Years you thought your team should have won the Cup

[Voight]

As a non-Stars fan, I'm pretty sure they would have won a cup in 2000 had the Flyers finished off the Devils in the ECF.

As for the Red Wings, 1995, 96, 2007 and 2009 were their best chances winning the cup.

They would have steamrolled the Flyers IMO

 

[AvsWraith]

2002 Avs. Going home for game 6 against Detroit up 3-2, I thought they were on their way again. However, the Avs just imploded completely. Pretty sure we would've smashed the Canes into a fine paste in the finals.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Canucks in 2009 were phenomenal with Sedin-Sedin-Sundin-Kesler-Demitra-Burrows etc. etc. Everyone in their prime and well-oiled except Sundin, Demitra, Ohlund. Actually that team was even better than the 2011 team, which also probably should have won.

 

[andreydali19]

Another year that should've belonged to the Wings: 1951.

 

[HisIceness]

2002 Finals. Carolina was up 2-1 late in game 3. Had the Canes won we would have a 2-1 series lead. Instead Detroit ties it late, wins in 3OT, and gains all the momentum the rest of the way. Carolina got shut out in game 4 and got a late 2nd period tally from Jeff O'Neill but Detroit already had a 2 goal advantage so it was too little too late. Would Carolina have won had we been victorious in game 3? Maybe/maybe not, but Detroit looked frustrated throughout much of that game whereas Carolina was playing with a lot of confidence. Was still a fun run and was the first time a team from NC had ever experienced a championship final.

HM 2008: Carolina didn't make the playoffs this year, instead they lost the last game of the regular season in a win and you're in scenario. The next night Washington wins the division. Highly doubt Carolina wins the Cup this year, but as evidenced by 2009, I feel that team could have done some serious damage in the playoffs but we'll never know.

 

[frankocb]

Flyers:

1987 - Take the Oilers to 7 games without Tim Kerr. Imagine if they had him?

1999 - Eric Lindros is playing the best hockey of his career. He goes down with a collapsed lung and the Flyers lose to the Leafs in Round 1 despite outscoring them.

2004 - Flyers take Lightning to 7 games despite having a defense so banged up that Sami Kapanen has to play D. It was the alst hurrah for LeClair, Recchi, Primeau, Roenick and company.

Ummm...1980?? That was the season of the 35 game unbeaten streak. If Leon StINKle calls the offsides like he should have...

 

[Voight]

. Was still a fun run and was the first time a team from NC had ever experienced a championship final.

UNC in 1982 & 1993 don't count?

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Blackhawks in 2014, but that's obviously crying over spilled milk considering our wins the year before and after (and 2010).

I think we can all agree with this one, it came down to a goal...

Perhaps I will add an oddball here - the Hawks did come back against the Nucks in 2011 down 0-3 to take it to game 7 OT, of course the Nucks went on to the Finals that year, had the Hawks won that series anything is possible.. I only say this because they won in 2010, had they not been champions this idea would be moot...

 

[NyQuil]

For the Senators, I'd rank it as follows:

The legitimate one:

1. 2003

I think this was the one we thought we had. President's Trophy winners, come back in the series against New Jersey, perfect 4-0 record in OT, tied late in the 3rd in Game 7.

Then Jeff Friesen. I was in the rink for this one, and it's as quiet as it's ever been.

In my opinion, this is the only legitimate one.

I think Ottawa would have won the final much as New Jersey had done.

This was the one that broke Ottawa's collective hearts I think.

---------------------------------

The debatable ones:

2. 2006

This is a tough one because it only would have been possible with Hasek standing on his head (as he had been doing all season) but he was out for the year as of February at the Olympics. Ottawa had played a very loose (and exciting to watch) system all year long, bolstered by the crackdown on obstruction and increased PPs. They scored 10 on Ryan Miller and Buffalo on a night where Alfredsson had 4 goals, Havlat had 4, and Heatley had 2 (10-4 final). They gave up a lot of shots, but Hasek was there.

