Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Stanley Cup Dynasties

Expand Messages
  • goaliedave
    Brian wrote: Winning Cups with 5 other teams in the league is not that impressive. Short schedules, quick playoff rounds, hardly any travel. I bet that if
    Message 1 of 8 , Aug 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Brian wrote:
      Winning Cups with 5 other teams in the league is not that impressive.
      Short schedules, quick playoff rounds, hardly any travel. I bet that
      if there were 15 teams in the league back in the 50's and longer
      schedules, the Habs wouldn't have won 5 cups in a row.
      But you could also say that the best players were crammed into only 6 teams.
      That meant that every team had loads of great players. If you were to make
      the
      current NHL only 6 teams it would be almost impossible for one team to win 5
      in a row.

      Brian,
      I think your first and last sentance contradict eachother.

      In terms of the 80s Oilers / Isles vs 50s/ 60s Habs debate, you have laid
      out the most significant difference... basically skill vs stamina. If the
      debate only considers those points then it cannot be resolved, and we are
      left with the HHOF solution which is showing dynastys of different time
      periods as equal. Unless you consider the fact that the early Ottawa
      Senators are listed first as meaning they are the greatest dynasty ever :)

      I think you have to look also to how each team organized itself for
      competition. The 50s / 60s habs had by far the best farm system, scouting,
      etc. In the 1940s and mid 60s they had a few years where they got first pick
      of the Quebec players, but then in the 50s and 60s they gave players away to
      keep the league competitive. They could have fielded 2 teams n the NHL and
      come first and second. If there were 15 teams in the 50s they all would have
      had to travel and play longer rounds, etc and Montreal still would have been
      the top team. In fact many people argue that the AHL of that era could have
      competed with the NHL on most nights, and they used to show so in exhibition
      games. So in effect Montreal was the best of 15 or so teams in the 50s.
      Montreal in the 80s would have laughed most teams out of the rink just as
      the Isles and Oilers did.

      Now, the Oilers and Isles in the 80s ... take their top 3 lines and keep
      them together for a decade... I think we would all mortgage our houses to se
      e those 3 teams play home and home games for a decade.

      Dave in Whitby
    • Hockey Collector
      That meant that every team had loads of great players. If you were to make the current NHL only 6 teams it would be almost impossible for one team to win 5 in
      Message 2 of 8 , Aug 30, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        That meant that every team had loads of great players. If you were to make
        the
        current NHL only 6 teams it would be almost impossible for one team to win 5
        in a row.

        ---Six of us performed a mock draft a few years back to see who would indeed be left off NHL rosters in a 6-team laeague. Again, these rosters were done a few years ago but the results are still posted on my website at http://www.hockeysandwich.com/mockdraft.html

        If anyone is interested in performing a more updated mock draft, drop me a note. It would be nice to have our original 6 drafters back to make the rounds - Morey, Bill, Joe, Pat, Mike, Jason...

        Keith Lenn, The Hockey Collector
        rockstar@...

        Read "The Hockey Collector"
        http://sportznutz.com/collector/the_collectors/nhl/

        Read "Penned By Lenn" by visiting the Professional Hockey Players' Association home page at www.PHPA.com




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • thegiantdevilfish
        ... You quoted brian instead of me. That was my quote I don t know why it had Brian written above it. Meanwhile my biggest beef with this debate is that
        Message 3 of 8 , Aug 30, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "goaliedave" <goaliedave@s...> wrote:
          >>
          > Brian,
          > I think your first and last sentance contradict eachother.
          >
          >
          > Dave in Whitby


          You quoted "brian" instead of me. That was my quote I don't know why
          it had "Brian" written above it.

          Meanwhile my biggest beef with this debate is that most people are
          saying "well the Isles had easy matchups" or 16 or 21 teams made the
          playoffs etc.

          The SAME THING APPLIED TO THE OTHER DYNASTIES. Let's dare to compare
          shall we?


          1. Number of teams making the playoffs.

          Yes the Isles played in an era where 16 of 21 teams made the playoffs
          so alot of crummy teams got in BUT THE SAME THING APPLIED TO THE
          OTHERS. During the Oilers run, 16 of 21 teams made the playoffs to!
          In the late 70's, 12 of 17 teams got in for crying out loud! Heck
          even the Colorado Rockies got in in 1977 for heavens sake. And back
          in the original six era 4 of 6 teams got in. If only the top two made
          the playoffs every year OK, but when 4 of 6 teams get in, what's the
          point of a regular season?


          2. The quality of opponents

          Yes the Isles got to play "ham and egger" teams such as Vancouver and
          Minnesota. BUT they also played tough teams such as Boston,
          Philadelphia, and Edmonton. The same thing applies to the other
          dynasties.

