Best teams to never win the Cup

[The Panther]

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

That's quite an achievement to go -7 when Montreal scored 4 times!

In fact, Orr was -2 in game seven in 1971.
-1 in game six (8 goals by Montreal).
Even in game five.
+2 in game four.
-1 in game three (3 goals by Montreal).
- 2 in game two (7 goals by Montreal).
+2 in game one.

So, overall Orr was -2 in the whole series. -2 is not bad when the opponent scores 28 times in seven games.

 

[The Panther]

79-80 Philadelphia Flyers - 35 game unbeaten streak.

This often gets brought up, and while I agree Philly was a great team that year, it should be remembered that the 35-game unbeaten streak was in the first half of the season. That streak started in game 3 of the season and ended in game 38.

From game 38 to season's end, the Flyers went 22-11-10, which is really good, but for example over the same stretch the Sabres went 23-7-13.

 

[GMR]

2001 Devils

2002 Avalanche

1996 Red Wings

 

[IslesFan2017]

I am honestly curious to hear everyone's opinion on the 2014 Ducks. I know they were beaten badly in Game 7 of their series against the rival Kings, but they had the second most points in the league, only behind the Bruins. Was their regular season a fluke, or were they a legitimate contender who couldn't get past the Kings, who were in the midst of their 2 Cup wins in 3 years?

Was the 2015 version that lost to the Blackhawks in the Conference Finals better? You could also make a case for the 2015 Rangers, who won the President's Trophy and I would say they were the best Rangers team in the post-lockout era.

 

[GreatGonzo]

2001 Devils were an amazing team. At least they made the finals. I feel the 2006 and 2007 wings greatly underachieved.

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.

I would say 09-11 was the time where they were getting a lot of hype for that. They blew it in 09 with a crazy 8th seed in the Ducks(that was not a normal wildcard team), and simply met better teams in the conference finals in both 2010 and 2011. Thornton wasn’t good overall in 2010, but was their best player in 2011. Anyways, that 2010 Hawks team was stacked. I knew we were in trouble when we were going to play them. Maybe it shouldn’t have been a sweep, but in the end they were better.

The best and most complete Sharks teams I ever saw were the 2010, 2014, and 2016 sharks. We all know how 2014 unfolded, but they did lose to the soon to be stanley cup champs. I don’t know if we were going to get past Chicago that season as well.

 

[JaegerDice]

I am honestly curious to hear everyone's opinion on the 2014 Ducks. I know they were beaten badly in Game 7 of their series against the rival Kings, but they had the second most points in the league, only behind the Bruins. Was their regular season a fluke, or were they a legitimate contender who couldn't get past the Kings, who were in the midst of their 2 Cup wins in 3 years?

Was the 2015 version that lost to the Blackhawks in the Conference Finals better? You could also make a case for the 2015 Rangers, who won the President's Trophy and I would say they were the best Rangers team in the post-lockout era.

The 2015 Ducks were definitely better than the 2014 Ducks.

Regular season point totals aren't a particularly good measure of team performance or quality in the NHL.

If the Ducks beat the Kings in 2014, they lose to the Blackhawks. They were worse than both the Kings and the Blackhawks in CF% and xGF%. They were worse than the Sharks in both too, actually, so if San Jose had managed to win one more game, they probably beat Anaheim and end up losing to Chicago. Anaheim just had the highest PDO in the league that regular season.

 

[IslesFan2017]

The 2015 Ducks were definitely better than the 2014 Ducks.

Regular season point totals aren't a particularly good measure of team performance or quality in the NHL.

If the Ducks beat the Kings in 2014, they lose to the Blackhawks. They were worse than both the Kings and the Blackhawks in CF% and xGF%. They were worse than the Sharks in both too, actually, so if San Jose had managed to win one more game, they probably beat Anaheim and end up losing to Chicago. Anaheim just had the highest PDO in the league that regular season.

I agree in that I felt that the Blackhawks were the team to beat just based on the fact that they were the defending Cup champions and they lost a heartbreaker to the Kings in Game 7 that year. It sure felt like the West was stacked with legitimate contenders back in those days before the Penguins/Capitals took over from 2016 on.

 

[ResilientBeast]

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.

Of all the Capitals teams the last 10 years, the 17-18 was the one I believe the least in. Except maybe the ones coached by Hunter.

 

[JMCx4]

St. Louis Blues, pick any season from 1967-68 thru present. Always the bride's wedding planner, never the bride.

 

[Tarantula]

St. Louis Blues, pick any season from 1967-68 thru present. Always the bride's wedding planner, never the bride.

