Habs 70's dynasty vs. Islanders 80's dynasty

[Big Phil]

The depth is better than the Isles dynasty and the Pens of 1993 would get sweep in 4 games.

I would take the Habs dynasty too. However, while the 1993 Pens choked badly they were two time Cup champs with Lemieux, Jagr, Francis, Stevens, Mullen, Tocchet, Murphy and Barrasso on their team. Coached by Scotty Bowman. I'm sorry, but Mario is clearly better than anyone on either one of the Isles or Habs dynasty. There is no way those Pens teams get swept. Sorry, but that was a damn fine team too and it just wouldn't happen. The Habs beat them in a clean 6 games, no worse though.

Between the Isles and the Habs to me it's still Montreal. That domination of the rest of the NHL was just spectacular and we may never see that again. They had the best player in the NHL, the best goalie and (depending on the year) the best defenseman. Oh yeah, they had the best coach then too. No disrespect to the Isles, but the 1970s Habs are kind of in their own class (maybe 1950s Habs). The Isles fare better in a comparison with the Oilers

 

[Sens Rule]

I'd take the 93 pens. That habs team was deep in comparison to the other teams in that era. The average skill level of players has gone up exponentially since then. Sorry no offense to the habs of that generation or anything, it's just the developement and resources at the players' disposal these days are not even comparable.

The 93 Pens did not even win the Cup so NOOOOOOOOO

 

[zimnyi]

I just think it is humorous that the New York Islanders play in every argument of this thread.

The 1976 and 77 Isles are the only team to beat the Habs in a game in those playoffs. The 1993 Isles were the ones who beat the Pens in the Patrick Division Finals.

It is such a shame that the Isles have been horrid for the better part of 20 years that people seem to forget that they have a good history and are even still part of the NHL.

 

[begbeee]

I just think it is humorous that the New York Islanders play in every argument of this thread.

The 1976 and 77 Isles are the only team to beat the Habs in a game in those playoffs. The 1993 Isles were the ones who beat the Pens in the Patrick Division Finals.

It is such a shame that the Isles have been horrid for the better part of 20 years that people seem to forget that they have a good history and are even still part of the NHL.

And Isles 1983 were one of the teams that have beat Edmonton.

 

[bruins309]

I'd assume most people would give the nod to Montreal here...I think it's really close though.

A better question: Was the quality of play better in the NHL in the late 70s or early 80s? Top to bottom, the NHL was much tougher in the early 80s because you went from 24-30 teams (including WHA) in the 70s to 21 teams in the early 80s. And Edmonton and Quebec were pretty good from the start...or at least not horrible like most expansion teams.

Point is: The Islanders deserve credit for winning 4 straight in a tougher setting...not to mention that they had to win four rounds every year since the first round bye was done away with for the '80 playoffs.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think you have to go with Montreal , the greatest team ever.

The Islanders had 2 superstar forwards while Montreal had only 1 , but Montreal had a superstar goalie superior to Smith.

Denis Potvin was better than any Montreal defenseman , but not enough to compensate the fact they had Robinson , Savard & Lapointe , which is the best ''big three'' any team has ever assembled.

I also like Montreal's forward depth more.They also had the greatest coach of all-time in Scotty Bowman.

 

[begbeee]

I think you have to go with Montreal , the greatest team ever.

The Islanders had 2 superstar forwards while Montreal had only 1 , but Montreal had a superstar goalie superior to Smith.

Denis Potvin was better than any Montreal defenseman , but not enough to compensate the fact they had Robinson , Savard & Lapointe , which is the best ''big three'' any team has ever assembled.

I also like Montreal's forward depth more.They also had the greatest coach of all-time in Scotty Bowman.

Yeah, Montreal was probably better team but Islanders were better dynasaty. If it make sense.

 

[Kirikanoir]

A better question: Was the quality of play better in the NHL in the late 70s or early 80s? Top to bottom, the NHL was much tougher in the early 80s because you went from 24-30 teams (including WHA) in the 70s to 21 teams in the early 80s. And Edmonton and Quebec were pretty good from the start...or at least not horrible like most expansion teams.

The league went from an 18 team league in Montreal`s first 3 Cup wins and 17 in their last, to 21 in the NY Islanders 4 Cups and 5 trips to the final. Not seeing where that is some big advantage for Montreal.

Point is: The Islanders deserve credit for winning 4 straight in a tougher setting...not to mention that they had to win four rounds every year since the first round bye was done away with for the '80 playoffs.

