1993 Stanley Cup Final/Your Thoughts Going In?

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
It's only come out in recent years -- from Robitaille and others -- just how distraught the Kings' locker-room was after that penalty. Gretzky was apparently reaming out McSorley in front of everyone, and after that incident everyone was on egg shells.

Panther I wonder, I know McSorely has a book/biography out, I wonder if he "falls on the sword" in the sense that he should've known better than to go back to his legal stick with 6 or 7 minutes or whatever left in the game. I want to say I've read on HoH on another posting there was a "friendly reminder" from someone during the 2nd intermission-"don't forget to switch your sticks back" or something to that effect.
 

Crosstraffic

Registered User
Mar 15, 2015
1,709
728
Yorba Linda, CA
No, I think L.A. wins if not for the McSorley penalty. You cannot over-estimate momentum shifts in hockey (esp. in that "emotion-over-systems" era). It's only come out in recent years -- from Robitaille and others -- just how distraught the Kings' locker-room was after that penalty. Gretzky was apparently reaming out McSorley in front of everyone, and after that incident everyone was on egg shells. Then, they lost the game. The Kings were completely flat to start game three, basically spotting Montreal three goals. They then came back to tie... and lost in overtime. Same script in game four.

I would think differently about this if Montreal had consistently been the better team in this series -- but they weren't. Only in game five, when it was all over but the cryin', was Montreal clearly stronger. I would say in all of games one through four, L.A. was the stronger team, and they didn't lose any of the games in regulation.

So, then, go back and give L.A. game two. Now, there's no club on egg shells, no drama, and Gretzky is just 2 wins away from completing his "L.A. mission", with three of the next four games at home.

Context aside, how many teams in the Finals have won the first two games on the road and then lost the series? Maybe none?

1966 Detroit Red Wings won first two games at the Forum and then lost the next 4 to the Habs. So it is possible. The illegal stick was the turning point of that series, I remember doing a tour of the now Scotiabank Arena in Toronto in 2000, we got to walk past the visitors dressing room which now had a latch where a lock was attached, to keep out spies from checking sticks or other shenanigans.
 

CrosbyIsKing87

Registered User
May 3, 2017
87
43
After the Kings won game 1 I of the SCF was sure they were going to win the Cup. Gretzky finished that game off with an empty netter and it just looked like destiny. But Montreal got the key goals when they needed them (OT). The team with the dominant offensive player usually took the Cup back then but Roy rose to the occasion. Kings are underdogs because they did not have that great a season. But Montreal was an unexpected finalist as well.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
1966 Detroit Red Wings won first two games at the Forum and then lost the next 4 to the Habs. So it is possible. The illegal stick was the turning point of that series, I remember doing a tour of the now Scotiabank Arena in Toronto in 2000, we got to walk past the visitors dressing room which now had a latch where a lock was attached, to keep out spies from checking sticks or other shenanigans.
Thanks! I do remember seeing that '66 tidbit before, but had forgotten.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
But Montreal got the key goals when they needed them (OT). The team with the dominant offensive player usually took the Cup back then but Roy rose to the occasion.
Montreal certainly got the key goals when they needed them (1 from a D-man, 2 from a third-liner), but I don't think Roy was anything too special in the Finals. He was good-ish, but no better than, say, Kelly Hrudey overall.

Has any other club lost three straight overtime games in the Finals?
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
I remember going into the Finals thinking that this was going to be a series of the greatest franchise of all time versus the greatest player of all time, with both of them no longer at their best. Something was going to have to give.

With regards to the McSorley incident, it felt like the ghosts of Montreal past were there to haunt the enemy again like the too many men on the ice call against Boston over a decade earlier.
 

Hobnobs

Pinko
Nov 29, 2011
8,863
2,236
Montreal certainly got the key goals when they needed them (1 from a D-man, 2 from a third-liner), but I don't think Roy was anything too special in the Finals. He was good-ish, but no better than, say, Kelly Hrudey overall.

Has any other club lost three straight overtime games in the Finals?

I think Roy dropped maybe a little bit compared to the Islanders series but I think that creates an illusion because he was beyond dominant vs the Isles (and Quebec). I think he was better than Hrudey but Hrudey was great as well.
 

hacksaw7

Registered User
Dec 3, 2020
1,279
1,343
I thought the Habs would win, in 6. Montreal was really under the radar outstanding all year, and I just never thought the Kings had the D or goaltending to take this series. Plus Montreal was on such a roll, the ghosts of the Forum still existed at that time. Didn't matter that they had Gretzky the Habs had Roy, they were overtime monsters...didn't think they could get beat.

Was hoping for Leafs/Habs but oh well.

Hrudey was playing well but he was a guy who overall was maybe an average to at times above average netminder who every so often can pull an insane game out (87 game 7) but over the course of a full series against a team that did have a top 10 offense I didn't think he could do it.
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
17,753
16,119
I was only 9 years old but i was very confident that the habs would beat the kings.

But the series turned out to be tight, especially the games in LA. I know people look to game 2 as the turning point, but games 3 and 4 were very nerve racking and could have easily went LA's way.

It wasn't until game 5 where the habs looked like they were in complete control of the series.

