91-93 Penguins vs. 86-88 Oilers

WingsFan95

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
3,492
259
Kanata
You conveniently have both winning back to back Cups and in that 3rd season they don't they lose 3-4 in the 2nd Round. On top of this both teams had Coffey, the Pens for 1 and a half seasons and the Oilers for 2.

BREAKDOWN
Oilers core: Gretzky-Messier-Kurri-Anderson
Support: Tikkanen, Krushelnyski, Lowe & Smith
Goaltenders: Fuhr
* Coffey for 2 Runs, Craig Simpson for 1

Pens core: Lemieux-Jagr-Francis-Murphy
Support: Mullen, Recchi, Stevens & Trottier
Goaltender: Barrasso
*Coffey for 1 Run, Phil Bourque for 2
 

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,589
4,548
Behind A Tree
Give me the Oilers here, still 2 great teams there. Was a shame we didn't see more Gretzky/Lemieux matches.
 

Pominville Knows

Registered User
Sep 28, 2012
4,477
333
Down Under
Losing to the 1993 Islanders is one thing, quite another to lose both a series and then later the cup to the grudge laden and great Calgary Flames of the late eighties.
Then there was the Flyers and Bruins as well, but with a wholly different outcome. Still pretty good teams.
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,041
12,661
I would take the Oilers. More battle hardened, deeper on defence, didn't lose to the 1980s equivalent of the 1993 Islanders.
 

blood gin

Registered User
Jan 17, 2017
4,174
2,203
I would take the Oilers. More battle hardened, deeper on defence, didn't lose to the 1980s equivalent of the 1993 Islanders.

Well early on they had that historic loss to the 82 Kings, though the Oilers were not a finished product yet, still no excuse to lose that 5-0 game or the series as whole to a 63 point team that went into the playoffs losing 7 of their last 8 games
 
  • Like
Reactions: WingsFan95

WingsFan95

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
3,492
259
Kanata
I personally take the 91-93 Pens.

The 88 Oilers are a good pick for the best single season of the 6 on offer and yet I can't scratch them missing Coffey for Craig Simpson. Fact is depth can only mean so much in the playoffs unless you're grinding out OT wins. I'd love some confirmation on this but I'm remembering the lines for Penguins being Stevens-Lemieux-Jagr and Recchi-Francis-Mullen while Coffey-Murphy were the 1st defensive pairing for the 91 playoffs then Murphy was paired with Paul Stanton. The Pens certainly lose on defense from 92-93 but I take Barrasso over Fuhr by a margin (really not a fan of Fuhr). Plus the 88 Oilers lose Coffey and have an older pair with Huddy being the veteran so I don't think they're too strong that season despite the playoff obliteration.

Then you have the top to bottom approach.

Gretzky-Lemieux, although I take Lemieux here but to not cause a stir we call them even.

Messier, Kurri, Anderson vs. Francis, Jagr, Stevens is a very tough comparison. I can't take Kurri-Anderson over Jagr-Stevens even if Jagr was raw, the size difference is just too much for me. Then the Moose with Esa and Krush over Francis-Recchi-Mullen? Here's what I need clarification, how do the switch ups work in 87-88 with those 2nd lines. I just think Pens are more top heavy. The 1st d-pairing of older Coffey-Murphy seems to be superior to any Oilers pair of that 3 year stretch as well.
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,041
12,661
Well early on they had that historic loss to the 82 Kings, though the Oilers were not a finished product yet, still no excuse to lose that 5-0 game or the series as whole to a 63 point team that went into the playoffs losing 7 of their last 8 games

Sure. I don't see the 1982 Oilers included in the choices though.
 

TheEye

Registered User
Nov 4, 2018
191
132
I personally take the 91-93 Pens.

The 88 Oilers are a good pick for the best single season of the 6 on offer and yet I can't scratch them missing Coffey for Craig Simpson. Fact is depth can only mean so much in the playoffs unless you're grinding out OT wins. I'd love some confirmation on this but I'm remembering the lines for Penguins being Stevens-Lemieux-Jagr and Recchi-Francis-Mullen while Coffey-Murphy were the 1st defensive pairing for the 91 playoffs then Murphy was paired with Paul Stanton. The Pens certainly lose on defense from 92-93 but I take Barrasso over Fuhr by a margin (really not a fan of Fuhr). Plus the 88 Oilers lose Coffey and have an older pair with Huddy being the veteran so I don't think they're too strong that season despite the playoff obliteration.

