight Cups, never having to even play a game 7? They were actually pretty unlucky with injuries in the playoffs to key players and still accomplished this.

2. Late 70s Habs - They feasted on an unbalanced league, but they were still very dominant.

3/4. 80s Islanders and Oilers. I still refuse to pick

5: 50s Red Wings - possibly the 2nd most talented dynasty, but underachieved somewhat in the playoffs.

6. 20s Senators - during this era, every game of the Cup finals was played at the home of the same team due to travel. The finals alternated between being hosted by the NHL and PCHA finalist every year. The Senators are the only team of the era to win the Cup on hostile territory (along with a couple on home ice).

7/8/9 (I have trouble choosing between them)

60s Maple Leafs - the ultimate "greater than the sum of its parts" team. The weakest group of forwards of any of the dynasties.

40s Maple Leafs - feasted on a war-weakened league in 1945, then won 3 in a row from 47-49 while the 4 American teams were still recovering from the war. But they still managed to steal a Cup from Detroit as late as 1951. The weakest group of defenseman of any of the dynasties.

60s Canadiens - the weakest goaltending of any of the dynasties. Great depth players, but less star power than any other dynasty.

In the 1950s, Montreal and Detroit had a near-monopoly on elite talent, but by the 1960s, top talent was spread over Montreal, Toronto, Detroit, and Chicago, which is why I think the 2 60s dynasties were less stacked than the two 50s ones.
Nice work. I would put the Isles ahead of the Oilers just based on consistency. The Oilers remind me of the 50's Red Wings. Kind of a 'what could have been' team. With a little luck and money, those Oilers teams could have had an unprecedented run.

LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 03:25 PM
  #9
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
I'm not old enough to remember the late 70s Habs, but hard to put anyone ahead of them.

75-76: 58-11-11 and 12-1 in the play-offs.
76-77: 60-8-12 and 12-2 in the play-offs
77-78: 59-10-11 and 12-3 in the play-offs
78-79: 52-17-11 and 12-4 in the play-offs.

patnyrnyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 05:26 PM
  #10
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,741
vCash: 500
1970s Habs - Even if you want to say the genius of Sam Pollock made it almost unfair for the rest of the NHL let's not ignore them here either. During their dynasty the Isles, Bruins, Sabres and Flyers all were 100 point teams every year and let's not pretend they didn't have their share of great players either. The fact that the NHL has done everything in its power to add extra points, shootout losses, etc. and no team has still broken the 132 points is amazing. This team was flat out dominant. They lost one home game in 1976-'77. They lost one playoff game in 1976. Two in 1977, three in 1978 and 4 in 1979.

1950s Habs - 5 Cups in a row is still unheard of. Plus let's look at the players they had on their team. It would be difficult for any team from any era to match up to this team.

1980s Isles/Oilers - The fact that they faced on in the final and one swept one and the other beat them in 5 games makes this one more or less a wash. What's the difference between 4 in a row and the Oilers' 4/5? I'd say the mere difference is Steve Smith errant pass and John Tonelli/Billy Smith's late game and overtime heroics in 1982 vs. Pittsburgh. That's it. Two marvelous teams.

1950s Red Wings - You could easily put them ahead of even the Isles and Oilers but the one thing lacking is the Cups. 4/6 is great, but the Isles did 4 in a row and the Oilers 4/5. In a 6 team league Detroit did less. However, they peeled through the NHL regular seasons back then to a greater extent than the Oilers and Isles. So they really aren't far behind at all.


From the OP, my definition of a dynasty is a minimum of 3 in 4 years. Look at other sports, the Dallas Cowboys of the 1990s are a dynasty. The Patriots of the 2000s are too. Hockey doesn't really have that 3/4 combo other than the Senators from the 1920s. So three in a row is a dynasty for me too. 4/6 would be as well. A team like the Pittsburgh Steelers recently? Not bad but two Super Bowls in 4 years doesn't cut it.

