Greatest multi Cup winner: Lightning vs Pens vs Blackhawks vs Kings

[Luck 6]

Blackhawks. Coming from a Canucks fan... Haha.

 

[LightningStorm]

In terms of teams preventing each other from potentially 3-peating, I believe the Pens/Caps is a false equivalency to the Hawks/Kings. The Caps title win in 2018 is looking more like a one-off, since they were never able to make it past the 2nd round before or since, regular season success notwithstanding. And the Pens were far from the only team they struggled against. For the Pens, had they gotten past the Caps in 2018, they would definitely be underdogs against a Bolts team who was a step above the same team who took them to 7 games in 2016, while the Pens weren't as good 2 years later. I think the Pens are a more favorable matchup for the Bolts than the Caps were.

And while the Kings definitely had a better chance at 3-peating than those 2, it was still noticeably less than the Hawks. For those 2 WCF's, the Hawks won there's in 5, while the Kings won there's in OT of game 7, so the Hawks had a way better chance at losing the series they lost, even if they had to come back from 3-1 down to force a game 7. 2nd, the 2013 Bruins were a better team than either of the Kings SCF opponents, so even if they beat the Hawks in the '13 WCF, there's no guarantee they beat the Bruins. Meanwhile, had the Hawks scored in game 7 OT in the '14 WCF, they would absolutely be the favorite over the Rangers.

Ranking each team's chance at repeating, IMO it's a very clear cut:

1. Chicago
2. LA
3. Pittsburgh

 

[ColbyChaos]

I have not read the entire thread so someone might already have responded to that:

It is not a good argument. The Pens and the Caps faced each other 3 years in a row from 2016 to 2018 and the winner won the Cup each time. They were the two best teams those years, just like the Hawks and Kings before. You could easily argue that the Pens AND Caps could have won 3 in a row. Heck, I'd say that the Caps won with the weakest team during that run (and the Pens too in 2017).

Caps and Pens were literally pushed to game 7 the following series with 2016 Pit even trailing 3-2 in the series... you cant argue a team blocked one another when they were pushed to the brink by Tampa and Ottawa the next round.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

Caps and Pens were literally pushed to game 7 the following series with 2016 Pit even trailing 3-2 in the series... you cant argue a team blocked one another when they were pushed to the brink by Tampa and Ottawa the next round.

But you can argue that a team would have necessarily won the next series had they reached it? Both are hypotheticals that cannot be proven.

 

[LightningStorm]

Caps and Pens were literally pushed to game 7 the following series with 2016 Pit even trailing 3-2 in the series... you cant argue a team blocked one another when they were pushed to the brink by Tampa and Ottawa the next round.

Not only pushed to a game 7, but in '16 and '18, the Pens and Caps trailed 3-2 to the Bolts (painful memories for me haha) while in '17 the Pens went to OT in game 7. I agree with you, when its that close you can't argue one team simply blocked the other when it comes to their 2nd round series 3 straight years.

 

[JaegerDice]

In terms of teams preventing each other from potentially 3-peating, I believe the Pens/Caps is a false equivalency to the Hawks/Kings. The Caps title win in 2018 is looking more like a one-off, since they were never able to make it past the 2nd round before or since, regular season success notwithstanding. And the Pens were far from the only team they struggled against. For the Pens, had they gotten past the Caps in 2018, they would definitely be underdogs against a Bolts team who was a step above the same team who took them to 7 games in 2016, while the Pens weren't as good 2 years later. I think the Pens are a more favorable matchup for the Bolts than the Caps were.

And while the Kings definitely had a better chance at 3-peating than those 2, it was still noticeably less than the Hawks. For those 2 WCF's, the Hawks won there's in 5, while the Kings won there's in OT of game 7, so the Hawks had a way better chance at losing the series they lost, even if they had to come back from 3-1 down to force a game 7. 2nd, the 2013 Bruins were a better team than either of the Kings SCF opponents, so even if they beat the Hawks in the '13 WCF, there's no guarantee they beat the Bruins. Meanwhile, had the Hawks scored in game 7 OT in the '14 WCF, they would absolutely be the favorite over the Rangers.

