Why did Gretzky get traded?

[Fish on The Sand]

Can you please provide a link showing us why a team must win 3 Cups in a row before being considered a dynasty.

There are only a handful of teams that have won 5 Cups. The ones that took home 5 in 7 years can be counted on one hand with a few fingers to spare.

The 80's Oilers were most certainly a powerhouse, and clearly the best team of their era, however I can't help but think not winning it 3 years in a row disqualifies them as a true dynasty like the Habs and Islanders were. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Ogopogo*]

The tears dried pretty quickly, as he was all smiles at the press conference in LA, shortly thereafter.

For all of the questionable business dealings of Pocklington and McNall, Gretzky had plenty of clout in engineering his own trade.

Pocklington told Gretzky he was being traded and he let Gretzky choose where he wanted to go. Pocklington didn't care where as long as the owner of Gretzky's chosen team was sending over $15 mill.

Gretzky was going no matter what. It just made it easier for Pocklington to get the money if Gretzky was going to a place he wanted to go.

 

[JCD]

The 80's Oilers were most certainly a powerhouse, and clearly the best team of their era, however I can't help but think not winning it 3 years in a row disqualifies them as a true dynasty like the Habs and Islanders were. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Why does three in a row matters? They won 4 of 5 (and 5 of 7). A dynasty is defined as greatness, and that certainly qualifies. Had they won 3 in a row, but no more, would that make them a dyansty? Is 3 Cups in a row really more impressive than 5 of 7? I would argue the opposite. Being able to appear in the Stanley Cup Finals for 8 of 11 years is a mind-blowing accomplishment. It shows that it wasn't just a short run, but more than a decade of dominance.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I agree, how could the Oilers not be considered a dynasty? In 1985-86 they were first in the league with 119 points, won 56 games, and outscored the next closest team by 72 goals. They were clearly the best team in the league. Yet because Calgary pulled off one of the flukiest and biggest upsets of all-time (Steve Smith own goal in game 7), you look at their 5 Cups in 7 years, 3 President's Trophies in 4 years, and 6 straight years of leading the league in goalscoring and don't see a dynasty?

Streaks are overrated anyway. Both the Islanders and the Oilers won 4 Cups in 5 years. To me, the fact that the Islanders' loss came at the end of their run and the Oilers' loss came in the middle makes no difference at all.

The reality is also that the playoffs are a crapshoot. The best team usually doesn't win, because there are many things like luck, slumps, injuries, bad calls, hot goalies, etc. that get in the way. Even if there is a super dominant team with a 90% chance of winning every playoff series they play in, the chance of them winning 3 Cups in a row is slightly better than 1 in 4. This shows just how special those Edmonton and New York Islanders teams were.

If you want to keep using Original Six standards in your definition of dynasties then go ahead and do so, but you'll probably never see another one in your lifetime.