Best team to never win a cup?

[John Flyers Fan]

My original point was not a one year thing, so teams like the:

86 Oilers
71 Bruins
79 Isles
95 Red Wings
93 Pens

would not count, because they all won Stanley Cups at some point during their run.

This is for teams like the 85-89 Flyers, late 70's Bruins, early 70's Rangers, late 60's Blackhawks etc.

To be considered the best would take a minimum of 2 Finals (good-bye Sharks, Blues, Senators, etc.) appearances, and regular season dominance as well.

 

[Eisen]

IMHO the 60s Hawks

 

[Blizzard]

1987 - 91 Bruins. Two losses to Edmonton(87-88, 89-90) in the Stanley Cup Finals then two losses to Pittsburgh(90-91,91-92) in the Wales Conference Finals. Bourque was dominating the Norris and Neely was piling up the goal totals until Samuelson took out his knees.


Just a note on the single season teams I'd go with the 82-83 Oilers who outscored their first three playoff opponents 74-33. Ridiculous. And the 1992-93 Pens were definitely talented but not much of a team by then, despite a 17 game run. The inmates were running the asylum, Bowman wasn't even allowed at practice and expansion took away most of their heart and soul players. Was ashame cause we would have got a Gretzky vs Lemieux final that year.

 

[pnep]

How about 1921-22 Ottawa Senators ?

 

[Boxscore]

The 1987 Flyers were the best "team" I saw not win a Cup. Not the best players per se, but they were a wonderful "team".

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

92-93 Kings should have won the cup


EDIT 92-93 Leafs SHOULD have won the Cup

I didn't realize that game six of the Western Conference Finals was the deciding game of the entire playoffs. I bet the eight Eastern Conference teams feel silly for showing up to all those games.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Bowman owned Cherry when it came to match-ups / line changes in Montreal where the Bruins went winless during the playoffs for period in question.

In Boston where Cherry had the last change, Bowman still managed to dictate the match-ups.

Now if a coach has not figured out how to counter line match-ups after three series with a grand finale that results in the tying goal being scored due to a "too many men on the ice" penalty late in the third period, most would admit that the coaching had certain serious flaws.

On the other hand the 1995 Devils, a lunch pail crew in many respects,coached by Jacques Lemaire swept the Bowman coached Red Wings in the SC finals Lemaire deftly countered the match-ups winning two games in Detroit.

Another problem that Cherry had was that Bowman was able to dictate the tempo of the games. Tweak lines, powerplay units, etc without a timely response. Slow the game down when the Bruins looked like they could get momentum, accelerate the pace when the Bruins were sagging. Prime example being the Jonathan KO of Bouchard. Bowman did not allow his team to play small afterwards and it became a simple bump in the road. Cherry never managed to counter or do the same.

Thanks. Classic or NHL Network usually only show the "too many men" game from this era (which occured before I was born) so it's tough to notice these things with only one game of a series to go by.

That being said, was this a case of a great coach one step ahead of a good one? Montreal was always Boston's undoing, but the Bruins were able to rise above everyone besides them, and that Habs team is cited by many as the best of all time.

 

[Basikk]

Might sound like a homer, but the Blues in the early 90s with Hull, Oates, Shanahan, Janney, Turgeon, MacInnis, Duchesne, Pronger, Joseph, etc have to be considered.

 

[mrhockey193195]

If one year teams don't count (my pick was the 1996 Redwings or the 86 Oilers), then I guess the following were pretty comparible:

80's Flyers
60s blackhawks (after 1961)
70s Rangers
Late 80s, early 90s Bruins

 

[Canadiens1958]

Quick Comments

Thanks. Classic or NHL Network usually only show the "too many men" game from this era (which occured before I was born) so it's tough to notice these things with only one game of a series to go by.

That being said, was this a case of a great coach one step ahead of a good one? Montreal was always Boston's undoing, but the Bruins were able to rise above everyone besides them, and that Habs team is cited by many as the best of all time.

You're welcome.

Great coach / good coach. Simple criteria did Don Cherry bounce back and continue a successful coaching career? Scotty Bowman had ups and downs in his career but he learned, adapted and progressed. Sometimes a major oops cannot be erased and it ends a career.

Don Cherry was able to get the Bruins to a certain level but lacked the ability to finish.

Coaching is a very delicate balance. No one expects a coach to win games - that is the players role. On the other hand a coach should not lose a game or games. Fastest way to demoralize or lose a team.

 

[finchster]

Late 80s, early 90s Bruins

I would argue thoes Bruins teams were mostly terrible and got by on Ray Bourque and Cam Neely carrying them

 

[lextune]

I would argue thoes Bruins teams were mostly terrible and got by on Ray Bourque and Cam Neely carrying them

....and you would be correct.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Might sound like a homer, but the Blues in the early 90s with Hull, Oates, Shanahan, Janney, Turgeon, MacInnis, Duchesne, Pronger, Joseph, etc have to be considered.

Except that those players you listed were never all together at the same time. The Blues were a consistently good team from the early 90's to the lockout, but always lacked one key component it seemed. And really, it's pretty hard to call a team that never got past the second round in the 90's decade the best to never win a Cup.

 

[Axxellien]

Most Underrated Team:

The Valiant Boston Bruins of the Late 1950s....Not a Question, Not a Doubt....

 

[Darius Dangleaitis]

2001 was probably the best team the Devils will ever have.

God Damnit.