Ranking each team's chance at repeating, IMO it's a very clear cut:

1. Chicago
2. LA
3. Pittsburgh

Agree with the bolded. The 2016 and 2017 Captials were considered a great team by virtue of their regular season success, whereas the Kings and Blackhawks were trading championships and deep playoff runs.

History is littered with great RS teams that never get it done in the playoffs, and while I think everybody is happy that Ovie finally won his cup, I don't think it's some great testament to the quality of the Penguins that they managed to beat a team/core that had never made it out of the 2nd round... in the 2nd round.

 

[LightningStorm]

Agree with the bolded. The 2016 and 2017 Captials were considered a great team by virtue of their regular season success, whereas the Kings and Blackhawks were trading championships and deep playoff runs.

History is littered with great RS teams that never get it done in the playoffs, and while I think everybody is happy that Ovie finally won his cup, I don't think it's some great testament to the quality of the Penguins that they managed to be a team/core that had never made it out of the 2nd round... in the 2nd round.

Right on the money with this post, especially the last paragraph. The Caps were like the 2000's Sens and Thornton era Sharks as great RS teams who could never get it done, the difference obviously being the Caps won their only cup appearance. But while all 3 only made the finals once, that was also the only CF appearance the Caps made, while the Sens made 2 and the Sharks made 4. You're completely right too about the Caps postseason struggles going well beyond the Pens. Of the 12 postseason series they've lost with Ovie, only 3 have been to the Pens. Heck, the Rangers have also beaten the Caps 3 times. Throw in too the great fact @SchmaltzLiquor8 brought up of the Pens/Caps winner coming closer to losing the ECF than their 2nd round series with each other after all 3 of their 2016-2018 meetings.

 

[HeavyHammer]

Looking at the team stats for the ranges OP has listed: (for the playoffs)
Bolts: .708 win %
Pens: .653 win %
Hawks: .662 win %
Kings: .641 win %

Just some food for thought. Kind of skewed because both the Kings and Hawks ranges include an extra year when they lost, but then again maybe that's the bonus the Pens and Bolts get for winning back-to-back...

All good choices for sure regardless.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

I feel like the Hawks or Bolts. Might say Bolts since Kucherov was way more dominant than any Chicago forward and they actually repeated.

 

[KidLine93]

just realized were not counting the Hawks first win. Will change my answer to tampa

 

[Varan]

Pens

Two back-to-back Cups after playing full 82 game seasons. None of this shortened season/playing your own division only bullshit...

Says the Pens fan

 

[Varan]

This is Hawks pretty easily. They had to go against the Kings and had to do it when the West was a monster

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Agree with the bolded. The 2016 and 2017 Captials were considered a great team by virtue of their regular season success, whereas the Kings and Blackhawks were trading championships and deep playoff runs.

History is littered with great RS teams that never get it done in the playoffs, and while I think everybody is happy that Ovie finally won his cup, I don't think it's some great testament to the quality of the Penguins that they managed to beat a team/core that had never made it out of the 2nd round... in the 2nd round.

Would they both be making deep playoff runs if they ran into each other in the 2nd round?

 

[JaegerDice]

Would they both be making deep playoff runs if they ran into each other in the 2nd round?

The Capitals didn't need to lose to the Penguins to lose by the 2nd round. They've literally not made it past the 2nd round since Ovechkin started playing for the team, except for one year when they went all the way.

The Penguins beat a team that never made it past the 2nd round... in the 2nd round. People expected more based on regular season success, not championship pedigree.

They've done nothing to suggest they're the kind of powerhouse that either the Kings or the Blackhawks were.

 

[BringTheReign]

Chicago and LA are tied in my mind, because they had to contend with each other. I don't feel any of the others had that same elite rival standing in their way to overcome.

Yup. Hawks took us down in '13, Kings took them down in '14 (in what I believe was the best playoff series of the Cap era).

