HOH Top 40 Stanley Cup Playoff Performers of All Time

[daver]

With regards, I think you're overcomplicating things.

And saying that Forsberg/Sakic faced "better competition", which ironically is also mentioned for Federov/Yzerman, with no qualification isn't?

Crosby faced the #1 and #2 GAA teams and put up a 1.40 PPG. That should have put to bed any narrative that he struggles against tough defensive teams.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think his point was mostly that the Pens didn't have anything close to the Wings on the way to the Stanley Cup Finals.

The problem is, with the Caps... errhhh... having been the Caps, they can't really count as top-notch competition.

Look at some of the Avs 1st and 2nd round foes. It's not exactly like they were running a gauntlet of all time great teams there.

Yes, the 90's Wings teams were especially great. I never denied that. But 1 elite team only makes up 1 round. As I showed it's not like the Avs played tougher teams in the Finals.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Weaker Competition? OK. This has been debunked so many times. Same garbage anyone who can't stand active players uses to devalue their worth. You can't quantify it.

It is not debunked at all. For 7 years, the same three teams controlled 13 of the 14 spots in the Western Conference Finals, thereby restricting each other's abilities to rack up Finals appearances. It only becomes an issue if you ignore the effects of opposition strength or disqualify any performance that goes three rounds instead of four.

In the project, no one did either of those things. You seem to be asking us to do both.

Quick, how many times did the Penguins get to face a team in the postseason with a losing record en route to a Cup win or in any playoff year? I'll save you the trouble. Never. Now do the same thing with the Avs in the 90's.

Just as consideration was given to stronger competition, consideration was given to weaker competition. That's one of the reasons why Bryan Trottier fell. Just remember that pre-1983 records, 1983-1999 records, 2000-2004 records, and post-2005 records are NOT the same. I remind you this, because you previously tried to equate the 1996 Florida Panthers and 2017 Nashville Predators' regular season records.

Why are you bringing up Ovechkin? This is a discussion about playoffs. Clearly Ovie has no business here as he's done absolutely nothing to note in the postseason since the day he came into the league. Next.

Because he was drawing a parallel between back-to-back Hart Trophies and back-to-back Conn Smythe Trophies not guaranteeing superior regular season or playoff performance relative to another player. Bernie Parent didn't even make the final list, and his 1974 and 1975 playoffs would have been valued higher than Crosby's 2016 and 2017. The trophies do not make the performance. Not the Stanley Cup or the Conn Smythe. The performance is what it is.

Honestly, would you even have Sidney Crosby over Bryan Trottier at this point? Another player with significant team success - something you continue to go back to while advocating for Crosby over Sakic.

 

[MXD]

And saying that Forsberg/Sakic faced "better competition", which ironically is also mentioned for Federov/Yzerman, with no qualification isn't?

Crosby faced the #1 and #2 GAA teams and put up a 1.40 PPG. That should have put to bed any narrative that he struggles against tough defensive teams.

Look at some of the Avs 1st and 2nd round foes. It's not exactly like they were running a gauntlet of all time great teams there.

Yes, the 90's Wings teams were especially great. I never denied that. But 1 elite team only makes up 1 round. As I showed it's not like the Avs played tougher teams in the Finals.

Again, I think you're moving goalposts AND complicating things (respectively, and exactly in that order).

The Avalanche played 4 series agaisnt the DRW. Which is stronger competition than the Penguins had to face en route to the Stanley Cup Finals, at any point. The Avs went 2-2. The Penguins also face a very good team who, sadly, cannot be considered great competition at that level, because the Capitals were doing Capitals things.

That's what I think bathdog meant by "stronger competition".

 

[quoipourquoi]

This past Cup is probably too fresh in people's minds but it should grow in legend given Crosby was maybe out of the playoffs and out of hockey during them but came and played great.

It certainly grew in legend from round-to-round.

