Are Great teams/Dynastys/Multiply Cup Winners a thing of the past??

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by FiveForDrawingBlood, Apr 28, 2011.

  1. FiveForDrawingBlood

    FiveForDrawingBlood Registered User

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Have we seen the last of the great teams?

    Hard to win a Stanley Cup now so many team into the league. When I was a kid about 14 teams in league and only 8 made the playoffs. When the playoffs started you knew only about 3 of them had a legitimate shot at the Cup - Bobby Orr and his gang in Boston, Lafleur, Dryden the Big Three in Montreal and Bobby Clake and the Broad Street Bullies in Philly. The Black Hawks were a dark-horse for a Cup, they had a decent club with Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita, Glenn Hall, etc...The Rangers were long shots with Rod Gilbert, Ratelle, Brad Park, etc... The first round of playoffs were a tune up for the good teams.

    Today, there are so many teams in NHL with 16 making the playoffs. About 10-12 out of the 16 good enough to win the Cup. Even if a team does draft well and trade good can't keep a good team together. Each club is allotted so much money once a team starts to win their salaries increase and they have to trade off good players. Black Hawks won last year and had to trade 3-4 decent players to fit under the cap. Those great teams are a thing of the past.
     
  2. TheDevilMadeMe

    TheDevilMadeMe Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    47,471
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Awards:
    It ms definitely much harder, but I think it's still possible.

    Remember how close the Red Wings came to back to back Cups (injuries to Datsyuk and Lidstrom MAY have been factors), and they have a great shot again this year.

    I do think it's impossible for a tram to win 4 in a row in the modern NHL, however.
     
  3. gifted88

    gifted88 Dante the poet

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    7,060
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Occupation:
    Aerospace
    Location:
    Guelph, ON
    I think winning 3-5 cups back to back is a thing of the past. That said, Detroit are perennial contenders and if they win another by next year it'll be 5 in 10 years. Half the cups in a 30 team league, I'd call that a dynasty so it's not really a thing of the past.
     
  4. The Nuge

    The Nuge RIP Fugu

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,047
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    British Columbia
    Not if you build the team correct (Detroit or Pittsburgh)
     
  5. Blades of Glory

    Blades of Glory Troll Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    18,401
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Investment banker
    Location:
    California
    The Los Angeles Lakers are the final dynasty in professional sports. And they are on their last legs, with an aging Kobe Bryan nearing the end of his career and Phil Jackson ready to move onto retirement with more championship rings than fingers. I do not think we will ever again see a true dynasty in the NBA, NFL, or NHL. The very concept of the salary cap is to prevent dynasties. The NFL implemented the salary cap prior to the 1994 season solely because the Dallas Cowboys and San Francisco 49ers had effectively rendered the rest of the NFL irrelevant. The league was tired of it's two most wealthy teams led by it's two most influential owners, already having combined for 5 Super Bowls between 1984 and 1993, run a monopoly on the game because they had money and the marquee players wanted to play for them. So, prior to 1994, they put in a salary cap. Fat lot of good the cap did at the time, considering the 49ers won the Super Bowl in 1994 and the Cowboys won it in 1995. But it took a long-term toll on both franchises and ended their unquestioned and all-encompassing reign over the NFL.

    The salary cap will prevent another dynasty in hockey or football. Basketball is a little different, because of the way one player and one coach can take over the game. The Lakers are really not much beyond Bryant and Jackson, but with Bryant's intense drive to win and Jackson's coaching ability, they have managed to set up a dynasty. Still, their days are numbered, and I have a hard time seeing another dynasty coming up from these three sports. A salary cap effectively evens out the financial equation, which in the past dynasties, was tremendously skewed towards those teams.

    The famous picture of Gretzky, Messier, Lowe, Coffey, and Kurri with the Cup after the 1987 Finals will forever be etched into my mind as the indelible image of hockey's last and final dynasty. It's too bad that the link I used to have of it no longer works.
     
  6. Moobles

    Moobles Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,555
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You just have to redefine dynasty from "a team that wins the Stanley Cup every year in a row for n years" to a team that wins the Stanley Cup intermittently and is a legitimate contender for n years. I think we'll see a franchise- be it Pittsburgh, Detroit, or otherwise go to at least 2 straight cups and maybe 3 in 5 years in the next 15-20 years. Statistically speaking it's just so unlikely that one team will ever be like the Oilers were- not that it's impossible, just that'd it be so hard (especially in a row).
     
