Very good players on very bad teams

[ted2019]

Viktor Kozlov.

I wouldn't consider Kozlov a very good player myself.

 

[ted2019]

Andy Bathgate with the Rangers. Prime of his career and from the 1958-59 season to 1963-64 season, he only made the playoffs once. After getting traded to the Leafs, he went to the Finals with the Red Wings in 1965-66 and then it was back out of the playoffs until his retirement after the 1970-71 season.

 

[Sentinel]

I wouldn't consider Kozlov a very good player myself.

He was good player, but I was merely pointing out that it was VICTOR Kozlov, not SLAVA Kozlov.

 

[Sentinel]

Hardly. Once 1986-87 got going, the 'Dead Wings' era was over. Yzerman's first three years were in that period.

Er, no. They started making playoffs. Doesn't mean they were good. No goalies, no defense, Probert, Klima, and young Adam Oates do not make a good team.

Overall, I should be ignoring your Red Wings posts. They make me cringe every time.

 

[The Panther]

Er, no. They started making playoffs. Doesn't mean they were good. No goalies, no defense, Probert, Klima, and young Adam Oates do not make a good team.

Seriously...? The Red Wings went from last overall -- a complete laughing-stock -- in 1985-86, going 8-31-1 in the back-half of the season. Then, they hired Jacques Demers and made Yzerman captain, and this is what happened in the next two seasons:
- 2nd in division 1986-87
- 1st in division 1987-88 (3rd in the "west", 5th overall NHL). Their best regular season in 18 years.
- the first season with Demers they shaved off 141 goals-against, from last overall to 5th-best defensively
- the second season with Demers they were 3rd in offense and 6th in defense
- both seasons they won the Norris in the playoffs before losing to dynasty Edmonton (doing so in '88 almost without Yzerman)

The goaltending wasn't great, but I don't know where you're getting "no defense" from. They were one of the best defensive teams in the League in this era.

The issue was when the "Dead Wings" era ended, not how good they were. The Dead Wings era clearly ended in the summer of 1986.

Overall, I should be ignoring your Red Wings posts. They make me cringe every time.

Please do ignore them, and please stop responding to them.

 

[vikash1987]

How about Mickey Redmond on Detroit during the ‘70s? Back-to-back 50-goal seasons, and about a point-a-game over 300+ games....but little help, and no playoff action.

 

[Asheville]

Palffy everywhere
Luongo's Panthers days
Robitaille pre-The Trade
Nicholls pre-The Trade
Barkov's entire NHL career
Blake's Kings days post-Gretzky
Much of Gretzky's post-Oilers career

 

[crobro]

John Tavares
Ron Francis
Charlie Simmer
Pierre Tourgeon
Reed Larsen
Gary Unger

 

[crobro]

Actually the best player on a bad team has to be Mark Howe in Hartford

 

[scribe114]

Bill Gadsby

Made the playoffs only 4 times his first 15 seasons in the NHL

 

[robsenz]

I wouldn't consider Kozlov a very good player myself.

Don't want to overly defend Kozlov here, but bad players don't have 500+ points in the NHL.

 

[VanIslander]

Don't want to overly defend Kozlov here, but bad players don't have 500+ points in the NHL.

Very good.
Pretty good.
Good.
Not bad.
Not so good.
Bad.

There is a lot of ground between 'very good' and 'bad'.

Viktor was... not bad.

 

[The Macho King]

The Calgary Flames were a bad team for pretty much all of Iginla's career. They missed the playoff 10 times during his stay there. You'll be hard pressed to find a first ballot Hall of Famer (which he will be) whose team missed the playoffs that frequently.

TBF, until the 90s expanded further 16 out of 21 teams made the playoffs, so it is harder to make the playoffs now than it used to be.

 

[CHIP72]

Joe Sakic on some of those Nordiques teams in the late 80's/early 90's.

That was my first thought as well.

 

[Retire91]

gonna second Sundin that guy was a machine, I wish we could have saw him make a run with a supporting cast.

I think Kovalchuk at least deserves an honorable mention?

Iginla he was always one of my favorites

 

[The Panther]

gonna second Sundin that guy was a machine, I wish we could have saw him make a run with a supporting cast.

Yes, he was awesome. It's funny, because the Toronto media/fans usually overhype certain players (Clark, Potvin, Gilmour, Matthews, etc.), but with Sundin they had the guy I personally think is #1 player in franchise history... and they've collectively underrated him.