Vote totals

Erik Karlsson, defenseman, Ottawa Senators -- 33 points (10 of 12 first-place votes)
Ryan Getzlaf, center, Anaheim Ducks -- 16 (2 of 12 first-place votes)
Pekka Rinne, goalie, Nashville Predators -- 13
Marc-Andre Fleury, goalie, Pittsburgh Penguins -- 8
Ryan Ellis, defenseman, Nashville Predators -- 1
Evgeni Malkin, center, Pittsburgh Penguins -- 1

Vote totals

Pekka Rinne, goalie, Nashville Predators -- 32 points (8 first-place votes)
Evgeni Malkin, center, Pittsburgh Penguins -- 24 points (3 first-place votes)
Erik Karlsson, defenseman, Ottawa Senators -- 6 (1 first-place vote)
Sidney Crosby, center, Penguins -- 4
Ryan Ellis, defenseman, Predators -- 3
Filip Forsberg, right wing, Predators -- 2
P.K. Subban, defenseman, Predators -- 1

This time next year, I suspect to story will involve him riding in on a big blue ox.

 

[quoipourquoi]

The Avalanche played 4 series agaisnt the DRW. Which is stronger competition than the Penguins had to face en route to the Stanley Cup Finals, at any point. The Avs went 2-2.

3-3.

1996: Avalanche over Red Wings in 6 (3rd Rd; DET 27-point favorite)
1997: Red Wings over Avalanche in 6 (3rd Rd; COL 13-point favorite)
1999: Avalanche over Red Wings in 6 (2nd Rd; COL 5-point favorite)
2000: Avalanche over Red Wings in 5 (2nd Rd; DET 12-point favorite)
2002: Red Wings over Avalanche in 7 (3rd Rd; DET 17-point favorite)
2008: Red Wings over Avalanche in 4 (2nd Rd; DET 20-point favorite)

And 2-2 against Dallas.

1999: Stars over Avalanche in 7 (3rd Rd; DAL 16-point favorite)
2000: Stars over Avalanche in 7 (3rd Rd; DAL 6-point favorite)
2004: Avalanche over Stars in 5 (1st Rd; COL 3-point favorite)
2006: Avalanche over Stars in 5 (1st Rd; DAL 17-point favorite)

The big stranglehold was definitely that 1996-2002 period, though they all remained good teams on-and-off right through to another Dallas/Detroit Conference Final in 2008.

 

[MXD]

3-3.

1996: Avalanche over Red Wings in 6 (3rd Rd; DET 27-point favorite)
1997: Red Wings over Avalanche in 6 (3rd Rd; COL 13-point favorite)
1999: Avalanche over Red Wings in 6 (2nd Rd; COL 5-point favorite)
2000: Avalanche over Red Wings in 5 (2nd Rd; DET 12-point favorite)
2002: Red Wings over Avalanche in 7 (3rd Rd; DET 17-point favorite)
2008: Red Wings over Avalanche in 4 (2nd Rd; DET 20-point favorite)

And 2-2 against Dallas.

1999: Stars over Avalanche in 7 (3rd Rd; DAL 16-point favorite)
2000: Stars over Avalanche in 7 (3rd Rd; DAL 6-point favorite)
2004: Avalanche over Stars in 5 (1st Rd; COL 3-point favorite)
2006: Avalanche over Stars in 5 (1st Rd; DAL 17-point favorite)

The big stranglehold was definitely that 1996-2002 period, though they all remained good teams on-and-off right through to another Dallas/Detroit Conference Final in 2008.

My bad, I forgot 1996 (yeah, that's an odd one, I know). I don't think 2008 really applies though.

 

[ImporterExporter]

It is not debunked at all. For 7 years, the same three teams controlled 13 of the 14 spots in the Western Conference Finals, thereby restricting each other's abilities to rack up Finals appearances. It only becomes an issue if you ignore the effects of opposition strength or disqualify any performance that goes three rounds instead of four.

In the project, no one did either of those things. You seem to be asking us to do both.



Just as consideration was given to stronger competition, consideration was given to weaker competition. That's one of the reasons why Bryan Trottier fell. Just remember that pre-1983 records, 1983-1999 records, 2000-2004 records, and post-2005 records are NOT the same. I remind you this, because you previously tried to equate the 1996 Florida Panthers and 2017 Nashville Predators' regular season records.



Because he was drawing a parallel between back-to-back Hart Trophies and back-to-back Conn Smythe Trophies not guaranteeing superior regular season or playoff performance relative to another player. Bernie Parent didn't even make the final list, and his 1974 and 1975 playoffs would have been valued higher than Crosby's 2016 and 2017. The trophies do not make the performance. Not the Stanley Cup or the Conn Smythe. The performance is what it is.