As it was, we had an inexperienced Ray Emery in net and he gave up 7 in that first game against Buffalo in the 2nd round.

Ottawa's style did not lend itself to tight-checking playoff hockey against a Buffalo squad led by Jay McKee and Mike Grier that blocked every shot and battled in every corner. Add an injured Zdeno Chara to the mix and it just wasn't in the cards. They peaked at the wrong time.

3. 2007

Here's a team that peaked at the right time. Out of the playoffs by Christmas, injuries to Ottawa's top 3 centres, and the team rallied with some late December heroics and tough, two-way hockey.

They rode into the playoffs as the league's hottest team and put Crosby and Malkin, Brodeur and the Devils, and the President's Trophy champs and the previous year's nemesis Sabres out in three straight 5-game series.

The Pizza line was the league's hottest line but it was the commitment to two-way hockey, strong penalty killing and limiting second chances on the part of the opposition that paved the way to the final.

Only to have a 10 day layoff, and then run into the Anaheim Ducks, who were more than happy to play a tough, grinding series after knocking out the Wings in similar fashion. 3 one-goal victories decided in the 3rd period, and the Senators were out in 5.

That Ducks team was strong, with Pronger, Niedermayer and Beauchemin a huge advantage over Volchenkov, Phillips and Redden. Not to mention Perry and Getzlaf as supporting players behind guys like Selanne and MacDonald, and the impressive shutdown line of Pahlsson, Moen and Niedermayer.

Could Ottawa have won that series? A five game series is a short series, but the games themselves were relatively close. Still, it was a tough challenge which is why I stick it on this side of "should have won the Cup". Not to mention, while the Red Wings might have been the slightly better match-up, they were still an extremely fearsome opponent.

Ottawa was a decent team that year, not as good as the 2003 or 2006 teams, but they got hot at the right time, and were already playing playoff hockey near the end of the regular season.

----------------------------------------------

The non-debatable ones:

4. 2005

To me, this is not debatable.

There was no season.

Assuming the Senators would have come close to the Cup without having played a single game is bizarre.

Sure, we had some guys in their primes, but anything can happen in the course of a season. Injuries? Slumps? Getting cold at the wrong time?

There's no evidence of any kind to go on.

 

[DaveG]

UNC in 1982 & 1993 don't count?

Unless Dean Smith was literally paying his players, no. Though let's be frank here, with what came out about the UNC programs with the academic scandal would that really surprise anyone?

 

[LightningStorm]

For the Senators, I'd rank it as follows:

The legitimate one:

1. 2003

I think this was the one we thought we had. President's Trophy winners, come back in the series against New Jersey, perfect 4-0 record in OT, tied late in the 3rd in Game 7.

Then Jeff Friesen. I was in the rink for this one, and it's as quiet as it's ever been.

In my opinion, this is the only legitimate one.

I think Ottawa would have won the final much as New Jersey had done.

This was the one that broke Ottawa's collective hearts I think.

I feel you when it comes to 2003. As I mentioned in my previous post, I thought 2003 was the biggest lost opportunity for the Stars. Since Ottawa and Dallas had the 2 best records in the league all season, I remember thinking that we were on a collision course to play each other in the finals. I think a Dallas-Ottawa SCF in 2003 would've been a great finals that could've gone either way.

 

[Talisman]

Penguins 93 & 96 and even 2001 against Avs in the final but Devils went!!

 

[No Fun Shogun]

I think we can all agree with this one, it came down to a goal...

Perhaps I will add an oddball here - the Hawks did come back against the Nucks in 2011 down 0-3 to take it to game 7 OT, of course the Nucks went on to the Finals that year, had the Hawks won that series anything is possible.. I only say this because they won in 2010, had they not been champions this idea would be moot...

Eh.... I don't buy the 2011 one, tbqh. To me, the Hawks just looked utterly gassed and emotionally spent as game seven dragged on. They were running on empty in every way from my perspective. Even if they had gotten the OT winner, I honestly don't think we would've had anything left for the next series, much less potentially mounting two or three more.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

For the Kings...

