1993 roster vs current roster

[shello]

My dad on the phone earlier today mentioned how underrated the 93 team was that year. Looking at that roster it's hard to think a team with some hall of famers, especially with Roy in net could be considered so.

 

[salbutera]

My dad on the phone earlier today mentioned how underrated the 93 team was that year. Looking at that roster it's hard to think a team with some hall of famers, especially with Roy in net could be considered so.

93 team was also a recipient of an incredible output by short lived NHLer Paul DiPietro, but that C depth was quite impressive. Not top end league scoring but still impressive: Damphousse, Muller, Carbo

 

[salbutera]

GTFO Nostradamus!

Give the winning loto numbers too since you can predict that shit!

Roy just couldn’t beat those early 90s Bruins teams, would’ve been shocking if all of sudden he did in 93 . Neely himself used to avg 1-2 blue line shots which resulted in goals per series from 90-92 playoffs.

 

[Pickles]

Roy just couldn’t beat those early 90s Bruins teams, would’ve been shocking if all of sudden he did in 93. Neely himself used to avg 1-2 blue line shots which resulted in goals per series from 90-92 playoffs.

Roy was in the zone I doubt any team could have beat him that year. Plus we had Bellows and Damphousse two great players we didn't have when they faced the Bruins before 93.

 

[Crapadiens]

You forgot the great Oleg Petrov. Yeah, I know he didn't play in the SCP, but he was dynamite in NHL 94 on PC

 

[ChesterNimitz]

My dad on the phone earlier today mentioned how underrated the 93 team was that year. Looking at that roster it's hard to think a team with some hall of famers, especially with Roy in net could be considered so.

A closer parallel would be the the 1983/1984 Canadiens, who just made the playoffs and with an aging core (Lafleur, Shutt, Robinson ) a large, but immobile defence (Green, Ludwig, Carlson, Hamel) a newly acquired power forward (Turnbull), a premier defensive center (Carbonneau); a newly acquired scoring forward (Walter) and a sprinkling of exciting young players (Chelios, Chabot, Lemieux, Hunter, McPhee) upset Boston and the Nordiques only to lose to the then defending Stanley Cup champions, New York Islanders. It doesn't take too much imagination to match up the players on that team to those on the current team ( i.e. substitute Anderson for Turnbull or Toffoli for Walter). But the biggest difference was in nets where the 83/84 Canadiens were riding the hot goaltending of the very mediocre Steve Penny while the current version has Cary Price.

While in the 1983 / 1984 playoffs, reality and the comparative weakness of the team ultimately ended what was then an unexpected playoff run, it did show the promise of the future. A future that was only buttressed by what was Montreal's best draft since 1971 when that spring they selected Svoboda, Corson, Richer and Roy all of whom played a pivotal role in Montreal's ascendancy in the mid to late 1980s and championship in 1986.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

You forgot the great Oleg Petrov. Yeah, I know he didn't play in the SCP, but he was dynamite in NHL 94 on PC

The Original Paul Byron

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Roy was in the zone I doubt any team could have beat him that year. Plus we had Bellows and Damphousse two great players we didn't have when they faced the Bruins before 93.

He was in the zone against scrub teams though. Buffalo and the Islanders? I mean, those were basically byes.

 

[Habs10Habs]

Exactly. We got extremely lucky with the schedule. The Nords were the toughest team we faced and they were only two points ahead in the standings.

We absolutely were unexpected champions that year but nobody expected Pittsburgh to lose to the Isles. And it never should've happened to begin with. Kasparitis was allowed to mug Lemieux to the point where it was disgusting.

I honestly can't believe he was able to get away with what he did. Especially considering how small he was. You'd figure one of the other Penguins would have taken him out. Heading into game 7, I still thought the Penguins would win. Until Kevin Stevens suffered that horrendous injury.

 

[habdynasty]

Thank you islanders for knocking out the best team that season , the Pittsburg penguins coached by the great Scotty Bowman. . Mario had 160 points in 60 games , that was one of the biggest upsets that I can remember in my life.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

Thank you islanders for knocking out the best team that season , the Pittsburg penguins coached by the great Scotty Bowman. . Mario had 160 points in 60 games , that was one of the biggest upsets that I can remember in my life.

