Did Chicago surpass Red Wings?

[RedWinged]

For as long as I have remembered, Red Wings have been the model of consistent success. Not only that, but also contending regularly for championships and winning a few of them along the way. I used to savor the opposing fan bases groaning at Red Wings success and openly rooting for anyone but the Red Wings to win the Stanley Cup.

Obviously, those days are in the past, and Chicago is the new standard bearer. My question is, has Chicago surpassed the championship success of Red Wings. What if they win another championship this year.

Should the Red Wings now emulate Chicago (tank and rebuild) as opposed to trying to eke into the playoffs every year as long as possible.

There are pros and cons obviously. A few years of bottom scraping and then rising like a phoenix, if the Chicago model is followed correctly, and not the Edmonton model.

On the other hand, it is cool to see the playoff streak being maintained. But no body in the right mind, would bet on the Red Wings to reach the SC finals, let alone win it. Not any more. And not with the current roster.

So what is the end game? death by a thousand cuts or a brutal revamp, with a few absolute bottom years and then become like Chicago again, or better yet Red Wings of yore (Stevie Y, Lidstrom and others).

Click to read more...

 

[PullHard]

I think what Chicago has done is pretty rare and surpasses basically anything in the modern era

Detroit had a more stacked team on paper for a longer period of time, but had a few legitimate opponents in Colorado, Dallas, New Jersey, etc. during that time frame who were very much part of the Cup conversation

Chicago, through a combination of good judgement and luck (much like us with our drafting), put together Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook, Hjalmarsson from 2002-2007. I don't know if you'll see a team match that ever again. The timing of having all 5 of those players be within 5 drafts of each is rare.

And now in an era where parity is key, there are very few legitimate opponents to take down the Hawks. Kings are good and have the Cups to prove it from the recent past, but no one else really poses as a threat. Another team could take them down, but I won't be holding my breath.

This is their window and they are maximizing it.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Before Chicago lost against Detroit in the WCF 09, they had missed the playoffs 9 of the previous 10 years and the one playoff appearance was a 4-1 first round exit.

Before LA won the Cup in 11-12, they had missed the playoffs 6 of the 8 previous years and had 1st round exits the other two years.

It's a myth that you can do a quick-rebuild by spending 2-3 years at the bottom of the league and then become a contender. The one example that sort of fits is Pittsburgh, but that only works if you get extremely lucky to pick players like Crosby and Malkin.

Anyway I've never believed that you're succesful by trying to follow what others teams are doing. Toronto, Buffalo, Edmonton, Carolina... these teams don't inspire a lot of confidence in the 'tanking' model.

 

[Frk It]

Is the sky blue?

 

[DanZ]

The Wings had 3 Cups in 6 years... and 4 in 11... Obviously Chicago has been much better since 2009, but they were also god awful before that. I'm not really sure what the question is. Have the Hawks been better since 2009? Yes. Have they been better since 1990? No.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

Duhhh

Cups>playoff streaks

Props to Detroit for getting four with two different cores, but the rate at which Chicago has been winning, you gotta expect Chicago to win at least one more with Kane/Toews/Keith.

 

[Ezekial]

If LA manages to win again this year what they would accomplish would be more impressive than what Chicago did even with missing the playoffs one of those years.

This question can't be answered with a simple yes or no. Regardless, **** the hawks, bears, and sox.

 

[GoAwayDanCleary]

Yes but I really don't care for comparisons. Both are no doubt dynasties... neither is over yet too.

 

[LowFive]

As much as I hate to say it, Chicago has thrived under the cap era and Detroit has faltered a bit. Loyalty to players is important but with the cap you need to keep a core you are loyal to, not every roster player.

Wings give out no-trade and no-move clauses like hotcakes. These days, you are hurt by those more often than not. We should consider giving those to our established young core (larkin, mrazek) but not anyone else. That's how you end up with Ericsson having a NMC and being our 6-7 best Dman.

Chicago is the model of cap era hockey. (and i just died a little inside typing that)

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Would pretty much say, That it's safe to say as of now YES they have.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Chicago who?

I believe that if you just ignore a problem it will go away.

Wing R' Da Best!

 

[SirKillalot]

As much as I hate to say it, Chicago has thrived under the cap era and Detroit has faltered a bit. Loyalty to players is important but with the cap you need to keep a core you are loyal to, not every roster player.

Wings give out no-trade and no-move clauses like hotcakes. These days, you are hurt by those more often than not. We should consider giving those to our established young core (larkin, mrazek) but not anyone else. That's how you end up with Ericsson having a NMC and being our 6-7 best Dman.

Chicago is the model of cap era hockey. (and i just died a little inside typing that)

What Chicago has been really good at is identifying and drafting/signing core players. Signing/trading for role/complimentary players. And, adding good young players into the mix.

To hit the jackpot with that core is absolutely the primary reason for their success.

