Worst Cup Winning Team, Roster Wise.

[george14]

This is not a bash thread and I do not need a lecture about how "you don't need a ton of stars". I am aware, this is just for purposes of opinion on who do you think had the worst roster, or may the most surprising roster to win a Cup.

I was looking through some of the past teams to win it all. The 2006 Hurricanes were the #2 seed in the East, but I really am surprised looking back on their roster. Staal had a big year with 100 points, while Williams and Brind'Amour tallied 30 goals. But looking at that roster, it is shocking to me they won the Cup. Not to mention their goaltending was terrible in the regular season, even though Ward stood on his head in the playoffs.

- The Kings being an #8 seed in 2012 may get some votes, but they had great goaltending and some really good defense.
- 2004 Tampa Bay was not very deep either, after Marty, Lecavalier, and Richards they were not star studded.

Click to read more...

 

[amnesiac]

67 Leafs.... I believe theyre the only Cup winners to have negative GF/GA difference during the season
86 and 93 Habs
06 Canes
2012 Kings

pretty much it

 

[Martinez]

1938 Black Hawks

 

[george14]

1938 Black Hawks

ah yes who could forget that glorious year. remember it like it was yesterday.

 

[Martinez]

ah yes who could forget that glorious year. remember it like it was yesterday.

Ikr? When they won I was like, omg this has to be the worst cup winning team, roster wise.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

How can you go this far without mentioning the '95 Devils?

 

[TheSituation]

06 Canes

 

[amnesiac]

How can you go this far without mentioning the '95 Devils?

Brodeur, Stevens, Niedermayer looks like a Cup winning foundation to me

but yes, forwards I agree

 

[george14]

How can you go this far without mentioning the '95 Devils?

They had plenty of names on that team. Brodeur, Stevens, Niedermayer, Guerin, Broten, Richer, Holik. I agree their forwards weren't great but I would say they are substantially a better roster than the 06 Canes.

 

[oXo Cube]

Here's the thing with the Hurricanes. They had a powerplay that was pretty much automatic in a season where teams regularly had 5-10 PPs a game.

They also had pretty good depth and elite goaltending.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I think the '06 Hurricanes. Brind' Amour, Staal, Stillman, Cullen and Cam Ward carried that team and just barely won.

 

[threeVo]

The 06 canes team was the luckiest cup champ ever. That Sabres team they beat in the ECF was so good but got destroyed by injuries last minute

 

[amnesiac]

93 Habs may have had the easiest route ever....

Buffalo beat the division winner Bruins
Isles beat the top seeded and defending Cup Pens
Kings were also a surprise

 

[KingBran]

I love how everyone loves to just rag on the Canes. If the Leafs had that roster and won the cup with it nobody would talk **** because it's the Leafs.

Peoples minds are pre-conceived by 'what have you don't for me lately' when answering these kinds of questions.

06 Canes had 112 points, only the Sens (113) and Red Wings (124) had more. The Dallas Stars had the same 112 points.

The Canes were good that year. They may have been a one-hit wonder but they were really really good and not lucky at all. You don't score 294 goals during a season because of luck.

 

[Flair Hay]

Still going 06 Canes. 04 Flames get HM despite how well they played as a team.

 

[DougieSmash]

How could that offense be the worst ever:

Stillman/Staal/Cole
Whitney/Brindamour/Williams
Ladd/Weight/Recchi
Adams/Adams/Larose

It's not even close. Staal was top 5 center at the time. Williams is Conn Smythe winner and three time SC champion. You know about Recchi, Weight and Whitney. Ladd was productive player for 10 years.

 

[Ryan Michaels]

Still going 06 Canes. 04 Flames get HM despite how well they played as a team.

Ummm I have to tell you something, you may want to sit down.

 

[HarryLime]

To me it has to be the Vancouver millionaires. They took advantage of the opposition being very weak and essentially some fluky bounces in the finals. Now they have a legacy but it's nowhere near the other cup champions. Most people never considered them to be the best, just a good team that got hot. I think when you take into consideration the fact that they never had star power also hurts them. I remember even their fans not over rating them on here.

 

[george14]

I love how everyone loves to just rag on the Canes. If the Leafs had that roster and won the cup with it nobody would talk **** because it's the Leafs.

Peoples minds are pre-conceived by 'what have you don't for me lately' when answering these kinds of questions.

06 Canes had 112 points, only the Sens (113) and Red Wings (124) had more. The Dallas Stars had the same 112 points.

The Canes were good that year. They may have been a one-hit wonder but they were really really good and not lucky at all. You don't score 294 goals during a season because of luck.

Yep, there is the party ruiner. No one here is "ragging" on them. They won the Stanley Cup! It's a legitimate question and don't you think the fact that a lot of people have said the 06 Canes....means they weren't that great roster wise? Go look at the stats, their goaltending was not very good during the regular season.

How could that offense be the worst ever:

Stillman/Staal/Cole
Whitney/Brindamour/Williams
Ladd/Weight/Recchi
Adams/Adams/Larose

It's not even close. Staal was top 5 center at the time. Williams is Conn Smythe winner and three time SC champion. You know about Recchi, Weight and Whitney. Ladd was productive player for 10 years.

This was the year after the lockout where scoring was drastically up. The Canes had 2 guy above 1 PPG when there were 40 players who achieved that. Ladd, Weight, Recchi, are solid names but combined for a whopping 31 points in 72 regular season games with a -14 rating. In the playoffs they combined for 37 points in 65 games with a -8 rating.

 

[HarryLime]

What hurts the hurricanes is 3 things

1) rolo injury
2) lockout the season before
3) they missed the post season in 03 04 07 08


It's not fair but that's the truth and reason they're constantly ranked low in these conversations

 

[Horse McHindu]

2012 Kings and 1995 Devils should NOT be mentioned!

As a guy that was a RedWings fan from 1994-2006 (2nd favourite team behind the Canucks), I can attest to the fact that the Devils that year were awesome and INSANELY tough to play against.

That was one of the tightest checking defensive oriented teams that I've ever seen, and they absolutely took Detroit to school. Detroit had a solid team that year but it was like watching a corvette run straight first into a brick wall at 140 mph.

The Kings in 2012 were also tough as nails. They absolutely steam-rolled the competition that year, and then flat out proved that their victory wasn't a fluke 2 years later.

With respect to Carolina and their fans, I think the 2006 Hurricanes were the worst team to win a cup (although they were still pretty good).

 

[evnted]

67 Leafs.... I believe theyre the only Cup winners to have negative GF/GA difference during the season
86 and 93 Habs
06 Canes
2012 Kings

pretty much it

im going to disagree with the 2012 kings. they underperformed in the regular season, but lots of predictions going into the season had them doing well. i wouldn't say they were a favorite, but the whole concept of them being weak is only attributed to them hobbling into the playoffs while on paper, they had a good roster. reminds me of this year's predators...

 

[HarryLime]

King went 16-4 in the playoffs in 2012. They started 15-2. They also went to the wcf in 2013 and won again in 2014. Their roster was very good.

 

[Horse McHindu]

1993 Habs also get a mention from me.

Both the Kings and the Habs had a little lady luck that year as far as legit seeds being eliminated early.

I might be wrong on this, but the 1990 Oilers sans Gretzky didn't really strike me as great either.

 

[AfroThunder396]

How can you go this far without mentioning the '95 Devils?

Honestly '03 was probably worse on paper. Old man Nieuwendyk/Daneyko and some very lackluster depth. If it wasn't for Herculean efforts by Niedermayer and Brodeur, as well as some well-timed contributions from Frisen/Langenbrunner/Marshall you're looking at a 2nd round out.

'95 had MacLean, Broten, Richer, etc. I'd take them over Gomez and Rafalski.