  7. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,349
    Likes Received:
    513
    Trophy Points:
    229
    Statistically it is harder yes. But let's not forget, it was NEVER easy.

    But this whole thing about dynasties being a thing of the past is crazy to me. First of all, the word dynasty hasn't changed. If you win 2 Cups in 5 years you aren't a dynasty. If you win 3 in 4 years you are. That goes for 1950, 1970 or 2011. Big Ben's Pittsburgh Steelers are not a dynasty, they haven't won enough times. They are however stringing together some memorable years sprinkled with some Super Bowls and will forever be remembered.

    But since the popular opinion is that a dynasty is a thing of the past I plan on correcting this myth using the 4 major sports.

    NBA
    Lakers - 2009, 2010. Reached the final in 2008. If they win this year they are a legitimate dynasty with three in a row
    Lakers - 2000, 2001, 2002. Legitimate dynasty with a classic duo of Shaq and Kobe
    Spurs - 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007. Not a dynasty, but a championship in any season between 2003-2007 would have made them one.
    Bulls - 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998. Legitimate dynasty. Won three in a row twice with Jordan being the key figure.

    We are waiting to see about the Miami Heat


    MLB
    Blue Jays - 1992, 1993. Not quite a dynasty, but fall into the group of "close but no cigar" teams like Denver Broncos, Reds, Flyers, Pistons, Penguins, Red Wings who won two championships in a row and were good prior or after their wins.
    Yankees - 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000. True dynasty just happened outside of the last 10 years. Three in a row, 4/5 years. Made the World Series in 2001 as well only to lose in 7 games.

    Phillies came extremely close last year to being the first team in the National League to REACH three straight World Series appearances since St. Louis in......wait for it.....1942-'44. Bottom line, it has never been easy.

    NFL
    Cowboys - 1992, 1993, 1995 champs winning the Super bowl the following January each year. Three in 5 years qualifies as a dynasty and this was a legendary team
    Broncos - 1997, 1998. Two in a row. Not a dynasty, but a memorable team
    Patriots - 2001, 2003, 2004. Three in four equals a dynasty. The last one in the NFL and it only happened 6 years ago. Not to mention they were literally inches away from making in 5 in 7 years when they lost that classic Super Bowl to the Giants and collapsed a year earlier in the AFC championship game vs. Indy.

    Packers? Saints? Would it surprise anyone if either one of these teams win next year? Me neither. That being said, should either one win there would be legitimate talk about a potential dynasty in the making

    NHL
    Oilers 1984, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1990. Probably a Steve Smith bank shot away from 5 in a row. Thank Peter Pocklington for literally tearing apart a team that could have won 4-5 more as well. This is the last one in the NHL.

    Both Pittsburgh and Detroit have won two in a row since. There have been no dynasties in the NHL in over 20 years making hockey the sport with the longest drought. Detroit came a whisker from winning two in a row and Pittsburgh as well in my opinion should have more than one Cup to their name.


    Bottom line is this, teams can win if they draft right and unload the right players. Chicago was fine without Andrew Ladd and Kris Versteeg, but they should have known better than to get rid of a lot of their sandpaper with Big Buff. No way Vancouver beats them this year with him standing in front of the net. Chalk that up to bad management. Pittsburgh has had some injury troubles or else we might be talking them up fairly well right now. Tampa Bay had all the tools to be a dynasty but Richards and Lecavalier got greedy and so did Khabibulin. Bye bye dynasty potential. It is still very possible in hockey. It HAS happened in the other sports several times over the last 20 years.
     
  8. JackSlater

    JackSlater Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,196
    Likes Received:
    1,403
    Trophy Points:
    109
    A dynasty in the NHL is still possible, but just more unlikely than ever before due to the number of teams and the hard salary cap. Even with Detroit in recent years it isn't inconceivable that they win in 2007, 2008 and 2009 with some luck. Pittsburgh also had the chance to construct a team that could have formed a dynasty with the high draft picks they had from 2003-2006. I fully expect that at some point with the way the league is structured a team will be able to win three consecutive championships in the NHL.

    Regarding basketball dynasties are much easier to form. An individual can impact each game so muc that it is much easier to build a great team. A team with two truly great players and only a decent supporting cast can pretty easily become a dynasty. If Miami can sign a decent free agent or two they would be unstoppable for the next few years.
     