And the Flames for upsetting the Oilers in 1986. But for those two upsets, our record of futility would probably be approaching that of the Leafs.

 

[ahmedou]

LONGEST STRETCHES WITHOUT TRAILING (SINGLE PLAYOFF YEAR - NHL HISTORY): #2 CANADIENS 2021 => 437:53

 

[themilosh]

Could compare DD to Jean Perron. 86

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

This whole underdog thing needs to stop. They were 2 games back of Quebec. Then they played Buffalo (bottom seed) who knocked off top seeded Boston. Isles (bottom seed) go passed Washington and then top seeded Pittsburgh. The Habs had to beat two teams that were the worst in their respective divisions making the playoffs. The Kings were barely a playoff team but had the benefit of knocking around the Sharks (5-2) and Oilers (5-1-1). Wins against these two teams accounts for 25% of their wins that year. The Kings played the rest of the NHL at 3 games under .500...

Habs underdogs vs Quebec? Sure. The rest of the teams they faced in that years playoff... Not a chance.

Calling the Kings "barely a playoff team" is grossly dishonest.

Gretzky missed 39 games that year and I don't think I need to explain the difference that he made. The nearest teammate was 15 points behind him in the 24 playoff games that season.

People like to point to the point totals of Damphousse, Muller and Bellows but they were enormously inflated during a season where scoring was bananas all across the league. Damphousse's 97 points put him 24th in league scoring and if it wasn't for other players being injured he likely would have finished in the 30's somewhere. Considering there were only 24 teams it really puts his production into perspective.

Much like today's team the '93 team was built on depth, defensive structure and goaltending. It seems that those with the most insufferable anti MB agendas are the one's primarily scoffing at such comparison's. The fact is that if Price plays out of his head like Roy did and the team can stay healthy this could be a championship team.

 

[LaFloater]

A closer parallel would be the the 1983/1984 Canadiens, who just made the playoffs and with an aging core (Lafleur, Shutt, Robinson ) a large, but immobile defence (Green, Ludwig, Carlson, Hamel) a newly acquired power forward (Turnbull), a premier defensive center (Carbonneau); a newly acquired scoring forward (Walter) and a sprinkling of exciting young players (Chelios, Chabot, Lemieux, Hunter, McPhee) upset Boston and the Nordiques only to lose to the then defending Stanley Cup champions, New York Islanders. It doesn't take too much imagination to match up the players on that team to those on the current team ( i.e. substitute Anderson for Turnbull or Toffoli for Walter). But the biggest difference was in nets where the 83/84 Canadiens were riding the hot goaltending of the very mediocre Steve Penny while the current version has Cary Price.

While in the 1983 / 1984 playoffs, reality and the comparative weakness of the team ultimately ended what was then an unexpected playoff run, it did show the promise of the future. A future that was only buttressed by what was Montreal's best draft since 1971 when that spring they selected Svoboda, Corson, Richer and Roy all of whom played a pivotal role in Montreal's ascendancy in the mid to late 1980s and championship in 1986.

I absolutely agree with this take. The current squad arent even in the same discussion as 1993. That team had so many character players and so much more quality. The current squad seem to be hardworking but extremely lucky so far. The 1984 team just like this one had several former stars and some promising younger players and Penney who caught fire but was a total one hit wonder. I can still remember the elation of them beating the Islanders 2 in a row, then the clock struck 12 and the Islanders just worn them down.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Calling the Kings "barely a playoff team" is grossly dishonest.

Gretzky missed 39 games that year and I don't think I need to explain the difference that he made. The nearest teammate was 15 points behind him in the 24 playoff games that season.

People like to point to the point totals of Damphousse, Muller and Bellows but they were enormously inflated during a season where scoring was bananas all across the league. Damphousse's 97 points put him 24th in league scoring and if it wasn't for other players being injured he likely would have finished in the 30's somewhere. Considering there were only 24 teams it really puts his production into perspective.

Much like today's team the '93 team was built on depth, defensive structure and goaltending. It seems that those with the most insufferable anti MB agendas are the one's primarily scoffing at such comparison's. The fact is that if Price plays out of his head like Roy did and the team can stay healthy this could be a championship team.

You have a point on the Kings but they were far from a powerhouse. They were an 84 point team the season before. They were a 66 point team the season after.