          Edmonton's only challenge every year in the Campbell Confrence was
          Calgary. Winnipeg/Vancouver/LA were hardly contenders and the Norris
          divison was a joke. The Oilers were usually unopposed getting to the
          Finals every year outside of Calgary, and despite that they STILL
          LOST to LA in 82!

          Montreal in the late 70's had the luxury of first round byes, and got
          to play bottom feeders like Toronto, Vancouver, Chicago and in 79 the
          Rangers. And we all know they never would have reached the finals in
          79 if Don Cherry knew how to count.

          Back in the Original Six era you basically had three strong teams
          (Montreal,Toronto, and Detroit) and three "also rans"
          (Rangers,Boston, and Chicago). With 4 out of 6 teams making the
          playoffs, alot of times for Montreal the first round was a gimme. I
          also think my theory of short seasons VS short travel VS short
          playoffs is relevant. If they Habs had to play against 20+ teams,
          with travel across North America, 80 game schedules and 4 gruelling
          rounds of playoffs THERE IS NO WAY THEY WOULD HAVE REACHED 10
          STRIAGHT FINALS. Despite not having the luxury of 40 game schedules,
          less teams, faster playoffs and less wear and tear, the Isles still
          were three wins away from winning a fifth striaght Cup. What they
          accomplished was incredible but they don't get the credit they
          deserve.

          And you can say I'm wrong all you want, but if the Isles were a
          Canadian based team they would be ranked the greatest thing since
          sliced bread up here. They don't get the credit they deserve because
          they are an "American team". It's the same with the baseball gurus
          down in the States who won't acknowledge the 92/93 Blue jays as one
          of the most talent laden teams in MLB history simply because they
          are "Canadian".
        • mtlhockey@aol.com
          ... Damned aol puts all this together. This was what I said. I did not say the first part, but was making a comment on that. Brian [Non-text portions of this
          Message 4 of 8 , Sep 1, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            > But you could also say that the best players were crammed into only 6
            > teams.
            > That meant that every team had loads of great players. If you were to make
            > the
            > current NHL only 6 teams it would be almost impossible for one team to win 5
            > in a row.
            >
            > Brian,
            > I think your first and last sentance contradict eachother.
            >

            Damned aol puts all this together. This was what I said. I did not say the
            first part, but was making a comment on that.


            Brian


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • John Serrati
            2 things regarding the FHL: 1) Bill, it is an out & out lie to say to say that nothing new has happened with the FHL for some time now. For our aural
            Message 5 of 8 , Sep 1, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              2 things regarding the FHL:

              1) Bill, it is an out & out lie to say to say that nothing new has happened
              with the FHL for some time now. For our aural pleasure, Mr Larsen put up a
              link to some music that one might hear at FHL games. I mean, anyone with
              music on their site must be serious, right?

              OK, sarcasm aside...

              2) Aside from the fact that Montreal Muskateers is an awful name, it is
              spelt incorrectly on top of that. The word is Musketeers.

              I personally think it is deplorable that he is once again trying to milk
              low level players out their their hard earnt dough with the carrot of yet
              another camp. Surely this is against the law...

              John



              Dr John Serrati
              Assistant Prof. of Classics and History
              John Abbott College
              Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec
              H9X 3L9
              Canada

              (514) 457-6610 ext. 5992
            • Rob Trainor
              The thing I feel most sorry about is those players who paid close to $1000 this time last year for their try-out. For their sake, I hope the FHL hits the ice
              Message 6 of 8 , Sep 1, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                The thing I feel most sorry about is those players who paid close to
                $1000 this time last year for their try-out. For their sake, I hope the
                FHL hits the ice so this was not all a scam for their money. I'm sure
                the players who tried out didn't have tons of money and I bet $1000 was
                a huge amount to come up with. If there is no league, I would sue John
                Larsen for my money back if I were one of the players. The nail in the
                FHL's coffin was the failure to secure a lease in Saskatoon and Regina.
                Both WHL teams said there was no way the FHL could play in their
                buildings. After that, the FHL went dormant, missing several
                self-imposed deadlines for play to begin. John Larsen is a crook and
                should be prosecuted. This is almost as bad as the IIHL fiasco last season.
                Rob Trainor
              • William Underwood
                ... 1) Bill, it is an out & out lie to say to say that nothing new has happened with the FHL for some time now. For our aural pleasure, Mr Larsen put up a
                Message 7 of 8 , Sep 2, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  >2 things regarding the FHL:

                  1) Bill, it is an out & out lie to say to say that nothing new has
                  happened
                  with the FHL for some time now. For our aural pleasure, Mr Larsen put
                  up a
                  link to some music that one might hear at FHL games. I mean, anyone
                  with
                  music on their site must be serious, right?

                  >OK, sarcasm aside...

                  True...but he could have at least chosen "three blind Mice" like the
                  Stooges did...and maybe even a "Hello...hello...hello...HELLO".

