2001 Devils and Avalanche best teams ever?

[goeb]

Outscoring the opposition by 100 goals during the regular season in the modern NHL era is very impressive, so got to give the devils credit for that. They had a pretty damn good offensive team that year. Most years they would've won the Cup but Avs were just as strong of a team at both ends and they were on a mission for Raymond.

 

[mrhockey193195]

Ooops. No. 94 Rangers.

I have a hard time putting "weak" and "cup win" in the same sentence, but your point is well taken. That team certainly did things the hard way! But don't forget how they obliterated the Isles in round 1 (6-0, 6-0, 5-1, 5-2), and were fairly dominant in round 2 vs. Washington (6-3, 5-2, 3-0, 2-4, 4-3).

 

[Tarantula]

line up those devils against the 50's canadiens, you're really betting on the canadiens?

Sure am, assuming they have had the same benefit of conditioning, coaching and equipment, general evolution of the game. Heck a scratch golfer with modern equipment would make Arnold Palmer look much less the golfer he was if he was using his old clubs and putter, etc. You really can't compare things across that much time, look how much benefit any industry has now with decades more institutional knowledge, and technological progress.

 

[Spirit of McMullen]

Game 6 was the most painful game I ever attended. I personally thought that after the easy series against the Pens, it took until Game 5 against the Avs for the Devils to really find their game. Guys who had long scoring droughts like Mogilny snapped their streaks and I remember being just as confident coming home for game 6. Unfortunately Brodeur just did not show up for that one.

Interesting side note: the Avalanche started the season with a simple phrase: 16W, which stood for "16 wins", as it obviously took 16 wins to win the Stanley Cup. They had hats, t-shirts, etc. made up. That was their slogan/motto/rallying cry for the season.

But anybody from NJ, familiar with NJ or whoever drove to a game in NJ, etc would know, that that is the precise exit number (16W) of the NJ Turnpike to access the Meadowlands Sports Complex, to reach what was then known as the Continental Airlines Arena.

A bad coincidence for Devils fans.

 

[blood gin]

Interesting side note: the Avalanche started the season with a simple phrase: 16W, which stood for "16 wins", as it obviously took 16 wins to win the Stanley Cup. They had hats, t-shirts, etc. made up. That was their slogan/motto/rallying cry for the season.

But anybody from NJ, familiar with NJ or whoever drove to a game in NJ, etc would know, that that is the precise exit number (16W) of the NJ Turnpike to access the Meadowlands Sports Complex, to reach what was then known as the Continental Airlines Arena.

A bad coincidence for Devils fans.

Yes. ESPN beat that into the ground during it's Bourque love fest

Bottom line is that Roy played phenomenal and Brodeur was terrible. The series itself was a disappointment in terms of exciting play. 7 game cup final series doesn't always translate to greatness. It was rare too see both teams at their best at the same time during this series. Game 1 was a total blowout. Game 2 a bore. After Gomez's goal got waived off (rightly so) in game 6 the Devils lost all their fight.

 

[blood gin]

The 2001 Devils beat Lemieux's Penguins and had already been to the dance a year earlier. I know I would take the 2001 Devils over the 1992 Rangers any day of the week.

The 1992 Rangers were an outstanding team and were a hair away from going up 3-1 on the Pens. They led game 5, 4-2 midway through the 3rd before it slipped away. If they get by Pitt it's tough to envision the Bruins or a way way overachieving Hawks team on an insane hot streak stopping them

I've always looked at that Rangers/Pens series as the real Cup Finals in 1992

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

The 1992 Rangers were an outstanding team and were a hair away from going up 3-1 on the Pens. They led game 5, 4-2 midway through the 3rd before it slipped away. If they get by Pitt it's tough to envision the Bruins or a way way overachieving Hawks team on an insane hot streak stopping them

I've always looked at that Rangers/Pens series as the real Cup Finals in 1992

it should be pointed out that they couldn’t beat the pens even after taking mario out of the series by intentionally injuring him.