They were never a threat to win a SC, they were the best of the West division which was comprised of 6 new expansion teams. Had the playoffs been a "open" format, that is not division based they would not have even made the finals those years.

 

[JMCx4]

They were never a threat to win a SC, they were the best of the West division which was comprised of 6 new expansion teams. Had the playoffs been a "open" format, that is not division based they would not have even made the finals those years.

Their 1999-2000 President's Trophy-winning team had a legitimate chance. Finished with 51 wins & 114 points. Pronger & MacInnis on the D-line and PP, Pavol Demitra (R.I.P.) and Pierre Turgeon leading the offense, a strong supporting cast of skaters, and Roman Turek with a career year in goal. Then along came San Jose, and The Curse continued.

 

[Tarantula]

Their 1999-2000 President's Trophy-winning team had a legitimate chance. Finished with 51 wins & 114 points. Pronger & MacInnis on the D-line and PP, Pavol Demitra (R.I.P.) and Pierre Turgeon leading the offense, a strong supporting cast of skaters, and Roman Turek with a career year in goal. Then along came San Jose, and The Curse continued.

Me bad, my old eyes locked and concentrated on the first four finals. Yes, they have been somewhat snakebitten, that is one reason I have made them my West team to follow from afar the last few years.

 

[GMR]

Their 1999-2000 President's Trophy-winning team had a legitimate chance. Finished with 51 wins & 114 points. Pronger & MacInnis on the D-line and PP, Pavol Demitra (R.I.P.) and Pierre Turgeon leading the offense, a strong supporting cast of skaters, and Roman Turek with a career year in goal. Then along came San Jose, and The Curse continued.

Did anyone realistically see them as being better than Dallas, Colorado, and Detroit? I know they had a better regular season record, but those other three teams were more proven in the postseason.

 

[McFlash97]

Calgary Flames 1988.
Detroit Red Wings 95
Oilers 86


In no order

 

[GlitchMarner]

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

Quality research job.

Even if he was -7 in the game you're referring to, why would a single game make him overrated?

 

[GreatGonzo]

Did anyone realistically see them as being better than Dallas, Colorado, and Detroit? I know they had a better regular season record, but those other three teams were more proven in the postseason.

Ya the blues had the misfortune of being a great team in a conference with even better teams. But they did fall to teams they probably should have beaten, like the Sharks in ‘00 and ‘04.

Dallas Semi finals ‘99(4-2)
Colorado WCF ‘01(4-1)
Detroit Semi Finals ‘02(4-1)
Vancouver Quat. Finals ‘03(4-3)

I think overall, they just had terrible luck with the playoff Match ups.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

You could also make a case for the 2015 Rangers, who won the President's Trophy and I would say they were the best Rangers team in the post-lockout era.

As a fan of that team I was convinced that was the year it was gonna happen. However that implosion in Game 3 that's right Game 3 vs Tampa killed them. Honestly I can't see them beating Chicago in the finals though, although it would have been closer than the 2014 final I could see them losing a heart breaker in Game 7. On home ice.

That team was masking alot of problems, the biggest one was obviously the Zucc injury which crippled their forward lines and led to them having to play Jim Sheppard and Tanner Glass on the 4th line. The other problem was the injury to St.Louis, he disappeared those playoffs and that late season injury really slowed him down, had he been scoring like he was the previous year maybe things go different. Another big issue IMO was they let go of Lee Stempniak at the deadline, now was he a superstar, no but he was a better option than Glass and Sheppard.

My only solace is that at least Anaheim didn't make the finals. The Rangers destroyed them in both regular season meetings that year, and contrary to popular belief on here, I'm convinced they would of taken the Ducks in a short series despite all the injuries.

 

[Hockeyholic]

2010-2011 Canucks?

 

[quoipourquoi]

I am honestly curious to hear everyone's opinion on the 2014 Ducks. I know they were beaten badly in Game 7 of their series against the rival Kings, but they had the second most points in the league, only behind the Bruins. Was their regular season a fluke, or were they a legitimate contender who couldn't get past the Kings, who were in the midst of their 2 Cup wins in 3 years?

I think Boudreau got way too cute with the goaltender and line rotation, hence Hiller and Selanne trashing him on their way out. Great team though.

 

[sr edler]

2010-2011 Canucks?

They didn't have enough scoring depth, to be honest. Once the Sedin's got stuck on Seidenberg/Chara (or in the Nashville series, Suter/Weber), not much happened offensively speaking. Kesler stepped up in the NSH series, but no one stepped up in the finals. You have to remember this is a team that sported Mason Raymond on the second line. Mikael Samuelsson was supposed to be the trigger guy on the Sedin line (top line). Raymond/Samuelsson in the top 6, best team to never win the Cup?

