Best teams to never win the Cup

[These Are The Days]

This is probably a duplicate but in the event of not doing so and simply refreshing discussion, what are some of the best teams you have ever seen that have not won the Cup? I'm a relatively new fan as of 2005 so my list of "I can't believe they did not win" isn't that long. To start with what I have seen

2005-2006 and 2006-2007 Sabres

Holy Moses this team could score at will almost like anything I have ever seen. I'm sorry but the Hurricanes lucked out with the Sabres defense getting hurt. 2005 was their year to win it all because they got past Ottawa. It's just simply amazing how clutch they were at all time and I was completely awestruck by how composed they always were -especially Drury.

2005-2006 and 2006-2007 Senators

Like the Sabres this team was on auto-pilot offensively and like them 2005 was their year to win it all. I'd wager they'd have won it all if Hasek stayed healthy and beaten Buffalo in 2005 but all the same they were incredible. The Ducks beat them fair and square the next season but on paper they just seemed unstoppable. Dat Pizza line tho...

2009-2010 San Jose Sharks

It's not so unbelievable they lost to Chicago but they picked a bad year to be good. An offense with Heatley, Paveslki, Marleau, Thornton a defense with MEV, Boyle and even Rob Blake. And of course Nabokov being his usual ridiculous self all year. If there was any team talented enough to knock off the Hawks in their prime I always thought this one was the best as opposed to that stiff playing Kings team.

There's probably a few I can spit ball but this post is long enough. Your thoughts?

Mods delete if this is a duplicate thread.

Click to read more...

 

[c9777666]

2009-10 Capitals

They had a better record than even that Sharks team mentioned.

They are the only team outside of 2005-06 to score 300+ goals in a season post-Dead Puck Era.

But alas, Jacques Martin made one hell of a sacrifice to the hockey gods and Halak went Hasek

 

[These Are The Days]

2009-10 Capitals

They had a better record than even that Sharks team mentioned.

They are the only team outside of 2005-06 to score 300+ goals in a season post-Dead Puck Era.

But alas, Jacques Martin made one hell of a sacrifice to the hockey gods and Halak went Hasek

To be honest I was not sold on them. When your defense is basically Green, Poti, Schultz (I can't remember the other guys right now) anyone who could score as well as they defended would beat them up and take their lunch money. Not to discredit the Caps but their division was trash that year and they were a product of facing a different team every night and never had a complete enough roster to make it all the way. I saw their exit coming a mile away because once you got them into a 7 game series, eventually you have to win 2-1 and 1-0 and I hate to say it but that's not how they were built.

But major credit to coach Boudreau for always playing to his team's offensive strength all year long because as I said before that team had MAJOR defensive deficiencies.

 

[The Panther]

Are we counting Cup-winner type teams that simply didn't win in one particular season? For example, Edmonton in 1986 or Pittburgh in 1993 or Detroit in 1996...?

 

[These Are The Days]

Are we counting Cup-winner type teams that simply didn't win in one particular season? For example, Edmonton in 1986 or Pittburgh in 1993 or Detroit in 1996...?

Yeah any team any year

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I think the Pens in 92/93 would be on any such list. Lemieux wasn't at 100% and yet was scoring like a man possessed. They probably would have won the Cup if the refs had called tighter games in those playoffs.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

1971 Bruins.. ainec

57-14-7 121 pts... win the President's by 12 pts

399 GF...108 more than anyone else
+192 differential 100 better than 2nd

Hart, Ross, Rocket, Norris winners

4 of the 6 AS-1

Top 4 scorers in the league and 6 of the top 8...Only Bruins scored more than 100 pts

3 of the top 4 goal scorers

Top 5 assists getters and 6 of the top 7

11 of the top 13 in +/-

Won the Cup in 70 and 72... but somehow didn't win in 71.

Was a combo of the Canadiens emerging, and the Bruins not being focused at all.

The 71 Bruins were dominance on a level the league hadn't seen before and hasn't seen since.

They are the '27 Yankees of hockey (minus the championship)

 

[GlitchMarner]

The best Capitals team that didn't win was the 2016 version. The 2010 team wasn't great on the back-end and the 2017 version was similar to the 2016 version, but Ovechkin wasn't himself in the 2017 season and playoffs.

 

[Sentinel]

1996 Detroit AINEC. If not for Roy...

 

[streitz]

1984-85 Jets.