  9. buffalowing88

    buffalowing88 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    96
    I'd gander to say Pittsburgh and Chicago have a chance to really dominate if injuries don't play a role. I see a lot of teams that are contenders but those two are a cut above the rest. I used to argue that Pittsburgh should trade Malkin if they wanted to build around Crosby but evidence suggests that a team with two great centers usually contends year in, year out (Yzerman/Fedorov, Forsberg/Sakick Gretzky/Messier, etc.). If Fleury keeps up his play and Letang develops even more offensively, they will be a contender for ten more years.

    Chicago has three amazing players locked up for 5 more years at least. Hossa, Kane, and Towes are going to make them competitive every season. If they can settle that goaltending situation and keep Keith and Seabrook, they will be the best team in the West a handful of years in the future.

    I just really want to see these two face off in a final.
     
  10. FiveForDrawingBlood

    FiveForDrawingBlood Registered User

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gives us a bunch of good hockey teams but no great teams. I miss those great teams of yesteryear
     
  11. Roomtemperature

    Roomtemperature Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    5,474
    Likes Received:
    220
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Location:
    New Jersey
    I hope not. Baseball was boring when the Yankees won 4 of 5 years. Dynasties aren't interesting unless you are a fan of said team or its the end of the dynasty and someone beats them. And even then its not worth the 4 or 5 years of terror that they bring.
     
  12. tarheelhockey

    tarheelhockey Highest Boss

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    57,960
    Likes Received:
    33,995
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    The Triangle
    I think we're past the point where there will always be a dynasty going on somewhere in the league, the way it was from the 1970s till the early 1990s. There is just too much competition for players, too much "churn" on the rosters and in the standings.

    That said, it's still quite possible to build a dynasty. And when it happens, it will stick out that much more because of its rarity.
     
  13. BraveCanadian

    BraveCanadian Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    11,857
    Likes Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    111
    It is definitely still possible.

    It is just much more unlikely to catch enough quality youngish players on their way up (to stay within the cap long enough) during the window of opportunity.
     
  14. My take on this is basically the same as Individual players. Yes obviously it's still possible to win 3 cups in a row, Detroit could have. Yeah it's still possible to stand way ahead in the scoring race, or win it multiple years in a row. Crosby and Ovechkin could have.

    That's just it right there, there's too many could have's and too much competition. Throughout history this has happened, because it was simply much more likely.

    That's why Detroit is the closest thing modern day we have to a dynasty, and Crosby and Ovechkin are the closest things we have to generational talents.
     
  15. ozzie

    ozzie Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Location:
    Australia
    Teams Can't even win back to back championships now in the NHL. However, Detroit and Pittsburgh were probably the only 2 teams in the league who could have been true Dynasties.

    I would say both teams to a degree have missed their windows, not for lack of talent, but injuries and bad luck. Detroit is getting old now and will need to re-tool, as much as it pains me.

    Pittsburgh still has Malkin, Crosby, Staal, Letang, Fleury. Injuries might derail the team. On the plus side, seeing the team play so well without its 2 best players makes the future look even brighter when they return.

    Chicago's core is pretty good too. But 1 or 2 injuries and its over and teams just don't have that depth now with the cap to combat bad luck.

    I honestly think unless a group of players take some good pay cuts, it wont happen anytime soon or unless GM's stop overing over priced contracts.
     
  16. Derick*

    Derick* Guest

    No, it would be 5 in 14 years.
     
  17. octopi

    octopi Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Messages:
    31,547
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Pretty much this, if you get it just right, there you are. Takes a lot of careful balancing and players to take a little less.
     
  18. Loto68

    Loto68 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    64
    Location:
    Boston
    I agree with those that say we need to redefine what a Dynasty is. In the NBA the Spurs have long been considered a Dynasty for winning 4 Championships in their extended run. They went 1st or 2nd in their division 14 consecutive years, finishing 1st 9 of those times. They also made 7 Conference finals, winning 4 times, all 4 of which lead to the NBA title.
     
  19. Kyle McMahon

    Kyle McMahon Registered User

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    807
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Occupation:
    Electrician
    Location:
    Evil Empire
    There just isn't enough separation between teams anymore for another dynasty to be possible in the NHL. When you've got four or five teams in each conference that could legitimately reach the final each playoff, it's just too unlikely that the same team is going to navigate the mine field repeatedly.

    A bunch of what ifs have been thrown out, but the fact is nobody has come close to becoming a dynasty since the Oilers ended. Only two teams have even managed to make three finals in four years. There's no cupcakes in the early rounds anymore, so it's a grind from day one for all the top seeds. It's tough to even close an opponent out in fewer than six games these days.