They had Gretzky and Robitaille. Other than that there was a young Rob Blake. Kurri was on the team but by that time he's like a point per game. A decent team with a couple of great players.

Our schedule this year has already been harder than anything either of those teams had to face. And it's not going to get any easier. Those teams didn't come close to facing a team as good as TO or Vegas. The best team in those two runs would've been the Nords in 93. Great young team. But they were just on the verge of completing a rebuild. It was their first year being a threat. Forsberg would join them a few years later in Colorado and then they became a real powerhouse from that point forward.

And the Flames for upsetting the Oilers in 1986. But for those two upsets, our record of futility would probably be approaching that of the Leafs.

Yep. We got super lucky. Plus, even ignoring the 86 Oilers and 93 Pens, we also avoided the 86 Flyers and the 93 Bruins. It was a very lucky schedule in both runs.

 

[Kojo]

That 93 team is so underrated.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

You have a point on the Kings but they were far from a powerhouse. They were an 84 point team the season before. They were a 66 point team the season after.

They had Gretzky and Robitaille. Other than that there was a young Rob Blake. Kurri was on the team but by that time he's like a point per game. A decent team with a couple of great players.

Our schedule this year has already been harder than anything either of those teams had to face. And it's not going to get any easier. Those teams didn't come close to facing a team as good as TO or Vegas. The best team in those two runs would've been the Nords in 93. Great young team. But they were just on the verge of completing a rebuild. It was their first year being a threat. Forsberg would join them a few years later in Colorado and then they became a real powerhouse from that point forward.

Yep. We got super lucky. Plus, even ignoring the 86 Oilers and 93 Pens, we also avoided the 86 Flyers and the 93 Bruins. It was a very lucky schedule in both runs.

Let's also not forget that Sandstrom missed 45 games and was on pace for over 50 goals and over 110 points and he was back for the playoffs.

Rob Blake also took a huge step in his development that season posting what turned out to be his second highest point total of his career, and almost tripling his previous seasons point total in just 19 more games.

The team fell apart the next season for a number of reasons but none of which had much to do with the talent level of the team.

The Nords were definitely very talented but were extremely young and inexperienced. I would hesitate before equating a more talented team with being called a better team as there are so many other components to a good team that are difficult to measure with offensive stats.

No doubt that we caught some breaks in those years but that can be said about most Stanley Cup Champs outside of the dynasty eras. The top two regular season teams almost never face each other in the finals and in order to win it all you have to beat a team that was good enough to knock off the top regular season teams.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Let's also not forget that Sandstrom missed 45 games and was on pace for over 50 goals and over 110 points and he was back for the playoffs.

Rob Blake also took a huge step in his development that season posting what turned out to be his second highest point total of his career, and almost tripling his previous seasons point total in just 19 more games.

The team fell apart the next season for a number of reasons but none of which had much to do with the talent level of the team.

I stand by what I said. Good but not great team. Not a powerhouse by any stretch. Not an easy win either. I considered the teams to be pretty evenly matched. Sandstrom never broke 90 points in his career. And as much as you can point to Gretzky missing, they had Paul Coffey and then traded him away. He wasn't there for that cup run. He would've helped them in the standings for sure.

The Nords were definitely very talented but were extremely young and inexperienced. I would hesitate before equating a more talented team with being called a better team as there are so many other components to a good team that are difficult to measure with offensive stats.

Nords were an up and coming team. Best of the 8 we faced in those two runs. But they hadn't put it together yet. Same as Calgary in '86. They were going to go on to become a powerhouse but hadn't done it yet.

No doubt that we caught some breaks in those years but that can be said about most Stanley Cup Champs outside of the dynasty eras. The top two regular season teams almost never face each other in the finals and in order to win it all you have to beat a team that was good enough to knock off the top regular season teams.

Sure. But those were insanely lucky breaks. It's not just that we avoided the top teams but we also got scrub teams to go along with it. No Flyers in 86, no Bruins in '93.

Doesn't mean those cups are worth any less. Doesn't mean we didn't earn them. Doesn't mean that Roy shouldn't have gotten the Smythes. But we got lucky for sure.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

I absolutely agree with this take. The current squad arent even in the same discussion as 1993. That team had so many character players and so much more quality. The current squad seem to be hardworking but extremely lucky so far. The 1984 team just like this one had several former stars and some promising younger players and Penney who caught fire but was a total one hit wonder. I can still remember the elation of them beating the Islanders 2 in a row, then the clock struck 12 and the Islanders just worn them down.