Honestly, would you even have Sidney Crosby over Bryan Trottier at this point? Another player with significant team success - something you continue to go back to while advocating for Crosby over Sakic.

Trying to say Pittsburgh has faced significantly weaker competition both in rounds 1-3 and the Finals relative to the Avs is flat out wrong.

In 08 Pitt faced a 40 regulation win team (Ottawa), a 34 regulation win team (NYR), and a 39 regulation win team (Philly) and a 49 regulation win team (Det). Seems a lot like Avs in 2001.

In 09 it was 40, 46, 42, and 45

In 16 it was 43, 52, 43, 42

In 17 it was 48, 53, 38, 39 (very tough 1st 2 rounds, very weak final 2)



In 1996 the Avs faced 32 (Vancouver, had losing record), 40, 62, 41.

I'd say that was incredibly weak competition, other than Detroit, obviously.

In 2001 it was 32, 38, 43, 48.

Incredibly weak 1st 3 rounds.




Bernie Parent didn't make the final list because outside of 2 years, he did absolutely nothing noteworthy. Crosby has.




Crosby over Trottier? Yes. BT's accomplishments are confined to a 3 1/2 year period. Outside of that, I'd argue he did next to nothing of note in a career that spanned 18 years.

Denis Potvin, for sure, and possibly Mike Bossy were more impactful on those Islander dynasties.

 

[bathdog]

...Seriously... Is he? That's probably a very legit question by now.

I think you're in a minority here, but even IF he'd be NOW, there is no way he's been close as far as career goes.

I think this merits a HOH poll, not sure if I'm eligible to create one.

Weaker Competition? OK. This has been debunked so many times. Same garbage anyone who can't stand active players uses to devalue their worth. You can't quantify it.

Quick, how many times did the Penguins get to face a team in the postseason with a losing record en route to a Cup win or in any playoff year? I'll save you the trouble. Never. Now do the same thing with the Avs in the 90's.

Why are you bringing up Ovechkin? This is a discussion about playoffs. Clearly Ovie has no business here as he's done absolutely nothing to note in the postseason since the day he came into the league. Next.

Sakic played 172 games in the postseason. Crosby 148. That is hardly a big gap. That's a single playoff run.

Was Forsberg out the ENTIRE PLAYOFF RUN in 01? Noooope. And also Pat Roy for 4 rounds. Next.

Was Crosby sub PPG in rounds 2, 3 and 4 this year? You act like Crosby is the ONLY player in hockey history to see his points per game totals dip the deeper he (or any other player) goes.

I never said Crosby was on Forsberg's level defensively. Don't invent narratives I'm not spinning.

But Forsberg was the 3rd leading scorer on the 1 Cup winning team he actually played all the games on (96). Only played 11 games in 2001. Never saw another Cup final outside that.

Don't think there is much left for me to cover, others did.

Avs made 6 CF. Each time they got bounced was vs DET/DAL.

Pens made 5 CF. The only remotely similar competition they faced was BOS when they got swept with Crosby/Malkin combined scoring zero points.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think you're in a minority here, but even IF he'd be NOW, there is no way he's been close as far as career goes.

I think this merits a HOH poll, not sure if I'm eligible to create one.



Don't think there is much left for me to cover, others did.

Avs made 6 CF. Each time they got bounced was vs DET/DAL.

Pens made 5 CF. The only remotely similar competition they faced was BOS when they got swept with Crosby/Malkin combined scoring zero points.

And now you're only focusing on Conference Final series? I forgot the Stanley Cup was awarded for performance in 1 series.

I already laid out the regulation win comparisons of all rounds during the Cup runs for both teams. The Avs never had a tough road to either Cup (outside of 1 series vs Detroit in 96).

 

[bathdog]

And now you're only focusing on Conference Final series? I forgot the Stanley Cup was awarded for performance in 1 series.

I already laid out the regulation win comparisons of all rounds during the Cup runs for both teams. The Avs never had a tough road to either Cup (outside of 1 series vs Detroit in 96).

Do I need to remind you of your Cup counting reasoning? It was harder to come out of the DPE West.

