"Dynastic" teams in the O6

[MadLuke]

In sports, a dynasty is a team or individual that dominates their sport or league for an extended length of time

As if someone making an official list of something like that can have some strong expert opinion to close debate.

I am sure there is some official list of the best restaurant as well that exists and if the owner of HFBoards call ours that we make right now the official HFboards Dynasty list then we would have our official list to go against their official list.

 

[Staniowski]

Yes, there's no official list of dynasties, or rankings of teams, or players, or anything. They are all a matter of opinion.

The problem with dynasties is that they're a relic of the past, soon to be the distant past. It's extremely hard for dynasties to exist now.

The result is that we have weaker teams qualifying as dynasties (according to some definitions), and better teams not qualifying.

 

[MadLuke]

The problem with dynasties is that they're a relic of the past

The Chiefs could have had arguably the "greatest" one had they just won. Tampa Bay could have "easily" won 3 cup in a row and would have been hard but could have won 4.

They went on a 128 pts regular season, cup, cup, cup final run.

The Hawks were a contract or cap rising timing away to have a good shot at being one or the 95-02 Wings, Avs getting an extra push that blocked them.

 

[VanIslander]

I am irked by this thread's title 'cuz: What was a dynasty was CLEAR in the O6.

Since then you would be laughed out of a room if the Islanders and Oilers were not included.

Doubty air quotes "Dynastic" became a thing in the '90's about the Wings & Devils.

Many elegantly distinguished dominant teams from a dynasty team.

 

[daver]

I am irked by this thread's title 'cuz: What was a dynasty was CLEAR in the O6.

Since then you would be laughed out of a room if the Islanders and Oilers were not included.

Doubty air quotes "Dynastic" became a thing in the '90's about the Wings & Devils.

Many elegantly distinguished dominant teams from a dynasty team.

When you have more than one "dynasty" team playing at the same time, it becomes a little less clear doesn't it?

When you have three teams winning every Cup from 1942 to 1969 it becomes less clear that the FIVE dynasties over that timeframe should be revered while no team in the past 45 years is deserving of that historical acknowledgement of greatness doesn't it?

Personally, I would make three in a row the standard for the 06 so remove the '50s Wings and the late '60s Habs to the Honourable Mention category, and reduce the '60s Leafs to '62 to '64.

I think post 1990, two Cups in a row plus other notable success can be argued as the standard to join the '50s Wings and late '60s Habs in the HM category with the Hawks being an exception.

The Wings from '95 to '02
The Pens from '08 to '17
The Hawks from '10 to '15
The Bolts from '15 to '22

 

[VanIslander]

Because you don't like the distribution, you try to re-define the meaning of the word?

 

[jigglysquishy]

From 1948-49 through 1954-55, the Red Wings

Lead the NHL in regular season points 8 seasons in a row
Won 4 Stanley Cups
Made another Stanley Cup Final