Patrick Roy's Best Playoff Run

[scott clam]

1986 is before my time too, but just based on roster, the defense was much stronger than 1993. They were led by Larry Robinson, who was no longer as much of an offensive force as he once was, but was probably just as good defensively as he ever was, finishing 3rd in Norris voting that year, and 4th the following year. 1986 also had young Chelios, but that was a couple of years before he got any Norris votes.

They also had a rookie Claude Lemieux, who lead the team in goals that spring.

 

[FerrisRox]

1986 is before my time too, but just based on roster, the defense was much stronger than 1993. They were led by Larry Robinson, who was no longer as much of an offensive force as he once was,

No longer much of an offence force?

Larry Robinson had 82 points in 1985-86, the second highest total of his Hall of Fame career.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

No longer much of an offence force?

Larry Robinson had 82 points in 1985-86, the second highest total of his Hall of Fame career.

Er... I obviously didn't check the season by season stats and was going by memory... I had forgotten 85-86 was an outlier year offensively for 80s Robinson.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

1986 is before my time too, but just based on roster, the defense was much stronger than 1993. They were led by Larry Robinson, who was no longer as much of an offensive force as he once was, but was probably just as good defensively as he ever was, finishing 3rd in Norris voting that year, and 4th the following year. 1986 also had young Chelios, but that was a couple of years before he got any Norris votes.

i disagree. setting aside robinson and chelios, and desjardins on the 93 team, which is a landslide, i prefer the meat of the 86 d.

i’d take green and ludwig as my 3/4 over any combination of odelein, daigneault, schneider, haller all day. they just were a much more experienced veteran playoff tested group.

 

[FerrisRox]

i disagree. setting aside robinson and chelios, and desjardins on the 93 team, which is a landslide, i prefer the meat of the 86 d.

i’d take green and ludwig as my 3/4 over any combination of odelein, daigneault, schneider, haller all day. they just were a much more experienced veteran playoff tested group.

So you disagree... by agreeing?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

So you disagree... by agreeing?

see that's what happens when you read things on your phone in the dark.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Yeah, the 1986 team allowed just 24.8 shots-per-60 in the playoffs to the 1993 team’s 30.0, so statistically, it seems accurate to assess that they were the stronger of the two.

Of course, they only scored 2.77-per-60 to the 1993 team’s 3.02-per-60. In terms of Goals vs. Expectation, the 1986 Montreal Canadiens scored 75.3% of what teams would be expected to score on the Bruins, Whalers, Rangers, and Flames in the same number of minutes - compared to the 1993 Montreal Canadiens scoring 85.6% of what teams would be expected to score on the Nordiques, Sabres, Islanders, and Kings.

Since 1968 expansion only three other champions scored less than 100% of the Goals vs. Expectation - 1975 Philadelphia (96.0%), 2006 Carolina (99.3%), and 1974 Philadelphia (99.6%). Not surprisingly, those are three more Conn Smythe goaltending runs!

So while the 1986 Montreal Canadiens’ defense made the job a little easier, their struggles offensively offered less of a safety net.

 

[JianYang]

From the early 80's to about 93, Montreal never had many superstars, but they always had a solid collection of very good players and were never an easy out in the playoffs.

They did have superstars in this period, but they just happened to play in goal, or defense, so they weren't as sexy.

Robinson, Chelios, and Roy were superstars.

At forward, savard was no longer a superstar. Richer should have been one, but we can understand now that his mental health probably played a factor in that.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i think the great thing about the '93 team up front was they didn't have any superstars, per se, but they had three A- guys in damphousse, muller, and bellows. and i'll channel c1958 here and note that all three guys could play at least two different positions. damphousse and muller were both C/LW hybrids, bellows played both wings and as a natural center occasionally played that position in the NHL.

that forward group got the job done because of its depth. so you have three guys who averaged 39 goals/93 points in the regular season, plus inconsistent contributions from savard and lebeau, who at times looked like they were in that tier of offensive producer but most of the time not. but you need to have those threats sometimes, even just as threats, like when boston would throw seguin on a scoring line in 2011.

but if you list all the other guys in the lineup, that's a pretty versatile forward corps: leclair, brunet, dipietro, dionne, ronan, a mix of big slow guys with great hands and little fast guys, but all of them could slot in on three different lines and most of them at multiple positions. and all of them could hold their own on their own side of the puck. and the best of these "other" guys was keaner playing the best hockey of his life, who was equally good on the first line with damphousse and dipietro or assigned to gretzky's line with carbonneau (and ronan or brunet?)