Then you have the top to bottom approach.

Gretzky-Lemieux, although I take Lemieux here but to not cause a stir we call them even.

Messier, Kurri, Anderson vs. Francis, Jagr, Stevens is a very tough comparison. I can't take Kurri-Anderson over Jagr-Stevens even if Jagr was raw, the size difference is just too much for me. Then the Moose with Esa and Krush over Francis-Recchi-Mullen? Here's what I need clarification, how do the switch ups work in 87-88 with those 2nd lines. I just think Pens are more top heavy. The 1st d-pairing of older Coffey-Murphy seems to be superior to any Oilers pair of that 3 year stretch as well.


And then from the "So I'm watching Bobby Orr highlights" thread (pages 2 & 5 respectively):

Gretzky was the best player on possibly most talented top heavy team of all time.


For how many years exactly? If talking about the early 90s to be fair, Trottier was on his last legs and not what you'd call a contributor at that point. Coffey was had for 1 season and Francis was brought in late in 91 for the playoff push. Then you had a young Jagr still very much learning.

So Mullen and Murphy round out. Again, this was for a short period that you had Coffey-Mullen-Murphy-Francis-Jagr all contributing. Basically for the 91 playoffs. Then you lose Coffey and Murphy/Mullen after 95.


It's interesting how one's perspective changes, depending on the narrative they wish to push forward.
 

WingsFan95

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
3,492
259
Kanata
And then from the "So I'm watching Bobby Orr highlights" thread (pages 2 & 5 respectively):

It's interesting how one's perspective changes, depending on the narrative they wish to push forward.

Lemieux had a 3 year stretch of which 1991 was at least in my opinion a bit better than 92-93 because of Coffey.

Gretz had from 83-88, a 6 year stretch. But he also had Kurri and Anderson or at least the 1 on his line from 80-81.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
It's hard to remove our knowledge of Edmonton's being a dynasty, and Pittsburgh not. It just swings it in Edmonton's favor.

But trying to just isolate those three years in the OP's topic, we have regular season finishes like this:
Edmonton
1986 - 1st overall (.744)
1987 - 1st overall (.663)
1988 - 3rd overall (.619)
AVG.: 1st overall (.675)

Pittsburgh
1991 - 7th overall (.550)
1992 - 6th overall (.544)
1993 - 1st overall (.708)
AVG.: 5th overall (.601)

Then, we have combined playoff records like this:
Edmonton
38-11 (.776)

Pittsburgh
32-13 (.711)

I think the main reason the Oilers slipped to 3rd in 1987-88 is (a) Canada Cup hangover; (b) adjusting to life without Coffey (and Moog); and (c) disinterest in regular season in general. In any case, I guess both RS and playoffs' records have to be in Edmonton's favor, although I think Pittsburgh probably had a bit harder competition in round one at least. (Both teams could wipe the floor with hard competition anyway: The '88 Oilers went 8-0 against the 1st overall and the 5th overall team, while Pittsburgh went 8-0 in the '92 Conference series and Cup Final.)

Offensively, maybe we'll call them even. Both have the nuclear weapon at center that will produce big points regardless of anything. I think the Pens had a more fearsome power-play, partly for reasons I'll get into below... But, is Lemieux going to be healthy and in the line-up (always an issue), and is Jagr really "Jagr" yet? He's sort-of arriving in the '92 playoffs and the 1992-93 season, but in both 1990-91 and 1991-92 he's not quite a stud yet.

Defensively is where it gets interesting. Coffey was awesome in the 1985-86 regular season (Norris; more goals scored than Orr; +61), but he was poor in the '86 playoffs. Then, he was oft-injured and less effective in the 1986-87 season and playoffs (and did they really need him in '87? They scored 13 goals in a playoff game when he was out with injury). It may be a controversial opinion, but after '86 I feel Edmonton was better with Simpson and without Coffey. Beyond Coffey, the Oilers had only Ruotsalainen as an offensive D-man and then only for the '87 run. Besides those two, it's stay-at-home defencemen, although Huddy and Smith could supply a bit of offense. In general, I think Pittsburgh had the better power-play, and it's because they always had two good offensive D-men at the point. Everyone knows I'm a fan of Murphy, and he added a lot and allowed them to lose Coffey in '92. (On the other hand, the Oilers' post-Coffey PP in 1988 was lights-out, so you never know...)