1993. **** you Habs. That is all.

I'll see your 1993 and raise you a **** you Kerry Fraser.

 

[HisIceness]

UNC in 1982 & 1993 don't count?

I guess I should clarify by saying it was the first time a major league sports team from this state went that far. Between the Hornets, Panthers, and Hurricanes, the closest any of them got before the 'Canes 2002 run was the Panthers in the 1996-97 NFC Championship game.

 

[Terry Yake]

For the Senators, I'd rank it as follows:

The legitimate one:

1. 2003

I think this was the one we thought we had. President's Trophy winners, come back in the series against New Jersey, perfect 4-0 record in OT, tied late in the 3rd in Game 7.

Then Jeff Friesen. I was in the rink for this one, and it's as quiet as it's ever been.

In my opinion, this is the only legitimate one.

I think Ottawa would have won the final much as New Jersey had done.

This was the one that broke Ottawa's collective hearts I think.

---------------------------------

The debatable ones:

2. 2006

This is a tough one because it only would have been possible with Hasek standing on his head (as he had been doing all season) but he was out for the year as of February at the Olympics. Ottawa had played a very loose (and exciting to watch) system all year long, bolstered by the crackdown on obstruction and increased PPs. They scored 10 on Ryan Miller and Buffalo on a night where Alfredsson had 4 goals, Havlat had 4, and Heatley had 2 (10-4 final). They gave up a lot of shots, but Hasek was there.

As it was, we had an inexperienced Ray Emery in net and he gave up 7 in that first game against Buffalo in the 2nd round.

Ottawa's style did not lend itself to tight-checking playoff hockey against a Buffalo squad led by Jay McKee and Mike Grier that blocked every shot and battled in every corner. Add an injured Zdeno Chara to the mix and it just wasn't in the cards. They peaked at the wrong time.

3. 2007

Here's a team that peaked at the right time. Out of the playoffs by Christmas, injuries to Ottawa's top 3 centres, and the team rallied with some late December heroics and tough, two-way hockey.

They rode into the playoffs as the league's hottest team and put Crosby and Malkin, Brodeur and the Devils, and the President's Trophy champs and the previous year's nemesis Sabres out in three straight 5-game series.

The Pizza line was the league's hottest line but it was the commitment to two-way hockey, strong penalty killing and limiting second chances on the part of the opposition that paved the way to the final.

Only to have a 10 day layoff, and then run into the Anaheim Ducks, who were more than happy to play a tough, grinding series after knocking out the Wings in similar fashion. 3 one-goal victories decided in the 3rd period, and the Senators were out in 5.

That Ducks team was strong, with Pronger, Niedermayer and Beauchemin a huge advantage over Volchenkov, Phillips and Redden. Not to mention Perry and Getzlaf as supporting players behind guys like Selanne and MacDonald, and the impressive shutdown line of Pahlsson, Moen and Niedermayer.

Could Ottawa have won that series? A five game series is a short series, but the games themselves were relatively close. Still, it was a tough challenge which is why I stick it on this side of "should have won the Cup". Not to mention, while the Red Wings might have been the slightly better match-up, they were still an extremely fearsome opponent.

Ottawa was a decent team that year, not as good as the 2003 or 2006 teams, but they got hot at the right time, and were already playing playoff hockey near the end of the regular season.

----------------------------------------------

The non-debatable ones:

4. 2005

To me, this is not debatable.

There was no season.

Assuming the Senators would have come close to the Cup without having played a single game is bizarre.

Sure, we had some guys in their primes, but anything can happen in the course of a season. Injuries? Slumps? Getting cold at the wrong time?

There's no evidence of any kind to go on.

as a ducks fan we can both agree on one thing

@#$% jeff friesen

 

[Doctor Coffin]

Chicago - 1990-1993. 1990, where they on paper were probably weakest of those four years, might have been their best chance as there were no dominant teams they would have had to face. But they let the Minnesota and St. Louis series drag on too long, and Mike Keenan continually insisted on using Greg Millen despite superior performances by Ed Belfour. 1991-93 didn't have enough consistent offense when it mattered.