 

[The Macho King]

Yes, he was awesome. It's funny, because the Toronto media/fans usually overhype certain players (Clark, Potvin, Gilmour, Matthews, etc.), but with Sundin they had the guy I personally think is #1 player in franchise history... and they've collectively underrated him.

I mean... that's a loooong history you're talking about.

 

[Hoser]

The Calgary Flames were a bad team for pretty much all of Iginla's career. They missed the playoff 10 times during his stay there. You'll be hard pressed to find a first ballot Hall of Famer (which he will be) whose team missed the playoffs that frequently.

Seven of those ten seasons they missed the playoffs were his first ones, from 1996 to 2003. No doubt about it they were bad in those years, but between the second (2004-05) and third (2012-13) lockouts the Flames were actually remarkably good for a team that missed the playoffs three out of seven seasons.

If you sum all regular season points from 2005 to 2012 the Flames would be 12th (665 pts), ahead of the likes of Cup-winners the Bruins (656), Hurricanes (642), Blackhawks (638) and Kings (601). The only teams who had more than 700 points across those seven seasons were the Red Wings (772), Sharks (745) and Canucks (711).

However, across all of those years the worst the Flames did was 90 points (in 2012-13 and 2009-10). That 90-point low-point is actually one of the highest across those seven seasons: the only teams who were never worse than that were the Red Wings (102 points in 2012-13 and 2009-10) and Sharks (96 points in 2012-13). If the Flames played in the Eastern Conference they'd have made the playoffs in 2009-10 and 2010-11, and only missed out by two points in 2011-12.

 

[GMR]

Seven of those ten seasons they missed the playoffs were his first ones, from 1996 to 2003. No doubt about it they were bad in those years, but between the second (2004-05) and third (2012-13) lockouts the Flames were actually remarkably good for a team that missed the playoffs three out of seven seasons.

If you sum all regular season points from 2005 to 2012 the Flames would be 12th (665 pts), ahead of the likes of Cup-winners the Bruins (656), Hurricanes (642), Blackhawks (638) and Kings (601). The only teams who had more than 700 points across those seven seasons were the Red Wings (772), Sharks (745) and Canucks (711).

However, across all of those years the worst the Flames did was 90 points (in 2012-13 and 2009-10). That 90-point low-point is actually one of the highest across those seven seasons: the only teams who were never worse than that were the Red Wings (102 points in 2012-13 and 2009-10) and Sharks (96 points in 2012-13). If the Flames played in the Eastern Conference they'd have made the playoffs in 2009-10 and 2010-11, and only missed out by two points in 2011-12.

I think most people would agree they were not a good team. More importantly, they did not surround Iginla with any kind of real talent. Even the 2004 team that almost won the Cup had a bunch of plugs all over the roster.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Johnny Bucyk spent 8 consecutive seasons, 1959-60 through 1966-67, without seeing a single playoff game on a consistently weak Bruins team.

Things got a lot better after the arrival of Orr and Esposito, but 8 seasons without a playoff game is a long drought in the 06 era.

 

[Hoser]

I think most people would agree they were not a good team. More importantly, they did not surround Iginla with any kind of real talent. Even the 2004 team that almost won the Cup had a bunch of plugs all over the roster.

K then, you obviously didn't read my post. Or you believe "most people would agree 90+ points per season for about a decade = not a good team". Or a "very bad team", as the OP asked for in the first place.

Frankly I think you're being patently ignorant.

 

[GMR]

K then, you obviously didn't read my post. Or you believe "most people would agree 90+ points per season for about a decade = not a good team". Or a "very bad team", as the OP asked for in the first place.

Frankly I think you're being patently ignorant.

I'm not. I just don't think they were a good team. 90+ points isn't that impressive when the loser point is in play. Fact is, they missed the playoffs for a lot of the seasons he was there. That's a fact. They were not a good team. That's also a fact. No, they weren't the 1970's Capitals or the 1992 Sharks, but they still weren't a good team. They had little talent most of his time there. He never had a legit number one center. They never had anyone else there remotely resembling a star or superstar to play with Iginla. When they did make the playoffs, they never got anywhere outside of 2004.

 

[Hoser]

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't think you can make the argument about Iginla for his whole career, because the good/bad seasons don't line up that way. In his prime, when he was very good, the Flames were a decent team. The years they were bad, were also the years before he was dominant.

That being said, the big exception is 2002. That season was definitely a case of dominant player, terrible team.

 

[justafan22]

It's stretching it a bit, but Kessel was by the far the best player from 2009-2015 Leafs, a team that made the playoffs in a 48 game season. Was around a 66 point player a season.