Can PIT steal the 'Team of the Decade' title from Chicago with a 3rd Cup?

[JaegerDice]

They don't need to - Pitt is already the best team of the 2010's in my opinion. Another cup would cement that barring Chi/LA winning another cup between now and 2020, which I don't see happening.

How?

They've won fewer playoff games, series and cups to date since the calendar turned 2010.

Since the beginning of the cap era, they're ahead in series wins and playoff game wins, and they'd tie cups with a repeat as a bonus. So since the cap era, they'd be the best team.

 

[Sidgeni Malkby]

Can we first play the Preds?

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I didn't know there was a team of the decade title... Are there banners

 

[aufheben]

If they win the Cup again, they'll have as many Cups this decade as the Blackhawks.

Plus a repeat, which hasn't been done in 20 years.

CHI won 3 Cups in 6 years, true- but 3 Cups in basically the same time span (2009-present) with a repeat as well as consecutive Stanley Cup Final appearances (which the Hawks have not done yet) can't be overlooked.

And given the Penguins situation seems less dicey than that of Chicago (ie the cap), who's to say they can't keep this up?

I don't think this is a last gasp/window's closing situation. They may keep this up- heck, they MIGHT win 4 Cups in a decade in a similar timespan as the Red Wings did.

What do you mean by "decade"? Last 10 years? Post-2010? Post-lockout?

If the Pens beat Nashville, I will say yes. Pittsburgh always has ridiculous injury issues, and as far as I can tell, Chicago's core has always been immaculately healthy.

 

[JaegerDice]

What do you mean by "decade"? Last 10 years? Post-2010? Post-lockout?

If the Pens beat Nashville, I will say yes. Pittsburgh always has ridiculous injury issues, and as far as I can tell, Chicago's core has always been immaculately healthy.

Except for that time we used an injury to build a roster that was over the cap. Don't forget that.

 

[Up the Irons]

4 finals appearances, 3 titles an a back-to-back in there?

answer: yes.

 

[aufheben]

Except for that time we used an injury to build a roster that was over the cap. Don't forget that.

I shouldn't fault Chicago for being healthy, they've always had such an incredible amount of skill that they didn't need to go out and beat the **** out of the other team to win.

 

[One87]

Uh no. Just look at any publication, newspaper, magazine, etc.

Teams of the decade start and end with 0-9. Period. There's no debate or semantics involved here.

I said it before...change the thread title to Team of the last ten years if you want to change the rules or definition.

The OP just needs to admit that he phrased it improperly IF that's what you want the criteria to be.

Nope, you're wrong.

 

[SirKillalot]

A decade is the last 10 years (or ten seasons). Meaning from 2008 until 2017.

From the 2010's can't be a decade until 2018/19 season is finished.

And neither team will be a dynasty, though two very good teams. But given that they in that scenario would have three each, the Kings two, the Red Wings one and the Bruins one. That isn't a dynasty scenario at any point. In addition with that, a lot of change on the teams during that time span isn't a plus either to the "dynasty"-preachers.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

I've seen a lot of debate about what years are included in a decade. For the purpose of this thread it doesn't even matter. Pitt won the SC in the 2008-2009 season, and nobody contends that 2009 belongs in this current decade. So Pitt won one Cup and lost one in the 2000s, won one Cup and made another final in the 2010s. Back-to-backs would be nice and all, but it doesn't amount to a dynasty. The league isn't set up for dynasties anymore.

Edit - if you want to just go by the last ten years, then this thread is really off base, because Pitt is trying for it's 3rd Cup in 9 years, while Chicago won 3 Cups in 6 years (which were indeed in THIS decade). How again could Pitt "steal" anything from Chicago??

 

[Honour Over Glory]

If they get the back to back, then yes, but until then Chicago is still #1

Even with the most wins in the playoffs in that decade, yeah, that 3rd cup has to happen to put us way ahead. Which the Pens will be. It'd be like 91 playoff wins to 70 whatever the Hawks have in the past decade.

That's nuts.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Seeing people start counting playoff victories to determine what teams are dynasties now. Don't even have to win anymore. Caps are a dynasty. Sharks are a dynasty.

 

[tom_servo]

4 Finals appearances to 3.

 

[66-30-33]

Can we first play the Preds?

I'd like that too. I wanna see how we match up against them on the ice, and see adjustments happen.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Seeing people start counting playoff victories to determine what teams are dynasties now. Don't even have to win anymore. Caps are a dynasty. Sharks are a dynasty.

Except, they aren't even in that Playoff Wins category, I forget the exact numbers, but neither are better than the Hawks and Penguins either in that decade for Playoff Victories.

So the fact that there are 2 clear teams and both are being considered as a Dynasty if one wins 3 in that 10yrs too...ok, be sour all you want.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

I'd like that too. I wanna see how we match up against them on the ice, and see adjustments happen.