With the Pens, it's the starpower vs. depth argument given Crosby-Malkin can't be matched by any of the 3 other squads. As for Tampa, it may be the most impressive roster top to bottom, but their runs didn't have that iconic series or rival like the Hawks-Kings did.

 

[BringTheReign]

I'll also add that it might be fun to split these up into only the Cup year teams.

The 2012 Kings were an 8th seed that eliminated the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd seeds in their conference with a historic 16-4 record (which was nearly 16-2 or 16-3 with close games in the Final).

The 2014 Kings basically reversed that steamroller script and had to beat the Sharks (reverse sweep), Ducks, and Hawks in 7 games each before facing arguably the greatest goalie of the Cap era in the Finals. I still think the 2014 run was the toughest route to the Finals in the Cap era. Just a murderer's row of big, nasty, skilled, veteran-laden teams in the WC.

 

[JaegerDice]

I'll also add that it might be fun to split these up into only the Cup year teams.

The 2012 Kings were an 8th seed that eliminated the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd seeds in their conference with a historic 16-4 record (which was nearly 16-2 or 16-3 with close games in the Final).

The 2014 Kings basically reversed that steamroller script and had to beat the Sharks (reverse sweep), Ducks, and Hawks in 7 games each before facing arguably the greatest goalie of the Cap era in the Finals. I still think the 2014 run was the toughest route to the Finals in the Cap era. Just a murderer's row of big, nasty, skilled, veteran-laden teams in the WC.

I don't know who could argue against the 2014 Kings having the toughest competition of any cup run in the cap era.

The beat the 1st (Sharks), 2nd (Blackhawks), 7th (Ducks), and 9th (Rangers) teams in xGF%. No other team has faced 4 teams in the top ten as far as I can tell from a cursory glance.


The only way the 2014 Kings could have made it tougher was if you replaced the 2014 Rangers with the 2014 Bruins.


EDIT: Actually, the 2013 Blackhawks and 2016 Penguins did it too.

The Hawks beat the 1st (Kings), 6th (Bruins), 9th (Red Wings) and 10th (Wild).

The Pens beat the 2nd (Sharks), 7th (Capitals), 9th (Lightning), and 10th (Blue Jackets).

 

[Nasti]

Fair enough.

I disagree that the Caps failure before and after should be factored in. If we do factor those in, then, we have to consider that the Kings were good for 3-4 years and that's about it.

If you look at the 2016-2018 Caps, to me, they were absolutely the best team we faced each year. Things could have gone wrong for them in the third round or in the SCF, that's for sure. However, I frankly believe that those 3 series determined, in a way, the Cup winner. Just like you are saying the Hawks and Kings was the real SCF (which I agree with).

My point is that if you give credit to the Hawks and Kings going through each other, you kinda have to include the Caps/Pens dynamic.

At the end of the day, I feel like all 4 franchises were great champions and it is very difficult to rank them. Heck, for all we know, the Lightning run is not over yet.

The fact that the Caps aren’t even on this list shows that facing them isn’t quite the same thing. Penguins vs Lightning is a more valid argument.

 

[Fataldogg]

Tampa's is the least impressive given they did both in shortened seasons, one with months of rest in between the last game of the season and the first game of the playoffs.

Don't get me wrong, winning the Cup back to back is hard under any conditions, but doing it in back to back 82 game seasons is more of a grind.

 

[sr edler]

It's between Chicago and Tampa (who ironically played each other in 2015)

Regarding LAK & PIT



Kings 1st Cup was pretty weak. Their hardest opponent was VAN in the first round who had their MVP player injured (D. Sedin with concussion), and played the wrong goalie in the first games (Luongo instead of a scorching hot Schneider). Then they just cruised or coasted pre season style over St. Louis, Phoenix (lol) and New Jersey. They still put up a great looking run though, but it wouldn't have looked that easy had they actually played some tough opponents.

Kings kinda redeemed themselves though by defeating the reigning champs Chicago in the 2014 Conference Finals, their marquee moment as a franchise. Kinda interesting with the Kings, that none of their Cup wins they played a particularly good team in the Finals. Much like the Red Wings in 97, 98 & 02.