In the NHL the Bruins of the early 1970s win two in three years. Not good enough. Flyers win two in a row and make the final the third year. This is the closest thing to a dynasty in my opinion. The Pens win two in a row, lead the NHL in points the 3rd year and while they looked infallible they lost in the second round. Very, very close to a real dynasty in my mind.

Other close calls: New Jersey reaching 3 finals in 4 years winning two. Close, but they weren't as memorable of a team. The Red Wings winning two in a row and then winning in 2002 make it 3/6. That's close, considering they reach the final in 1995, dominate the regular season in 1996 and lose to Colorado twice in 1999 and 2000. One more win and this team is a true dynasty with all the rest.

As it stands, these "close but no cigar" teams are still teams that we remember fondly. The Red Wings were the closest to a dynasty in my mind since the Oilers. I personally think a dynasty is one thing or another. If we call teams dynasties in the original 6 and the 1980s with a 21 team league why does the standard of it have to change in a 30 team league? A great team will be a great team.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 05:56 PM
  #11
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
1 - Islanders /early 80s/

2 - Canadiens /late 70s/

3 - Oilers /mid and late 80s/

Yamaguchi* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 07:24 PM
  #12
Killion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Westcoast
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,755
vCash: 500
1. 50's Habs
2. 70's Habs
3. 80's Isles/Oilers
4. 50's Wings
5. 60's Leafs
6. 47-51 Leafs
7. Teens/20's Sens

spotty, sporadic, or whatever
but who should be included;

8. 70's Bruins & Flyers
9. 60's Canadiens & Hawks
10. 90's-00 Detroit Red Wings
11. 90's Colorado Avalanche

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 07:28 PM
  #13
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
1. 50's Habs
2. 70's Habs
3. 80's Isles/Oilers
4. 50's Wings
5. 60's Leafs
6. 47-51 Leafs
7. Teens/20's Sens

spotty, sporadic, or whatever
but who should be included;

8. 70's Bruins & Flyers
9. 60's Canadiens & Hawks
10. 90's-00 Detroit Red Wings
11. 90's Colorado Avalanche
Well, I obvously agree with your top 4 (really your top 5 since you have two listed under #3), since it was the exact same order as I had, right down to the tie for #3.

But two questions:

1) how do you have the 60s Canadiens who won 4 Cups in 5 years on the same level as the 60s Hawks (who won a single Cup - why include them at all?) and below the 70s Bruins and Flyers who only won a Cup each?

And why is 90s Colorado over 90s New Jersey?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2013, 07:40 PM
  #14
Killion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Westcoast
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Well...
Well, if you must know, a shiny bauble in the room distracted me so I just slammed down the last few picks. Gave it little thought. No particular order. And ya, glaring omission there without Jersey. So lets do this in that 2nd tier...

8) 60's Habs
9) 90's/00 Wings
10) 90's Jersey
11) 90's Colorado
12) 70's Bruins/Flyers
13) 1960's Blackhawks

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 07:38 AM
  #15
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,582
vCash: 500
During my time....late '60s to present. Can't speak before that because I never saw them play

1 - 1970s Habs - Sam Pollock took a good team from the late '60s and supplemented it with some high draft picks in early 70s. Formed the greatest team ever. Especially from '76 to '78.

2. 1980s Oilers - Had the greatest player ever with plenty of fire power around him. Messier one of best leaders.

3. 1980s - Islanders - Torrey learned from Montreal and kept his draft picks and drafted well.

4. 1960s - Canadiens - Almost had 5 Cups in a row if not for an upset in Cup Finals in 1967. The '50s dynasty holdovers in Beliveau, Pocket Rocket, Tremblay combined with a new generation of french Canadian stars in Lemaire, Cournoyer, Backstrom.

5. 1970s - Bruins - Should have won more than they did. They probably would have if not so cheap and let Harry Sinden leave over peanuts to work for a construction company right in their best years. Orr was best of his era, unreal firepower. WHA really gouged them at their peak.