In goal, definitely Edmonton. Fuhr over Barrasso any day, and then you've got either Moog as back-up (another NHL starter until about 2000) or Ranford ('90 Conn Smythe and '91 Canada Cup MVP), so even if the top-guy goes down, you're still totally safe. But do you wanna put Frank Pietrangelo or Ken Wregget in to face top playoff teams?

Then, how did each lose? Edmonton can be forgiven more readily, for sure. Calgary in '86 was a team on the rise, stuffed with top players and some future Hall of Famers, and went on to the Finals that very spring (and then dominated the League, in the RS, from '87 to '94). The Islanders in '93 had their legendary coach and a nice mix of players, but their top guy wasn't even in the line-up and Glenn Healy was in net.


I think the difference, for me, is that the Oil had Messier hitting his prime, whereas Jagr wasn't really peak-Jagr yet in those years (and, truth be told, Jagr isn't generally thought of as a playoff legend; it's sort of the one thing a bit underwhelming on his resume). Not to mention Gretzky, Anderson, and Kurri are all legendary big-game players who always came through in the clutch.
 

c9777666

Registered User
Aug 31, 2016
19,892
5,875
I think 1984-1986 EDM vs 1991-1993 Pit is more interesting to debate since there are similarities.

Back to back Cups, a threepeat derailing arguably the best team of that bunch in a game 7 second round upset
 

GMR

Registered User
Jul 27, 2013
6,064
5,038
Parts Unknown
Oilers for me. Penguins had more scares in their playoff runs. The Oilers basically ran through their opponents. Also, I'll take Gretzky and Messier over the Penguins top two centers.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
You can never bet against Gretzky, and this time is no different. Not that Lemieux in his prime isn't scary, because he is and we all saw how individually talented and dominant he was in those Cup runs, but let's not forget, Gretzky did this too.

But even if you want to call those two a wash at that point in their careers you have to lean on the Oilers here. Just a bit better in top end talent. For example, Messier is better than any other Penguin not named Mario. Heck, Kurri likely is too. Coffey is on both teams but might be better on the Oilers. Fuhr is better in bigger games than Barrasso and let's not forget the X-factor in Glenn Anderson scoring those big goals at the right time.

Both the 1986 Oilers and 1993 Pens were upset but as was said earlier there is a lot less shame in losing to the 1986 Flames. Especially considering the fact you beat them every other time you played them during that era. The 1st place finishes matter as well, the Oilers just simply were better over a long haul and even in the playoffs we can see over a short haul. You've got that 7 game series vs. Philly in 1987 where the Flyers came back and other than Calgary knocking them out in 1986 that was the only Game 7 and the only time there was a bit of tension that they may lose. The Pens in 1991 and 1992 showed tremendous heart in coming back from their series deficits but they were down 3-2 to New Jersey and 2-0 to Boston in 1991. Then 3-1 to Washington in 1992 and a nervous series against the Rangers after that. Good on them for winning 11 straight games in the 1992 playoffs but they had plenty of scares those first two rounds while the Oilers were more in control. Heck, the Pens were even down 2-1 in the series vs. the Northstars in 1991 - a 68 point team. We might remember Mario's classic goal on Casey in those finals and then an 8-0 thrashing in the clinching game but the series was a lot tighter than it should have been.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,516
3,352
Oilers, easily.

Gretzky > Lemieux. Messier > Francis. Oilers Coffey > Pens Coffey. Fuhr > Barrasso.

The Pens make up a little bit of ground with depth on the wings, but Jagr wasn't Jagr yet.
 

blogofmike

Registered User
Dec 16, 2010
2,176
926
I personally take the 91-93 Pens.

The 88 Oilers are a good pick for the best single season of the 6 on offer and yet I can't scratch them missing Coffey for Craig Simpson. Fact is depth can only mean so much in the playoffs unless you're grinding out OT wins. I'd love some confirmation on this but I'm remembering the lines for Penguins being Stevens-Lemieux-Jagr and Recchi-Francis-Mullen while Coffey-Murphy were the 1st defensive pairing for the 91 playoffs then Murphy was paired with Paul Stanton. The Pens certainly lose on defense from 92-93 but I take Barrasso over Fuhr by a margin (really not a fan of Fuhr). Plus the 88 Oilers lose Coffey and have an older pair with Huddy being the veteran so I don't think they're too strong that season despite the playoff obliteration.

