Worst Teams over Multiple Years
- Thread starter Hasbro
- Start date
The New York Rangers in the early 1940's (5 straight years not making the play-offs), early 1950's to mid 1960's (12 out of 16 years failed to make the play-offs).
The Bruins - from 1959-60 to 1966-67 they failed to qualify for the play-offs for
8 straight years.
The Hawks from the did 1940's to the late 1950's they went to the play-offs once and missed 11 times.
Remember in those years 4 of 6 teams made the play-offs.
Sens Rule
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2005
- 21,251
- 74
While the Sens grew into a great organization. For the 3-4 years they were bad they were really, really bad. Terrible.
The Ballard Leafs were poor over a long time. But they were rarely absolutely the worst team in the NHL. Those bad mid 80's Leafs teams may have been bad but more often than not they made the playoffs with 54 or 60 points or something and then in the playoffs they did damage, going to the 7th game of the 1st or often the 2nd round. Perhaps because 16/21 teams made the playoffs and the Leafs were in the weaker Norris division. But still those Leafs teams at the worst of the Ballard years still had Grit and Flair and could win a playoff series against a better team. And the 1970's Leafs will not great had some good moments in the regualr season and the playoffs. McDonald, Sittler, Turnbull, Salming. They were a weak team not a horrible team. The Ballard Leafs are a good example of "what could have been" they could have had alot more success. But they did have at least some success.
The Ballard Leafs were bad, and they could have been better but they are not the worst teams ever. The sad Rangers and Bruins franchises in the 50's and early 60's were worse - and in a 6 team NHL where 3 of the 4 teams and often 4 knew they would be making the playoffs no matter what they did. For a decade and a half.
The Ballard Leafs were poor over a long time. But they were rarely absolutely the worst team in the NHL. Those bad mid 80's Leafs teams may have been bad but more often than not they made the playoffs with 54 or 60 points or something and then in the playoffs they did damage, going to the 7th game of the 1st or often the 2nd round. Perhaps because 16/21 teams made the playoffs and the Leafs were in the weaker Norris division. But still those Leafs teams at the worst of the Ballard years still had Grit and Flair and could win a playoff series against a better team. And the 1970's Leafs will not great had some good moments in the regualr season and the playoffs. McDonald, Sittler, Turnbull, Salming. They were a weak team not a horrible team. The Ballard Leafs are a good example of "what could have been" they could have had alot more success. But they did have at least some success.
The Ballard Leafs were bad, and they could have been better but they are not the worst teams ever. The sad Rangers and Bruins franchises in the 50's and early 60's were worse - and in a 6 team NHL where 3 of the 4 teams and often 4 knew they would be making the playoffs no matter what they did. For a decade and a half.
Cropduster
Registered User
playoffhero
Registered User
Whiplash27
Quattro!!
soundtigersfan
Registered User
Hartford was only above .500 for 3 of their 18 NHL seasons. They never broke .600 and were at times a glorified farm team that traded away their best players once their salaries got too high. They also only won one playoff series and one division championship. We still get mocked for the parade we threw after the playoff series victory.
Cropduster
Registered User
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,146
Right away I first thought of the '74-75 and '75-76 Capitals. What a brutal team. 8-67-5 in '74-75 is the worst record of all time.
After that you have to look to the Rangers from '98-04. Sure they missed the playoffs all of those years but it was how they missed it. They were such terrible underacheivers. And they overpaid their players big time. Think about this, Kamensky, Bure, Jagr, Fleury, Leetch, Richter, Messier, Lindros were all there during parts of those years. No playoffs. It was a joke.
The Islanders are still a joke, have been for 20 years. Only Ted Nolan made them respectable.
After that you have to look to the Rangers from '98-04. Sure they missed the playoffs all of those years but it was how they missed it. They were such terrible underacheivers. And they overpaid their players big time. Think about this, Kamensky, Bure, Jagr, Fleury, Leetch, Richter, Messier, Lindros were all there during parts of those years. No playoffs. It was a joke.
The Islanders are still a joke, have been for 20 years. Only Ted Nolan made them respectable.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
They were the very definition of laughingstock when I started watching hockey in the mid-seventies, from the day the team arrived in Denver to the Don Cherry circus to their departure. If you wanted someone to smirk you'd just mention the Rockies. When the Bad News Bears movie came out I remember hearing people say that even they were better than Colorado. There was absolutely no respect for that franchise. Even the announcers took digs at them. There's really no team that compares since.