Gretzky also mentioned recently how that team was was running on fumes. That team went through Vancouver, Calgary, and Toronto to get to Montreal. The playoff travel schedule couldn't get much worse than that.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
I didn't mean to suggest that Hrudey was great in the Finals -- he wasn't. But Roy was equally mediocre. The Canadiens didn't beat L.A. because of Roy; he was kind of average. (I'm now remembering Dave Taylor -- who was, like, 40 or something -- beating Roy on that harmless-looking slapper from the boards in game two. That likely would have held up as the winner if not for McSorley's stick.)

I'd say the Canadiens beat L.A. because they could roll 4 good lines and really pressure L.A.'s fairly crappy defense.
 

double5son10

Registered User
Jan 20, 2011
1,149
456
Denver
Montreal certainly got the key goals when they needed them (1 from a D-man, 2 from a third-liner), but I don't think Roy was anything too special in the Finals. He was good-ish, but no better than, say, Kelly Hrudey overall.

Has any other club lost three straight overtime games in the Finals?

1951 Finals, all five games went to OT. Leafs and Habs split the first two games, then Leafs won the last three, the series winner being Bill Barilko's famed final goal.
 

EpochLink

Canucks and Jets fan
Aug 1, 2006
59,514
15,336
Vancouver, BC
Montreal had a really great defense that playoff run.

Desjardins/Schenider/Odelein/Daigneault/Brisebois/Haller.

The epic hat trick from Desjardins in game 2 is one of my fondest memories as a kid.
 

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
9,410
5,068
But Roy was equally mediocre

Patrick Roy still had a .929 save percentage during the final round and .932 during the 4 wins (to Hrudey .915), seem an fully elite vs really really good performance goaltending duel wise (low sample size, so number would not be that telling obviously and so on)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cole von cole

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Patrick Roy still had a .929 save percentage during the final round and .932 during the 4 wins (to Hrudey .915), seem an fully elite vs really really good performance goaltending duel wise (low sample size, so number would not be that telling obviously and so on)
Wow, you are right, and the .929 is better than I thought it was!

That said, if we knock off game 5 -- at which point the Kings were toasted -- and look only at the first four games that decided the series, the two goalies were at:

Hrudey .926
Roy .926

Their save percentages were exactly even after four games, yet Montreal was up 3-1.

Sometimes, it's not how many, though, it's when. And Hrudey often showed a tendency to fold at key moments.
 

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
9,410
5,068
Hrudey .926
Roy .926

Which was extremely good at the time I think (even today), but that could the impression, Roy was really good in what feel like closing the book of a done deal (like against the Panthers were it is very easy to underestimate him that final).
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
17,753
16,119
Montreal had a really great defense that playoff run.

Desjardins/Schenider/Odelein/Daigneault/Brisebois/Haller.

The epic hat trick from Desjardins in game 2 is one of my fondest memories as a kid.

This was actually the defense while it was disengrating.

Around 89 and 90, the habs had what was probably an unprecedented level of riches on defense.

By 1996, desjardins, odelein, and Schneider had also been traded.
 

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
Montreal had a really great defense that playoff run.

Desjardins/Schenider/Odelein/Daigneault/Brisebois/Haller.

Those names do jump out. Without looking at the statistics I'm curious if:

1. One (or more) of their D-men would be in say...the top 3 of the Canadiens total scoring that postseason, I'm wondering if the Canadiens' defense as a whole surpassed the play of the forward group, with maybe the exception of John LeClair as I think of the overtime goals...
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
17,753
16,119
Those names do jump out. Without looking at the statistics I'm curious if:

1. One (or more) of their D-men would be in say...the top 3 of the Canadiens total scoring that postseason, I'm wondering if the Canadiens' defense as a whole surpassed the play of the forward group, with maybe the exception of John LeClair as I think of the overtime goals...

Desjardins was the 5th leading socrer for the habs with 14 points in 23 games. He scored 4 goals, but three of those were in the Marty mcsorely brain fart game.

Every other dman on the team had no more than 1 goal for that run. The thing people forget is that Schneider only played in half of the playoff games because of injury. The other dman you expect some offense from is brisebois, but he was only 21 years old at the time.
 

Kranix

Deranged Homer
Jun 27, 2012
18,122
16,154
I’ll be using that video to help explain Gretzky to the kids. That’s one of those where if you slow it down, the chess-master aspect of his game becomes very apparent.
Wayne was amazing in that run. I was rooting for Gilmour so I was disappointed in that CF outcome, but was a big Wayne fan too. I was pretty young so I wasn't really analyzing the finals matchup other than that I understood Montreal had some kind of magic going on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelhockey

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,585
15,948
Desjardins was the 5th leading socrer for the habs with 14 points in 23 games. He scored 4 goals, but three of those were in the Marty mcsorely brain fart game.

Every other dman on the team had no more than 1 goal for that run. The thing people forget is that Schneider only played in half of the playoff games because of injury. The other dman you expect some offense from is brisebois, but he was only 21 years old at the time.

now that i think back i think i always had a prejudice about offensive dmen who weren’t also elite two way players because calgary won without gary suter and montreal won mostly without schneider. those were two very formative playoffs for me as a kid, along with vancouver destroying phil housley in back to back years.

even that early i would classify desjardins as an elite two way d.

so even when i was just a kid who didn’t know anything, i was like, you can’t win with a steve duchesne. and back on the topic of those finals, look at LA after they replaced their blueline that was built around duchesne with the core of blake, zhitnik, and marty mcsorley playing out of his mind.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->