96 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 278/278 - 15th
CHI - 273/220 - 6th
DET - 325/181 - 1st
FLA - 254/234 - 7th

01 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 239/238 - 15th
LAK - 252/228 - 13th
STL - 249/195 - 6th
NJD - 295/195 - 3rd

Pens 2017 run features the sole opponent that scored less than they allowed (OTT) either of these team had en route to the Cup, and also the team that finished worst in the standings at 17th (NSH).

 

[ImporterExporter]

Do I need to remind you of your Cup counting reasoning? It was harder to come out of the DPE West.

96 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 278/278 - 15th
CHI - 273/220 - 6th
DET - 325/181 - 1st
FLA - 254/234 - 7th

01 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 239/238 - 15th
LAK - 252/228 - 13th
STL - 249/195 - 6th
FLA - 295/195 - 3rd

Pens 2017 run features the sole opponent that scored less than they allowed (OTT) either of these team had en route to the Cup, and also the team that finished worst in the standings at 17th (NSH).

So? You're now focusing on 1 metric. I showed that using regulation wins, the Avs clearly didn't play a ridiculously tougher group of teams. Take a bunch of different metrics, couple them all together and you will find that the eras aren't drastically different. It's a myth.

And also 3 of those teams I highlighted were average in the GF/GA deparment.

Edit, also Vancouver allowed the same amount of goals as they scored in 96 and in 2001 they had 1 whopping goal more for, then against. Semantics.

 

[K Fleur]

13th in a 26 team league is equivalent to 15th in a 30 team league. 15th in a 26 team league is equivalent to 17th in a 30 team league.

 

[daver]

Again, I think you're moving goalposts AND complicating things (respectively, and exactly in that order).

The Avalanche played 4 series agaisnt the DRW. Which is stronger competition than the Penguins had to face en route to the Stanley Cup Finals, at any point. The Avs went 2-2. The Penguins also face a very good team who, sadly, cannot be considered great competition at that level, because the Capitals were doing Capitals things.

That's what I think bathdog meant by "stronger competition".

By the same token, how much extra credit can we give Crosby for carrying weaker seeds to the Finals i.e (#1,#2, #2, #4) than Sakic (#1 *first overall, #2)?

Bathdog has said he agrees that the AVs had a better supporting cast. Again, I don't see how either of these really should be taken into consideration.

 

[daver]

I think you're in a minority here, but even IF he'd be NOW, there is no way he's been close as far as career goes.

I think this merits a HOH poll, not sure if I'm eligible to create one.

You might want to also ask if Crosby facing the other team's #1 D-pairings moreso than not relevant to this discussion.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Do I need to remind you of your Cup counting reasoning? It was harder to come out of the DPE West.

96 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 278/278 - 15th
CHI - 273/220 - 6th
DET - 325/181 - 1st
FLA - 254/234 - 7th

01 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 239/238 - 15th
LAK - 252/228 - 13th
STL - 249/195 - 6th
NJD - 295/195 - 3rd

Pens 2017 run features the sole opponent that scored less than they allowed (OTT) either of these team had en route to the Cup, and also the team that finished worst in the standings at 17th (NSH).

Also who did Pittsburgh beat in rounds 1 and 2 this past season?

Columbus +54 = 3rd in League
Washington +81 = 1st in League

Yeah, that's elite competition using the GF/GA.

What about 2016?

Rangers +19 = 9th in League
Capitals + 59 = 1st in League
Lightning +26 = T 7th in League
San Jose +31 = 5th in League

Yup, 2016 is tougher than either year the Avs won if you want to use GF/GA.

Both years Pitt played the #1 team in the league in GF/GA ration. And won.

You need to come up with some better points if you want to compete in this argument sir.

 

[MXD]

By the same token, how much extra credit can we give Crosby for carrying weaker seeds to the Finals i.e (#1,#2, #2, #4) than Sakic (#1 *first overall, #2)?

Bathdog has said he agrees that the AVs had a better supporting cast. Again, I don't see how either of these really should be taken into consideration.

It's hard to answer that question without mentionning the C-word.

 

[daver]

Do I need to remind you of your Cup counting reasoning? It was harder to come out of the DPE West.

96 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 278/278 - 15th
CHI - 273/220 - 6th
DET - 325/181 - 1st
FLA - 254/234 - 7th

01 Avs opponents
Team - GF/GA - League finish
VAN - 239/238 - 15th
LAK - 252/228 - 13th
STL - 249/195 - 6th
NJD - 295/195 - 3rd

Pens 2017 run features the sole opponent that scored less than they allowed (OTT) either of these team had en route to the Cup, and also the team that finished worst in the standings at 17th (NSH).