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,353
People here keep mentioning recent editions of the Rangers, but go back a few decades if you really want to see a woeful Rangers team:
After finishing first in 1941-42, the Rangers proceded to miss the playoffs 18 out of the next 24 seasons. They won only a single playoff series during this period, and finished in last place 8 times. 22 of these years they were below .500, and only finished in the top half of the standings twice. The one brief moment of glory came in 1950, when they upset the Canadiens in the first round of the playoffs. In the final against Detroit, the Rangers pushed them to Game 7 OT before losing. The circus potentially cost them the Cup that year, as five of the seven games, including the last four, had to be played in Detroit because MSG was unavailable.
It's difficult to find a stretch of futility that long in any professional sports league (outside of baseball perhaps, where there are some even worse examples). Somebody mentioned the Whalers above, and that's probably as close as you'll get to finding an equally inept team over a long stretch of time in the NHL. The Islanders are about half way there. They've been bad from 1994 on, though even the Isles have a few playoff appearances to show. The front office gong-shows could be what eventually puts them over the top (bottom?).
After finishing first in 1941-42, the Rangers proceded to miss the playoffs 18 out of the next 24 seasons. They won only a single playoff series during this period, and finished in last place 8 times. 22 of these years they were below .500, and only finished in the top half of the standings twice. The one brief moment of glory came in 1950, when they upset the Canadiens in the first round of the playoffs. In the final against Detroit, the Rangers pushed them to Game 7 OT before losing. The circus potentially cost them the Cup that year, as five of the seven games, including the last four, had to be played in Detroit because MSG was unavailable.
It's difficult to find a stretch of futility that long in any professional sports league (outside of baseball perhaps, where there are some even worse examples). Somebody mentioned the Whalers above, and that's probably as close as you'll get to finding an equally inept team over a long stretch of time in the NHL. The Islanders are about half way there. They've been bad from 1994 on, though even the Isles have a few playoff appearances to show. The front office gong-shows could be what eventually puts them over the top (bottom?).
The Quebec Nordiques from 1988 to 1992 were terrible. They had about 30 points one year. They were marginally better the next, and I believe they went about 12 months between road wins in 1991 and 1992. For a couple of years, the only reasons to watch the Nords were Joe Sakic and the Guy LaFleur retirement tour.
Whiplash27
Quattro!!
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
I'm going to say the Columbus Blue Jackets. They have been nothing but a consistant laughing stock and what's worse, they don't even have that bright of a future. They will in all likleyhood start to get worse before things improve. I almost think they should be contracted out of the league just because they are such an embarassment. I honestly think your average hf poster could have built a better team than Maclean did over a near decade. Having said this, I think the Kansas City Royals all around crappiness deserves mention in this despite it being a hockey board. Their crappiness transcends sports. Anything that one could possibly do in baseball, they are consistantly among the worst at.
Last edited:
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,799
- 16,540
Seals
The seals in there first couple of years were a good team, they even made the playoffs a couple of times.
The seals in there first couple of years were a good team, they even made the playoffs a couple of times.
Don Cherry
Don Cherry was one of the hilites of the rockies in colorado when he was there coach.he could not even get them into the playoffs with Lanny McDonald.it was a bad team cant blame don cherry for that.
Don Cherry was one of the hilites of the rockies in colorado when he was there coach.he could not even get them into the playoffs with Lanny McDonald.it was a bad team cant blame don cherry for that.
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,353
But the Royals, while mismanaged, have absolutely zero chance to begin with because of baseball's absurd salary disparity. Teams like the Royals, Pirates, the old Expos, and other once-proud franchises have been forced to wallow in the basement for over a decade because Bud Selig and the Players Association are more than content to let salaries skyrocket and drive them out of business. Imagine if a team in the NHL today were spending only $10 million a year on player payroll. They'd be finished on October 5th. But you're right; they are terrible, it's just that they're basically terrible by default.
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,353
Well I wasn't alive to witness those years of crappiness
Good thing, you might have died from ulcers by now
South Florida Canuck
Biggest Canucks Superfan in South Florida
Which is exactly why baseball wont receive one cent from me. Its an absolute joke that teams like the Pirates, Royals, Brewers, and Devil Rays can maybe make the playoffs once every 15-20 years and wind up wandering the wilderness after that while the big dogs like the Yankees and Red Sox can pretty much punch their cards for the playoffs the moment the season starts. I can't imagine being a stupid baseball fan of a small market team, knowing that with the salary disparity, my team is practically dead once opening day comes.
As for the topic at hand, I would have to say the pre-Mario era Penguins. They only made the playoffs a couple times and were pretty much the LA Clippers of hockey. Thank God we picked the right year to tank
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: WCQF Game 3: LA Kings vs Edmonton Oilers @7:30pm PT | Series tied 1-1- Latest: Megaterio Llamas
-
