1 Player Difference among Cup Winners?

[WingsFan95]

Instead of talking about a player carrying their team to the promised land we can open up discussion on teams that were a player difference from losing. Not to say they'd drop off completely.

As stacked as the 02 Wings are I don't think they overcome Avs if you take away Lidstrom, for example. 04 Lightning are obvious without St. Louis. And so forth.

Personal question, replace Giguere with Bryzgalov on that 07 Ducks team and do they still win? Bryz isn't bad and the team was stacked especially on defense but eeked out against Wings.

UPDATE: SKATERS ONLY

Click to read more...

 

[Big Phil]

Hard to say with the 2007 Ducks. Their toughest series was Detroit in the semis, not Ottawa in the final. I'd say Giguere helped be a difference that year.

Take away Crosby or Malkin especially in 2009 and the Pens do not win.

Come to think of it, there are a lot of teams like this. What do Lemieux's Pens look like without him? Gretzky's Oilers? Messier's two Cups without Gretzky...........I say the 1990 Oilers and 1994 Rangers lose.

Roy in 1986 and 1993 for sure.

 

[MadLuke]

A team would probably need to streamroll your 4 rounds quite a bit for someone to be confident they still win the cups without that year best performer.

Almost all recent winner's probably loose without their top player, maybe even missing one of their top 3.

Even the strongest team, say 2013 BlackHawks, Detroit did push them to a game 7 overtime 2-1 game, do they beat them without Patrick Kane, Toews, Hossa or Keith ?

When was the last time a cup winner had an easy enough road to be able to loose a main piece and still win ? Considering even the mighty 2002 Detroit needed a game 7.

The 2010 Hawks maybe ?

 

[tony d]

Do the 1996 Avalanche win the Cup without Patrick Roy I wonder?

 

[Wrath]

Similar-ish question, do the Avs fare better against Detroit in 2002 if Bourque doesn't retire?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

A team would probably need to streamroll your 4 rounds quite a bit for someone to be confident they still win the cups without that year best performer.

Almost all recent winner's probably loose without their top player, maybe even missing one of their top 3.

Even the strongest team, say 2013 BlackHawks, Detroit did push them to a game 7 overtime 2-1 game, do they beat them without Patrick Kane, Toews, Hossa or Keith ?

When was the last time a cup winner had an easy enough road to be able to loose a main piece and still win ? Considering even the mighty 2002 Detroit needed a game 7.

The 2010 Hawks maybe ?

Exactly. A better question would be "who would still win the Cup without their best player." Not many I'd wager.

 

[steve141]

Exactly. A better question would be "who would still win the Cup without their best player." Not many I'd wager.

Not many. The Avs won without Forsberg, they still had Roy, Sakic, Bourque and Blake though.

Could the Red Wings perhaps have won in 1998 without Fedorov (who was probably their top playoff performer at the time)?

 

[JackSlater]

It has to be most true of most teams, especially since the 90s. Most teams don't have the centre depth or defence depth to mitigate the loss of their top centre or defenceman. Even when the team doesn't have a very high end centre or defenceman (2006 Carolina) the team rarely won in dominating fashion and even one subtraction may have been the difference. I wouldn't even consider removing goaltenders because that isn't really fair.

 

[TheAngryHank]

97 Wings and Shanny.

 

[Spirit of McMullen]

Do the 2002-2003 NJ Devils win the Cup with Corey Schwab (and his playoff experience of 0 starts/40 minutes), in net instead of Martin Brodeur?

 

[86Habs]

Pittsburgh most likely doesn't get past New York in 1992 without Ron Francis.

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

Exactly. A better question would be "who would still win the Cup without their best player." Not many I'd wager.

