Better Stanley Cup Final, 2001 or 2004?

[Theokritos]

Ray Bourque's Stanley Cup is one of the most hollow "achivements" in hockey history. He hitched his wagon to a team that was likely to win without him. Andreychuk spent three seasons playing for TB before winning the cup. Andreychuk earned his, Bourque's was more like a participation ribbon. Cheap way to get your name on the cup.

Being the #1 defenceman on a Stanley Cup winning team and contributing a ton by playing almost Norris-level defence, all that at the advanced age of 41, is a "cheap way" to get your name on the cup? I guess one man's "cheap" is another man's "expensive".

 

[Doctor No]

Ray Bourque's Stanley Cup is one of the most hollow "achivements" in hockey history. He hitched his wagon to a team that was likely to win without him. Andreychuk spent three seasons playing for TB before winning the cup. Andreychuk earned his, Bourque's was more like a participation ribbon. Cheap way to get your name on the cup.

Considering that Bourque did this:



In a seven-game series win, and the Avs had to win another seven-game series to get past New Jersey, I'd say that it's questionable whether the Avs were "likely to win without him".

 

[LightningStorm]

Ray Bourque's Stanley Cup is one of the most hollow "achivements" in hockey history. He hitched his wagon to a team that was likely to win without him. Andreychuk spent three seasons playing for TB before winning the cup. Andreychuk earned his, Bourque's was more like a participation ribbon. Cheap way to get your name on the cup.

Not true at all. Bourque was 2nd in the Norris voting that season. He was far from a passenger. It would've been tough for the Avs to win without him. Before he got there, the Avs top d-man was Adam Foote, who was a low end #1/high end #2 d-man. Trading for Bourque and later Blake gave them 2 elite #1 d-men.

Besides, while Andreychuk didn't take any shortcuts and probably provided more leadership, Bourque was definitely playing at a much higher level in his cup winning season than Andreychuk was in his. Again, Andreychuk deserving extra praise for sticking out with Tampa doesn't mean Bourque deserves criticism for requesting to be traded to a contender. He did every thing he could do for 20 years in Boston.

 

[Johnny Engine]

4 teams managed to win a cup between 1995 and 2003. Bourque joining the Avalanche looks like a case of "you have to play to win". Yeah, it's pretty remarkable that Andreychuk picked the one team that broke that trend, but it doesn't take anything away from Bourque to suggest that he wasn't getting past New Jersey and Detroit on just any team.

 

[Club]

2004

 

[Johnny Engine]

2004

Can you tell us why? Better hockey, more drama?

 

[bruins309]

I've read this board for almost 9 years, and stating that "Bourque was a passenger" on the 2001 Avs might be the single most asinine statement I have ever read here. Congrats!

As to the question, it's 2001 for sure. I prefer playoff years where it is more a "battle of the titans" like 2001, 2013 etc than years like 2004 and 2006 where it's just complete randomness in the final 4 teams.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Ray Bourque's Stanley Cup is one of the most hollow "achivements" in hockey history. He hitched his wagon to a team that was likely to win without him. Andreychuk spent three seasons playing for TB before winning the cup. Andreychuk earned his, Bourque's was more like a participation ribbon. Cheap way to get your name on the cup.

It's worth pointing out that the Avalanche weren't actually having that great of a season in 2000 when he got traded there. They were in a tight battle with a mediocre Edmonton team just to finish first in their division, and a playoff berth was by no means assured. They really turned it around when Bourque was acquired. I actually remember a fair bit of surprise when the news broke that he decided to accept a trade to Colorado. They weren't seen as a strong contender at that particular moment.

 

[EpochLink]

Bourque made First Team all star in 2001 and was still playing like a Norris defensemen in his prime.
The Avs adding Rob Blake midway through the season bolstered their defense core.

The notion of Bourque 'riding the pine' with the Avs is nonsense, he was still producing at his age.

 

[Ogopogo*]

I've read this board for almost 9 years, and stating that "Bourque was a passenger" on the 2001 Avs might be the single most asinine statement I have ever read here. Congrats!

As to the question, it's 2001 for sure. I prefer playoff years where it is more a "battle of the titans" like 2001, 2013 etc than years like 2004 and 2006 where it's just complete randomness in the final 4 teams.

Fascinating...nobody said that. You should read what is actually typed.

Bourque was a rental and being a rental is a cheap way to get your name on the cup.

 

[Johnny Engine]

How long do you have to play for a team before you're not a rental?

Were Roy, Lemieux, and Ozolinsh rentals on the '96 cup team?

 

[LightningStorm]

One ironic thing about the 2004 finals was though the games were very close, the winning team never trailed. By contrast, the winner of games 2-4 of the 2001 finals all trailed at some point in each game.

 

[Big Phil]

2004 was surprisingly entertaining. It is remember for a lot of things including the close last three games. There are lots of storylines behind this series, which sort of makes it a classic.