Wow, that's some awesome spin there. The 2017 Sens were -2 in goal differential; almost literally no difference between them and the '96 and '01 Canucks. That's awfully objective of you to position the Sens as being "the sole opponent that scored less than they allowed"

Interesting to also note the '96 and '01 Canucks were 16th and 15th in the league standings, the Sens were 12th. But of course that's a Western Conference DPE 16th and 15th placing so they would be Cup favourites in the current NHL.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Look at some of the Avs 1st and 2nd round foes. It's not exactly like they were running a gauntlet of all time great teams there.

Yes, the 90's Wings teams were especially great. I never denied that. But 1 elite team only makes up 1 round. As I showed it's not like the Avs played tougher teams in the Finals.

The thing is, the playoffs are about surviving four opponents. Having one single elite opponent and three cream puffs is often less desirable than having to survive four "good" teams. That one elite team that stood in the way likely cost Colorado winning the 1997, 1999, and 2002 Stanley Cups.

 

[ImporterExporter]

The thing is, the playoffs are about surviving four opponents. Having one single elite opponent and three cream puffs is often less desirable than having to survive four "good" teams. That one elite team that stood in the way likely cost Colorado winning the 1997, 1999, and 2002 Stanley Cups.

And as I correctly pointed out using the regulation win metric AND countering bathdog's GF/GA metric, the Avs didn't face a tougher road when they won both of their Cups.

In fact, it's quite easy to see that the Pens 2016 run was as tough or tougher than either of the Avs runs, whether looking at GF/GA or their ALL 4 opponents regulation win totals from the regular season. Plus none of the Pens 4 opponents in the 2016 playoffs had fewer than 42 regulation wins. Between the 96 and 2001 runs, the Avs faced FIVE (5) teams with fewer than 42 regulation wins. 3 one year and 2 the other.

Another thing,

97 Red wings = 38 wins (The Avs had 11 more wins and 13 more points, were the favored team and lost in the Conference finals)

98 Avs (first place in their division) lost to a team with a losing record (Edmonton) in round 1. Won't find a Pittsburgh debacle that bad in the Crosby era.

Other than the 1996 Red Wings (which the Avs bested and is a huge feat to be fair), what team did the Avs face in any other year that is definitively better than the President's trophy 2016-17 Washington Capitals? 53 Regulation wins and +81 in goal differential.

What about the Presidents trophy winning Caps the year before (15-16). They had 52 regulation wins and were a +59!

I find it funny people try and act like the 95-96 season was in any sort of DPE. Yeah it wasn't.

In 95-96 the most goals scored by a team was Pitt at 362. In 2015-2016 it was Dallas at 265. That's a 97 goal difference!

In fact 9 times scored more than the Dallas Stars of 2015-16. NINE. And a 10th (Montreal) scored the exact same amount.

Even in 2001, the league high was greater (295) then 2015-16 (265).

People act like the Penguins and teams from this era play ridiculously soft schedules and don't have the same difficulty scoring (actually it's been harder to score the past few years than in either years the Avs won the Cup)! It just isn't true. It's a myth.

Add that to the following:

Also who did Pittsburgh beat in rounds 1 and 2 this past season?

Columbus +54 = 3rd in League
Washington +81 = 1st in League

Yeah, that's elite competition using the GF/GA.

What about 2016?

Rangers +19 = 9th in League
Capitals + 59 = 1st in League
Lightning +26 = T 7th in League
San Jose +31 = 5th in League

Yup, 2016 is tougher than either year the Avs won if you want to use GF/GA.

Both years Pitt played the #1 team in the league in GF/GA ration. And won.

Trying to say Pittsburgh has faced significantly weaker competition both in rounds 1-3 and the Finals relative to the Avs is flat out wrong.

In 08 Pitt faced a 40 regulation win team (Ottawa), a 34 regulation win team (NYR), and a 39 regulation win team (Philly) and a 49 regulation win team (Det). Seems a lot like Avs in 2001.

In 09 it was 40, 46, 42, and 45

In 16 it was 43, 52, 43, 42

In 17 it was 48, 53, 38, 39 (very tough 1st 2 rounds, very weak final 2)



In 1996 the Avs faced 32 (Vancouver, had losing record), 40, 62, 41.

