Montreal Canadiens vs. New York Yankees up until 1995

Montreal Canadiens vs. New York Yankees up until 1995


  • Total voters
    20

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Simple question, more complicated and hard answer I would presume. Why 1995? Because this was the first time in 14 years the Yankees made the playoffs and after 1995 they had a dynasty, the last one in baseball, but it was a great one with great teams. Since that dynasty another championship and other close calls and they have always been contenders. The Canadiens, not at all. 1995 they trade Roy and the mystique of the Canadiens is forever gone. Since then, mostly mediocrity.

But what about up until 1995?

Things to factor in are championships at this point. 24 for Montreal, 21 for Yankees. Not to mention players, Hall of Famers, reverence from the rest of the league, dynasties (both teams have multiple dynasties), dominance of individual teams, etc.

Both franchises have what most consider the best single season team of all-time. Montreal in 1977 and New York in 1927. I consider Ruth the best player of all-time so the Yankees have that, while Montreal doesn't. Both teams have at least three guys in the top 10 of all-time though. The Yankees have a bit more of a lull than the Habs did. After 1964 it was no man's land for a decade and even in parts of the 1980s they were sometimes a reckless team. Montreal had scarce Cups after 1979 but even so were better in the 1980s than the Yankees.

The Yankees would have the better dynasty though. The DiMaggio years starting in 1936 were probably a better run than the 1950s Habs and arguably the 1970s Habs.

But it's close, so call it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wings4Life

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,578
18,344
Las Vegas
with your 1995 cut off, I'd add the Boston Celtics to the mix.

the NBA started in 1946. By 1995, the Celtics had won 16 titles in those 50 years. in other words, 32.6% of all championships in the history of the league were won by the Celtics

They had a run of 8 consecutive championships and 11 out of 13.

The greatest coach and GM in basketball history in Red Auerbach, who won 9 titles as the Celtics coach and GM, and won another 7 purely as a GM after retiring from coaching.

37 Celtics players are in the hall of fame.

but i digress....as a Boston fan I had to do that because you're making me pick between Satan and Satan

I'd give the slightest of edges to for 1 main reason.

To reach the World Series, the Yankees had to be the best team in their league for the entire season. Up until the 1968, baseball playoffs only consisted of the World Series, where the best team from the AL played the best from the NL.
 

WJCJ

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
1,641
686
Simple question, more complicated and hard answer I would presume. Why 1995? Because this was the first time in 14 years the Yankees made the playoffs and after 1995 they had a dynasty, the last one in baseball, but it was a great one with great teams. Since that dynasty another championship and other close calls and they have always been contenders. The Canadiens, not at all. 1995 they trade Roy and the mystique of the Canadiens is forever gone. Since then, mostly mediocrity.

But what about up until 1995?

Things to factor in are championships at this point. 24 for Montreal, 21 for Yankees. Not to mention players, Hall of Famers, reverence from the rest of the league, dynasties (both teams have multiple dynasties), dominance of individual teams, etc.

Honestly this just seems like a way to make the Canadiens have more championships. The Yankees have 25 and the Canadiens 24. The Canadiens also won most of those in a 6 team league while the least the Yankees had to go up against was 16. Just going by the odds, it was much easier to win in the NHL than Major League Baseball.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Honestly this just seems like a way to make the Canadiens have more championships. The Yankees have 25 and the Canadiens 24. The Canadiens also won most of those in a 6 team league while the least the Yankees had to go up against was 16. Just going by the odds, it was much easier to win in the NHL than Major League Baseball.

The reason there was the 1995 cut off is because it is at least something we need to think about to compare. If I asked you which franchise all-time is more successful including the last 23 years there is no chance for the Canadiens anymore. The Yankees have won 5 World Series since then, been in it other times and have been perennial contenders even when they haven't won. It isn't fair and would be a landslide.

1995 is just before the Yankees exploded again and just around the time the Habs collapsed. So it is a pretty good comparison to make. It isn't just a lock cinch for either side.
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,578
18,344
Las Vegas
The reason there was the 1995 cut off is because it is at least something we need to think about to compare. If I asked you which franchise all-time is more successful including the last 23 years there is no chance for the Canadiens anymore. The Yankees have won 5 World Series since then, been in it other times and have been perennial contenders even when they haven't won. It isn't fair and would be a landslide.

