Oh, so we're basically taking out how dominant the Hawks were in a shorter amount of time, to compensate the pens who up until recently were a middle of the road playoff team?
Three in six does matter. The Hawks had a three year gap where they were neck and neck with a Kings team that was their only peer and lost to those same Kings, who went on to win the Cup.
You could argue the Hawks 13 thru 15 we're a much better team then the Pens back to back teams considering they took the cup champs to a seventh game who then went and destroyed the Rangers in the finals.
Or, you can say the Hawks had a higher peak, which would be right, while the Pens needed eight years of being a middling playoff team to actually aquire the depth to be on a similar, if not a notch below a Hawks team that's a cap era dynasty.
Depends on what the pens do in the next few years. Too early yet to place them with the Hawks,imo