    That leaves you open to running into a hot goalie, a team on a roll, a couple injuries, and the general fact that you're going to face two or three other teams that are almost as good or just as you, even as a #1 seed. There's just no margin for error anymore. With all that conspiring against you, I just can't picture the same team overcoming it enough times in succession to become a dynasty.
     
  20. WingsFan95

    WingsFan95 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Occupation:
    Office Job
    Location:
    Toronto
    One thing to consider is the extent of the salary cap.

    It is essentially the thing bearing down on dynasties, but it's not by any means set in stone.

    Three things:

    Limitations of the salary cap, the soft and hard cap, like in the NBA teams can overspend but have to pay fees, like the luxury tax in MLB.

    Growth of the cap, in the NFL the cap has grown steadily the last 10 years making it less and less of a handicap

    Necessity of the cap, the cap exists for parity, which is only favorable so that the life of lower end teams is extended. Especially in NBA and NHL, some teams relocated frequently due to lack of fan support. Today it can go both ways, there is the prospect of more and more cities having teams but speed of transport may also mean more centralized teams, it may mean less teams or it may mean sports leagues will care less about economically failing franchises.


    That settled, I do not believe dynasties are dead or ever will be. There is always the drive for management to be a perennial contender. Fans may thirst for their basement team to covet a championship within 3 years but many organizations attempt to win multiple championships to monopolize their regions.

    My point? For dynasties to die there has to be a drop in perseverance for excellence, and that will never die in sport.


    And FYI, the Wings winning in 97, 98 and 02 was a dynasty.
     
  21. I agree there. Detroit is also probably the closest thing we've had to a dynasty post-lockout.
     
  22. Ishdul

    Ishdul Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,902
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    96
    There will eventually be some hockey dynasties, some football dynasties and there will certainly be some basketball dynasties. It's definitely tougher in the NHL than it has been in the past but it feels like people are extrapolating 6 years of results until the end of time. In the NFL, we've already had a salary cap era dynasty plus several other teams that have been dominant in the last decade, and a team like the Packers could certainly become a dynasty if a few things fall their way. In the NBA, dynasties are a fact of life and I don't see why anyone would think that would change, even if they get a new CBA. The Heat have a great shot at winning this year and will be the title favourites for a while.

    And I don't think you have to be a dynasty to be considered a great team.
     
  23. tarheelhockey

    tarheelhockey Highest Boss

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    57,960
    Likes Received:
    33,995
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    The Triangle
    No,

    no,

    and no. The cap exists to create cost certainty, preventing a runaway upward salary spiral like what we have seen in MLB. That creates a much more favorable cost/revenue dynamic for higher end teams than it does for lower end teams. If anything, as Fugu is quick to remind us around here, the cap hasn't done much at all to improve the situation for teams that fall in the lowest revenue bracket.

    And, needless to say, teams like the Jets, Nordiques and Whalers most certainly did not relocate due to lack of fan support. If you want to go farther back, neither did the Flames. Ownership/arena issues scuttled those franchises.


    I'd say the 94-98 Wings constituted a dynasty.
     
  24. Duke749

    Duke749 Formerly "BigTuna49"

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    36,246
    Likes Received:
    3,411
    Trophy Points:
    157
    Location:
    Canton, Georgia
    I agree with this.

    Nice summary. There is so much that has to go right to even have a chance to have a dynasty. I think Chicago and Pittsburgh have good chances going forward. More so Pittsburgh IMO. It'll take commitment from the ownership on down to make it work though. There are a few teams that if they can get over the hump could make a 3-5 year run like Vancouver for example. Someone like Nashville could build one going forward with the way that whole franchise is run, but they might just end up being more like a St. Louis team.

    I think you have to win 3 to have a chance to be considered a dynasty and 3 in 6 if those other 3 years were deep playoff runs.

    I definitely think we'll see one within the next 10 years.
     
  25. Kyle McMahon

    Kyle McMahon Registered User

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    807
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Occupation:
    Electrician
    Location:
    Evil Empire
    It hasn't been just the last six years that hasn't produced a dynasty. The last dynasty ended 21 years ago. (Sorry Red Wings fans, but three Cups in six years is not a dynasty, not really even close seeing as '99-'01 were all early exits).

    I wold not consider the Patriots three in four a dynasty either.

    Basically any arguments espousing the likelyhood of another dynasty are predicated on the definition of "dynasty" being loosened considerably. The Lakers' three-peat early last decade is about the bare minimum to be considered a dynasty.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"