1995 is just before the Yankees exploded again and just around the time the Habs collapsed. So it is a pretty good comparison to make. It isn't just a lock cinch for either side.

so you are eliminating 2+ decades of time to make the Canadiens look better.

Just because they've sucked for 25 years, doesn't mean those 25 years didnt exist...especially since the Yankees have sustained their success
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
so you are eliminating 2+ decades of time to make the Canadiens look better.
Dude, it's pretty obvious (except to you) why he made 1995 the cut-off point. It's not to "make the Canadiens look better"; it's to focus on respective periods when each franchise was in its pomp. As Phil already explained, there's no point in discussing it with the past 23 years included, as Montreal has fallen out of contention vs. The Yankees.
Just because they've sucked for 25 years, doesn't mean those 25 years didnt exist...especially since the Yankees have sustained their success
Actually, in the first paragraph of the first post, Phil specifically talked about the past 25 years, so again he is not saying "those 25 years didn't exist". I get that you're a sensitive Bruins' fan but put down the Kool-Aid and please be reasonable.

Now that we've gotten BigBadBruins up to speed with the rest of us, I'll address Phil's excellent thread:

Yes, they're definitely comparable up to the mid-1990s. The Yankees first became champs and a really high-profile team (in fact, the higher profile New York team) from around the early-1920s. They were almost always in contention from then until the early/mid-1960s, but then kind of nose-dived badly for quite a while, despite the '77 and '78 victories.

Montreal won the Cup in '30 and '31, but then sort-of sucked until the Elmer Lach/Maurice Richard era late in World War II. From then until 1979 they won 18 championships in 36 seasons; i.e. they won 50% of the Stanley Cups for a nearly 40-year period. In the 80s, they were (mostly) quite good, too, and of course more Cups in '86 and '93.

I think a good case can be made that the Habs pip the Yanks up to 1995.
 

frontsfan2005

Registered User
Mar 26, 2006
789
260
Ontario, Canada
Even in 1995, I think the Yankees have the edge over the Canadiens, although it would be close.

While the Canadiens had more championships, it is much easier to win when there is only 6 teams, compared to 16 in MLB. In a historical sense, the Yankees run of making the World Series 32 times in a 57 year span (1921-1978) is more impressive than anything the Canadiens did. From 1923-1962, the Yankees won 20 out of 39 World Series. If you expand it to from 1921-1964, the Yankees played in 29 World Series in a 43 year span. Keep in mind, to even qualify for the World Series, the Yankees had to have the best record in the American League, as there was no playoffs.

By 1995, the Yankees showed signs that they were back. Even throughout the 80s, the team averaged close to 90 wins per season, despite not making the playoffs since 1981, until tearing it down in 1989 and doing a proper rebuild. The Yankees were back to being a top team in 1993 and were World Series contenders once again in 1994.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
While the Canadiens had more championships, it is much easier to win when there is only 6 teams, compared to 16 in MLB.
Well yeah, but keep in mind there were only 6 teams up to 1967. After that, Montreal won 11 more Stanley Cups when there were between 12 and 21 teams.
 

Kyle McMahon

Registered User
May 10, 2006
13,301
4,352
Even in 1995, I think the Yankees have the edge over the Canadiens, although it would be close.

While the Canadiens had more championships, it is much easier to win when there is only 6 teams, compared to 16 in MLB. In a historical sense, the Yankees run of making the World Series 32 times in a 57 year span (1921-1978) is more impressive than anything the Canadiens did. From 1923-1962, the Yankees won 20 out of 39 World Series. If you expand it to from 1921-1964, the Yankees played in 29 World Series in a 43 year span. Keep in mind, to even qualify for the World Series, the Yankees had to have the best record in the American League, as there was no playoffs.

By 1995, the Yankees showed signs that they were back. Even throughout the 80s, the team averaged close to 90 wins per season, despite not making the playoffs since 1981, until tearing it down in 1989 and doing a proper rebuild. The Yankees were back to being a top team in 1993 and were World Series contenders once again in 1994.

This is why I go with the Yankees in this comparison. That's just an insane run of dominance. If you shrink the window to their best 26-year span, they win 16 World Series and 20 pennants. 20! With no playoffs in this era, you had to basically be the best/co-best team in baseball just to reach the WS.

