Ranking the 90s Expansion Teams

Maelmoor

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 20, 2004
6,463
1,748
Stockholm, Sweden
Tough one!

Both Ottawa and San Jose are solid organizations who have done well and got strong fanbases. However, in the end it's about winning the cup, so can't shut your eyes for that fact.

I rank Anaheim first cause they have been more consistent. Flordia is the only team which is easy to rank..

After much though I placed Ottawa above San Jose considering the playoffs..

1. Anaheim
2. Tampa
3. Ottawa
4. San Jose
5. Florida
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Since when does one player make a line?

Ottawa's .600+ seasons and the 50+ point forwards in those:

2002-03: Hossa (80), Alfredsson (78), White (60), Havlat (59), Bonk (54) - one line + Alfredsson + overachieving White -> basically one-line team

2005-06: Heatley (103), Alfredsson (103), Spezza (90), Schaefer (50) -> prototypical one-line team

2000-01: Yashin (88), Hossa (75), McEachern (72), Alfredsson (70), Bonk (59) -> not a one-line team, but not from the Pizza line era when they were heavily overrated

2006-07: Heatley (105), Spezza (87), Alfredsson (87) -> another prototypical one-line team

1998-99: Yashin (94), McEachern (56), Dackell (50) -> one-MAN team even

2003-04: Hossa (82), Alfredsson (80), Havlat (68), Spezza (55) -> almost one-line team

The Pizza line era Sens, which saw the most Ottawa hype, were a pure one-line team.

If a team spreads out their best scorers on different lines, they aren't a one line team. Period.

1998-99: Alfredsson was hurt for much of the season, but when Alfredsson is on a second line you aren't a one line team. Arvedson-Bonk-Hossa was an excellent checking line, scoring at a very good rate considering they were a third line and didn't get any PP time.

2000-01: Obviously not a one line team.

2002-03 and 2003-04: Obviously not a one line team. The Hossa-Bonk line. The Alfredsson-White line. And Martin Havlat on a third line. Havlat was a superb even strength scorer at this time, playing against other teams depth and chewing them up. He couldn't crack the 1st PP unit with Hossa and Alfredsson ahead of him. (Spezza was on the 3/4 line and PP). If you call that a one line team, 95% of teams are one line teams.

2005-06: Again, Havlat was on a depth line, although he was injured for much of the regular season. And Alfredsson was playing with Brian Smolinski on the second line for most of the playoffs (and a substantial part of the regular season, as well). So in the playoffs, they had a Spezza-Heatley line, an Alfredsson line, and a Havlat line. They spread out their scoring.

2006-07: You could call this a one line team. They did have a lot of good depth forwards like Fisher, Vermette, Comrie, Kelly, etc. They weren't a one line team like the LA Kings in the 1980s.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Ottawa in 2002-03 was definitely not a one-line team. In fact, they had arguably the deepest group of forwards in the league. Significantly deeper group of forwards than the Stanley Cup winner Devils (who had better defensemen and goaltending).
 

MadArcand

Whaletarded
Dec 19, 2006
5,872
411
Seat of the Empire
^^ we obviously have a very different definition of one-line team. To me, if a team can only field one top-6 caliber line, it's a one-line team. Having a lone top-6 caliber player with two scrubs doesn't make a real top-6 line (Jagr with Kip Miller and Jan Hrdina, for example).

Anyway, my point was that:

- Anaheim achieved more in postseason and was more consistent, never coming close to the lows of Ottawa, San Jose and Tampa Bay (Anaheim also has the best all-time winning % of the four)

- the Ottawa team that was consistently billed as a contender was overhyped, same as Canucks. The forward corps were shallow, and goaltending was often iffy too. You may disagree, but in that case, Ottawa is even worse choking team than Sharks.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
^^ we obviously have a very different definition of one-line team. To me, if a team can only field one top-6 caliber line, it's a one-line team. Having a lone top-6 caliber player with two scrubs doesn't make a real top-6 line (Jagr with Kip Miller and Jan Hrdina, for example).

Anyway, my point was that:

- Anaheim achieved more in postseason and was more consistent, never coming close to the lows of Ottawa, San Jose and Tampa Bay (Anaheim also has the best all-time winning % of the four)

- the Ottawa team that was consistently billed as a contender was overhyped, same as Canucks. The forward corps were shallow, and goaltending was often iffy too. You may disagree, but in that case, Ottawa is even worse choking team than Sharks.

I don't know about "even worse," but they were generally considered the "biggest chokers" of the early 00s.
 

MadArcand

Whaletarded
Dec 19, 2006
5,872
411
Seat of the Empire
Ottawa in 2002-03 was definitely not a one-line team. In fact, they had arguably the deepest group of forwards in the league. Significantly deeper group of forwards than the Stanley Cup winner Devils (who had better defensemen and goaltending).
You're kidding, right?

Top-6 players: Hossa, Alfredsson, Havlat, Bonk
2nd/3rd liner: White
3rd line checkers: Fisher, Arvedson
4th liners: Van Allen, Schaefer, Hull, Neal, Schastlivy
Teenager rookie: Spezza

Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, Dallas or St.Louis forwards were miles better.
 

jkrx

Registered User
Feb 4, 2010
4,337
21
You're kidding, right?