Just kidding, probably the wings in 96, Oilers in 86, 93 penguins, 71,73 and 74 Bruins.


Any year the wings or avs didn't win in the late 90's/early 2000's could work aswell, those teams were so far above the rest of the league. I seem to remember the wings especially being decimated by injuries a few of those years.


Basically the same teams everyone has mentioned.

 

[The Panther]

1971 Bruins.. ainec

57-14-7 121 pts... win the President's by 12 pts

399 GF...108 more than anyone else
+192 differential 100 better than 2nd

Hart, Ross, Rocket, Norris winners

4 of the 6 AS-1

Top 4 scorers in the league and 6 of the top 8...Only Bruins scored more than 100 pts

3 of the top 4 goal scorers

Top 5 assists getters and 6 of the top 7

11 of the top 13 in +/-

Won the Cup in 70 and 72... but somehow didn't win in 71.

Was a combo of the Canadiens emerging, and the Bruins not being focused at all.

The 71 Bruins were dominance on a level the league hadn't seen before and hasn't seen since.

They are the '27 Yankees of hockey (minus the championship)

The only part I disagree with is the sentence in bold. Consider:

The 1976-77 Habs won the regular season title by 20 points. They were 1st in offense and 1st in defence.
They won the Cup easily, and had the Art Ross, Hart, (retro) Richard, Norris, Ted Lindsay, Vezina, and Conn Smythe winner.

The 1977-78 Habs won the regular season by 16 points. They were 1st in offense and 1st in defence.
They won the Cup easily, and had the Art Ross, Hart, (retro) Richard, Ted Lindsay, Vezina, and Conn Smythe winner.

These two seasons, they went 119 - 18 - 23. Yes, they were defeated 18 times in 160 tries.

The only thing the '76 to '78 Canadiens didn't dominate more than the '71 Bruins is the list of leading scorers... but one might argue that Boston's dependence on offensive depth instead of having a more well-rounded team was the cause of their failure to win the '71 Cup.

The c.1977 Canadiens are exactly like the '27 Yankees (with the championship)!

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The only part I disagree with is the sentence in bold. Consider:

The 1976-77 Habs won the regular season title by 20 points. They were 1st in offense and 1st in defence.
They won the Cup easily, and had the Art Ross, Hart, (retro) Richard, Norris, Ted Lindsay, Vezina, and Conn Smythe winner.

The 1977-78 Habs won the regular season by 16 points. They were 1st in offense and 1st in defence.
They won the Cup easily, and had the Art Ross, Hart, (retro) Richard, Ted Lindsay, Vezina, and Conn Smythe winner.

These two seasons, they went 119 - 18 - 23. Yes, they were defeated 18 times in 160 tries.

The only thing the '76 to '78 Canadiens didn't dominate more than the '71 Bruins is the list of leading scorers... but one might argue that Boston's dependence on offensive depth instead of having a more well-rounded team was the cause of their failure to win the '71 Cup.

The c.1977 Canadiens are exactly like the '27 Yankees (with the championship)!

all true.

The 1 edge I give to the 71 Bruins team is the degree to which they outpaced the others.

the 76 Habs led the league in scoring by 54 compared to the 71 Bruins' 108

they only (doesnt feel right saying only here) had 2 of the top 10 in points and goals, compared to the Bruins having the 6 of the top 8 scorers and 3 of the top 4 goals.

The 27 Yankees comparison was because the Bruins dominated the individual stats leaders the way they did. That's the difference for me between that Bruins team and the great Habs teams.

Overall, yeah the Habs teams were better...they actually won it all. But purely regular season, I'd say the 71 Bruins were slightly better.

 

[rfournier103]

I think the conversation begins and ends with the 1971 Bruins and 1986 Oilers.

As great as the 1993 Penguins and 1996 Red Wings were, I just don’t think they could displace either of those clubs.

The Oilers and Bruins had the best and second best players of all time on the roster. That counts for something.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

1992 Rangers.

President's Trophy winners
Messier has an MVP season
Leetch scores 100 + pts and wins the Norris
Young depth with Amonte,Weight, and Nemchinov
Good veteran depth with Ogrodnick and Kerr
You had the ever reliable Mike Gartner scoring goals as well.
And a goalie tandem of Richter and Vanbiesbrouck

The strike partially hurt that team as it killed their momentum for 2 weeks. The 7 game series with NJ killed them a bit. They had Pittsburgh on the ropes and were this close to taking a 3-1 series lead until Ron Francis scored from the red line on Richter. If they win that game they take the Pens in 5, and I honestly see them getting by Boston and Chicago afterwards and ending the curse 2 years early.