Take Lafleur away from the late 70s Habs dynasty, they still win at least 2-3 Cups, for sure.
Take Potvin away from the Islanders, they lose the cornerstone of their franchise & probably can't make it all the way.
Take Gretzky away from the Oilers, do they develop into a powerhouse Cup team? They were able to do without him after having won 4 Cups with him, but he was the spark.
Early 70s Bruins struggled to win their Cups with Orr, but take him away, can they still do it?
Flyers absolutely not without Clarke, Penguins absolutely not without Lemieux.
Rangers without Messier? Avs without Roy? Likely not.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

Similar-ish question, do the Avs fare better against Detroit in 2002 if Bourque doesn't retire?

Yep, I still think Avs take the series if Bourque played one more year.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Do the 2002-2003 NJ Devils win the Cup with Corey Schwab (and his playoff experience of 0 starts/40 minutes), in net instead of Martin Brodeur?

Not even close. Brodeur didn't have to do much in Rounds 1 and 2, but he was amazing in rounds 3 and 4. That said, I think Scott Niedermayer was the best Devil in 2003, but it was close.

The only time I think the Devils have a shot to win without Brodeur is 2000, but even then, he had to outduel Ed Belfour in the finals.

They win 0 Cups without Scott Stevens.

 

[MadLuke]

Not many. The Avs won without Forsberg, they still had Roy, Sakic, Bourque and Blake though.

Avs-Forsberg is a good pick for an example but he still had 14 points in 11 games that year, Colorado needed 7 games to beat Los Angeles in round 2 with Forsberg playing all the games of that serie.

We cannot say the Avs would have won the Cup without Forsberg that year when he scored 8 points in one of the series Colorado needed a game 7 to win, specially that he had a 2 points/+3 performance in with ended has an essential for them to win the cup 4-3 Avs victory against the Kings.

Many cup winners could have won some of those rounds without one of the best player or even the best player I imagine, but winning 4 rounds in a row in a league were pretty much all playoff team are hard to beat is the challenge.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Boston 2011 would've been better off without Tim Thomas.

 

[goeb]

A team would probably need to streamroll your 4 rounds quite a bit for someone to be confident they still win the cups without that year best performer.

Almost all recent winner's probably loose without their top player, maybe even missing one of their top 3.

Even the strongest team, say 2013 BlackHawks, Detroit did push them to a game 7 overtime 2-1 game, do they beat them without Patrick Kane, Toews, Hossa or Keith ?

When was the last time a cup winner had an easy enough road to be able to loose a main piece and still win ? Considering even the mighty 2002 Detroit needed a game 7.

The 2010 Hawks maybe ?

Maybe the Kings? They dominated the 2012 playoffs like no other in recent memory. However, without Quick, not sure how they would fare.

 

[goeb]

Not many. The Avs won without Forsberg, they still had Roy, Sakic, Bourque and Blake though.

Could the Red Wings perhaps have won in 1998 without Fedorov (who was probably their top playoff performer at the time)?

I think so. I don't believe the Wings were ever really in danger during the playoffs. They had that first round scare vs. the Coyotes but that was about it. I would still favor them over the all the teams they beat in the playoffs if they didn't have Fedorov. That being said, I am sure a one of those series go to game 7.

 

[goeb]

Not even close. Brodeur didn't have to do much in Rounds 1 and 2, but he was amazing in rounds 3 and 4. That said, I think Scott Niedermayer was the best Devil in 2003, but it was close.

The only time I think the Devils have a shot to win without Brodeur is 2000, but even then, he had to outduel Ed Belfour in the finals.

They win 0 Cups without Scott Stevens.

Brodeur saved his best for the Devils toughest series, which was against Ottawa (Anaheim wasn't much of a threat to them on home ice in the finals). It would be interesting to see how the Devils would have fared with schwab, I doubt they get by Ottawa though. I do think they could take the other 3 opponents though with Schwab as the Devils were pretty good at containing scoring chances.