Top-6 players: Hossa, Alfredsson, Havlat, Bonk
2nd/3rd liner: White
3rd line checkers: Fisher, Arvedson
4th liners: Van Allen, Schaefer, Hull, Neal, Schastlivy
Teenager rookie: Spezza

Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, Dallas or St.Louis forwards were miles better.

...and the 03 ducks? With your definition of a one-line team the ducks cup winner is a one line team basically.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
You're kidding, right?

Top-6 players: Hossa, Alfredsson, Havlat, Bonk
2nd/3rd liner: White
3rd line checkers: Fisher, Arvedson
4th liners: Van Allen, Schaefer, Hull, Neal, Schastlivy
Teenager rookie: Spezza

Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, Dallas or St.Louis forwards were miles better.

IMO, Detroit is the only one on that list that rivaled Ottawa in terms of forward depth at the time, and many of their stars were on their way out.

Colorado had better players at the top (Sakic, Forsberg, Drury, Hejduk, Tanguay), but their lower lines were a mess and Sakic was injured much of the season. Philadelphia lacked the top talent of Ottawa. Don't remember the Dallas and St. Louis lineups that well, but I know that Dallas basically traded their 2nd line to NJ before the 2003 playoffs (in exchange for Arnott and basically finished McKay).

Ottawa won the President's Trophy in 2002-03, scoring only 6 fewer goals than 1st place Detroit.
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
You're kidding, right?

Top-6 players: Hossa, Alfredsson, Havlat, Bonk
2nd/3rd liner: White
3rd line checkers: Fisher, Arvedson
4th liners: Van Allen, Schaefer, Hull, Neal, Schastlivy
Teenager rookie: Spezza

Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, Dallas or St.Louis forwards were miles better.

Fisher and Arvedson were very good third line checkers. Peter Schaefer was also definitely better than fourth line quality. If he played on Ottawa's fourth line, that was a credit to their depth.

And seriously, the Philadelphia team that had no forwards with 60+ points, and lost to Ottawa in the playoffs had forwards that were miles better? I don't agree that any of those forward groups were miles better, but the idea that Philadelphia's forwards were better is bizarre.

Ottawa had an excellent, deep lineup of fast forwards who were strong defensively and were the second highest scoring forward group in the league. Their RW's were just awesome - Hossa and Alfredsson were great two-way players and among the very best forwards in the league, and nobody else in the league had a player like Havlat on the third line. If you're arguing that teams like St Louis and Philadelphia had better forwards, you're just looking at the names.
 

MadArcand

Whaletarded
Dec 19, 2006
5,872
411
Seat of the Empire
IMO, Detroit is the only one on that list that rivaled Ottawa in terms of forward depth at the time, and many of their stars were on their way out.

Colorado had better players at the top (Sakic, Forsberg, Drury, Hejduk, Tanguay), but their lower lines were a mess and Sakic was injured much of the season. Philadelphia lacked the top talent of Ottawa. Don't remember the Dallas and St. Louis lineups that well, but I know that Dallas basically traded their 2nd line to NJ before the 2003 playoffs (in exchange for Arnott and basically finished McKay).

Ottawa won the President's Trophy in 2002-03, scoring only 6 fewer goals than 1st place Detroit.
Philadelphia lacked the top talent of Ottawa? Roenick, Recchi, Primeau, LeClair, Gagne, Williams, Handzus, adding Amonte and Kapanen?

St. Louis had better top end with Demitra, Tkachuk, Stillman, Weight and Mellanby, and some solid bottom 6 players like Drake, Rucinsky or Podein.

Dallas had Modano, Guerin, Lehtinen, Arnott, Morrow, Young, Turgeon... and players like Dahlen, Kapanen, Malhotra, Claude Lemieux or Muller in bottom 6.

Colorado's bottom 6 had Keane, McAmmond, Hinote, Shantz and Battaglia, not much worse than Ottawa.
 

jkrx

Registered User
Feb 4, 2010
4,337
21
Philadelphia lacked the top talent of Ottawa? Roenick, Recchi, Primeau, LeClair, Gagne, Williams, Handzus, adding Amonte and Kapanen?

St. Louis had better top end with Demitra, Tkachuk, Stillman, Weight and Mellanby, and some solid bottom 6 players like Drake, Rucinsky or Podein.

Dallas had Modano, Guerin, Lehtinen, Arnott, Morrow, Young, Turgeon... and players like Dahlen, Kapanen, Malhotra, Claude Lemieux or Muller in bottom 6.

Colorado's bottom 6 had Keane, McAmmond, Hinote, Shantz and Battaglia, not much worse than Ottawa.

Roenick, Williams, Handzus and Amonte? Mellanby?
 

MadArcand

Whaletarded
Dec 19, 2006
5,872
411
Seat of the Empire
Fisher and Arvedson were very good third line checkers. Peter Schaefer was also definitely better than fourth line quality. If he played on Ottawa's fourth line, that was a credit to their depth.