And while they had a good and depthy defense-corps (until everyone got injured or suspended), they didn't have a stand out guy that would ever seriously contend for a Norris (a Doughty, Keith, Chara, Suter guy). Now Carolina won with such a team, but they barely squeezed it out against a one-man-show injury depleted Oiler team, so it's hardly supposed to happen.

 

[BadgerBruce]

29-30 Bruins still own the best regular season winning percentage (.875) in NHL history, posting a 38-5-1 record. No Stanley Cup for Beantown.

That was the season where a series of rule changes were implemented, including the virtual elimination of offensive zone offsides. Probably the most historically interesting season ever.

 

[ShelbyZ]

2003 Red Wings?

Obviously Dave Lewis proved to be nowhere near Bowman caliber, but you have mostly the same future HOFer laden roster that won the year before, but with some minor tweaks, especially come playoff time:

-Joseph replaces Hasek
-Rookie Zetterberg displaces Boyd Devereaux on the 2 kids and an old man line with Hull and an improving Datsyuk in his sophomore season
-Duchesne, Olausson and Fischer (still on the team but hurt to start the playoffs) replaced by Schneider, Woolley and Bykov on defense
-Robitaille barely playing 4th line icetime, while Draper and Maltby get a lot more

Hypothetically speaking, if nothing else changes in the first round of the 2003 playoffs except for the Red Wings getting past the Ducks, they have a pretty solid chance of getting to the WCF and possibly clinching a 2nd consecutive Cup. Fischer was supposed to return later in the 1st round, and the Red Wings would've played Vancouver in the 2nd. Given that Dan Cloutier got absolutely lit up by a Wild team that was 7th from last in regular season GF, the Red Wings probably do the same.

 

[GMR]

2003 Red Wings?

Obviously Dave Lewis proved to be nowhere near Bowman caliber, but you have mostly the same future HOFer laden roster that won the year before, but with some minor tweaks, especially come playoff time:

-Joseph replaces Hasek
-Rookie Zetterberg displaces Boyd Devereaux on the 2 kids and an old man line with Hull and an improving Datsyuk in his sophomore season
-Duchesne, Olausson and Fischer (still on the team but hurt to start the playoffs) replaced by Schneider, Woolley and Bykov on defense
-Robitaille barely playing 4th line icetime, while Draper and Maltby get a lot more

Hypothetically speaking, if nothing else changes in the first round of the 2003 playoffs except for the Red Wings getting past the Ducks, they have a pretty solid chance of getting to the WCF and possibly clinching a 2nd consecutive Cup. Fischer was supposed to return later in the 1st round, and the Red Wings would've played Vancouver in the 2nd. Given that Dan Cloutier got absolutely lit up by a Wild team that was 7th from last in regular season GF, the Red Wings probably do the same.

They way things were back then, they'd probably choke against Minnesota and their boring, trapping style of hockey. Make their goalie look like the second coming of Jesus. The Wings owned the Stars and Marty Turco, so I do believe they'd beat that team.

Honestly, the 2003 Wings were an old team coming off a long playoff run the season before. No way they'd have enough gas to repeat as Champs. They'd probably lose to New Jersey in the Finals if they got that far.

 

[double5son10]

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

That was a dominant defensive team. '88-89 Habs are the only team that has had players win the Vezina (Roy), the Norris (Chelios) and the Selke (Carbonneau) in the same season. Ran into a Calgary team that was almost as good defensively, but had better O.

I will always have a soft spot for the '77-78 Bruins (51-18-11, 113 pts), with their record of 11 twenty goal scorers. The Lunch Pail AC had loads of character and was as tough as they come, led by leading scorer Terry O'Reilly (!?!). This was the year of Wensink challenging the North Stars bench and Stan Jonathan breaking Bouchard's cheekbone. It was Park's final season as a Norris runner-up (he was also 5th in Hart voting). And me personally, I've always loved their 3rd line of Gregg Sheppard, Bobby Schmautz and Don Marcotte (Selke finalist that yr. and the next). With Cheevers injured for much of the season Ronnie Grahame filled in nicely, with Gilbert the backup. It was Bucyk's final season and Cashman's first as captain. Just a lot of interesting characters and stories, with Cherry at the center of it all.
Bruins gave the Canadiens all they could handle in the Finals (and in the semis the yr. after). No shame in being the bridesmaid to arguably the greatest team ever.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

They'd probably lose to New Jersey in the Finals if they got that far.

I'm not so sure, a lot of Devils fans I know have told me that was by far their worst cup team. I think Detroit beats them in 6.