2001 was the battle of two heavyweights. I believe the first time since 1989 that the best two teams in the NHL met in the final. Plus it had the Bourque thing going for it. I think 2004 was closer and perhaps more entertaining because of that but 2001 had the star power.

 

[Big Phil]

Ray Bourque's Stanley Cup is one of the most hollow "achivements" in hockey history. He hitched his wagon to a team that was likely to win without him. Andreychuk spent three seasons playing for TB before winning the cup. Andreychuk earned his, Bourque's was more like a participation ribbon. Cheap way to get your name on the cup.

I don't agree with this. Bourque came in March of 2000. He played the entire 2001 season on Colorado. The Avs would have won without him you think? Well, they didn't other than 1996 despite losing to some top western conference teams. Throw in Blake's trade late in 2001 and the Avs had their own version of a "Big 3" on defense with Bourque, Blake and Foote. Bourque had 10 points that spring so he contributed for sure. Was a 1st team all-star in 2001 as well. I don't think Bourque is the type of player that "hitched his wagon" to anything. I think he earned his stripes. All those years in Boston, he is the defensive AND offensive star some years. I think we forget just how much that Bruins team relied on him.

 

[VanIslander]

The post-94 lockout NHL was dominated by four teams: Detroit, Colorado, Dallas and New Jersey. They won EVERY Stanley Cup championship over a 9-year stretch, after 7 of 9 president's trophies.

The build up was intense. The #1 seed from the East (with plenty of two-cup vets) vs. the #1 seed in the league.

Bourque joining obvious HHOFERS-to-be Sakic, Forsberg, Roy, and co. to take on HHOFers-to-be Stevens and Brodeur with talented Mogilny, Niedermayer and an impressive "A line" of Elias-Arnott-Sykora trying to defend their Stanley Cup victory the year before.

I WAS BLOODY DIALED IN TO EVERY GAME (wasn't a fan of either team but the drama and clash was too epic to ignore).

....vs.... vs.... eh... Tampax and 3rd in their division Calgary. I didn't bother to watch a single game of that series. An early summer trip out to the lake (pre-smartphone era) was more worthy certainly.

 

[ShelbyZ]

Fascinating...nobody said that. You should read what is actually typed.

Bourque was a rental and being a rental is a cheap way to get your name on the cup.

Sorry, no.

You'd have a case if he had won the Cup with the Avs only months after being acquired in 99-00. However, his rental status expired when he committed his future to the Avs and signed a one year extension in June of 2000.

 

[The Macho King]

2004 2004 2004 2004

I cannot be objective about this, but it's 2004.

 

[HisIceness]

I don't remember a lot of 2001. I do however remember both game 7's, and in my opinion 2004 had a much better game 7

That game was edge-of-seat after Conroy scored to cut the Tampa lead to 1 with like 11 minutes left. After that Khababulin had to come up with save after save, including one on a crazy rebound with 5 minutes left. Even in the last minute the drama ran high. Tampa went to the penalty box with like 30 seconds left and still threw a couple of shots at the 'Bulin Wall. There was also had that hit that Andrew Ference laid on St. Louis in those final seconds. On top of this, the series went 7 because Tampa won game 6 in double-overtime.

2001 was over after Tanguay scored his 2nd goal.

 

[LeafalCrusader]

01=Better storylines
04=Better hockey

Personally preferred 04.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

The post-94 lockout NHL was dominated by four teams: Detroit, Colorado, Dallas and New Jersey. They won EVERY Stanley Cup championship over a 9-year stretch, after 7 of 9 president's trophies.

The build up was intense. The #1 seed from the East (with plenty of two-cup vets) vs. the #1 seed in the league.

yeah, i feel exactly the same way. what was the previous 1 vs 2 SCF? calgary/montreal in '89?

that series had

- the single player that almost any fan wanted to see win the cup if their own team couldn't win it

- the defending champs, now armed with their first ever offensive superstar (elias, who finished 3rd in league scoring)

- the MVP (who finished 2nd in scoring)

- the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best defensemen in the league, according to norris voting

- roy vs brodeur

- even the benches were star-studded—larry robinson and slava fetisov on new jersey, bryan trottier on colorado

- you had the great set up of NJ again flexing their defensive muscles by making quick work of the pittsburgh jaromieux and on the other side deadmarsh eliminating detroit


and storylines aside, sakic making a monkey of scott stevens, colorado coming back from a 2-3 deficit, tanguay's beautiful 1-0 goal in game seven, that series was unbelievable.


as an aside, for all our complaints about low scoring boring hockey, we were spoiled with HHOF goalie matchups in those years. roy vs belfour two years in a row in 1999 and 2000, hasek vs belfour in '99, brodeur vs belfour in '00, roy vs brodeur in '01, and then finally at last the matchup everyone wanted: roy vs hasek in '02.