Last edited by BrimStone64: 03-16-2013 at 08:48 AM.
BrimStone64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 02:38 PM
  #16
Cadienhomme
Registered User
 
Cadienhomme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 22
vCash: 500
The 50s montreal canadiens is the greastest. Having 11 hall of fames working together like that and winning is crazy

Cadienhomme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 02:52 PM
  #17
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
1970s Habs - Even if you want to say the genius of Sam Pollock made it almost unfair for the rest of the NHL let's not ignore them here either. During their dynasty the Isles, Bruins, Sabres and Flyers all were 100 point teams every year and let's not pretend they didn't have their share of great players either. The fact that the NHL has done everything in its power to add extra points, shootout losses, etc. and no team has still broken the 132 points is amazing. This team was flat out dominant. They lost one home game in 1976-'77. They lost one playoff game in 1976. Two in 1977, three in 1978 and 4 in 1979.

1950s Habs - 5 Cups in a row is still unheard of. Plus let's look at the players they had on their team. It would be difficult for any team from any era to match up to this team.

1980s Isles/Oilers - The fact that they faced on in the final and one swept one and the other beat them in 5 games makes this one more or less a wash. What's the difference between 4 in a row and the Oilers' 4/5? I'd say the mere difference is Steve Smith errant pass and John Tonelli/Billy Smith's late game and overtime heroics in 1982 vs. Pittsburgh. That's it. Two marvelous teams.

1950s Red Wings - You could easily put them ahead of even the Isles and Oilers but the one thing lacking is the Cups. 4/6 is great, but the Isles did 4 in a row and the Oilers 4/5. In a 6 team league Detroit did less. However, they peeled through the NHL regular seasons back then to a greater extent than the Oilers and Isles. So they really aren't far behind at all.


From the OP, my definition of a dynasty is a minimum of 3 in 4 years. Look at other sports, the Dallas Cowboys of the 1990s are a dynasty. The Patriots of the 2000s are too. Hockey doesn't really have that 3/4 combo other than the Senators from the 1920s. So three in a row is a dynasty for me too. 4/6 would be as well. A team like the Pittsburgh Steelers recently? Not bad but two Super Bowls in 4 years doesn't cut it.

In the NHL the Bruins of the early 1970s win two in three years. Not good enough. Flyers win two in a row and make the final the third year. This is the closest thing to a dynasty in my opinion. The Pens win two in a row, lead the NHL in points the 3rd year and while they looked infallible they lost in the second round. Very, very close to a real dynasty in my mind.

Other close calls: New Jersey reaching 3 finals in 4 years winning two. Close, but they weren't as memorable of a team. The Red Wings winning two in a row and then winning in 2002 make it 3/6. That's close, considering they reach the final in 1995, dominate the regular season in 1996 and lose to Colorado twice in 1999 and 2000. One more win and this team is a true dynasty with all the rest.

As it stands, these "close but no cigar" teams are still teams that we remember fondly. The Red Wings were the closest to a dynasty in my mind since the Oilers. I personally think a dynasty is one thing or another. If we call teams dynasties in the original 6 and the 1980s with a 21 team league why does the standard of it have to change in a 30 team league? A great team will be a great team.
Quite simply it's a heck of a lot harder, all things being equal, to be a dynasty in a 30 team league than a 6 team one.

This thread is focusing on SC it seems but the current Red Wings have the record for consecutive spot seasons making the playoffs with 21 I believe and the next best in hockey is less than half of that, San Jose with 8 seasons.


Last edited by Hardyvan123: 04-27-2013 at 03:17 PM.
Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 06:17 PM
  #18
yave1964
22 and counting
 
yave1964's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Lexington ohio
Posts: 332
vCash: 500
1. 1970s Canadiens
2. 1950s Red Wings
3. 1980s Oilers
4. 1950s Canadiens
5 1980s Islanders
6. 1990s Wings
7. 1960s Canadiens
8. 1970s Bruins
9. 1960s Leafs
10. 1940s Leafs

yave1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 09:56 AM
  #19
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,894
vCash: 500
70s Canadiens
80s Oilers
50s Canadiens
50 DRW
80s Islanders
70s CSKA (should be included in this conversation)
90s DRW (3 in 6 plus the 62 season)
80s CSKA

Sentinel 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 07:46 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.