It takes a lot of luck (puck luck, injuries, etc) to win one cup, let alone 3 or 4. Not hard at all to see how it might not happen.
Montreal Canadiens
- Thread starter Fun For All
- Start date
I consider what TB and Florida did a mini Dynasty but as you can see in a salary cap era it ain't that easy. Even with the same core TB has lost in the first round their last 4 playoffs after winning two straight cups. Florida is out of the playoffs after winning 2 straight cups. According to your threshold 2 cups and 3 straight Finals conveniently just missed the cutoff for Dynasty status.
Kane and Toews were 21 and 22 when they won their first cup. Their team was stacked but they eventually lost very good players because they couldn't pay everyone. There were also other championship calibre teams during their peak years. In this era very unlikely you'll see one dominant team for a 4 cup run. It's more like 4 teams or so sharing the dominance and doing a rotation. You'll also see teams catch lightning in a bottle and win one like St Louis did.
I consider what Chicago did better than what TB and Florida did even though they never won back to back cups. I'd put Pittsburgh on par with what Chicago did even though they had a 6 year gap between cup wins. So 3 in a row is a Dynasty for you. How about 4 cups with one gap year in between 2 back to backs. Not a Dynasty according to you.
Last edited:
I'm reminded of the infamous Hockey News cover "It's not if the Leafs win the cup, its how many"
Winning cups is hard.
We are well positioned moving forward, but the goal should be to be a top 3/top 4 team for an extended period (5+ years) and hope the dice come in our avour.
Winning cups is hard.
We are well positioned moving forward, but the goal should be to be a top 3/top 4 team for an extended period (5+ years) and hope the dice come in our avour.
Three in a row isn't according to me it's a benchmark that was set all the way back in the original six days. It's a clear line you have to cross, as previously stated the Islanders were the last to accomplish this. Many have come close since, none have achieved it inspite of the saltiness of fans who wish it were otherwise
For one thing we're not in the original 6 days. There are 32 teams now. Not 6 teams. So you're saying winning 3 straight in a 6 team league is the same as winning 3 straight in a 32 team league. Even the playoffs now has 16 teams. NYI had their Dynasty in a 21 team league. How can you honestly think winning in a 6 team league has the same degree of difficulty as a 16 team playoffs, the top half of a 32 team league.
Original 6 playoffs. Two thirds of the league makes the playoffs. That's 4 teams. 2 series wins you the Cup. Winning 4 series now is required. I would say Chicago's 3 cups within 6 seasons when it was 30 teams is easily a bigger accomplishment than 3 straight cup wins in a 6 team league.
Last edited:
This team continously struggles to get 15 shots a game. It has some real growth to do beyond this year. Pump the brakes on any dynasty talk.
Still very happy with this current team, and where it is headed.
Didn't have one shot in OT tonight it seemed.... we went from 13 in the third, down to 12.
Still very happy with this current team, and where it is headed.
Didn't have one shot in OT tonight it seemed.... we went from 13 in the third, down to 12.
Last edited:
From '27 to '67 there were three teams that fit the definition of a dynasty. Three teams in forty years. Since '67 there has only been two other teams who met that definition. To say that Hockey was easier back in those days is farcical at best. They wore no helmets (including goalies), their equipment by today's standards would be considered woefully inadequate and they played a far more physical game where penalties that would result in suspension didn't even get called. I would argue that hockey in the original six days was far more difficult and physically punishing than it is today. Regardless of those arguments it doesn't change the fact that in 100+ years of professional hockey there has only been five dynasties. That's a title reserved for truely exceptional teams
Hockey may have been harder on the players (due to conditions) - but that is sort if irrelevant in terms of whether it made dynasties easier or not.
In the Original 6 Era, there was only 3 teams out of 6 that were consistently good. Toronto, Montreal, Detroit. Rights to players, was also heavily tilted in favour of Toronto and Montreal.
Winning consecutive cups (2,3,4 or 5) was far easier in that era just because there was only 3 contenders most years... odd time 4.
I would also say that the Oilers had a dynasty (4 cups in 5 years).
For the first time in the playoffs, I thought the Habs looked tired last night, especially in OT.
It's simple math. Forget about anything else. All teams playing under the same rules during whatever era.
Competing against 6 teams is not harder to win than competing against 32 teams no matter no helmuts, wooden sticks, touch icing, bench clearing brawls, legal head shots,. Everyone is playing with the same equipment.
Definitely Oilers were a Dynasty. Why would anyone in their right mind even question that.
Competing against 6 teams is not harder to win than competing against 32 teams no matter no helmuts, wooden sticks, touch icing, bench clearing brawls, legal head shots,. Everyone is playing with the same equipment.