Game 4 turned around on a phantom non penalty call. To that point, Montreal was the ‘better’ team and looked like they had the Islanders number.

 

[LaFloater]

Game 4 turned around on a phantom non penalty call. To that point, Montreal was the ‘better’ team and looked like they had the Islanders number.

Just watched some highlights on Youtube of this series. Its funny some of the things you remember and the things that fade. Things I recall and are confirmed by the video are utter hatred of the that Islanders team. They were a team of great skill but also had a fair share of dbags from Smith to Gillies. Reminds me a lot of the NE Patriots. Also Steve Penney looks really amateurish in the 2nd half of the series. Seeing his old stand up style of goal keeping (and its great limitations) you start to appreciate the Patrick Roy butterfly revolution. What non penalty call was it in game 4?

 

[bobholly39]

He was in the zone against scrub teams though. Buffalo and the Islanders? I mean, those were basically byes.

20 years from now....

"Price was in the Zone against scrubt teams though. Leafs and Jets? Leafs hadn't won a playoff round in ~20 games and Jets gave a pathetic effort. I mean, those were basically byes..."

Roy won 5 OT games vs those 2 teams, 5-0. That's insane for any goalie, in a do or die playoff overtime situation.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

Just watched some highlights on Youtube of this series. Its funny some of the things you remember and the things that fade. Things I recall and are confirmed by the video are utter hatred of the that Islanders team. They were a team of great skill but also had a fair share of dbags from Smith to Gillies. Reminds me a lot of the NE Patriots. Also Steve Penney looks really amateurish in the 2nd half of the series. Seeing his old stand up style of goal keeping (and its great limitations) you start to appreciate the Patrick Roy butterfly revolution. What non penalty call was it in game 4?

Actually, it wasn't a non-call, but a forgotten one. The referee was Bruce Hood, who in my opinion was one of the worse referees of his time.

It was the first period, and Steve Shutt had just tied the game up on the power player. The Islanders, after their lackluster play in the first two games , changed their game plan and started to aggressively forecheck Montreal's defence and supported their forecheck by pinching their defencemen. On the play in question, a Montreal player chipped the puck past the pinching Islander defenceman and it was all but certain that Mats Naslund would have a breakaway from the Montreal blue line. The 'caught' defenceman reached out and held/interfered with Naslund, preventing this scoring chance. Hood, who was on the boards and had a clear view of the play, immediately raised his arm signaling an Islander penalty when he was run into and practically put over the boards. When Hood recovered, his arm had come down and his intention to call a penalty, seemingly forgotten. A small, curious , but important incident that I remember well and which may have turned the momentum in Montreal's at this critical junction.

What's impressive was how dominant Robinson was even at this late stage of his career. He was clearly the best player on the ice. Naslund was in his ascendancy and would soon earn his recognition and acclaim as one of the games' most dynamic players. On the reverse side, was the deterioration in the great Lafleur's game. By game 4 of this semi-finals , Lafleur had gone scoreless for about 25 games and was a mere shadow of his former greatness. All Montreal fans were hoping that Lafleur could recapture a fraction of his greatness. Even Lafleur at 75% may have been enough tip the balance in Montreal's favour over a reigning, dynastic Cup champion that was clearly in decline. But even if somehow Montreal got past the Islanders, the next dynasty , the Gretzky lead Oilers, awaited them. The outcome of that series may have well been quite embarrassing.

As for Steve Penny, I always thought he was the least athletic goalie to ever play for Montreal. He was stiff, wooden and had a complete inability to catch a puck. Perhaps if the coaching staff had taken him to a parking lot and shot 1,000 tennis balls at him and asked him to catch the balls, he may have had a career that lasted longer than two abbreviated Stanley Cup runs.

 

[Banjo Cat]

That team had John Leclair. And then they traded him a couple years later.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

That team had John Leclair. And then they traded him a couple years later.

Worse trade in the team’s history. A funny fact: prior to the trade , Montreal never lost a game to the Flyers when Leclair was on the team. After the trade, Montreal never beat the Flyers when Leclair was in his prime. Dumb always loses.