 

[The Macho King]

The only part I disagree with is the sentence in bold. Consider:

The 1976-77 Habs won the regular season title by 20 points. They were 1st in offense and 1st in defence.
They won the Cup easily, and had the Art Ross, Hart, (retro) Richard, Norris, Ted Lindsay, Vezina, and Conn Smythe winner.

The 1977-78 Habs won the regular season by 16 points. They were 1st in offense and 1st in defence.
They won the Cup easily, and had the Art Ross, Hart, (retro) Richard, Ted Lindsay, Vezina, and Conn Smythe winner.

These two seasons, they went 119 - 18 - 23. Yes, they were defeated 18 times in 160 tries.

The only thing the '76 to '78 Canadiens didn't dominate more than the '71 Bruins is the list of leading scorers... but one might argue that Boston's dependence on offensive depth instead of having a more well-rounded team was the cause of their failure to win the '71 Cup.

The c.1977 Canadiens are exactly like the '27 Yankees (with the championship)!

I think the league in general was getting a little deeper then, too. The immediate post-expansion teams were basically punching bags, but by the late 70s talent was dispersed a bit more evenly.

 

[NyQuil]

The best Senators team was actually the 2002-2003 edition.

They won the President's trophy, putting up 113 points in an era that still had ties (52-21-8-1 record) and if I recall correctly didn't give up a lead for the entire regular season.

In the dead puck era, Hossa scored 45 goals that year to go along with 80 points, and Alfredsson was close behind with 78 points. Havlat put up 59 points in 67 games as the third RWer.

It was also the real emergence of Chara who had 116 PIMS to go along with 39 points and was a +29. Redden scored 45 points on the strength of the 2nd best PP in the league.

In the playoffs, they suffered that dramatic Game 7 loss via the Jeff Friesen goal after clawing back into the ECF down 3-1 against the eventual Cup winning Devils.

I think that was probably the most painful loss in team history.

 

[tony d]

The 1996 Red Wings for me. Got to think if Roy hadn't gone to the Avs what might have been.

 

[frisco]

Probably the 1993 Pens. But a team that hasn't been mentioned are the 1967 Hawks. Won the league by 17 points (#1 in goals and goals against), 5/9 top scorers in the league including the top 2 (Hull and Mikita) and 4/6 first team All-Stars.

My Best-Carey

 

[JaegerDice]

2009-2010 San Jose Sharks

It's not so unbelievable they lost to Chicago but they picked a bad year to be good. An offense with Heatley, Paveslki, Marleau, Thornton a defense with MEV, Boyle and even Rob Blake. And of course Nabokov being his usual ridiculous self all year. If there was any team talented enough to knock off the Hawks in their prime I always thought this one was the best as opposed to that stiff playing Kings team.

2009-10 Capitals

They had a better record than even that Sharks team mentioned.

They are the only team outside of 2005-06 to score 300+ goals in a season post-Dead Puck Era.

But alas, Jacques Martin made one hell of a sacrifice to the hockey gods and Halak went Hasek

I don't necessarily disagree with either of these, but I have to chuckle at how they're held up in retrospect (not just by the people listing them in this thread, but by many many fans and posters on these forums), because fans of Thornton and Ovechkin (until last year) would shout until they were blue in the face that the reason those stars hadn't won the big one yet (Stanley Cup) was a lack of support relative to their more accomplished peers. But it's crazy to argue both a) they were part of one of the best teams in the league in any given year and b) they had no supporting cast simultaneously. The Sharks in particular, were a popular pick to make the Finals or win the cup for like a five year span.... yet Thornton never won because his teams sucked? It was always lunacy to me.

Anyway, my picks:

2009 Red Wings - On paper, they were a better team than the 2008 Red Wings that just murdered the league and remain the best cap-era team to this day. But injuries down the stretch prevented them from reaching the ultimate goal. And thank god for that, cause my team got Hossa as a result.

