|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 13, 2016 15:34:07 GMT -5
Rutherford can't be that bad. You just don't luck in to two Cups. The entire Kessel line as well as guys like Hornqvist and Daley were acquired in Rutherford trades. I questioned his hiring too but you can't argue with the results. I think you can luck into 2 cups. There's no way Carolina deserved that first one. They got lucky with a rookie goalie getting hot and while he had an adequate career after that, it wasn't up to the level of that playoff. I still subscribe to the thinking that you have to have an elite centre and an elite defender to win a Cup. The 06 Hurricanes did not follow that mold. They had the elite centre (Eric Staal in his prime), but their defense consisted of Bret Hedican, Frantisek Kaberle, Aaron Ward, Oleg Tverdosky, Mike Commodore and a 36 year old Glen Wesley. Seriously? That's possibly the worst Stanley Cup winning defense ever in the modern era. When that defense wins, I call it luck...or namely twilight zone goaltending. Rutherford made some decent additions to the existing squad, but he isn't responsible for Crosby, Malkin and Letang. There's that elite centre (two in fact) and the elite defender. It was Ray Shero who traded Jordan Staal for Brian Dumoulin, Brandon Sutter (who Rutherford flipped for Bonino [who played over his head]) and the first rounder who became Derrick Pouliot. That was a great deal for Pittsburgh. I wonder who the Carolina GM was at the time (dripping sarcasm)? |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 13, 2016 17:48:26 GMT -5
At the end of the day they won, that's all that matters. When people start nit picking it just sounds like sour grapes.
Yes, Pitt has 2 great centres but even with those guys, it took 7 years to get back to the Finals. I'll give Rutherford credit for making the right moves such as realizing Perron was a mistake & flipping him for Hagelin.
Every team has their flaws. Even Habs fans pick apart the Cup winners. But all that matters us that Cup banner.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jun 13, 2016 19:04:59 GMT -5
There's no way Carolina deserved that first one. They got lucky with a rookie goalie getting hot and while he had an adequate career after that, it wasn't up to the level of that playoff. And if Justin Williams hadn't ended Koivu's playoffs by nearly blinding him in one eye…(or if he'd have at least been given the 4:00 call) the Habs might've got past them. Our PP was 5th in the league. Every Carolina win was by 1 goal. 2 of them in OT in Montreal. I was so angry that year. We had a 2-0 lead coming home after Ryder scored in OT in Game 2….then we lost the next 4. Ward outright stole it. In Round 3, they barely got past the Sabres in 7, who were decimated on defence. I watched every game of that series…I wanted Carolina gone!  |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 13, 2016 20:51:10 GMT -5
How is Carolina an example of lucking into TWO Cups ....
Ohhhh you mean Rutherford.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 13, 2016 21:16:26 GMT -5
At the end of the day they won, that's all that matters. When people start nit picking it just sounds like sour grapes. Yes, Pitt has 2 great centres but even with those guys, it took 7 years to get back to the Finals. I'll give Rutherford credit for making the right moves such as realizing Perron was a mistake & flipping him for Hagelin. Every team has their flaws. Even Habs fans pick apart the Cup winners. But all that matters us that Cup banner. OH, they deserved to win this year, but I'm annoyed over the Pittsburgh dynasty speculation that has already started. Let them win it twice more in a row and then maybe I'll agree with those sentiments. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 14, 2016 5:21:46 GMT -5
Lucking into 2 Cups ... '86 (10 rookies including Patrick Roy) and '93 (the Roy show and 10 OT W's) ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 14, 2016 6:25:10 GMT -5
Lucking into 2 Cups ... '86 (10 rookies including Patrick Roy) and '93 (the Roy show and 10 OT W's) ... Cheers. 1986 maybe but not 1993. That team finished with 102 points - 6th overall. Plus they had scoring up & down the lineup: www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000451993.htmlPeople look at the OT wins & Roy's level of play & ignore the quality of the team. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 14, 2016 7:29:51 GMT -5
Lucking into 2 Cups ... '86 (10 rookies including Patrick Roy) and '93 (the Roy show and 10 OT W's) ... Cheers. 1986 maybe but not 1993. That team finished with 102 points - 6th overall. Plus they had scoring up & down the lineup: www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000451993.htmlPeople look at the OT wins & Roy's level of play & ignore the quality of the team. I remember discussing the stats of the '93 team a while back and they in the top tier of the league in several categories (special teams for example), but all I was suggesting was that it takes some luck to win 10 OT games ... and, IMO, there's no way they would have won the Cup without Roy ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 14, 2016 10:20:42 GMT -5