LAK also was a bit suspect-ish in-between those wins, missing playoffs some years, occasionally sliding into the post season on a banana peel, et cetera, et cetera.



16 & 17 just felt like an intermediate vacuum between two ups. PIT defeated San Jose & Nashville in the Finals. And to arrive there they had to beat perennial playoff chokers (or East Coast San Jose) Washington without 2018 version Kuznetsov. As a Canucks fan, I take those opponents any day of the week, because we've beaten them (NSH & SJS) in the playoffs and they're not scary. Nashville at one point in the 2017 Finals played Freddy Gaudreau and Colton Sissons as a 1C/2C punch. Are those players even in the league anymore?

Not bad teams, but not all-time great either. They brought a pretty neat semi-run & gun-ish style though, but doubtful if that style would have worked against a more cynical opponent.

 

[Favin]

Hawks

I'd like to see same poll with 1990's and 2000's multi-cup winners

1. 1991/1992 Pittsburgh Penguins
2. 1997/1998 Detroit Red Wings
3. 2010/2013/2015 Chicago Blackhawks
4. 2016/2017 Pittsburgh Penguins
5. 1995/2000/2003 New Jersey Devils
6. 1996/2001 Colorado Avalanche
7. 2012/2014 Los Angeles Kings
8. 2020/2021 Tampa Bay Lightning

 

[Gurglesons]

16 & 17 just felt like an intermediate vacuum between two ups. PIT defeated San Jose & Nashville in the Finals. And to arrive there they had to beat perennial playoff chokers (or East Coast San Jose) Washington without 2018 version Kuznetsov. As a Canucks fan, I take those opponents any day of the week, because we've beaten them (NSH & SJS) in the playoffs and they're not scary. Nashville at one point in the 2017 Finals played Freddy Gaudreau and Colton Sissons as a 1C/2C punch. Are those players even in the league anymore?

Not bad teams, but not all-time great either. They brought a pretty neat semi-run & gun-ish style though, but doubtful if that style would have worked against a more cynical opponent.

What a horrible take. PIT has been THE team since 2007.

 

[Gurglesons]

The Capitals didn't need to lose to the Penguins to lose by the 2nd round. They've literally not made it past the 2nd round since Ovechkin started playing for the team, except for one year when they went all the way.

The Penguins beat a team that never made it past the 2nd round... in the 2nd round. People expected more based on regular season success, not championship pedigree.

They've done nothing to suggest they're the kind of powerhouse that either the Kings or the Blackhawks were.

The Capitals in 2016 and 2017 were a much different team than the Capitals of 2009 and 2010.

As per usual people want to discredit the Penguins because they are "the league darling and failed up" or some bullshit.

PIT has been the only team to make the playoffs since 2007. They have the most finals appearances since 2006. They are tied with the most cups. They won back to back in an actual 82 game season. They have two superstars that have won more than anyone combined over the last 15 years.

It's pretty simple what team is the best.

LA had three wonderful years. Chicago had an all timer team in 2010 and then it got blew up and they won a shortened season cup and then had a dominating defensive performance in 2015.

PIT has been in the conversation every year before and after for a cup since those runs. PIT lost as many games as Chicago in 2013.

PIT are the Red Wings of the salary cap era. It's picture perfect given how their first back to back worked out.

 

[JaegerDice]

Impassioned rant.

They've done nothing to suggest they're the kind of powerhouse that either the Kings or the Blackhawks were.

I was referring to the Capitals.

Nobody is taking anything away from the Penguins. The 2016 and 2017 Capitals are not in the same category as the 2013 Kings or 2014 Blackhawks.

 

[Gurglesons]

I was referring to the Capitals.

The Capitals and Penguins traded three series that were widely recognized as being “the Stanley cup final”.

if you want to pretend otherwise that’s fine. The pens and caps did exactly what the Hawks and Kings did in 2013-2015. Only the Caps and Pens have actually been playoff contenders outside of that run from 16-18.