2011 Canucks - I don't think they were as good as some Canucks fans claim them to be, but there's no doubt they were the best team in the league that year. They just ran into injuries and a historical goaltending performance. Bad luck.

2014 Blackhawks - They took a step back in terms of their forward depth after turning the league to mulch in 2013, but they were still a crazy dominant team getting career years out of all their major talent. They went up against the only team in the league on their level, went to 7 games, and ultimately some bad coaching decisions that took far too long to address sewed their undoing. Ah well. Winning the cup in 2015 helped sooth the wound.

2015 Lighting - Speaking of which, the Blackhawks probably shouldn't have won the cup in 2015. That's not to say they weren't even in the conversation. They were just the second best team in the league all year... until the SCF. Injuries to who was essentially Tampa's 1C at the time (Johnson), as well as their number 1 goalie, and the fact that Stamkos picked a bad time to get snake-bit, all worked against them.

2016 Capitals - I mean, what can you say? I was honestly dumbfounded watching that 2nd round series.

 

[blood gin]

1988-1989 Canadiens

12-3 in the playoffs before running into Calgary

Great offense and the best D/Goaltending in the NHL

Started the season 4-7-1, went 49-11-8 after

 

[James Walker]

1971 Bruins.. ainec

57-14-7 121 pts... win the President's by 12 pts

399 GF...108 more than anyone else
+192 differential 100 better than 2nd

Hart, Ross, Rocket, Norris winners

4 of the 6 AS-1

Top 4 scorers in the league and 6 of the top 8...Only Bruins scored more than 100 pts

3 of the top 4 goal scorers

Top 5 assists getters and 6 of the top 7

11 of the top 13 in +/-

Won the Cup in 70 and 72... but somehow didn't win in 71.

Was a combo of the Canadiens emerging, and the Bruins not being focused at all.

The 71 Bruins were dominance on a level the league hadn't seen before and hasn't seen since.

They are the '27 Yankees of hockey (minus the championship)

Bobby Orr was -7 in game 7, that's why they lost, and that's why he is overrated.

 

[JackSlater]

Probably any of the dynasty or near dynasty teams that lost out on a championship, as most have already pointed out. I'll throw the 1951 and 1953 Detroit Red Wings into the mix.

1951: +97, most points by 6, four players on the 1st all star team, two players on the 2nd all star team, dominant Art Ross winner, Vezina and 1st team all star goaltender, likely Norris winner had the trophy existed, four of top ten scorers.

1953: +89, most points by 15, four players on the 1st all star team, one player on the 2nd all star team, dominant Art Ross winner, Hart winner, Vezina and 1st team all star goaltender, likely Norris winner had the trophy existed, five of top ten scorers.

 

[Chili]

Alot of good choices mentioned, 71 Bruins, 86 Oilers, 92 Rangers, 93 Pens (who broke the record for consectutive wins just before the regular season ended, believe it still stands), 96 Wings, some recent Caps teams, 2014 Hawks.

I would add the 67 Habs...Mtl won 4 of 5 in the late sixties this was the blemish...If Gump Worsley had been healthy...

71 Hawks, the Hawks could have won game seven but the Habs found a way, it was a great playoff year that spring.

79 Bruins...I thought they had the Habs a couple of times in game seven but Guy Lafleur was incredible that night.

 

[Chili]

1992 Rangers.

President's Trophy winners
Messier has an MVP season
Leetch scores 100 + pts and wins the Norris
Young depth with Amonte,Weight, and Nemchinov
Good veteran depth with Ogrodnick and Kerr
You had the ever reliable Mike Gartner scoring goals as well.
And a goalie tandem of Richter and Vanbiesbrouck

The strike partially hurt that team as it killed their momentum for 2 weeks. The 7 game series with NJ killed them a bit. They had Pittsburgh on the ropes and were this close to taking a 3-1 series lead until Ron Francis scored from the red line on Richter. If they win that game they take the Pens in 5, and I honestly see them getting by Boston and Chicago afterwards and ending the curse 2 years early.

And Mario Lemieux was out because of the slash he had taken on the hand earlier in the series. Ron Francis was incredible that game (taking over as the #1 centre).

The Pens ran the table after that game and ended up breaking the record for consectutive playoff wins which I believe still stands.

 

[aborkie]

79-80 Philadelphia Flyers - 35 game unbeaten streak.