I remember discussing the stats of the '93 team a while back and they in the top tier of the league in several categories (special teams for example), but all I was suggesting was that it takes some luck to win 10 OT games ... and, IMO, there's no way they would have won the Cup without Roy ... Cheers. I wanted to see how often goalies won the Conn Smythe. On a website called www.hockeygoalies.org they had a list of Conn Smythe winners playing goal. There were 16 names. The awarding of this trophy began in 1965 so that is almost 1/3 of all winners. Maybe they don't win in 93 without Roy but a lot of other Cup winning teams needed stellar goaltending too, including the 2001 Avalanche when Roy won his 3rd Conn Smythe. Sorry to belabor the point but I feel the 1993 team doesn't get close to the credit it deserves. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 14, 2016 10:25:18 GMT -5
I remember discussing the stats of the '93 team a while back and they in the top tier of the league in several categories (special teams for example), but all I was suggesting was that it takes some luck to win 10 OT games ... and, IMO, there's no way they would have won the Cup without Roy ... Cheers. What a lot of people forget about 93 is that Montreal was trailing Quebec 2-0 in Round 1. We actually lost game 1 in OT on a very weak wrap around goal by Scott Young. Between game 2 and game 3, the Quebec media came out with 2 stories. Out of Montreal they were suggesting that Roy be traded because it was his weak goaltending in the first two games that had the Habs behind the eight ball. Out of Quebec City, their coach claimed that they had solved how to score on Roy. Game three went to OT, and the Habs won with a bit of controversy. Lebeau had a goal in OT called back due to a highstick, and then Damphousse's winner had to go to video review. Remember how Hextall chased after McCreary claiming that Muller kicked it in. The video review showed Muller apparently kicking, but the puck never made it to his skate and went in off Gusarov. Lucky bounce there. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 14, 2016 10:49:25 GMT -5
I remember discussing the stats of the '93 team a while back and they in the top tier of the league in several categories (special teams for example), but all I was suggesting was that it takes some luck to win 10 OT games ... and, IMO, there's no way they would have won the Cup without Roy ... Cheers. What a lot of people forget about 93 is that Montreal was trailing Quebec 2-0 in Round 1. We actually lost game 1 in OT on a very weak wrap around goal by Scott Young. Between game 2 and game 3, the Quebec media came out with 2 stories. Out of Montreal they were suggesting that Roy be traded because it was his weak goaltending in the first two games that had the Habs behind the eight ball. Out of Quebec City, their coach claimed that they had solved how to score on Roy. Game three went to OT, and the Habs won with a bit of controversy. Lebeau had a goal in OT called back due to a highstick, and then Damphousse's winner had to go to video review. Remember how Hextall chased after McCreary claiming that Muller kicked it in. The video review showed Muller apparently kicking, but the puck never made it to his skate and went in off Gusarov. Lucky bounce there. Had Quebec went on to win that game the series might have been over (we won't know either way, I guess) ... JKR is right insomuch as, we had a pretty good team back then, but there was some luck in that Cup run and Muller's goal was a good example of that ... it's been my experience that goals like that tend to go in when you work hard and the '93 team generated a lot of their own luck but doing just that ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 14, 2016 11:00:45 GMT -5
Sorry to belabor the point but I feel the 1993 team doesn't get close to the credit it deserves. I do think you're right in that, the '93 Cup winner doesn't receive enough credit ... I don't want to blow off their efforts, but think they're like a lot of championship teams in that they peaked at the right time (I certainly don't have a problem with that) ... short story; was golfing with a buddy who's friends with Doug Gilmour ... Gilmour once told him that the general feeling from the players he knew felt that the '93 Cup winner wasn't the best team that year ... maybe he was just disappointed in not getting past Gretzky that year, I really don't know ... maybe that's what Gilmour was getting at, but truth be told, I've seen him walking around in town on occasion and I've never approached him ... I just don't have the time of day for him ... Cheers, buds. |
|