As a side note, I think Langenbrunner takes the 2003 Smythe if not for Giguere's legendary playoff performance (possibly the best postseason goaltending display we have ever seen but it is definitely up for debate)

 

[MadLuke]

Maybe the Kings? They dominated the 2012 playoffs like no other in recent memory. However, without Quick, not sure how they would fare.

That a good one, 4-1, 4-0, 4-1, 4-2, certainly a lot of rooms there, that team was +27 in only 20 games

2012 Quick is one of the best and most dominant goaltending performance in the playoff histories statistically speaking too:
Top Playoff Goaltending, 1968-2017 (Error Rate Analysis)

But even if they give 10-15 more goals, only 5 of their wins were by only 1 goal, quite the domination.

Still they won the first 2 against the devils in overtime with Quick getting in the 3 stars, could have changed the series a lot even if you give them a good mediocre goaltending.

Them and the Ducks feel like the best candidate.

 

[WingsFan95]

Exactly. A better question would be "who would still win the Cup without their best player." Not many I'd wager.

Exactly. A better question would be "who would still win the Cup without their best player." Not many I'd wager.

Exactly. A better question would be "who would still win the Cup without their best player." Not many I'd wager.

I can't change thread title but I should have taken out goaltenders as an option. But yes I wouldn't expect many Cap-Era teams to win minus a big piece, but then we all know that. I think the 80s Oilers without Gretzky absolutely have similair success, if maybe 1 less Cup. Pens without Lemieux, yeah no. I know Shanahan is considered a big piece is the 97-98 Wings runs but I remain unconvinced, I think just a bunch of things went wrong in 95 against the Devils. I think one of those teams still win and don't forget the chokes 99-01.

Do the 1996 Avalanche win the Cup without Patrick Roy I wonder?

No.

Similar-ish question, do the Avs fare better against Detroit in 2002 if Bourque doesn't retire?

I think Detroit still wins. They won Game 6 by beating Roy once, I don't think Bourque changes that and of course Game 7 was a slaughter. Game 7 probably doesn't go as bad but Wings still win.

 

[MadLuke]

I think the 80s Oilers without Gretzky absolutely have similair success, if maybe 1 less Cup.

At least 2 seem pushed to say absolutely.

83-84 they were pushed in a game 7 against Calgary, Gretzky had 13 points that series, 2g2a in the game 7
86-87: Won the cup in 7 game, Greztky had 11 point in the final.

And while they dominated in 84-85 who know what happen when you remove a player that scored 47 points in only 18 games.

 

[Normand Lacombe]

Butch Goring. Perhaps there isn’t a dynasty without his acquisition. The Isles maybe don’t make the SCF in 1980 without him and they never get over the hump.

 

[WingsFan95]

At least 2 seem pushed to say absolutely.

83-84 they were pushed in a game 7 against Calgary, Gretzky had 13 points that series, 2g2a in the game 7
86-87: Won the cup in 7 game, Greztky had 11 point in the final.

And while they dominated in 84-85 who know what happen when you remove a player that scored 47 points in only 18 games.

Yeah I don't think they win 84 but 85-90 I think they win 3 of those 4 if not all. They don't play as free without Gretz but guys would step up with points. They traded Coffey in 87 because of money which I doubt happens without Gretzky for 88 and though that series went 7 games I don't think Gretzky is the marker. It was Hextall. Remember they were up 3-1. Game 2 goes OT but Gretzky wasn't the hero and scored 0 goals in the big Game 4 win.

I think Coffey probably doesn't bounce around the league and stay with Edmonton until Messier leaves. You look at 91-92 where they convincingly lost to Stars and Hawks in the Conference Finals. I'm not saying Coffey changes all that but the mentality could have been different.

Then again management had money problems so maybe team moves to Phoenix...

 

[Jim MacDonald]

I was thinking of Brian Leetch on the 94 Rangers, you guys think with him missing the Rangers still end the 54 year jinx? JUST before I developed my love/following of hockey, but I heard and seen a bit that Leetch was otherworldly in 94...