I'd say that was incredibly weak competition, other than Detroit, obviously.

In 2001 it was 32, 38, 43, 48.

Incredibly weak 1st 3 rounds.

 

[bathdog]

13th in a 26 team league is equivalent to 15th in a 30 team league. 15th in a 26 team league is equivalent to 17th in a 30 team league.

Agreed, and it wasn't an attempt to degrade Pens common competition overall, it was just to show some of Pens opponents had characteristics of a lesser team too. The argument was never that every team Avs faced were tougher. The DPE West simply had more elite high end teams.

So? You're now focusing on 1 metric. I showed that using regulation wins, the Avs clearly didn't play a ridiculously tougher group of teams.

And as I correctly pointed out using the regulation win metric AND countering bathdog's GF/GA metric, the Avs didn't face a tougher road when they won both of their Cups.

In fact, it's quite easy to see that the Pens 2016 run was as tough or tougher than either of the Avs runs, whether looking at GF/GA or their ALL 4 opponents regulation win totals from the regular season. Plus none of the Pens 4 opponents in the 2016 playoffs had fewer than 42 regulation wins. Between the 96 and 2001 runs, the Avs faced FIVE (5) teams with fewer than 42 regulation wins. 3 one year and 2 the other.

If you say so.

Also who did Pittsburgh beat in rounds 1 and 2 this past season?

Columbus +54 = 3rd in League
Washington +81 = 1st in League

Yeah, that's elite competition using the GF/GA.

What about 2016?

Rangers +19 = 9th in League
Capitals + 59 = 1st in League
Lightning +26 = T 7th in League
San Jose +31 = 5th in League

Yup, 2016 is tougher than either year the Avs won if you want to use GF/GA.

Both years Pitt played the #1 team in the league in GF/GA ration. And won.

You need to come up with some better points if you want to compete in this argument sir.

Again, the argument was that it was harder to come out of the West.

The Avs made more Conference Finals than the Pens. I'm not making a big fuss about it, because it's a team accomplishment, but considering you're doing a non-insignificant amount of Cup counting, it's probably fair to acknowledge there were more truly elite competition in the DPE West.

Of course, you can always argue that Caps, who has several great regular seasons, with great GD's, but made 0 Conference finals, are better than DET (4 CF) and DAL (3 CF) with the following GD's:

DET 96-04 +144, +56, +54, +43, +68, +51, +64, +66, +66.
DAL 97-04 +54, +75, +68, +27, +54, +2, +76, +19.

Wow, that's some awesome spin there. The 2017 Sens were -2 in goal differential; almost literally no difference between them and the '96 and '01 Canucks. That's awfully objective of you to position the Sens as being "the sole opponent that scored less than they allowed"

Interesting to also note the '96 and '01 Canucks were 16th and 15th in the league standings, the Sens were 12th. But of course that's a Western Conference DPE 16th and 15th placing so they would be Cup favourites in the current NHL.

I never made such argument. If you followed the discussion you'd have seen. It's a response to ImporterExporter's flawed attempt at showing team strength through regulation wins while completely ignoring how point awarding has changed and the difference of how teams approach it.

The thing is, the playoffs are about surviving four opponents. Having one single elite opponent and three cream puffs is often less desirable than having to survive four "good" teams. That one elite team that stood in the way likely cost Colorado winning the 1997, 1999, and 2002 Stanley Cups.

This is a pretty good way to put it. There is no such team in the East. If anything it's the Pens themselves. BOS/WSH would probably be the most elite teams outside of that, with BOS being the sole other recent East team to win a Cup. WSH hasn't even made the CF.

 

[daver]

Agreed, and it wasn't an attempt to degrade Pens common competition overall, it was just to show some of Pens opponents had characteristics of a lesser team too. The argument was never that every team Avs faced were tougher. The DPE West simply had more elite high end teams.

To what end is this relevant? Seems you want to say put Crosby/Malkin on the Avs and they don't score as much or Sakic/Forsberg score more if they are on the Pens. Why would that be the case when you agree the Avs had the better supporting cast?