That's going to be a tough series, it's where the Preds stack up defensively that worries me. That top 4 is solid but that 3rd pair is doing its part too by not being a massive liability. I wish we had Letang (as I am sure they would wish they had RJ as well). But Schultz back is a big help, hopefully that ribs issue is not as bad as we think it is, because as painful as that sounds, we need him to play solid hockey.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Except, they aren't even in that Playoff Wins category, I forget the exact numbers, but neither are better than the Hawks and Penguins either in that decade for Playoff Victories.

So the fact that there are 2 clear teams and both are being considered as a Dynasty if one wins 3 in that 10yrs too...ok, be sour all you want.

Pretty sure Sharks are #3 and the Caps are in the top 5. And no, the Penguins are considered a dynasty no matter what happens in their series with the Preds right now. They could get swept and they still have the dynasty title purely because they won a lot of playoff games which is definitely lowering the bar further for what counts for a dynasty.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

I didn't know there was a team of the decade title... Are there banners

Ask the caps. They love their random banners. Hehehehe

 

[T1K]

Even with the most wins in the playoffs in that decade, yeah, that 3rd cup has to happen to put us way ahead. Which the Pens will be. It'd be like 91 playoff wins to 70 whatever the Hawks have in the past decade.

That's nuts.

I didn't realize the Pens had that many playoff wins. After 2009 we had so many playoff disappointments, but I kinda feel spoiled now looking back at it. Aside from the season when Sid and Geno were both hurt I always felt like we had a legit shot at winning it all.

The Pens don't necessarily have to win B2B to take the title from the Hawks, I suppose, but if they get the B2B they'll undoubtedly be the best team over the last 10 years.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I mean, in other threads, people mock the idea that the Hawks could have been a dynasty with 3 Cups in 5 years or whatever it was...but here we're okay with the idea of 3 in 10? That's the beef I'm having with it. The goalposts are moving mightily.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

A decade is the last 10 years (or ten seasons). Meaning from 2008 until 2017.

From the 2010's can't be a decade until 2018/19 season is finished.

And neither team will be a dynasty, though two very good teams. But given that they in that scenario would have three each, the Kings two, the Red Wings one and the Bruins one. That isn't a dynasty scenario at any point. In addition with that, a lot of change on the teams during that time span isn't a plus either to the "dynasty"-preachers.

No, but back to back would set up the pens nicely for a run at a real dynasty. Getting ahead of myself though...

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

There is no actual definition. It's a know it when you see it type of deal, especially in the salary cap era.

Personally, I'd call the Hawks a dynasty, but not the Pens even if they win it this year- the 2009 win is just too far away for me to be comfortable doing that. The Hawks wins were much more closely spaced.

I will count anything in the Crosby/Malkin era. That is how this timeline will be judged. How many Cups have the Pens been in and how many they win in the Crosby era to be more exact but I believe both should be the timeline because Malkin does not get his respect he deserves.

I feel really good about the next 5 years for the Pens because they built a very young group around the core players of Crosby, Malkin, Kessel, and Letang. Starting next year the oldest player on the Pens could be 31. Sprong and Aston-Reese will also be fighting to make the team at some point next season. Goaltending is young with great prospects behind for Murray's backup. Team is in good cap shape to go for it again.

Watching the Finals last year it gave me the Pens window of legit Cup contenders when the Pens played the Sharks with Thornton and Marleau both being 36 at the time. I think the Pens have 5 legit Cups runs left with that core and the young supporting cast. In 5 years Malkin will be 35 and Crosby 34. They could still make a run like the Sharks did after that age but that would just be gravy.

 

[mpp9]

I mean, in other threads, people mock the idea that the Hawks could have been a dynasty with 3 Cups in 5 years or whatever it was...but here we're okay with the idea of 3 in 10? That's the beef I'm having with it. The goalposts are moving mightily.

Pens need to take full advantage of their window the next 3-5 years to be even considered a dynasty.

I'm just happy for 87 and 71 to get recognized for how ****ing good they are. 2012-15 were some ****** times. Malkin wasn't a top 10 player. Toews was better than Sid. Blah blah blah.

 

[Oilers Propagandist]

Back to back then yes no doubt. Even if they don't win it all this year, Their coach is utilizing the players properly and they've made it to the scf without letang. Pretty crazy.

 

[kingsfan28]

If they get the back to back, then yes, but until then Chicago is still #1

You can't have a 7 year or whatever gap between cup wins, then go back to back and all of a sudden be "The Team". The Hawks are the closest with 3 in 5 since 2010, followed by the Kings with 2 in 3. The Pens have 1 Cup since then, same as the number as the Bruins this decade.