Hockey's Biggest "What if"?

BadgerBruce

Registered User
Aug 8, 2013
1,558
2,195
What if . . .

R. Alan Eagleson had won his 1967 re-election bid to the Ontario legislature (Lakeshore riding)?

Some context:

In 1963, a 30 year-old Eagle secured the Federal Progressive Conservative nomination for the York West riding. He was defeated by Liberal candidate Leonard "Red" Kelly (yes, that Red Kelly).

Just a few months later in 1963, Eagleson secured the Provincial Progressive Conservative nomination for the new Lakeshore riding.

He won that election and became a newly-minted MPP.

Fast-forward to 1967 . . . it's re-election time and in what some consider the upset of the night, New Democrat candidate Pat Lawlor defeats Eagleson. Final tally: 9,135 to 7,026.

How would hockey history from 67-onwards have played out if Eagleson had won his 1967 re-election bid?

Did just over 2,000 provincial election voters in 1967 give the community of Etobicoke the MPP they wanted (Lawlor) and hockey history 25 years of corruption and duplicity (Eagleson)?

Had Eagleson won his '67 re-election bid, would he go on to found and control the NHLPA (Executive Dictator/Director from 67-91)? Would he still have expanded his player representative activities and become the super agent he did? Would he have become the first leader of Hockey Canada in 1968 who essentially created and ran the Summit Series and 5 Canada Cups?

I'm not saying that none of the above would have occurred, but career paths are sometimes strange animals . . . a sitting member on the government side of a provincial legislature with well-known ministerial and possibly even leadership aspirations might not have become a hockey czar.

My wife grew up in Etobicoke. I frequently ask her exactly what Pat Lawlor ever did for the Lakeshore riding. Shrug of the shoulders and a look that says, "Hell if I know."

And then I tell her what R. Alan Eagleson did to the world of hockey.
 
Last edited:

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,591
2,687
Northern Hemisphere
In 1993 Lemieux and pens got beaten by an underdog NYI. I'm sure Lemieux wasn't 100% due to lingering issues that year - but it's also the year he scored 160 points in 60 games, so it's not like he wasn't near the top of his ability. The pens lost fair and square, and it's not attributable to Lemieux's health.
Lemieux only played six of the seven games (although the Pens did win the game he missed) and was not near full health. He did not resemble the player who ripped it up that regular season or up to his 91 and 92 playoff form. I still think the Stevens injury sort of took the life out of Pittsburgh in that game seven. And Patrick Roy or no Patrick Roy if the Pens get by NYI they walk to the Cup over Montreal and L.A. in short order.

My Best-Carey
 

ponder719

Haute Couturier
Jul 2, 2013
6,492
8,460
Philadelphia, PA
The two I don't think I've seen here so far:

What if Larry Bertuzzi had ruled in favor of the Rangers in the Lindros Affair?

What if Peter Pocklington and Harold Ballard had traded cities (probably wasn't a real thing, but Pocklington talked about it in his book)?
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,241
14,861
Lemieux only played six of the seven games (although the Pens did win the game he missed) and was not near full health. He did not resemble the player who ripped it up that regular season or up to his 91 and 92 playoff form. I still think the Stevens injury sort of took the life out of Pittsburgh in that game seven. And Patrick Roy or no Patrick Roy if the Pens get by NYI they walk to the Cup over Montreal and L.A. in short order.

My Best-Carey

This just sounds like excuses and revisionist history.

I'm not saying Pittsburgh couldn't beat Montreal and LA - but the point is they also were supposed to beat the NYI and lost fair and square. You can't just go rewriting history every time there's an upset and say "yeah that upset was a fluke - if the better team gets thru they'd rip through the rest of the rounds easily".

I'm sure Lemieux wasn't 100% - but he rarely was 100% and he had just had a fantastic season and the rest of the team/roster was pretty great. They simply got beat - which happens in hockey, sometimes the better team loses.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,591
2,687
Northern Hemisphere
This just sounds like excuses and revisionist history.

I'm not saying Pittsburgh couldn't beat Montreal and LA - but the point is they also were supposed to beat the NYI and lost fair and square. You can't just go rewriting history every time there's an upset and say "yeah that upset was a fluke - if the better team gets thru they'd rip through the rest of the rounds easily".

I'm sure Lemieux wasn't 100% - but he rarely was 100% and he had just had a fantastic season and the rest of the team/roster was pretty great. They simply got beat - which happens in hockey, sometimes the better team loses.
Well, true enough. But it is a "what if" thread so a person should be allowed some measured speculation I'd think...

My Best-Carey
 

bobbyking

Registered User
May 29, 2018
1,860
874
Canada does produce the top talent in the world. Especially in the era that you guys are talking about.
Because there was weak competition that's why it was all Canadian . Explain why since the 05lockout the best regular and post season performances are mostly European?
 

MuzikMachine

Registered User
Nov 14, 2005
800
5
What if the New Jersey Devils don't win the 1995 Stanley Cup (or go on a significant run)?

IIRC, there were rumours they were going to relocate to Nashville (no Nashville Predators as we know them today) and the argument can be made that the the trap/dead puck era might either delayed or avoided.
 

blood gin

Registered User
Jan 17, 2017
4,174
2,203


Calgary the 2004 Stanley Cup Champs?