IMO, this line of thinking doesn't seem to be reasonable at all. First and foremost because it is baseless speculation. The 2001 Cup win by the Avs without Forsberg for the last two rounds should put this line of thinking to bed. I don't think anybody sees the Pens doing anything similar.

I don't agree that Crosby's 3 Cups automatically trumps Sakic's 2 Cups which seems to be the root of this discussion but I do not agree that any of the Pens' Cup wins were not earned as much as the Avs were. I think Sakic, Forsberg, and Crosby are all very close at this point but like Sakic, Crosby's multiple high end runs gives him the edge over Forsberg. In the past two years, Crosby has moved from having a playoff resume befitting his stature as the best/co-best player of his era but, similar to Jagr and Hull, not quite one that stood out from a few other players, to one that is the best of his era and is one of the stronger ones in an all-time sense which legitimately gives him an advantage over players like Jagr and Hull.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Agreed, and it wasn't an attempt to degrade Pens common competition overall, it was just to show some of Pens opponents had characteristics of a lesser team too. The argument was never that every team Avs faced were tougher. The DPE West simply had more elite high end teams.



If you say so.



Again, the argument was that it was harder to come out of the West.

The Avs made more Conference Finals than the Pens. I'm not making a big fuss about it, because it's a team accomplishment, but considering you're doing a non-insignificant amount of Cup counting, it's probably fair to acknowledge there were more truly elite competition in the DPE West.

Of course, you can always argue that Caps, who has several great regular seasons, with great GD's, but made 0 Conference finals, are better than DET (4 CF) and DAL (3 CF) with the following GD's:

DET 96-04 +144, +56, +54, +43, +68, +51, +64, +66, +66.
DAL 97-04 +54, +75, +68, +27, +54, +2, +76, +19.



I never made such argument. If you followed the discussion you'd have seen. It's a response to ImporterExporter's flawed attempt at showing team strength through regulation wins while completely ignoring how point awarding has changed and the difference of how teams approach it.



This is a pretty good way to put it. There is no such team in the East. If anything it's the Pens themselves. BOS/WSH would probably be the most elite teams outside of that, with BOS being the sole other recent East team to win a Cup. WSH hasn't even made the CF.

I do say so.

Actually you did try and show that every team the Avs faced was tougher when you posted the GF/GA ratio's with all 4 teams in both 96 and 01. And I then countered that by correctly showing that the Penguins have actually had run(s) that were collectively tougher. Don't change your tune now sir.

Please stop using the "dead puck era" argument as some sort of pro argument for the Avs. Look up goal scoring per team in this era, especially over the last 6 years and it rivals most of the years from the "DPE". The REAL DPE was actually from about the mid 1920's through the end of the 30's.

And I will argue the Caps, especially given the metrics you used. The Caps of the past 2 seasons rival just about any team the Avs beat/lost to outside of the 96 Red Wings if you look at GF/GA and regulation wins. Those metrics prove as much. And have you ever considered the fact that the Caps never making it past the 2nd round has a lot to do with them playing the Penguins?

 

[MXD]

And I will argue the Caps, especially given the metrics you used. The Caps of the past 2 seasons rival just about any team the Avs beat/lost to outside of the 96 Red Wings if you look at GF/GA and regulation wins. Those metrics prove as much. And have you ever considered the fact that the Caps never making it past the 2nd round has a lot to do with them playing the Penguins?

It doesn't explain why they weren't anymore successful while not playing the Pens.

Sorry, but the Caps cannot be considered great competition if the DRW are considered as such, because it would put on the same footing two things that really, really shouldn't be on the same footing.

 

[ImporterExporter]

It doesn't explain why they weren't anymore successful while not playing the Pens.

Sorry, but the Caps cannot be considered great competition if the DRW are considered as such, because it would put on the same footing two things that really, really shouldn't be on the same footing.

What, the myth that the league was so much harder to score in the late 90's/early 2000's? Yeah, many folks (including me on this page) have proved that wasn't true. Scoring has been way down for half a decade now. Basically to the same levels of the so called DPE.

Or that the Avs 2 Cup runs featured competition that was so much more difficult than Pittsburgh? Yeah, no, other than the 96 Red Wings, which I've clearly stated are on their own level. But look at other versions of the Wings in that era. The 2015-16 Caps compared very favorably with just about all of them if looking at multiple metrics that were either brought up by myself or bathdog (GF/GA).