Then you have the top to bottom approach.

Gretzky-Lemieux, although I take Lemieux here but to not cause a stir we call them even.

Messier, Kurri, Anderson vs. Francis, Jagr, Stevens is a very tough comparison. I can't take Kurri-Anderson over Jagr-Stevens even if Jagr was raw, the size difference is just too much for me. Then the Moose with Esa and Krush over Francis-Recchi-Mullen? Here's what I need clarification, how do the switch ups work in 87-88 with those 2nd lines. I just think Pens are more top heavy. The 1st d-pairing of older Coffey-Murphy seems to be superior to any Oilers pair of that 3 year stretch as well.

Jagr didn't play on a line with Mario during this run. Before 1993, Jagr barely saw the PP. In 1991 he would have been on the 3rd line with Trottier. The big Pens line was Stevens - Lemieux - Recchi (then Tocchet). Coffey and Murphy were PP partners, but I don't recall them being a regular pair. Murphy and Ulf is what I remember later in the run. I don't recall who Paul Stanton played with. Or Paul Stanton in general to be honest...

Anyways, I always take Gretzky over Lemieux. 99 beats 66 in head to head results and produced at even strength in a way that even Lemieux never did. There's not really a Pens line you can put out there with Gretzky/Kurri, and Messier/Anderson isn't a fun matchup either.

The Oilers have the better version of Coffey, and they probably do not need him. The 88 Oilers had a playoff run where Fuhr's SA/60 was 24.88. The best SA/60 team in the league that regular season was Boston, who allowed 26.97 (25.95 in playoffs).

Barrasso is good, but Grant Fuhr didn't have a playoff run where he was benched for Frank Pietrangelo, and during these three years he is a three time Vezina finalist with one Vezina win, and a Hart finalist in 1988, even if he also played against the higher powered offenses of the day more often in the Smythe Division.
 

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
Close. It could probably go either way. The oilers were more dominant at least but the pens showed great heart. The problem is Jagr is still green here and not at moose’s level. Lemieux vs Gretzky here is like Godzilla vs King Kong. Let them duke it out but after that lean slightly to the oilers
I’ll call it a wash
 

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
It really comes down to the rest of the teams. Because in this scenario both Gretzky and Lemieux are the same age 25-27 and in there 3 straight runs put stat lines of
Lemieux
49-40-56-96
Gretzky
50-25-71-96

Pretty cool find imo
 
  • Like
Reactions: Casanova

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,076
14,579
Oilers

Hard to bet against Gretzky in big game situations. Obviously Pens and Lemieux are talented enough to win too but id guess Oilers.

If the timing could have worked so those teams actually went head to head in the finals with each team exchanging cups and 99 and 66 each having a smythe the first 2 years and with the rematch the 3rd year - that could have gone down as the greatest thing in hockey history.
 

shazariahl

Registered User
Apr 7, 2009
2,030
59
Really good choices of teams, TBH. Like most here, I think it would be a close series, and it could easily go either way. But I have to give the edge to the Oilers. The Pens were great, but the Oilers were just slightly better. That being said, anything can happen. Just look at 93 Isles...

As far as the Gretzky/Lemieux angle though, Gretzky actually dominated Lemieux in head to head matches, which again doesn't bode really well for the Pens.
 

TheGuiminator

I’ll be damned King, I’ll be damned
Oct 23, 2018
1,971
1,654
It’s close, but if I had a gun pointed to my head, i’d go with the Oilers
 

L L

Registered User
Mar 21, 2019
12
5
I agree it would be close, but Gretzky is legendary in the playoffs.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
Barrasso is good, but Grant Fuhr didn't have a playoff run where he was benched for Frank Pietrangelo, and during these three years he is a three time Vezina finalist with one Vezina win, and a Hart finalist in 1988, even if he also played against the higher powered offenses of the day more often in the Smythe Division.
Barrasso was injured, not benched. Pietrangelo played outstanding in his absence. I think Barrasso vs. Fuhr would be pretty even.

My Best-Carey
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->