The thing that makes them thrive in the cap era at the current moment is that they are satisfied with their core, and confident in that they can trade away solid players who aren't part of that core to get good returns and still keep themselves under the cap.

You could say, oh they got cap hell and cap issues all the time. But, I'd rather have a core and that, than not having such a luxury problem.


Now, if Detroit end up finding their core with the young guys claiming their spots. This team could end up in the same position.

 

[Red Stanley]

Six finals and 4 Cups with one back-to-back (should be 5 with 2 back-to-backs grrrrr) over the span of 14 years, vs three finals and 3 Cups over the span of 5 years with no back-to-back. I'd say we've been more dominant over a much longer period of time, so, no.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Duhhh

Cups>playoff streaks

Props to Detroit for getting four with two different cores, but the rate at which Chicago has been winning, you gotta expect Chicago to win at least one more with Kane/Toews/Keith.

Depends, I think you are looking at the final two years of their window without a significant retool. They are all on the big money now, save Keith who is likely to drop somewhat in terms of play given all the minutes and whatever else with his age.

We will see, but no while Chicago is better today, they have not matched the Wings yet.. For some they would if they win this year. I guess that would be the raw cup totals. Really they would still be more of a compare dynasty to dynasty team like the 50's Wings or teams of that ilk. Winning with two different cores and being excellent for 20+ years and in the playoffs for 25 years is still pretty different.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Nope. If they win this year. Maybe. But they still have to win one with multiple cores. Also I think the wings had better regular seasons? Not sure Still waiting for Chicago to face a real team before LA. Detroit had to face St. Louis Colorado and more. Chicago has had to face..... La and it's 50/50

Colorado could be the San Jose for chicago

 

[KJoe88]

People do realize that Kane and Toews are much younger than D and Z, right?

Pavel had his success and so did Z. Two cups for Datsyuk and only one for a Z, but they've also been more successful for longer periods - so has the team.

Both teams are also in different situations.

No, I don't think so and probably won't.

 

[PelagicJoe]

Let's wait until Chicago dominates the league for another 10-12 years before we go there.

 

[Mickey Redmond*]

Chicago has only won 2.5 cups, not 3.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Chicago has only won 2.5 cups, not 3.

Short season? Yeah that still counts

 

[RedWingsfan55]

It's the same as Pittsburgh just Chicago has more.


When you have 3 superstar forwards, 2 super star defense, and one pretty good goalie you'll make the playoffs a lot. And win cups.

Detroit has none of that except a better goalie. We don't have hossa, toews, kane, keith or Seabrook.



Also Detroit did tank to win. How did we get yzerman?
The difference is Chicago's core is young. Detroit's is old. Detroit is still having success after those players a acquired from tanking have retired. Lets see if Chicago and Pitts can do that.

 

[aar000n]

They have a better team right now. That is all.

 

[Mickey Redmond*]

Short season? Yeah that still counts

Winning a cup in a season shortened by a strike isn't the same accomplishment as winning one after playing a full 82 game season.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Surpass what? Are the Hawks a better team today? Yes. Have the Hawks been the better team for the last 5-6 years? Yes. So in that sense they did surpass the Wings as an organization some time ago.

Is the Hawks' run between 2009 and now better than what the Wings did from 95 up to 09? Difficult to say. The Wings won 4 Cups and made 6 Finals in that time span of 14 seasons. The Hawks have so far have won 3 Cups in 7 seasons (and I count it since 09 as they made the conference finals so that was their first 'good' year). Hard to compare given the different time spans. I suppose if you compare the Wings 95 to 02 with the Hawks 09 to 15 years you'd find a pretty similar amount of success - but if they win the 4th Cup this year they would be the 'better' dynasty so to speak. It was a different time with different challenges though. There was no cap and in some ways the Wings 'bought' the 02 Cup but then the teams you had to compete against also had much deeper rosters. I don't think there's been a team since the lockout as good as the Wings and Avs were at that time.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

As others have said, the key to Chicago's continued success has been their consistent willingness to trade role and complimentary players for picks and prospects (who then go on to be good role and complimentary players) whilst keeping hold of their core.

The more time goes on, the more I realise how keeping hold of the likes of Filpulla and Hudler till the very end was a mistake - the Hawks would never have done that. But then again, we don't have the core that they do either.

But as for tanking as a way to success - its a flawed model. Edmonton have how many top 3 picks? Someone on the main board said Winnipeg have nine top-10 players on their roster. Pittsburgh got real lucky in landing generational players in back to back drafts and have really done appallingly with it by trying to go "all-in" every year and now they have no depth and no support for them.

I should say however, that the Hawks don't really have any competition (other than the up and down Kings), certainly not like we had with the Avs and Dallas. Every season you knew the road to the finals was going through those cities.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The more time goes on, the more I realise how keeping hold of the likes of Filpulla and Hudler till the very end was a mistake - the Hawks would never have done that. But then again, we don't have the core that they do either.

Yeah they would have. When have Chicago traded upcoming UFAs before going into the playoffs?