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Eh.... I don't buy the 2011 one, tbqh. To me, the Hawks just looked utterly gassed and emotionally spent as game seven dragged on. They were running on empty in every way from my perspective. Even if they had gotten the OT winner, I honestly don't think we would've had anything left for the next series, much less potentially mounting two or three more.

Well, I think that coming back from being down 0-3 would really energize or boost the that teams confidence.... It seems that teams that do the impossible go on to do quite well... Look at Philly in 2010, they were down 0-3 (if I remember correctly it was against the Bruins?), their starter even went down and they had to go with Leighton yet made it to the finals..

Also, really don't think they were gassed, they just weren't as talented as the 2010 team.. Look at 2013,2014,2015... 2 cups and a WCF that came down to game 7 OT, so it's possible that 2011 team could have pulled off one of the biggest upset (if not the biggest surprise) in NHL history...

Either way those last 4 games in that series were pretty exciting.. Chris Campoli

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Chicago - 1990-1993. 1990, where they on paper were probably weakest of those four years, might have been their best chance as there were no dominant teams they would have had to face. But they let the Minnesota and St. Louis series drag on too long, and Mike Keenan continually insisted on using Greg Millen despite superior performances by Ed Belfour. 1991-93 didn't have enough consistent offense when it mattered.

Yeah, well Keenan lost those series for the Hawks, especially against Minnesota. Keenan was trying to goon it up... Look at the PIM's from that series, the Stars weren't buying into it and the officials weren't having it which is why the Hawks spent half the series in the box... Of course him playing Millen over Belfour was stupid but that's the type of crap Keenan would do... It's like Keenan approached the game from a bizarre psychological angle... To this day I don't understand what he wished to accomplish by sitting his best goaltender, or even his crazy antics by replacing goaltenders multiple times in a game..

At any-rate, those were skilled hockey teams, however Keenan was just a fool.

Here is a good article about Keenan by Jeremy Roenick..

http://deadspin.com/5958837/mike-keenan-the-nhls-last-great-*******-coach

 

[blueinbigd]

The 90-91 Blues win the cup if they don't make a horrible trade.
Courtnall Momesso and Ronning to the Canucks for Dirk and Butcher.
It still haunts me to this day

 

[Doctor Coffin]

The 90-91 Blues win the cup if they don't make a horrible trade.
Courtnall Momesso and Ronning to the Canucks for Dirk and Butcher.
It still haunts me to this day

It was actually Courtnall, Momesso, Dirk and Ronning for Quinn and Butcher, but as a Hawks fan, I was ecstatic when I heard of that trade. Couldn't believe that Caron would gut his team like that when they were running 1st or 2nd place overall.

They had as good a shot at winning the cup as anyone, but still were using Riendeau most of the time in goal.

 

[Doctor Coffin]

Yeah, well Keenan lost those series for the Hawks, especially against Minnesota. Keenan was trying to goon it up... Look at the PIM's from that series, the Stars weren't buying into it and the officials weren't having it which is why the Hawks spent half the series in the box... Of course him playing Millen over Belfour was stupid but that's the type of crap Keenan would do... It's like Keenan approached the game from a bizarre psychological angle... To this day I don't understand what he wished to accomplish by sitting his best goaltender, or even his crazy antics by replacing goaltenders multiple times in a game..

At any-rate, those were skilled hockey teams, however Keenan was just a fool.

Here is a good article about Keenan by Jeremy Roenick..

http://deadspin.com/5958837/mike-keenan-the-nhls-last-great-*******-coach

Good article, thank you.