1975-76
Philadelphia 118 points Montreal 4 to 0
Boston 113 points
Buffalo 105 points
NY Islanders 101 points Montreal 4 to 1

1976-77
Philadelphia 112 points
NY Islanders 106 points Montreal 4 to 2
Boston 106 points Montreal 4 to 0
Buffalo 104 points

1977-78
Philadelphia 105 points
Boston 113 points Montreal 4 to 2
Buffalo 105 points
NY Islanders 111 points

1978-79
NY Islanders 116 points
Boston 100 points Montreal 4 to 3

1979-80
Philadelphia 116 points NYI 4 to 2
Boston 110 points NYI 4 to 1
Montreal 107 points
Buffalo 105 points NY! 4 to 2

1980-81
St.Louis 107 points
Montreal 103 points

1981-82
Edmonton 111points
Montreal 109 points

1982-83
Boston 110 points NYI 4 to 2
Edmonton 106 points NYI 4 to 0
Philadelphia 106 points
Chicago 104 points

1983-84
Edmonton 119 points Edm 4 to 1
Boston 104 points
Buffalo 103 points
Washington 101 points NYI 4 to 1

Outside of the NY Islanders first Cup win I`m not seeing where NY Islanders had any tougher a road to the Cup than did Montreal

As for the extra playoff round which was a best 3 of 5. Does anyone really think that the 70s Montreal teams would have had any problem making their way through a 1 vs 16 match up.This was the same Montreal team that in back to back finals swept two 100 plus elite teams.

 

[bruins309]

The league went from an 18 team league in Montreal`s first 3 Cup wins and 17 in their last, to 21 in the NY Islanders 4 Cups and 5 trips to the final. Not seeing where that is some big advantage for Montreal.

Factoring in the WHA in the equation. In 75-76 there were 12 WHA teams that played the whole season (2 folded). Added to 18 NHL teams, that means there were 30 teams competing for pro talent at the time. If people think the 30 team NHL is watered down even with many, many more European players...you would have to think that it was far worse back then.

Admittedly, the quality of play in the WHA was definitely lower, but it's not as if their good teams wouldn't have been competitive in the NHL of that time.

 

[FiveForDrawingBlood]

1975-76 Montreal 58-11-11=127
1975-76 Playoffs 12-1

1976-77 Montreal 60-8-12=132
1976-77 Playoffs 12-2

1977-78 Montreal 59-10-11=129
1977-78 Playoffs 12-3

Those numbers are pretty amazing. Doubt they will ever be matched

 

[fireworks]

I'd take the 93 Penguins over any of them

You would lose badly against badly against the Oilers,Islanders and the Habs

 

[Dreakmur]

Habs of the 50s would be the best team of all time.


Jean Beliveau
Maurice Richard
Henri Richard
Bernie Geoffrion
Dickie Moore
Bert Olmstead

Ralph Backstrom
Claude Provost
Ken Modsell
Don Marshall
Floyd Curry
Phil Goyette

Doug Harvey
Tom Johnson
Jean-Guy Talbot
Butch Buchard
Dollard St. Laurent
Bob Turner

Jacques Plante
Gerry McNeill

 

[FiveForDrawingBlood]

The '60s Habs are probably the most underrated dynasty. Nobody mentions them but they won 4 Cups in 5 years which is amazing when you think of it. Not to mention they got to the Finals the 5th year. That team had 8 Hall of Famers and 2 often mentioned who should be in JC Tremblay and Rogie Vachon. Jean Beliveau the star player, Toe Blake the coach and Sam Pollock GM. That is a hell of a team

 

[markrander87]

I think you have to go with Montreal , the greatest team ever.

The Islanders had 2 superstar forwards while Montreal had only 1 , but Montreal had a superstar goalie superior to Smith.

Denis Potvin was better than any Montreal defenseman , but not enough to compensate the fact they had Robinson , Savard & Lapointe , which is the best ''big three'' any team has ever assembled.

I also like Montreal's forward depth more.They also had the greatest coach of all-time in Scotty Bowman.

I still would like to know why Potvin is always placed ahead of Robinson on All-time lists. I think Robinson gets discredited because he was "a part of the big three."

 

[brianscot]

I used the hockey summary project to look up how Montreal vs Isles fared in head to head matchups between 1976-77 (the height of Montreal's dynasty) until 1981-82 (the Isles dynasty in full bloom.)

This isn't offered as evidence towards anything, I was just curious about the matchup.

The teams met 23 times during the regular season during those 6 six seasons.

The record was 10-10-3.

Each team scored 72 goals.

As much as I admire the Islander dynasty and with no basis other than gut instinct, the Montreal franchise during the 70's were the best teams that I've seen in 40 years.

 

[edog37]

I lol'd


1976-77 Habs if IMO the best team ever.

60 wins - 8 loses - 12 ties


Lafleur: 136pts
Shutt: 105pts (60 goals)
Robinson: 85pts (+120, yeah u read it right)
Lapointe: 76pts
Lemaire: 75pts (34 goals)
Mahovlich: 62pts (47 assists)
Riseborough: 60pts (132PIM)
Cournoyer: 53pts (60 games)
Lambert: 52pts
Houle: 52pts
Tremblay: 46pts
Savard: 42pts (The Big 3 with Larry and Pointu was sick that season)
Jarvis: 38pts (One of the best def forward in the game)
Gainey: 33pts (The best defensive forward EVER)


+ Ken Dryden.


