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.

Which franchise is the third greatest in NHL history?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-18-2013, 04:41 AM
  #1
alko
Registered User
 
alko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 3,084
vCash: 500
Which franchise is the third greatest in NHL history?

We already know, what is the second greatest franchise in NHL history. The winner of this discussion are Red Wings.
Lets find out the THIRD greatest.

alko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2013, 07:06 AM
  #2
tony d
Kyle Turris
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 56,110
vCash: 500
The Leafs, 2nd most Cups. If you ask me they should have got #2.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2013, 10:59 AM
  #3
gudzilla
Registered User
 
gudzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
i'm curious where philly will land as they're generally considered the best expansion team... as #3? IDK, maybe leafs. they've been bad for long stretches but 13 cups is 13 cups.

gudzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2013, 11:27 AM
  #4
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,812
vCash: 500
Leafs or Bruins.

I would start the argument for Philly next.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2013, 01:09 PM
  #5
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,145
vCash: 500
Leafs, Bruins or Hawks. And even as a Leaf fan, I have to actually pause and think about this one. The reason being is that the Leafs had just some horrendous stretches of bad hockey, especially since 1967. Both the Hawks and Bruins have been significantly better since 1967 and both are recent Cup winners. The Leafs do have the hardware to back it up, but both the Hawks and Bruins should have had more Cups on paper.

I guess you might still have to go with the Leafs here. When faced off pre-1967 against either of the Bruins or Hawks it was them winning the Cups. I think that will override what they've done since.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2013, 01:10 PM
  #6
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,483
vCash: 500
It's obviously the Leafs.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2013, 11:27 PM
  #7
Sprague Cleghorn
User Registered
 
Sprague Cleghorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Edmonton, KY
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 2,674
vCash: 350
Hi, first post here.

I'd have to say the Leafs. Despite not having won the Stanley Cup, let alone made the Finals since 1967, they still have the second most Stanley Cups in history, something that just can't be ignored.

Sprague Cleghorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 07:45 AM
  #8
Fresh Prince
Go Red Wings!
 
Fresh Prince's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: In my house
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,447
vCash: 500
The Maple Leafs, obviously.

Fresh Prince is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 04:52 PM
  #9
terex
Registered User
 
terex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 576
vCash: 500
I believe the Leafs have only won their division once since 1967.

At what point does success in the pre-expansion era get overcome by overwhelming mediocrity in the post-expansion era?

I think the Oilers are are an interesting analogous microcosm: tremendous success early on, followed by mediocrity.

terex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 05:53 PM
  #10
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,838
vCash: 500
My vote is for Boston. A contender at some point in pretty much every decade. Have only missed the playoffs 5 times since expansion, 29 winning seasons in a row in that span. Winning record in 70% of their seasons played. The knock is only 6 Cups, but numerous years where they were second best only to be foiled by nemesis Montreal.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 05:57 PM
  #11
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
My vote is for Boston. A contender at some point in pretty much every decade. Have only missed the playoffs 5 times since expansion, 29 winning seasons in a row in that span. Winning record in 70% of their seasons played. The knock is only 6 Cups, but numerous years where they were second best only to be foiled by nemesis Montreal.
Toronto was 2nd best quite a few times too.

Stanley Cups: Toronto 13 Boston 6
Lost in the finals: Toronto 8 Boston 13
Total finals: Toronto 21 Boston 19

This isn't Detroit, a team only 2 Cups behind Toronto and a team as close to a modern dynasty as we've had since Edmonton. Toronto has more than double the number of Cups as Boston, and has lost in their fair share of finals too. So you're basically saying that Boston's more consistent regular season success outweighs the fact that Toronto has more than twice as many Cups. I don't see it.

Edit: Pretty amazing though that Toronto had been to 21 Cup finals by 1967... and none afterwards.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-19-2013 at 06:17 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 06:15 PM
  #12
Godot
Justice is blind
 
Godot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,571
vCash: 500
The only answer here is Toronto.