Definitely Oilers were a Dynasty. Why would anyone in their right mind even question that.
Last edited:
Its been 21 years since the start of the cap (modern era).
If we are to use a rule that dynasties are a once in a generation thing (every 20 years), then the baseline for a modern NHL dynasty w ould be the best run since 2005. And that would be Chicago's 3 Cups in 6 years -- given that this is the best anybody has done in 20 years I don't think its unfair to label it as a modern dynasty. In terms of modern era, becomes the baseline.
To project that out for any time moving forward as a strong possibility is being unrealistic.... much less 3 or 3+ in a row..
And I like the Canadiens team moving forward. But the Dynasty word is way too ambitious..
If we are to use a rule that dynasties are a once in a generation thing (every 20 years), then the baseline for a modern NHL dynasty w ould be the best run since 2005. And that would be Chicago's 3 Cups in 6 years -- given that this is the best anybody has done in 20 years I don't think its unfair to label it as a modern dynasty. In terms of modern era, becomes the baseline.
To project that out for any time moving forward as a strong possibility is being unrealistic.... much less 3 or 3+ in a row..
And I like the Canadiens team moving forward. But the Dynasty word is way too ambitious..
Last edited:
The Hockey Hall of Fame disagrees and while there's a few teams I wouldn't have included in there they give no participation trophies to modern teams. Which is how it should be. Modern teams prioritize winning now over winning in the long term which leads to at best winning two cups in a row before the team starts to fall apart. Kent Hughes on the other hand has made it clear that he is not assembling a team to win a cup or two now, his intention is to build a real dynasty that will win cups over a long period. Given how much this Habs team has out performed expectations I'm inclined to believe he and the team he's assembled is going to to do the job.
www.hhof.com
As for the here and now. Tonight is a do or die game for the Habs. They need a win tonight if they stand any chance of making it to the finals but Carolina is back to doing Carolina things so even if the Habs do pull off a W tonight it's still going to be a tough slog to win the series. No matter what this season should be considered a resounding success and the best is still to come for them
HHOF | NHL Dynasties
The nine legendary franchises which lorded over the National Hockey League for extended periods of time.
www.hhof.com
As for the here and now. Tonight is a do or die game for the Habs. They need a win tonight if they stand any chance of making it to the finals but Carolina is back to doing Carolina things so even if the Habs do pull off a W tonight it's still going to be a tough slog to win the series. No matter what this season should be considered a resounding success and the best is still to come for them
#1. Kent Hughes has said that he wants to build a team that "can win for a number of years". Any hockey fan should be able to realize that is not a claim that he intends to build a "real dynasty" that wins 3+ Stanley Cups in a row. Its that he intends to build a championship level team that will seriously contend for Cups over a long period, and will win some.The Hockey Hall of Fame disagrees and while there's a few teams I wouldn't have included in there they give no participation trophies to modern teams. Which is how it should be. Modern teams prioritize winning now over winning in the long term which leads to at best winning two cups in a row before the team starts to fall apart. Kent Hughes on the other hand has made it clear that he is not assembling a team to win a cup or two now, his intention is to build a real dynasty that will win cups over a long period. Given how much this Habs team has out performed expectations I'm inclined to believe he and the team he's assembled is going to to do the job.
HHOF | NHL Dynasties
The nine legendary franchises which lorded over the National Hockey League for extended periods of time.
As for the here and now. Tonight is a do or die game for the Habs. They need a win tonight if they stand any chance of making it to the finals but Carolina is back to doing Carolina things so even if the Habs do pull off a W tonight it's still going to be a tough slog to win the series. No matter what this season should be considered a resounding success and the best is still to come for them
#2. Your "inclined to believe" something that Hughes never said, and that no team has done for 40 years.
Believing we are the team that will win 3+ consecutive cups in a row is over the top.
I'm happy where we are NHL and system wise,. it's been a tough series, we were lucky to get to round 3, and we are tired.
We were not built to be at our best this year either.
Last edited:
It's amazing where this thread has went over 18 months,
It started 18 months ago, with a biased Hab hater (Fun for All) and other Leafs fans who were saying the Habs sucked.
And 18 months later it has progressed to an overzealous fan who believes the Habs will be a Real Dynasty, and win 3+ Cups in a row.
We are in very good shape though as a franchise. Those Leaf fans who commented on the first page, can't feel good on how fortunes have been reversed.
It started 18 months ago, with a biased Hab hater (Fun for All) and other Leafs fans who were saying the Habs sucked.
And 18 months later it has progressed to an overzealous fan who believes the Habs will be a Real Dynasty, and win 3+ Cups in a row.
We are in very good shape though as a franchise. Those Leaf fans who commented on the first page, can't feel good on how fortunes have been reversed.