The depth is better than the Isles dynasty and the Pens of 1993 would get sweep in 4 games.

not a chance....please just stop....

 

[BenchBrawl]

Yeah, Montreal was probably better team but Islanders were better dynasaty. If it make sense.

disagree completely , Montreal was a better dynasty imo.Probably the best , even better than the 5 consecutive 50s one.

they were also the team with the most ''flavor''

the big 3 , flower , bowman , the defensive forwards a la gainey , dryden , the 70s , oh god...

 

[BenchBrawl]

I still would like to know why Potvin is always placed ahead of Robinson on All-time lists. I think Robinson gets discredited because he was "a part of the big three."

like I said , while Robinson was cornerstone in his way , Potvin was THE cornerstone of the isle dynasty , while Lafleur was definitely Montreal's one.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Lafleur Bossy is essentially a wash
Ditto with Potvin and Robinson
Trottier is much better than Shutt or Lemaire

But...

Montreal has Savard, Lapointe, Cournoyer, Gainey and most importantly Dryden. Tough to see how they lose here. Just an incredible team.

 

[Kant Think]

In my opinion, that't how I would rank the great hockey dynasties:

50s Habs
70s Habs
80s Isles
80s Oilers
50s Wings
60s Habs


I have to admit that I'm not quite sure about the 60s Habs and the 50s Wings, I wouldn't have any problem switching them.

I think that the 50s Habs are easilly the best Dynasty of the bunch though. Greatest number of superstars, arguably best defense, best goaltending, best depths, they only lose on best offense, but they are up there.

 

[JT Dutch*]

... I'd tend to favor the 80s Islanders over the 70s Canadiens, because the Isles didn't have the added advantage of not having to deal with the considerable talent in the WHA. The Habs played a watered-down league, and it showed.

I'd favor the 80s Oilers over both of them, incidentally.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

... I'd tend to favor the 80s Islanders over the 70s Canadiens, because the Isles didn't have the added advantage of not having to deal with the considerable talent in the WHA. The Habs played a watered-down league, and it showed.

I'd favor the 80s Oilers over both of them, incidentally.

The 80s were absolutely watered down. Tons of franchises that were brand new. Anyone remember Gretzky's 'Mickey Mouse' comments on the Devils?

 

[JT Dutch*]

The 80s were absolutely watered down. Tons of franchises that were brand new. Anyone remember Gretzky's 'Mickey Mouse' comments on the Devils?

... Tons??? You mean the four WHA teams? That was the only expansion made in the 80s, and those teams weren't "brand new" at all; they were pretty solid organizations with years of experience in pro hockey.

And not only that, the rest of the WHA's talent was dispersed throughout the existing NHL teams. There's no question in my mind the NHL was stronger as a league from 1979-88 than it was from 1975-79.

You mention the Devils - sure there are going to be bad teams in any era. But were the Devils as bad as the mid-70s Capitals or the K.C. Scouts or the Cleveland Barons? There was far more expansion in the 70s than in the 80s, and the Canadiens in particular took full advantage of those new teams - both on the ice and at the negotiating table. I don't blame them for it at all, because obviously the goal is to win, but let's not kid ourselves - the Canadiens were great, but they got fat off of a very watered-down NHL.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

... Tons??? You mean the four WHA teams? That was the only expansion made in the 80s, and those teams weren't "brand new" at all; they were pretty solid organizations with years of experience in pro hockey.

And not only that, the rest of the WHA's talent was dispersed throughout the existing NHL teams. There's no question in my mind the NHL was stronger as a league from 1979-88 than it was from 1975-79.

You mention the Devils - sure there are going to be bad teams in any era. But were the Devils as bad as the mid-70s Capitals or the K.C. Scouts or the Cleveland Barons? There was far more expansion in the 70s than in the 80s, and the Canadiens in particular took full advantage of those new teams - both on the ice and at the negotiating table. I don't blame them for it at all, because obviously the goal is to win, but let's not kid ourselves - the Canadiens were great, but they got fat off of a very watered-down NHL.

It's not just the expansion teams. There were just plain too many teams for the talent pool back then.

Go look at say 1982's rosters for Detroit, Toronto... might as well be AHL rosters. Then add in the Rockies, Whalers, Jets, Caps... Brutal, brutal teams. Just because the WHA wasn't around doesn't mean it was a harder league. Gretz would walk into Detroit and put up 6 points without blinking an eye. There's not the huge difference that you're saying there was.

 

[habsjunkie2*]

It's not just the expansion teams. There were just plain too many teams for the talent pool back then.

Go look at say 1982's rosters for Detroit, Toronto... might as well be AHL rosters. Then add in the Rockies, Whalers, Jets, Caps... Brutal, brutal teams. Just because the WHA wasn't around doesn't mean it was a harder league. Gretz would walk into Detroit and put up 6 points without blinking an eye. There's not the huge difference that you're saying there was.

79-88 wasn't nearly as watered down as it was from 75-79