Godot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 06:27 PM
  #13
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Toronto was 2nd best quite a few times too.

Stanley Cups: Toronto 13 Boston 6
Lost in the finals: Toronto 8 Boston 13
Total finals: Toronto 21 Boston 19

This isn't Detroit, a team only 2 Cups behind Toronto and a team as close to a modern dynasty as we've had since Edmonton. Toronto has more than double the number of Cups as Boston, and has lost in their fair share of finals too. So you're basically saying that Boston's more consistent regular season success outweighs the fact that Toronto has more than twice as many Cups. I don't see it.
Toronto going on a 46-year-and-counting hiatus from competing for the Stanley Cup does it for me. Two full generations of Leaf fans have been born and come of age without ever seeing their team come close to winning a championship. No other team of any era can claim that ignominious distinction.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 06:31 PM
  #14
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,987
vCash: 500
The only real argument to be made for Boston>Toronto is their success after expansion(s). Bruins have came close to multiple cups in recent/modern years, Toronto hasn't.

So I guess someone could argue that in an NHL with much fewer teams Toronto's cups count for less.


That said I still pick Toronto.

Wrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 08:39 PM
  #15
Dissonance
Registered User
 
Dissonance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cabbage Patch
Posts: 1,413
vCash: 500
It really depends how much weight you put on the Cups. Toronto has more than twice as many as Boston (13-6), so if that's your only criteria, there's no point in discussing further.

But the Bruins have been a far more successful team day-in day-out over the lifetime of the franchises:

--Boston has a .555 overall record in the regular season, behind only Montreal and Philadelphia.

--Boston has 187 more regular-seasons wins than Toronto, despite being in the league for seven fewer years. They've also been to the playoffs 68 times to Toronto's 65.

--Boston has 19 Finals appearances to Toronto's 21, though as pointed out before, the Bruins runs are spread out over a much longer period.

--Boston has some of the most iconic players to ever play the game, stretching across all eras. Orr, Esposito, Bourque, Shore, Milt Schmidt. That's 3 of the top 10 players on the HOH list.

--By contrast, the Maple Leafs ranked highest on the HOH list are, who, Syl Apps and Charlie Conacher? Obviously there are a bunch of great players who've played for Toronto but the top end isn't quite as illustrious.

--Then there are a whole bunch of more ephemeral considerations I'm not really sure how to weigh: The colossal popularity of the Maple Leafs, the Ballard era, etc.

I'd vote Boston, though I can see the case for the Leafs.

Dissonance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 08:42 PM
  #16
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,812
vCash: 500
I know when we did this before - Philly vs Pitt - we counted players. Pretty obvious third is between Toronto and Boston, so do we count players here as well?

With Boston boasting 2 of the top 2-3 defensemen of all-time (Orr and Bourque) and probably 3 of the top 10 (+Park), can Toronto come close there? Does it play in to the argument?

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 09:36 PM
  #17
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lord of HFBOARDS
Country: United Nations
Posts: 73,740
vCash: 3164
Obviously the original 6 take up the first 6 spots, due to the fact they have been around for nearly 100 years each

Personally I think we should use the bench mark "since 1968" to even out the playing field

jumptheshark is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2013, 06:22 PM
  #18
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozwell View Post
Obviously the original 6 take up the first 6 spots, due to the fact they have been around for nearly 100 years each

Personally I think we should use the bench mark "since 1968" to even out the playing field
Why would the New York Rangers rank ahead of the Oilers? They have fewer Cups despite a 53 year head start.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2013, 01:17 AM
  #19
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Why would the New York Rangers rank ahead of the Oilers? They have fewer Cups despite a 53 year head start.
Yeah I wouldnt place the Rangers ahead of the Flyers anyways. Probably wouldnt place the Hawks ahead of them either.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2013, 06:23 AM
  #20
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,349
vCash: 500
13 cups is too difficult to ignore despite what's happened since 67. It's the Leafs.

Psycho Papa Joe 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 02:15 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.