 

[Blades of Glory]

Except that those players you listed were never all together at the same time. The Blues were a consistently good team from the early 90's to the lockout, but always lacked one key component it seemed. And really, it's pretty hard to call a team that never got past the second round in the 90's decade the best to never win a Cup.

The key component that they lacked has got to be goaltending.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Bowman owned Cherry when it came to match-ups / line changes in Montreal where the Bruins went winless during the playoffs for period in question.

In Boston where Cherry had the last change, Bowman still managed to dictate the match-ups.

Now if a coach has not figured out how to counter line match-ups after three series with a grand finale that results in the tying goal being scored due to a "too many men on the ice" penalty late in the third period, most would admit that the coaching had certain serious flaws.

On the other hand the 1995 Devils, a lunch pail crew in many respects,coached by Jacques Lemaire swept the Bowman coached Red Wings in the SC finals Lemaire deftly countered the match-ups winning two games in Detroit.

Another problem that Cherry had was that Bowman was able to dictate the tempo of the games. Tweak lines, powerplay units, etc without a timely response. Slow the game down when the Bruins looked like they could get momentum, accelerate the pace when the Bruins were sagging. Prime example being the Jonathan KO of Bouchard. Bowman did not allow his team to play small afterwards and it became a simple bump in the road. Cherry never managed to counter or do the same.

With all due respect, I think you could have coached those Canadiens teams past the Bruins.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The Bruins of that time period are generally considered to have over-achieved by a fair degree relative to their talent. A "lunch pail crew" that was more than the sum of their parts. It seems to me that this is usually an indication of good coaching. Why do you feel Cherry was what held them back?

I think Cherry was perfect for those Bruins teams. No one else could have gotten so much out of them.Those teams were all about effort, not X's and O's. Cherry couldn't match those other guys as far as in-game coaching went, but I doubt any of them could have taken those Bruins teams that far.

 

[MXD]

Throw in the 1962-1967 Blackhawks as well.

While it wasn't exactly the same team...
They won the Cup in 61, so I kinda discarded them.

 

[CanadaBacon]

I didn't realize that game six of the Western Conference Finals was the deciding game of the entire playoffs. I bet the eight Eastern Conference teams feel silly for showing up to all those games.

And now you know and knowing is half the battle

 

[mrhockey193195]

I would argue thoes Bruins teams were mostly terrible and got by on Ray Bourque and Cam Neely carrying them

fair enough, I guess my selective memory only decided to remember that they were competative most of those years including the two finals. On second look, you're definitely right, those teams actually weren't all that special (at least, not really comparable to others mentioned in this thread). My mistake.

 

[finchster]

fair enough, I guess my selective memory only decided to remember that they were competative most of those years including the two finals. On second look, you're definitely right, those teams actually weren't all that special (at least, not really comparable to others mentioned in this thread). My mistake.

Some of the first and second liners on Boston during those years were worse than some teams third and fourth liners. I think this is why many fans under rate Bourque and Neely because they see them as on a good team that could never get over the hump. When really they were excellent players who carried a poor team. If you trade Bourque for Coffey the Oilers are the greatest dynasty in NHL history and Boston probably doesn't make the playoffs.

The best Bruins team of the 1980's was the 1982-83 team that lost to the Islanders in the conference finals. Had Normand Leveille not had that brain aneurysm, with the season he started out with, the Bruins might have been able to take the Islanders

 

[Peter9]

"Best team never to win a Cup" means more than a one-season failure. Otherwise there is no point in using "never." A separate thread might consider best team failing to win the Cup in a single season, but that is not the subject of this thread. The operative word is "never." Most of the comments address a one-season failure. Only a few suggest great teams that "never" won a Cup. How about trying to stick to the topic?

There may be some difficulty in deciding when, say, one Bruins team ends and another Bruins team begins. But in most cases that's easily determinable. For example, the Bruins of the early 1970s are plainly not the same team as the Bruins of the late 1970s. A bit more difficult is whether the Black Hawks of the early 1960s are the same team as the Black Hawks of the late 1960s. Most of the major stars remained, but Glenn Hall had gone and the supporting cast had changed.

That a team was never the best in the league at the time does not disqualify it from this "best to never win" distinction. It will be very hard to find a team that was the best in the league that never won the Cup.

Anyway, I think the Rangers of the early to mid 1970s are a good candidate, although the Bruins were better and, some of that time, the Canadiens as well. And the Flyers of the 1980s, although the Oilers were better.

 

[Canadiens Fan]

Anyway, I think the Rangers of the early to mid 1970s are a good candidate, although the Bruins were better and, some of that time, the Canadiens as well. And the Flyers of the 1980s, although the Oilers were better.

From about 1970-71 to about 1973-74 the Rangers were as good as any team in the regular season.

Boston Bruins - 460 points.
Montreal Canadiens - 424 points.
N.Y. Rangers - 414 points.
Chicago Black Hawks - 412 points.

However, in the playoffs they always seemed to be one player short whether it was Orr in 1972, or Parent in 1974. They also had an interesting playoff history with the Black Hawks. They sweep them in 1972, but are eliminated by them both the year before (1971) and the year after (1973). Of course, over these four years the Rangers eliminated the Canadiens on two occasions (1972 and 1974). The two years in which they didn't face the Rangers in the playoffs saw the Habs take the Cup (1971 and 1973).

 

[Killahpunk]

1993 Pittsburgh Penguins, they had the record for longest winning streak too at 17 games.