JTToilinginToronto
Isles Fan
- Jan 18, 2019
- 4,667
- 4,786
Edmonton Oilers
Florida Panthers
New York Islanders
Ottawa Senators
Arizona Coyotes
Florida Panthers
New York Islanders
Ottawa Senators
Arizona Coyotes
Instead of listing five good teams you list five bad ones. That's comedy gold. Thank you for the contribution.Edmonton Oilers
Florida Panthers
New York Islanders
Ottawa Senators
Arizona Coyotes
Glad you liked it. It makes my day knowing that I triggered you so much, erh I mean made you laugh so much that you decided you needed to quote and reply to my post instead of just bypassing it.Instead of listing five good teams you list five bad ones. That's comedy gold. Thank you for the contribution.
The top 6 is pretty obvious and only thing up for debate would be which way around would you place the Blues and the Caps. Teams like Sharks, Rangers and the Lightning have performed well but are in my personal opinion way behind the top 6 because one Cup weighs more than five good playoff runs in this discussion.
They have zero argument over Boston. Washington has 894 regular season points since 2010/11 vs. Boston's 887. Washington's only trip past the 2nd round was when they won the Cup where as Boston has been to 3 Finals. That extremely small regular season edge in no way makes up for the difference in postseason success.Washington is clearly 5th, and they've honestly got an argument for being ahead of Boston, although I would say that Boston was better.
this is probably correct, BUT it is worth pointing out that los angeles was only really a relevant team for that crazy three-year peak—they haven't won a playoff round since 2014, and only made it twice in that time. even in that peak period, they were only really good in the playoffs: they never won their division in the entire decade. taking the decade as a whole, i might bump them down to 5th, with boston and washington moving up a spot each.1) Chicago - only team to win 3 cups this decade. Easy choice for #1 on my list.
2) Pittsburgh - back to back Cups means they edge out L.A.
3) Los Angeles - two Cups in the 2010s makes them a shoo-in for this next spot.
4) Boston - one Cup and two Finals appearances gives them the advantage over the Capitals.
5) Washington - could have gone with St. Louis here too, but both teams have one Cup, and the Caps have had more regular season success this decade (two Presidents' Trophies).
HM: St. Louis - see above
It’s Vancouver.
There were at least 30 teams that were in the league in this decade. If we have 10 different Cup winners (I’m counting 09-10 to make it an even 10 seasons for the decade), it’s less than a 1/3 chance to win. Since seven of the Cups were won by three teams, that only leaves three Cups to be won by other teams other than the three.
“The three” should be the top 3 the next two will be two of the three other Cup winners.
1 Chicago (three time Cup winner, could have won 4 if not for LA)
2 LA (two time Cup winner, could have wine three in a row if not for Chicago)
3 Pittsburgh (two timer, back to back runs...not as good as LA or Chicago, both of which put up three good runs in a row)
Drop off here...
4 Boston (Cup and Final appearance)
5 tie...St Louis and Washington (both teams with one Cup, both teams with several semi and conference final runs...regular season means nothing...Ovie doesn’t go swim in a fountain for the Presidents Trophy).
7 Here’s where it truly becomes interesting. 1-3 are a lock, 4-6 are relatively obvious. Does repeated playoff failure mean some sort of success? Do we measure worthless regular season wins? Does getting beat by the eventual Cup winner count for something? Nothing good here...
The Rangers made 3 ECF's and won a presidents trophy so I don't think it's as easy to discount them. It's very close between the Rangers and Sharks for me. Blues cup puts them right in the mix, arguably above the aforementioned
The kings first half of the decade was so strong. I think 2012-14 gets them in. But to be honest, their other years are average/bad enough to argue they shouldn't be top 5. Then again, 2 cups
I'd argue Pittsburgh was better than LA in the non-Cup years, overall.
-Pittsburgh never once missed the playoffs during the entire 2010s decade. Los Angeles missed the playoffs 3 times.
-Pittsburgh made it out of the 1st round 4 times, whereas LA only made it out of the first round once.
Literally the only thing in the Kings' favor is that 3rd Cup finals appearance. But the Pens' back to back Cups, as well as consistently making the playoffs every single season, as well as getting out of the first round more when they don't win, should favor them.
are we talking 2009 -2010 or 2010-2011?
1 & 2 are set in stone. 3-5 are debatable, but these are the teams.
- Pittsburgh
- Chicago
- Los Angelas
- Washington
- Boston
I would argue LA shouldn't be included but obviously two cups is a big deal
However they've had several mediocre to downright terrible regular seasons alongside a couple of first round exits as well. Whereas teams like the Caps, Tampa and San Jose have had a mix of regular season and playoff success, at a consistent rate throughout the decade
Washington is clearly 5th, and they've honestly got an argument for being ahead of Boston, although I would say that Boston was better.
After that, you've got to include St. Louis since they've got a Cup and it's not as if they had been a poor team outside of that Cup by any stretch.
Then it gets dicey between San Jose, Tampa, and the Rangers. I believe all 3 teams have lost twice in the conference finals and once in the Cup Finals. I'll go with San Jose for that #6 spot since they only missed the playoffs once, then I'll go with Tampa since they felt like a more dominant team than the Rangers.
Could probably shut it down after this one. Don't see how anyone could have it any other way.
Since we're doing 2010s, I'd say Chicago is first. The Penguins' 2009 Cup was 11 seasons ago now, so outside the purview.