 

[Big Phil]

The 1992 Rangers were an outstanding team and were a hair away from going up 3-1 on the Pens. They led game 5, 4-2 midway through the 3rd before it slipped away. If they get by Pitt it's tough to envision the Bruins or a way way overachieving Hawks team on an insane hot streak stopping them

I've always looked at that Rangers/Pens series as the real Cup Finals in 1992

You've got to admit, the message by vadim right below on this post is pretty damaging. I think the 1992 Rangers were a good team, a very good team, but they were missing some pieces. 1993 was a write off for them, Leetch missed most of the season, but in 1994 they had a new coach in Keenan, still had Messier, Leetch and Richter but added guys like Larmer, Kovalev, Zubov and then character guys from the old Oilers dynasty like MacTavish, Tik, Lowe, Anderson. Plus stuck with just one goalie in Richter rather than Vanbiesbrouck who wasn't always a playoff goalie. 1994 was a different team, a different feel. They traded away youth for that Cup, but they got it.

Graves slashed Mario and he missed the last 4 games of the Rangers series and they still couldn't beat the Pens.

it should be pointed out that they couldn’t beat the pens even after taking mario out of the series by intentionally injuring him.

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

Sure am, assuming they have had the same benefit of conditioning, coaching and equipment, general evolution of the game. Heck a scratch golfer with modern equipment would make Arnold Palmer look much less the golfer he was if he was using his old clubs and putter, etc. You really can't compare things across that much time, look how much benefit any industry has now with decades more institutional knowledge, and technological progress.

how can you automatically assume they would benefit that much from today's advances in technology?

why do people always think that old greats from decades ago would be super human if they played today?

 

[Kyle McMahon]

how can you automatically assume they would benefit that much from today's advances in technology?

why do people always think that old greats from decades ago would be super human if they played today?

Why do you assume that today's pampered millionaires/off season golf buddies would have no problem surviving 20 hour train rides, playing through significant injuries due to fear of losing their jobs, or the general violence that was just a regular part of the game without 21st century body-armour equipment?

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

Why do you assume that today's pampered millionaires/off season golf buddies would have no problem surviving 20 hour train rides, playing through significant injuries due to fear of losing their jobs, or the general violence that was just a regular part of the game without 21st century body-armour equipment?

i think it's more realistic today's guys can handle a long train ride than to think a shiny new pair of modern skates will turn guys in the 50's into superior specimens that would crush everything we have seen since then

 

[Kyle McMahon]

i think it's more realistic today's guys can handle a long train ride than to think a shiny new pair of modern skates will turn guys in the 50's into superior specimens that would crush everything we have seen since then

This was never suggested anywhere. Resorting to hyperbole is the clearest sign of a weak argument.

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

This was never suggested anywhere. Resorting to hyperbole is the clearest sign of a weak argument.

actually it was suggested above, and you are the one that called the guys today "pampered millionaires/off season buddies" as if that means they couldn't handle the "tough" game of the 50's, so you are no stranger to hyperbole

 

[Kyle McMahon]

actually it was suggested above, and you are the one that called the guys today "pampered millionaires/off season buddies" as if that means they couldn't handle the "tough" game of the 50's, so you are no stranger to hyperbole

It was? The post you were responding to states nowhere that superior skate technology would turn 50s guys into superior specimens that would crush everything since then.

I don't think the players themselves would argue that they are not pampered in the 21st century. First class travel, 5 star hotels, personal trainers, top of the line facilities, comped equipment from manufacturers, business agents...come on, these guys have a fabulous lifestyle.

John Tortorella was quoted recently lamenting the fact that everyone out there on the ice is all buddy-buddy with eachother now, as opposed to earlier in his career when there was much more hatred between opponents.

I'm not saying modern players couldn't adapt to the 50s, but there would be some significant culture shock. Something tells me a player coming from the 50s to today would have a little less trouble getting used to private air travel and million dollar paycheques.

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

having an easier lifestyle and being more civilized in social situations doesn't some how make players less tough on the ice

if it does, the overall speed and skill today compensates for it

 

[shazariahl]

having an easier lifestyle and being more civilized in social situations doesn't some how make players less tough on the ice

if it does, the overall speed and skill today compensates for it

I don't think players from older eras adjusting to modern equipment is difficult at all. It certainly didn't hurt 80's goalies who played in the 90's balloon era as well. And that was guys past their primes who still managed to stick around. Heck, guys like Hasek and Roy started with that gear and dominated the league in the 90's with more modern equipment.