I think a Stanley Cup is equivalent to a WS. You can claim smaller league, but in reality baseball just had more also-rans than the NHL most years. However, a pennant holds more weight for me than a SC Finals appearance. A .500 team could get hot for a week and appear in the SC Final, but you had to win your league over the course of 154 games to take the pennant.

Montreal from 1956-1979 is a ludicrous run of success...but the Yankees managed to keep it up for nearly twice as long during their Ruth-through-Mantle golden age. Pretty much any incredible Habs span has a Yankees span that equals or exceeds it.
 

Its a Trap

Yes I’m still here to piss you off
I’d say the Yankees are more impressive considering they competed against more teams and for the majority of the time in baseball if you didn’t win your league you didn’t get a chance for the title and even when it changed it was the best two from your league facing off before the World Series. Just a smaller margin for error in baseball thus why i vote Yankees.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,668
16,394
I think I have to give the Yankees the edge, because they didn't have anything close to the awful 32-33/41-42 stretch.
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
30,844
13,628
I'm not sure if this is the case for the Yankees, but one thing Montreal had going for it in the "intangible" department (if such a thing can exist for sports teams) is that many of their legendary players were local talent.On top of that, it had a "french underdog" underlying narrative, which was sociologically relevant.

I mean many doctoral thesis were written about the importance of the Montreal Canadiens for francophones in Quebec.It was more than a hockey team.

Not saying the Yankess don't have their own "intangibles", I don't know enough.
 

LightningStorm

Lightning/Mets/Vikings
Dec 19, 2008
3,020
2,008
Pacific NW, USA
Great observation Phil about these 2 franchises in 1995, with the Yanks ending their playoff drought and the Habs trading Roy. Another thing to add is in 1996, the Montreal forum closing was another death blow to the Habs mystique, while the Yanks started a dynasty later that year. Plus one correction, the Yankees had 22 titles in 1995, adding 5 more (96, 98, 99, 00, 09) afterwards to their 27.

All in all I'd go with the Yankees, for the reason others have pointed out that winning a pennant is tougher than making it to the SCF. But they truly were neck and neck in 1995, and a good case could be made for the Habs.

What makes 1995 an interesting year of choice is at the time, the Dallas Cowboys were the most legendary NFL franchise, and won their then record 5th Super Bowl (tied with the 49ers) that season. But this was around the time Jerry Jones started micromanaging the team, and they've never been the same in the 20+ years since. Quite interesting how in 1995, the Habs lost their mystique and the Cowboys began losing it, while the Yankees were on the doorstep for their next dynasty.
 

frontsfan2005

Registered User
Mar 26, 2006
789
260
Ontario, Canada
I think I have to give the Yankees the edge, because they didn't have anything close to the awful 32-33/41-42 stretch.

To be fair, the Highlanders/Yankees franchise was mostly bad from 1903-1919. They had a few seasons where they finished 2nd in the AL (closest to winning the pennant in the pre-Babe Ruth era was in 1904, finishing 1.5 games out of first), however, the team also had a couple of 100+ loss seasons and were mostly among the bottom dwellers until 1919.

This is why I go with the Yankees in this comparison. That's just an insane run of dominance. If you shrink the window to their best 26-year span, they win 16 World Series and 20 pennants. 20! With no playoffs in this era, you had to basically be the best/co-best team in baseball just to reach the WS.

If you shrink it down to 1949-1964, the Yankees failed to win the AL Pennant twice. They qualified for 14 out of 16 World Series. In one of their missed seasons, the team had a 103-51 record (1954), which was their only 100+ win season of the 1950s.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Another thing to note, both teams had players with legendary records that lasted the same amount of time. Rocket's 50-in-50 in 1945 lasted 36 years until 1981. Roger Maris' 61 home runs lasted 37 years until 1998. To this day while it is not a major league record anymore it still remains an American League record.

It was mentioned that the Habs had a bit more of a "cultural" feel to their team. Meaning that the Habs were thought to have players with more local flavour. This is true as there were more French guys on the Habs than New Yorkers on the Yankees. However, even the players that played on the Yankees developed a "New York" feel to them. Ruth was from Baltimore but fit in with the Big Apple well. Mantle was from Oklahoma yet fit in perfectly at the Copacabana after every game. Berra was from St. Louis, DiMaggio was a Californian, Maris was from North Dakota. Yet you still think of them as "New Yorkers".

However, lots of Yankees were local boys. Jeter, Rizzuto, A-Rod, Ford, Gehrig were all native New Yorkers or in Jeter's case a Jersey boy, but like Frank Sinatra you can pretty much give New York to him that way. So while you associate Montreal with local French players, there are a lot of legendary Yanks too that are local.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
I'm a Habs fan through and through, and I have a basic dislike for the Yankees. Up to your cut-off of 1995, it's very close. The Habs may have more championships, but as has been stated above, a lot of them were won in a six team league. And the two teams are so much more than just their win/loss records and championship counts.

If I'm being very impartial, I'd still have to give it to the Yankees. I'm not from North America, though I came to Canada at a very young age. What I do know is that they know nothing about hockey and the NHL in many parts of the world, whereas the Yankees are certainly a little more "world famous" if you will. This is why I'd grudgingly have to give the edge to the Yankees. Even up to a cut-off of 1995, the Yankees are about equal to the Habs in league success, but in a sport that is more recognized throughout the world.
 
Last edited:

c9777666

Registered User
Aug 31, 2016
19,892
5,875
I want to say the Habs because it never seemed like the Yankees had a true AL foil compared with Montreal's legendary rivalries with THREE Original Six teams (Boston, Detroit, Toronto).
 

LightningStorm

Lightning/Mets/Vikings
Dec 19, 2008
3,020
2,008
Pacific NW, USA
I want to say the Habs because it never seemed like the Yankees had a true AL foil compared with Montreal's legendary rivalries with THREE Original Six teams (Boston, Detroit, Toronto).
This is a great point that I never thought of. In the O6 era, the Leafs and Habs were neck in neck in cups, and after that, the Bruins continued to be a real good challenger during the 70's and 80's. Meanwhile, the Red Sox, being the Yankees biggest rival, have arguably the most famous drought in sports history (only the Cubs one has a case for being bigger).
 

Newsworthy

Registered User
Jan 28, 2018
4,253
982
USA
Dude, it's pretty obvious (except to you) why he made 1995 the cut-off point. It's not to "make the Canadiens look better"; it's to focus on respective periods when each franchise was in its pomp. As Phil already explained, there's no point in discussing it with the past 23 years included, as Montreal has fallen out of contention vs. The Yankees.

Actually, in the first paragraph of the first post, Phil specifically talked about the past 25 years, so again he is not saying "those 25 years didn't exist". I get that you're a sensitive Bruins' fan but put down the Kool-Aid and please be reasonable.

Now that we've gotten BigBadBruins up to speed with the rest of us, I'll address Phil's excellent thread:

Yes, they're definitely comparable up to the mid-1990s. The Yankees first became champs and a really high-profile team (in fact, the higher profile New York team) from around the early-1920s. They were almost always in contention from then until the early/mid-1960s, but then kind of nose-dived badly for quite a while, despite the '77 and '78 victories.

Montreal won the Cup in '30 and '31, but then sort-of sucked until the Elmer Lach/Maurice Richard era late in World War II. From then until 1979 they won 18 championships in 36 seasons; i.e. they won 50% of the Stanley Cups for a nearly 40-year period. In the 80s, they were (mostly) quite good, too, and of course more Cups in '86 and '93.

I think a good case can be made that the Habs pip the Yanks up to 1995.
Thing is Montreal was never truly in contention when you consider the six team league.
 

Newsworthy

Registered User
Jan 28, 2018
4,253
982
USA
I'm not sure if this is the case for the Yankees, but one thing Montreal had going for it in the "intangible" department (if such a thing can exist for sports teams) is that many of their legendary players were local talent.On top of that, it had a "french underdog" underlying narrative, which was sociologically relevant.

I mean many doctoral thesis were written about the importance of the Montreal Canadiens for francophones in Quebec.It was more than a hockey team.

Not saying the Yankess don't have their own "intangibles", I don't know enough.
I'm no Yankee fan but they have a rich history.

The game of Baseball was invented in NY. But on the sociological level I would say the Brooklyn Dodgers signing of Jackie Robinson was more relevant than anything the Yankees could ever compete with.
Yankee stadium was known as the "House that Ruth Built".
Ruth is the greatest play ever.
Several major movies were made about Ruth and Gehrig. Mantle and Mays are the inspiration for Fogerty's song "Centerfield"
George Steinbrenner was a legendary and Hall of Fame owner. Yogi Berra has 10 rings.
Don Larsen only pitcher ever to throw a perfect game in the World Series.

They have won the most WS in MLB history and the next team isn't anywhere close.
 

PenguinSpeed

Registered User
Oct 4, 2017
1,799
898
with your 1995 cut off, I'd add the Boston Celtics to the mix.

the NBA started in 1946. By 1995, the Celtics had won 16 titles in those 50 years. in other words, 32.6% of all championships in the history of the league were won by the Celtics

They had a run of 8 consecutive championships and 11 out of 13.

The greatest coach and GM in basketball history in Red Auerbach, who won 9 titles as the Celtics coach and GM, and won another 7 purely as a GM after retiring from coaching.

37 Celtics players are in the hall of fame.

but i digress....as a Boston fan I had to do that because you're making me pick between Satan and Satan

I'd give the slightest of edges to for 1 main reason.

To reach the World Series, the Yankees had to be the best team in their league for the entire season. Up until the 1968, baseball playoffs only consisted of the World Series, where the best team from the AL played the best from the NL.


-Why stop there?

-Oklahoma State won 30 Championships in Wrestling in 67 years up to 1995. They also lost in the National Title game 11 more times. So in 67 years, Ok State played for the National Title in 41 of them, and won 30. Oklahoma State's dominance blows the doors off Boston, the Habs, and the Yankees.
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,578
18,344
Las Vegas
-Why stop there?

-Oklahoma State won 30 Championships in Wrestling in 67 years up to 1995. They also lost in the National Title game 11 more times. So in 67 years, Ok State played for the National Title in 41 of them, and won 30. Oklahoma State's dominance blows the doors off Boston, the Habs, and the Yankees.

because no one cares about college wrestling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thenameless

Nerowoy nora tolad

Registered User
May 9, 2018
1,403
652
Gladstone, Australia
Im surprised the consensus is so heavily Yankees on this one. IMO Id argue its clearly Canadiens pre 1995, and maaaaybe even Canadiens when you include the post 1995 period as well.

First off, Im assuming the goal of this exercise is ranking which of the two teams has the most impressive performances/results/whatever up until 1995. Im defining it as who built the most impressive team(s) that accomplished the most impressive things over that period. The two points that I think make what the Canadiens accomplished over that span far more impressive (harder to do as a GM, uncommon to see in sports, far less likely to ever see happen in the sport again, etc, etc, etc) are:

-The Canadiens built a team (same specific group of players over 7-8 years or so) that is without question the best ever assembled in their sport, and probably the best ever assembled in any sport. That would be the 70s Canadiens, who were ahead of the pack to an extent never seen before or since. I did some digging through year by year SRS numbers on baseball-reference, and I can tell you that while the Yankees have had a handful of teams that pulled very far ahead of the pack for a single season, none of those teams sustained it for long enough to even be mentioned in the same breath as the late 70s Canadiens.

-Hockey is a harder sport to build great teams in, and no, Im not just referring to anything related to salaries, as the Yankees success has little to do with that before the reserve clause was broken back in the 70s. Baseball is a much simpler sport when it comes to diagnosing what makes a team win or lose because most of what a player has to do to make his team win can be easily measured at the plate and/or mound. If you put a 0.400 hitter on the Jays tommorow, the team would instantly be much better, and it would show very clearly in the W-L column. By contrast, you could have put prime Lafleur on last years Canadiens, and it wouldnt have helped a damn because its a poorly constructed team at its core. When you compare building dynasties across the two sports, building one in hockey is a lot harder because its so much easier for a short run of bad luck to torpedo things (for every 1982 Islanders team coming through in the clutch, theres an 86' Oilers team losing to a team they probably should have beaten because of a shitty bounce), and the concept of chemistry between players is really important, while also being f***ing impossible to measure.

I can do a post expanding on my points after work if anyone is interested.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
I want to say the Habs because it never seemed like the Yankees had a true AL foil compared with Montreal's legendary rivalries with THREE Original Six teams (Boston, Detroit, Toronto).

The Red Sox? It all started with the trade that sent Ruth to New York.

Besides, without the Yankees the Red Sox surely have some World Series in their pocket. 1977 and 1978 come to mind as losing the division at the expense of the Yanks. 1949 comes to mind. Then of course the post 1995 meetings, but we aren't counting that. The Yanks would have had the Brooklyn Dodgers as a more formidable foe.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->