And seriously, the Philadelphia team that had no forwards with 60+ points, and lost to Ottawa in the playoffs had forwards that were miles better? I don't agree that any of those forward groups were miles better, but the idea that Philadelphia's forwards were better is bizarre.

Ottawa had an excellent, deep lineup of fast forwards who were strong defensively and were the second highest scoring forward group in the league. Their RW's were just awesome - Hossa and Alfredsson were great two-way players and among the very best forwards in the league, and nobody else in the league had a player like Havlat on the third line. If you're arguing that teams like St Louis and Philadelphia had better forwards, you're just looking at the names.
I find the notion that forward quality & depth = more goals scored quite bizarre. Team system/playing style, offense from D-men, injuries etc. all factor into overall offense.

The argument was that Ottawa had superior depth.

Hell, even if we go just by points scored and not actual forward skill level:

Ottawa forwards with pts:
80+ - 1
70+ - 2
60+ - 3
50+ - 5
40+ - 5
30+ - 8

Detroit had:
80+ - 1
70+ - 2
60+ - 3
50+ - 4
40+ - 7
30+ - 10

Dallas had:
80+ - 1
70+ - 1
60+ - 1
50+ - 3
40+ - 8
30+ - 10

St. Louis had:
90+ - 1
80+ - 1
70+ - 1
60+ - 3
50+ - 5
40+ - 6
30+ - 9

Tampa comes close (but beats Ottawa in top talent):
70+ - 4
60+ - 4
50+ - 4
40+ - 5
30+ - 7

Lowly Caps actually beat Ottawa's depth:
70+ - 1
60+ - 2
50+ - 5
40+ - 5
30+ - 9

And so do Oilers:
60+ - 2
50+ - 5
40+ - 5
30+ - 9

Now, I'm not saying Oilers or Caps had better forwards (Tampa is a fair comparison). But it's same case as Sens having more statistical production than Flyers and Avs, even if Avs had much better top end talent, and Flyers had much superior players, if not offensive performances out of them that season.
 

jkrx

Registered User
Feb 4, 2010
4,337
21
Are you saying Bonk, White or Havlat were better players?

Are you saying that an injured Amonte is better than them? A goalscorer who only scores 1 goal in the playoffs is not better than a checker doing his job. So yes Im saying they are atleast equal to those guys in some cases better.

or to turn it around, what is Williams case over Bonk or Havlat?
 

Kyle McMahon

Registered User
May 10, 2006
13,301
4,352
Im suprised by how much respect they have. They have three(!) great seasons. They've missed the playoffs 9 times out of 17 (4 consecutive) and lost the first round twice and second round twice. One division title.

Ottawa has 12 playoff berths in 18 seasons (11 consecutive). Four division titles. One conference titles. Much of this during a period where the franchise were facing bankruptcy.

San Jose have 13 playoff berths in 19 seasons(6 consecutive). Five division titles and two conference titles.

I'd say Anaheim's three great seasons are more than either San Jose or Ottawa have. I'm assuming you mean 2003, 2006, and 2007, the years that they advanced to the semi-final or beyond. I don't think a season where you fail to move past round 2 can be considered great (if you ignore expectations coming into the season). Ottawa (2003, 2007) and San Jose (2004, 2010) only boast two such seasons.

As pointed out as well, both those teams experienced much worse lows than the Ducks ever have. A lot of Anaheim's missed playoffs were pretty narrow misses. They've never been an easy two points for anybody, not even in their expansion season.

The Sharks, Senators, and Lightning have all been acquainted with the league basement on several occasions. The Sharks have a 70-loss season to their credit, Ottawa was an embarrassment for their first four seasons, and Tampa Bay has been in the bottom-five more often than not.
 

CanadianHockey

Smith - Alfie
Jul 3, 2009
30,547
513
Petawawa
twitter.com
Since when does one player make a line?

Ottawa's .600+ seasons and the 50+ point forwards in those:

...

The Pizza line era Sens, which saw the most Ottawa hype, were a pure one-line team.

You should look at the rosters and who played on what line, not arbitrarily say that points judge how many lines a team has. There's a huge difference between having to cover the Pizza line v. covering a Hossa line and an Alfie line. Even then, the Pizza line was hard to shut down; it took Anaheim's great checking lines and defence corps featuring Pronger to do it.

Anyway, yes, Ottawa was considered a Contender during the Pizza line era. The first year of which included Chara and Redden, in addition to Phillips, Volchenkov, and Hasek covering the D. The lockout, and Hasek's injury, hampered Ottawa's ability to live up to potential. Not saying that excuses the team, but there's more to it than just offence.

The other years of Contender status were during the Martin era, where Ottawa had two lines (Hossa and Alfie lines) to roll with, with some solid pieces in Havlat, a young Spezza, and the same blueline pieces. Lalime was a solid goalie for a time; his numbers were good, he just lacked poise to make easy saves in the playoffs. In 2003, the team was one win away from the SCF. The lockout, again, would've seen Ottawa roll a pretty solid roster featuring a mixture of vets and young players.

My main point, Ottawa wasn't overrated. They simply didn't win the Cup; two solid runs ended short and the other years were underachievement or the lockout.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->