Keenan had some help in losing the 1991 MN series, namely the forwards not named Larmer or Roenick (Goulet missed the series with an injury and Rychel and McKegney played well the limited time they were allowed, though), the penalty killing and goaltending. I didn't think they were looking to goon it up against the North Stars, they played pretty much the same way they had all year, only in the playoffs, their actions were called penalties much more frequently. THAT threw them off their game and hurt them (thinking of Gregson in game 1 and Fraser in game 5, particularly). But to Minnesota's credit, they adjusted and did well in drawing the Hawks into taking a lot of those penalties.

Keenan had no small responsibility for the loss, though, I'm not arguing that. He melted down. I remember the fifth game, they're down by a few, then several goals in the 2nd period, and Mike Peluso's out there about every second shift. He would sit his top offensive guys out of spite and pique when he needed them most. Like game 2 of the 1992 finals. Brilliant.

The Minnesota coaches helped prepare their team for that series by placing a 3X6 foot board in front of the net, leaving only the top foot to shoot at, in practice sessions. That paid off against Ed Belfour.

Regarding playing Millen in the face of his 1990 playoff performance, one other angle to consider is that if you'll remember, Keenan was scheduled to become GM that summer and had pushed for Millen's acquisition that spring when Chevrier faltered again and again. So I suppose Keenan might have been thinking to "prove" to ownership and the world what a shrewd GM he would be giving "his guy" every opportunity to backstop the team to playoff glory.

 

[dzd ncnfzd]

I know for Montreal, they thought they were supposed to win in 1945, 1955, 1961, 1967.

.....1967: I was 12 and I was shattered. '67, Expo, etc etc, it should have been our year!!!

I guess my curses worked......and the '70's made up for it!!!

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Good article, thank you.

Keenan had some help in losing the 1991 MN series, namely the forwards not named Larmer or Roenick (Goulet missed the series with an injury and Rychel and McKegney played well the limited time they were allowed, though), the penalty killing and goaltending. I didn't think they were looking to goon it up against the North Stars, they played pretty much the same way they had all year, only in the playoffs, their actions were called penalties much more frequently. THAT threw them off their game and hurt them (thinking of Gregson in game 1 and Fraser in game 5, particularly). But to Minnesota's credit, they adjusted and did well in drawing the Hawks into taking a lot of those penalties.

Keenan had no small responsibility for the loss, though, I'm not arguing that. He melted down. I remember the fifth game, they're down by a few, then several goals in the 2nd period, and Mike Peluso's out there about every second shift. He would sit his top offensive guys out of spite and pique when he needed them most. Like game 2 of the 1992 finals. Brilliant.

The Minnesota coaches helped prepare their team for that series by placing a 3X6 foot board in front of the net, leaving only the top foot to shoot at, in practice sessions. That paid off against Ed Belfour.

Regarding playing Millen in the face of his 1990 playoff performance, one other angle to consider is that if you'll remember, Keenan was scheduled to become GM that summer and had pushed for Millen's acquisition that spring when Chevrier faltered again and again. So I suppose Keenan might have been thinking to "prove" to ownership and the world what a shrewd GM he would be giving "his guy" every opportunity to backstop the team to playoff glory.

I will add this, despite Keenan's questionable judgments, Minnesota got away with gooning it up too....

Remember when Chris Chelios got blatantly high sticked, and basically the front of his jersey was covered in blood and there was no call?

That series was a total mess. The officials called the Hawks for everything and Minnesota for nothing, and I think that had to do with the officials not tolerating Keenan's antics...... Sure Keenan got away with that nonsense during the regular season but I don't think the officials or the NHL were going to turn the playoffs into a gong show circus...

Check this video out..


If you look closely you can see Keenan whisper something into Grimson's ear, then he jumps back out on the ice.... You can bet Keenan told Grimson to go back out there...

But that's how Keenan handled the team...

 

[EpochLink]

Outside of 1994 and 2011, Vancouvers other chances were in probably 2003, 2009 and 2010.

2009 is up there. Prime Sedins, Burrows, Kesler, Mitchell, Edler, Luongo, veteran Demtria, Sundin, Ohlund. We had a great team....

Too bad Luongos mental game went to the toilet when Patrick Kane scored a hat trick in game 6...he's never recovered since.