One thing I'll say, I rewatched bits and pieces of this game and I'm shocked at just how quiet the Saddledome is when the puck drops for the 2 OT period before St. Louis wins it. I mean you would never think they were a goal away.
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,671
18,505
Las Vegas
What if in 2013 Iginla doesn't veto the trade to the Bruins?

I think its extremely likely the Bruins win the 2013 Cup with Iginla giving him the Cup he so desperately wanted.

If that trade happened, it means the Bruins get Iginla, and Horton doesn't play injured (an Iginla hit in the ECF injured his shoulder)

a healthy Horton and Iginla are more than enough to change the result of the 2013 Cup Finals. As it is, that was a coin flip series:

Game 1: 4-3 CHI win 3OT
Game 2: 2-1 BOS win OT
Game 3: 2-0 BOS win
Game 4: 6-5 CHI win OT
Game 5: 3-1 CHI win, had an empty netter
Game 6: 3-2 CHI win
 

goeb

Registered User
Oct 24, 2013
355
203
Grand Rapids, Michigan
What if Columbus scores in OT of game 3 of their series against Washington?...

I don't think the Caps come back from it but never know.

What if Holtby doesn't absolutely rob Tuch in Game 2 of the finals?

Game probably goes to OT and who knows what happens there. Knights could've been up 2-0 going into Washington.
 

c9777666

Registered User
Aug 31, 2016
19,892
5,875
What if the Red Wings lose game 7 in 2009 vs. Anaheim?

Does PIT still win the '09 Cup against ANA/CHI?
 

crobro

Registered User
Aug 8, 2008
3,873
720
Growing up a Ranger fan,
What if Bobby Orr had healthy knees for a full career?

Or What if Bobby Orr didn’t play in the 1976 Canada cup and completely kill his knees, would he have played maybe 3-4 full seasons with the Black Hawks?
 

WingsFan95

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
3,508
269
Kanata
The biggest what if for me has include ramifications on the business side of the league. Gretzky getting traded to Los Angeles is probably the most direct impact scenario for long-term consequences. Obviously it seems to us now the Vancouver deal wasn't too serious and you throw in Gretzky's wife and the NHL not having a US network contract but that doesn't mean this can't apply to a what if scenario.

I don't think Pocklington can keep Gretzky so he's going but outside of Vancouver there was also Philadelphia, Detroit and New York. Any of those other landing spots likely means we don't have several of the teams we have now. I'd cross Anaheim, San Jose, Atlanta, Phoenix and Tampa off the list immediately. I think Miami has that vacationer aspect and the NBA had expanded into Florida, Dallas and Nashville still get teams but with Nashville it might well be relocation. No idea about Vegas, too far out.

In terms of the league results, harder to say. Vancouver with Bure and Gretz have a better shot of winning the Cup or at least seriously contending against others teams in the West and getting to the Final. Gretzky vs. Lemieux is more likely to happen. The Rangers might land Gretzky in 95 or 96 and win the Cup with him or maybe the curse is still in effect. The league is certainly in a far different place.

It is not unreasonable to think that the Orr/Gretzky debate is considered truly neck and neck if Orr has a full career. Youre looking at:

- at least 1,500 points
- 3-6 Harts
- 12-15 Norris
- 2-5 Ross
- 2-4 Cups (Boston for sure beats Montreal in 78 and 79 with him)
- 2-4 Smythe
- 12-15 AS-1

Orr was basically robbed of 2 Hart as it were. I think just 6 more full seasons by Orr with a 3rd ring likely stamps him as the GOAT with Gretzky being the greatest forward.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,855
1,788
Because there was weak competition that's why it was all Canadian . Explain why since the 05lockout the best regular and post season performances are mostly European?

Well, first off, Europe is not a country. Secondly, I agree that a lot of the best regular season and post season performers have been non-Canadian since the lockout, but I'd still say the best players overall have been Crosby and McDavid.
 

blood gin

Registered User
Jan 17, 2017
4,174
2,203
What if the New Jersey Devils don't win the 1995 Stanley Cup (or go on a significant run)?

IIRC, there were rumours they were going to relocate to Nashville (no Nashville Predators as we know them today) and the argument can be made that the the trap/dead puck era might either delayed or avoided.

They wouldn't have moved even if they were eliminated in the 1st round. McMullen was just sabre rattling for better terms at Brendan Byrne Arena. Nashville rolled out the red carpet for him but he was never interested in leaving.

The dead puck era maybe would've been delayed slightly. But if you look at how big goalie equipment was getting, the butterfly style, and the refs gradually letting more clutch and grab play persist in the early 90's, a more defensive game was always in the cards. Plus the Panthers were also trapping (from their inceptions really) and they were a competitive club off the bat. People took notice. They were in the finals their 3rd season using the trap.
 

AvsWraith

Registered User
Jan 21, 2010
23,031
13,724
Colorado
In the 03-04 season...

What if:

- Karyia, Selanne, and Forsberg are 100% healthy
- Roy didn't retire the year before
- Tony Granato is not the coach
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad