Has Colorado’s core underachieved?.

[nbwingsfan]

Nah, it's just the fact that Sakic, Forsberg and Roy were a very dangerous 3-headed trio that nobody wanted the smoke with in the playoffs. From 1996-2004, both were respectively 1-2 in playoff scoring during that time stretch. 2nd place Forsberg (148pts) had a 42pt lead on Fedorov (106pts) and Roy lead with wins and sv% IIRC.

Hockey's a random game obvioulsy, but that Avs team had multiple chances of advancing to the cup finals where it was all but certain they would win vs whoever eastern team that made it to the last dance.

Their individual STAR POWER was something else

That’s significantly better than the Wings with Fed, Yzerman, Shanahan, Lidstrom, Coffey, Hasek etc?

Or Modano, Hull, Zubov, Belfour, etc?

Or Elias, Gomez, Niedermeyer, Stevens, Brodeur?

were some super franchises back then

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

The Avs drafting seriously let them down during this most recent stretch. If they had just average drafting abilities alongside the MacKinnon, Rantanen, Makar trio they likely would've won another cup or two, and have a longer contention window. Instead, they have league worst drafting and that's led to a cycle of hoping internal players magically become significantly better than they've ever demonstrated, followed by desperation moves

 

[KJoe88]

Yes. lol

 

[Jixer19]

They have a cup, if that is underachieving, then what is the play/definition of all the cores that don't have one? There is a reason the Stanley Cup is the hardest to win in all sports

 

[GMR]

No, because Edmonton/Toronto still haven’t won a Cup with their current group. Maybe that changes soon but it just shows you how difficult it is to win one Stanley Cup.

 

[Tryblot]

It's actually pretty embarrassing the avs have done against expectations. They were primed for multiple Stanley cup visits and multiple cups, yet here we are.

 

[landy]

Exceeded expectations:
Penguins
Blackhawks
Kings
Blues
Lightning

Underachieved:
Avalanche
Capitals
Bruins

Everyone else:
lol

Ill take underachieving all day every day then.

 

[ProfessorFink22]

Many of us will never see our teams win a Stanley Cup in our lifetimes. there's a 1/32 chance to win one each year, soon to be 1/36. If you told me I'd get to see my team win even once in my lifetime, I'd take it, happily. Even "only" winning one cup is not underachieving, IMO.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

No, they won a championship.

It's that simple

 

[BednarIsStupid]

Undetachieved thanks to stupid coaching. Only past the second round once in a decade with a team that gets 50 wins a year.

 

[BednarIsStupid]

No, they won a championship.

It's that simple

Florida, Edmonton and Dallas have made numerous deep runs at a time when Colorado should be there threatening with them. Colorado is a trash ass organization that pisses away opportunities to win. This year was the best example of it. Who let's their team give up a 2-0 lead in Game 7? It takes a special kind of stupid to do that and not even make it to OT.

 

[thebeernerd]

If you win even one Stanley Cup with a good core, you've historically done more with it than most teams in the NHL have. Just ask those early Sabres teams. So no, I'd say they haven't underachieved in the slightest.

 

[The Note]

By the standards some people have in this thread, only the Penguins and Blackhawks have managed to avoid underachieving in the cap era...

I think this is a problem across sports fandom. People see the what Hawks/Pens, or Golden State in the NBA, or the Chiefs (and Pats before them to a greater degree) did or are doing and think that should be the standard. Those teams are the outliers - the reason they get so much airtime is because the leagues are designed to stop runs like that from happening. So any team that “only” wins one title gets lumped in as some sort of underachiever.

Firsthand, growing up a Chiefs fan and now being back in the city, I’ve gotten whiplash going from 7 years ago when just hosting an AFCCG seemed impossible and now that is the “floor”. Expectations for good teams have grown ridiculously high across sports.

 

[57special]

First off, they aren't done yet, with the best players of the team still around, and relatively young. As others have said, they can only be so disappointing if they have won a Cup.

Losing Rantanen... I don't know why that happened, but it looks like a mistake. Looked like one when they made the deal, and still does now.

Losing Landeskog prematurely hurt them a lot. He provided the leadership and toughness that the team needed.

It's tough to manage the cap once players win a Cup and get out of their early contracts. CO hasn't been terrible at it, but not great, either.

 

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

It's really hard to win a cup. Lots of things have to go right . Coaching, lack of injuries, puck luck, preferrred match up. The Av's teams of the late 1990's and early 2001 were 1 game away from the Cup finals 3 different times. That's not including the 2 years (1996 & 2001) when they did actually win the cup. I always though they underachieved for the teams they had during those years. But looking back now, I'll take the two cups. They did just fine.

By the standards of the 1996 version of the team, sure they did just fine.

But when you factor in the ridiculous pool of prospects and assets they had at the start to work with around 1992 when the lindros trade went down, two cups just isn't enough.

On the list of hockey arguments nobody cares about Pierre Lacroix is a good candidate for the most overrated GM of all time.

 

[Fatass]

Florida, Edmonton and Dallas have made numerous deep runs at a time when Colorado should be there threatening with them. Colorado is a trash ass organization that pisses away opportunities to win. This year was the best example of it. Who lets their team give up a 2-0 lead in Game 7? It takes a special kind of stupid to do that and not even make it to OT.

The current Florida has a Cup. Current Dallas and Edmonton votes have no Cup. Current Avs core and Panthers core have Cups. The other two cores don’t. For the best players it’s about Cups. There is no consolation prize for those guys.

 

[acor]

They won a cup. Its still more than Edmonton, Carolina, Dallas and Toronto achieved with their cores- and it remains true in at least 3 of 4 cases even after the season.

But having said that... Rantanen trade was literally biggest WTF I remember.

I mean people talking Erat-Forsberg for ages, but at least there were some logic behind it- team in "win now mode" trades for player who they think increases their chances of winning now. TBH, if Erat hadn't gone to shit almost immediately (management has zero control over such things), that trade wouldn't look so bad.

Here I don't see ANY logic. And its kinda karmatic that he was the player who contributed most in their elimination- textbook case of getting punnished for bad decision.

 

[JoVel]

To everyone simplifying it to 'won a Cup = of course not', how good of a core do you need to say that a team underachieved even if they won the Cup? If the Oilers of the 80s only won one Cup, would you still say they met expectations?

Besides, the point isn't that Avalanche should've necessarily won multiple cups by now. It's that they've only made precisely one deep playoff run.

 

[The Macho King]

That one banner is papering over a lot of disappointment.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

To everyone simplifying it to 'won a Cup = of course not', how good of a core do you need to say that a team underachieved even if they won the Cup? If the Oilers of the 80s only won one Cup, would you still say they met expectations?

Besides, the point isn't that Avalanche should've necessarily won multiple cups by now. It's that they've only made precisely one deep playoff run.

The Avs have also had a round 2, game 7 tying goal called back on a phantom offside call, then had both goalies injured during the 2nd round the next year, leaving Andrew Hammond as the starter, then faced Vegas who had 96.5m in total salary on the roster.

The next year they went 16-4 to win the Cup. But the Cup winning game was the last game Landeskog played for about 3 years. And they lost Nuke during the next two playoffs.

What other team has made a deep playoff run with a 3rd string goalie in net, or without half of their top 6 wingers?

 

[JFedol]

That one banner is papering over a lot of disappointment.

True, but It'll lesser in it's value if they choke away this current era. The Flames have 89, Rangers 94 and it's damn near been what?.....like 30+years both teams have done anything of significance since. Sure the cup wins are cherished forever, but it's get tiring after you blow playoff chance after playoff chance (as if the Flames were going to do anything.) IMO.

The whole thing kind of fades away if you're not relevant again.

Calgary missed out in the early 90s badly. The Rangers have probably been pretenders the whole time if you exclude 2015 and 2024 (reach).

 

[Foppberg]

Yes.

 

[JFedol]

A cup win with a 16-4 record is bonkers, but if I'm the Avs, I'd be expecting at the bare minimum 2 more cups to solidify your place in a rarified legendary tier in the history books. There's lots of cup wins that just fade away into obscurity if the team doesn't live up to the potential or just fizzles out.

Mack, Makar & co need to go apeshit, respectfully.

 

[RevengeOfTheDrai]

Undetachieved thanks to stupid coaching. Only past the second round once in a decade with a team that gets 50 wins a year.

Bednar definitely has his faults, but blowing a two goal lead in the third period without even taking to OT is on the players. Bednar didn’t instruct Jack Drury to get a holding penalty all tied in a game 7. He also didn’t tell the D to let Rantanen enter the zone all alone unobstructed to tie the game with a raparound. What adjustments are there to make when you’re leading 2-0 and everything is working?. It’s individual mistakes and special teams for me. Only issue with Bednar is not separating Mack and Necas.

 

[NikolaTesla]

1 cup in 8 years. thats not bad at all.