                  >2) Aside from the fact that Montreal Muskateers is an awful name, it is

                  >spelt incorrectly on top of that. The word is Musketeers.

                  Maybe it is a copy right thing...:)

                  >I personally think it is deplorable that he is once again trying to
                  milk
                  low level players out their their hard earnt dough with the carrot of
                  yet
                  >another camp. Surely this is against the law...

                  Unfortunately it is not so long as what is promised is delivered. And I
                  suspect that the small windfall that he collected last year is why he
                  persists. If he didn't he would have failed to deliver and be more
                  vulnerable to the bunco squad.



                  Dr John Serrati
                  Assistant Prof. of Classics and History
                  John Abbott College
                  Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec
                  H9X 3L9
                  Canada

                  (514) 457-6610 ext. 5992




                  To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
                  hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                  Yahoo! Groups Links
                • William Underwood
                  ... $1000 this time last year for their try-out. For their sake, I hope the FHL hits the ice so this was not all a scam for their money. I m sure the players
                  Message 8 of 8 , Sep 2, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >The thing I feel most sorry about is those players who paid close to
                    $1000 this time last year for their try-out. For their sake, I hope the
                    FHL hits the ice so this was not all a scam for their money. I'm sure
                    the players who tried out didn't have tons of money and I bet $1000 was
                    a huge amount to come up with. If there is no league, I would sue John
                    Larsen for my money back if I were one of the players. The nail in the
                    FHL's coffin was the failure to secure a lease in Saskatoon and Regina.
                    Both WHL teams said there was no way the FHL could play in their
                    buildings. After that, the FHL went dormant, missing several
                    self-imposed deadlines for play to begin. John Larsen is a crook and
                    should be prosecuted. This is almost as bad as the IIHL fiasco last
                    season.
                    >Rob Trainor

                    Well the thing is Rob, he should have known that about Saskatoon and
                    Regina BEFORE he held the camps. He should have had teams and owners
                    before holding the camps, and he had neither. The only actual owner that
                    we know of aside form him was in Edmonton, and that is supposedly via a
                    relative. He NEVER had a lease ANYWHERE. The folks in North Bay say
                    "John who when you talk to them, yet he claims to have a team there..."

                    And trying to avoid being sued for h8is scam is why I suspect he
                    persists as well as his dream of starting a league.

                    All I can tell you is that I have a copy of his business plan. While it
                    has a few ideas of merit, the presentation quality is worse than a
                    hastily written mid term paper by a below average undergraduate. The
                    overall approach shows that he has absolutely NO knowledge of how pro
                    hockey operates. The mere fact that he was having Try Out camps for a
                    league that was targeted to be AAAA level is a sure symptom there! And
                    he actually expected PRO players to pay to go originally! NO pro player
                    even of the AA level will do that! This also showed that he was
                    undercapitalized. The fact that he charged 1000 dollars was even worse!
                    I hold a free agent camp for AA level teams in the summer and charge 150
                    US! The fact that he actually named his teams was also a dead give away.
                    Unless you CENTRALLY own a league you don't do that! You name target
                    venues and leave the possibility of other sites open at most or just
                    name criteria for sites. And those names showed no marketing work or
                    sense. Case in point is a name like Muskateers for Montreal? Not a name
                    in French or a neutral word like Concorde was in the CFL? Or at least
                    something that had something to do with the city or an old team name
                    with a dead trademark...this reeks of "it's 1 AM I want this thing done
                    so lets wing a name..." and some names may be trademarked. He had
                    Voyageurs there, I'm not so sure that the trademark is dead there...He
                    had an interesting ownership structure and pay structure but they too
                    had worrisome points. Would players of the level that he was looking for
                    play I a combine scenario? Most want at least some guaranteed money. He
                    wanted owner/managers but to have that you preclude any owner with no
                    hockey background and firing a GM who isn't up to snuff...

                    I had my doubts the minute that I saw that plan. And they mounted as the
                    months went on and I began to hear from hockey people who dealt with him
                    or contacted him.

                    The concept of an All Canadian league was a good one. But here we have
                    another break down, the name "Federal", as a colleague of mine in Quebec
                    said, "that name isn't going to be so hot around here..." You have the
                    all Canadian theme but you fail to exploit it! It is a nice idea for a
                    league but it was in the hands of an amateur, worse yet one who really
                    didn't listen much to hockey people yet wanted to start a hockey league.
                    It is really sad actually for all of the laughs that are easy to have
                    about it. All of those players got bilked, several people wasted a lot
                    of time with it, a good concept has been tarnished, and guys like this
                    make it tougher for LEGITIMATE new groups to talk to buildings as the
                    building says "oh no not more "Larsony"" (sorry I couldn't help it)...it
                    is too bad.



                    To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
                    hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    Yahoo! Groups Links
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.