Your favorite decade (era) of the NHL

Night Shift

Registered User
Nov 3, 2014
9,801
4,559
Florida
Thought this would be a fun topic for different generations to discuss..apologies if this was a topic once before, im not up on this thread.

I was born in early 80's and vaguely remember anything hockey in the 80's but knew it was a great decade for the sport. I fell in love with the sport in the mid 90s so I'm picking the 90s as the best era for me. Im a Pens fan so I was spoiled with Lemieux and Jagr, but I not only missed Lemieux's younger days, I missed the teams first 2 cups.

Despite the latter I still pick the 90's as my favorite decade.
 

Normand Lacombe

Registered User
Jan 30, 2008
1,442
1,352
The 1980's. Teams played to win in the 80's, not to lose like in the DPE. This mindset made the game more free flowing and exciting like hockey is meant to be. And there was more offense in the 80's obviously.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,223
15,804
Tokyo, Japan
I don't know if I'd call it my 'favorite' (since my team was mostly crap), but the most entertaining era I've seen was circa 1990 to 1997.

I would say NHL hockey today is about 50% of the entertainment value of the early-90s, although some periods of the recent past (c.2001-2004; 2011-2016) were even worse than today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrhockey193195

GreatGonzo

Surrounded by Snowflakes
May 26, 2011
8,860
2,905
South Of the Tank
The 90s was the last of the “creativity” that the game sorely lacks today, and before systems took over the play, resulting in lower scoring with little star power.

It was extremely entertaining to watch the Detroit/Colorado Rivalry during the early 2000s though. Some of the most intense hockey I ever watched. Add in other teams like New Jersey and Dallas, classic physical very defensive oriented teams with some amazing players, I always was fond of how they played.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,223
15,804
Tokyo, Japan
The 90s was the last of the “creativity” that the game sorely lacks today, and before systems took over the play, resulting in lower scoring with little star power.
That's exactly right.

If you look back at it, 1995-96 was still an unpredictable season, with one playoff team (Pittsburgh) scoring 362 goals and another playoff team (Tampa) scoring 238. There was a lot of offense, still, but several teams also played a defensive style.

In 1996-97, scoring slows down a bit and I think it hit a nice, medium-level balance between offense and defense. Rivals still hated each other and played with passion. Only a couple of teams were really bad, but almost all matches were competitive. There were still big hits and fights, but not really much gooning or brawling anymore.

1997-98 is when scoring gets too low and play starts to get a bit boring, as creativity is being phased out for systems. But there was still lots of passion.

1998-99 is getting boring. And then 1999-00 to 2004 was mostly a yawner.
 

GreatGonzo

Surrounded by Snowflakes
May 26, 2011
8,860
2,905
South Of the Tank
That's exactly right.

If you look back at it, 1995-96 was still an unpredictable season, with one playoff team (Pittsburgh) scoring 362 goals and another playoff team (Tampa) scoring 238. There was a lot of offense, still, but several teams also played a defensive style.

In 1996-97, scoring slows down a bit and I think it hit a nice, medium-level balance between offense and defense. Rivals still hated each other and played with passion. Only a couple of teams were really bad, but almost all matches were competitive. There were still big hits and fights, but not really much gooning or brawling anymore.

1997-98 is when scoring gets too low and play starts to get a bit boring, as creativity is being phased out for systems. But there was still lots of passion.

1998-99 is getting boring. And then 1999-00 to 2004 was mostly a yawner.
It is so strange how the star power just became almost non existent in the late 90s. Maybe it was the first retirement of Lemieux and Gretzky leaving. I mean, Forsberg, Jagr, Sakic, And Bure were incredible to watch, but it’s like the talent level just drops drastically after those players.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,266
6,477
South Korea
The 1930's without a doubt.

The decade started off with the great Habs of Morenz & Joliat winning a couple of cups, Bruins Eddie Shore won a cup and some Hart trophies, Chicago won two cups in 1934 and 1938 with an intriguingly oft-ignored core and Detroit's Herbie Lewis helped his squad to backtoback cups. Yet history books often focus on one cup winners this decade like Old Poison's Maroons and the emerging Kraut Line and Boucher line for the Rags not to mention the high-flying Leafs with Primeau and Busher Jackson and co. only taking one cup, Selke saying because the forwards were always thinking about scoring and neglected defensive play. It was such a vibrant competitive decade from start to finish with plenty of interesting aspects Id like to learn much more about.
 

streitz

Registered User
Jul 22, 2018
1,258
319
I enjoyed hockey from the time I started watching hockey in the early 80's(not understanding it fully until a few years later) up until around the time we lost the Jets which was the season the DPE era started.

From that point on I watched Detroit/colorado and usually the playoffs if there was a good series, I usually watched the cup final except a few extremely boring occasions(1999, 2000,2003,2004 where I just watched parts).


Then Colorado stopped being good, followed by detroit. Then they started taking physicality out of the game after the lockout(this was already happening but at a slower pace). Now all they do is whine about concussions and other injuries. I mean no offense to anyone who plays pro hockey and gets hurt but they're making minimum 500-600k per year for a reason.


Whatever I'm going off topic but tl'dr the 80's, first half of the 90's and anything before that ie 50s60s70s seemed entertaining. Now hockey is boring and I don't watch it.
 

DannyGallivan

Your world frightens and confuses me
Aug 25, 2017
7,577
10,186
Melonville
I have to pick the era I fell in love with the sport, which was the 70's. It helped that I was a Habs fan then. Loved the aesthetics of that era too... the garish jerseys, the truly original and distinct (and probably dangerous) goalie masks, and the 70's hair (sans helmets). Of course, circus that was the Flyers, the artistry that was Orr, Lafleur, etc., and the play-by-play of Danny Gallivan helped.

I may have picked the 80's, but I was a Jets fan then, which tempered my enthusiasm somewhat. ;)
 

Puck Dogg

Puck life
Mar 13, 2006
1,812
496
The 90's had all-time scoring leaders (Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier) active at the time, tough guys like Bob Probert and Marty McSorley with 399 PIM's, Selanne scored 76 goals during his rookie year, you had goalies like Dominik Hasek, Martin Brodeur and Patrick Roy plus the iron curtain had collapsed and there was plenty of talent like Pavel Bure and Sergei Fedorov around. Not to mention Whalers, Jets (the WHA one) and Nordiques were still around.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,799
16,540
To study as an history fan? 30ies. Best teams tended to fumble and average teams tended to rise. Lots of "15 mins of fame". Lots of guys that are really well thought of for reasons I can't really fathom (Thompson, Conacher) and some really under appreciated too (Thompson, Conacher).
 

Ducks in a row

Go Ducks Quack Quack
Dec 17, 2013
18,010
4,368
U.S.A.
Salary Cap era especially considering my team won a Cup in it but even without the Cup I would still say it because I love having a Salary Cap.
 

SealsFan

Registered User
May 3, 2009
1,716
506
The 70's, because that's what I grew up with and had a team to obsess over. But I readily admit the level of play in that decade was tainted by the bad teams being REALLY bad. Setting fandom aside, I'd have to say the 90's had the best balance of everything hockey has to offer.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad