Ranking the Most Successful Franchises in the Expansion Era

[Maestro84]

That's a reasonable answer. I figured it might have something to do with the Penguins being bad for so long. Another thing that a lot of people tend to hold against them is their outrageous luck in the draft, and outright tanking for Lemieux. I don't have a problem that - I would have tanked for Lemieux too. And hating people for their good fortune is not good for one's health (not saying you're like that).

If anyone's actually going to hold "lucky drafting" against the Penguins, then every other sports franchise who has "tanked" to get generational talents should also be "penalized," and they're A LOT of them too. Such as:
Spurs tanked to get Tim Duncan
Leafs tanked to get Matthews/Marner
Oilers tanked to get McDavid
Cavs tanked to get LeBron
etc, etc, etc.

 

[Saintb]

Since the league expanded from just 6 teams, which teams have been the most successful?
IMO, the top 10 would be:
1. Montreal Canadiens: 10 cups; 11 finals - 82 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1968, 1969, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1986, 1993)

2. Pittsburgh Penguins: 5 cups; 6 finals - 76 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1991, 1992, 2009, 2016, 2017)

3. Edmonton Oilers: 5 cups; 7 finals - 59 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1984, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1990)

4. Detroit Red Wings: 4 cups; 6 finals - 62 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1997, 1998, 2002, 2008)

5. New York Islanders: 4 cups; 5 finals - 43 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1980, 1981, 1982, 1983)

6. Boston Bruins: 3 cups, 9 finals - 72 total team/individual awards won

Cup winning years (1970, 1972, 2011)
​

7. Chicago Blackhawks: 3 cups; 6 finals - 47 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (2010, 2013, 2015)

8. New Jersey Devils: 3 cups; 5 finals - 33 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1995, 2000, 2003)

9. Philadelphia Flyers: 2 cups; 8 finals - 48 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1974, 1975)

10. Los Angeles Kings: 2 cups; 3 finals - 39 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (2012, 2014)

It would give a better picture if each cup win was adjusted for the number of teams in the league at the time. The total factors could be added to get the real picture. Too bad I am so lazy lol

 

[b in vancouver]

Yea the pens were off to rough start with their franchise, but imo, what they've been able to accomplish over the last 30 years or so has more than made up for that bad start. Remember, this isn't like rating individual players, this is a thread for rating franchises, so the amount of cups won will always be the primary determinant for how successful a franchise is

Disagree about that being the primary determinant. The Isle and Oil are best examples of this. If you're under the age of 45 (I'm not) then how would you possibly think those teams are 'successful' franchises?

That's not a 'rough start' - that's a generation. That 33/34 year-old man taking his 10 year-old to the inaugural night. That 10 year-old is 34 years old taking his 10 year-old to the first time they have a competitive team - sure, it's a super great team by then but that original dad is in his 60s.

I have no horse in the race between Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New Jersey, The Isle - but stating a team is 'successful' because of some all-star players and a couple of Cup wins is missing the point of what's actually happened.

How about look at something like win % also, conference finals, etc.

 

[JJ68]

pens should be number 1

canadiens at number 1 seems silly when they have been irrelevant for the last 25 years

lol Habs are never irrelevant boy. When you no longer have your star players, your franchise will once again be on life suppport. Habs are always gonna be in that upper tier. Even when last, they matter.

 

[Maestro84]

Disagree about that being the primary determinant. The Isle and Oil are best examples of this. If you're under the age of 45 (I'm not) then how would you possibly think those teams are 'successful' franchises?

That's not a 'rough start' - that's a generation. That 33/34 year-old man taking his 10 year-old to the inaugural night. That 10 year-old is 34 years old taking his 10 year-old to the first time they have a competitive team - sure, it's a super great team by then but that original dad is in his 60s.

I have no horse in the race between Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New Jersey, The Isle - but stating a team is 'successful' because of some all-star players and a couple of Cup wins is missing the point of what's actually happened.

How about look at something like win % also, conference finals, etc.

You have more than a valid point, but in my perspective, a sports franchises' three main goals are to:
1. Help the team win championships
2. If not, do the next best thing and try to make as deep of a run as possible (i.e. the cup finals)
3. Acquiring household names to bolster the franchise's chances of winning, selling merchandise, increasing national views, ratings and airtime, along with consistently bringing butts to the seats

And in this case, the Penguins have outdone the Devils in all three categories.

 

[pvr]

It really depends on how you define it. Of course The Cup is the end-game however
The Oil and Isle above the Flyers and Bruins seems sorta ridiculous.
Penguins above the Devils seems wrong.
The Sharks haven't won a Cup but have damn successful.
The Flames have been competitive nearly every year of their existence.

I know you're looking at Cups as a determining factor but how about 105+ point seasons where fans get to enjoy hockey games, or reaching the Conference Finals, or making the playoffs?

Or balancing success versus failure?

Honestly. The early Isle's 80s team is one of my favourite of all-time but in what world would you think they've been more 'successful' than Boston?

How are The Hawks there? Recency bias? The Hawks were nothing for decades.
The Wings proved themselves with 20 years but weren't much either for two decades beforehand.

You see, this is what happens when you’ve been following hockey for only ten years. You’re historically ignorant of the facts.

The Chicago Blackhawks have the second longest playoff streak in the history of the NHL. at 28 consecutive seasons from 1969-70 through 1996-97. All are post expansion. They typically were one of the better teams in the NHL during that period, losing two Cups to the dynasty Canadiens and one to Lemieux’s Pens, and not making it past the dynasty Oilers.

Your recency bias is post-1997 Hawks, teams decimated by their owner selling off all assets and poorly running the franchise until his death.

 

[Thenameless]

You have more than a valid point, but in my perspective, a sports franchises' three main goals are to:
1. Help the team win championships
2. If not, do the next best thing and try to make as deep of a run as possible (i.e. the cup finals)
3. Acquiring household names to bolster the franchise's chances of winning, selling merchandise, increasing national views, ratings and airtime, along with consistently bringing butts to the seats

And in this case, the Penguins have outdone the Devils in all three categories.

I agree. Over say 20 or 30 years, a team that wins around half of its game every year, sometimes getting into the playoffs and sometimes not (but never winning a Stanley Cup), is not as successful as a team that averaged 20 or 30 wins for most seasons, but was able to win even just 1 or 2 Cups. For me, the Cup is the Holy Grail.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

pens should be number 1

canadiens at number 1 seems silly when they have been irrelevant for the last 25 years

LOL okay...

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

I agree with the OP list excepted that the Avalanche should be before the Kings.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

pens should be number 1

canadiens at number 1 seems silly when they have been irrelevant for the last 25 years

The best Canadian team for the longest time. Currently the Jets.

 

[Thenameless]

If anyone's actually going to hold "lucky drafting" against the Penguins, then every other sports franchise who has "tanked" to get generational talents should also be "penalized," and they're A LOT of them too. Such as:
Spurs tanked to get Tim Duncan
Leafs tanked to get Matthews/Marner
Oilers tanked to get McDavid
Cavs tanked to get LeBron
etc, etc, etc.

While true, tanking was more effective in 1984 when the Penguins got Mario Lemieux. Back then, it was guaranteed that you were going to get him. With the more modern examples of Duncan, Lebron, and McDavid, the lottery can really throw a wrench into a team's plans especially if the draft is not a deep one (i.e. a big drop off from say #1 to #2-#4).

 

[Goldenshark]

Since the league expanded from just 6 teams, which teams have been the most successful?
IMO, the top 10 would be:
1. Montreal Canadiens: 10 cups; 11 finals - 82 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1968, 1969, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1986, 1993)

2. Pittsburgh Penguins: 5 cups; 6 finals - 76 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1991, 1992, 2009, 2016, 2017)

3. Edmonton Oilers: 5 cups; 7 finals - 59 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1984, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1990)

4. Detroit Red Wings: 4 cups; 6 finals - 62 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1997, 1998, 2002, 2008)

5. New York Islanders: 4 cups; 5 finals - 43 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1980, 1981, 1982, 1983)

6. Boston Bruins: 3 cups, 9 finals - 72 total team/individual awards won

Cup winning years (1970, 1972, 2011)
​

7. Chicago Blackhawks: 3 cups; 6 finals - 47 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (2010, 2013, 2015)

8. New Jersey Devils: 3 cups; 5 finals - 33 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1995, 2000, 2003)

9. Philadelphia Flyers: 2 cups; 8 finals - 48 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (1974, 1975)

10. Los Angeles Kings: 2 cups; 3 finals - 39 total team/individual awards won
Cup winning years (2012, 2014)

Good God, why are we going back over 50 years and half the league’s existence to come up with this narrative?

When you say Expansion Era I’m not thinking 1967 when the league doubled from 6 to 12 (1 of which folded) and players still didn’t wear helmets but 1991-2000 when the league went from 21 to 30 teams and resembles its most current state right now minus Vegas and Seattle.

Let’s talk the most succesful since that time and Pittsburgh and Detroit would easily be Number 1 and 2.

 

[Beauner]

any team that hasn't won shit since the Ford administration has no place in this thead

 

[Howe Elbows 9]

When you say Expansion Era I’m not thinking 1967 when the league doubled from 6 to 12 (1 of which folded) and players still didn’t wear helmets but 1991-2000 when the league went from 21 to 30 teams and resembles its most current state right now minus Vegas and Seattle.

Let’s talk the most succesful since that time and Pittsburgh and Detroit would easily be Number 1 and 2.

My top 13 since the 1991-92 season...

1. Detroit Red Wings - 4 Stanley Cups, 6 Finals appearances
2. Pittsburgh Penguins - 4 Stanley Cups, 5 Finals
3. New Jersey Devils - 3 Stanley Cups, 5 Finals
4. Chicago Blackhawks - 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Finals
5. Los Angeles Kings - 2 Stanley Cups, 3 Finals
6. Colorado Avalanche - 2 Stanley Cups
7. Boston Bruins - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
8. Anaheim Ducks - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
9. Washington Capitals - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
10. Tampa Bay Lightning - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
11. New York Rangers - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
12. Dallas Stars - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
13. Carolina Hurricanes - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals

 

[Ridley Simon]

My top 13 since the 1991-92 season...

1. Detroit Red Wings - 4 Stanley Cups, 6 Finals appearances
2. Pittsburgh Penguins - 4 Stanley Cups, 5 Finals
3. New Jersey Devils - 3 Stanley Cups, 5 Finals
4. Chicago Blackhawks - 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Finals
5. Los Angeles Kings - 2 Stanley Cups, 3 Finals
6. Colorado Avalanche - 2 Stanley Cups
7. Boston Bruins - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
8. Anaheim Ducks - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
9. Washington Capitals - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
10. Tampa Bay Lightning - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
11. New York Rangers - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
12. Dallas Stars - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
13. Carolina Hurricanes - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals

Yep. Although with the Caps run the past 10 years (1 Cup and 3 Prez Trophies), I'd prob have them over Anaheim and Boston. Biased obv as a Caps fan (and recency bias to boot)

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

It took the Penguins 26 bloody years to get 100 points!
They had a year of 53 points near two decades in!
Oh - sorry... that wasn't close to their worst year as the year before they had 38 points. They also 45.
Lemieux, Jagr, Crosby, Malkin and a couple Cups might have you thinking they're successful - and if we were talking since 1990 you'd be right - but if it's since expansion.... come on.
20+ years - name the best couple players they had before Lemieux.

Pens have left more of a mark on hockey history than teams like NJ and Philly....without a doubt. Yea pre-1990 was bad but Philly for example hasn't done anything of note since 1976. Pens have 5 cups and more individual awards than any team. They've also made the playoffs 24 of the last 28 years.

 

[Maestro84]

Good God, why are we going back over 50 years and half the league’s existence to come up with this narrative?

When you say Expansion Era I’m not thinking 1967 when the league doubled from 6 to 12 (1 of which folded) and players still didn’t wear helmets but 1991-2000 when the league went from 21 to 30 teams and resembles its most current state right now minus Vegas and Seattle.

Let’s talk the most succesful since that time and Pittsburgh and Detroit would easily be Number 1 and 2.

Well if we're just evaluating the last 30 seasons of hockey (since 1990), then my list would probably be:
1. Pittsburgh Penguins: 5 cups; 6 finals
2. Detroit Red Wings: 4 cups; 6 finals
3-4. New Jersey Devils: 3 cups; 5 finals or Chicago Blackhawks: 3 cups; 4 finals
5-6. Colorado Avalanche: 2 cups; 2 finals or Los Angeles Kings: 2 cups; 3 finals
7. Washington Capitals: 1 cup; 2 finals
8. Anaheim Ducks: 1 cup; 2 finals
9. Boston Bruins: 1 cup; 2 finals
10. Tampa Bay Lightning: 1 cup; 2 finals

 

[ColbyChaos]

Pens have left more of a mark on hockey history than teams like NJ and Philly....without a doubt. Yea pre-1990 was bad but Philly for example hasn't done anything of note since 1976. Pens have 5 cups and more individual awards than any team. They've also made the playoffs 24 of the last 28 years.

Yea they really have, they are a big reason why there is a draft lottery in place now coupled with sens throwing games for Daigle.

 

[Chili]

Lemieux, Jagr, Crosby, Malkin.

Messier, Kurri, Anderson, Coffey, Fuhr.

Bossy, Trottier, Potvin, Gillies.

Lafleur, Robinson, Roy, Gainey.

Build through the draft...

 

[BigEezyE22]

My top 13 since the 1991-92 season...

1. Detroit Red Wings - 4 Stanley Cups, 6 Finals appearances
2. Pittsburgh Penguins - 4 Stanley Cups, 5 Finals
3. New Jersey Devils - 3 Stanley Cups, 5 Finals
4. Chicago Blackhawks - 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Finals
5. Los Angeles Kings - 2 Stanley Cups, 3 Finals
6. Colorado Avalanche - 2 Stanley Cups
7. Boston Bruins - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
8. Anaheim Ducks - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
9. Washington Capitals - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
10. Tampa Bay Lightning - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
11. New York Rangers - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
12. Dallas Stars - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals
13. Carolina Hurricanes - 1 Stanley Cup, 2 Finals

Did you just chop off the first of Pittsburgh's back-to-back cups by accident or for convenience?

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

lol Habs are never irrelevant boy. When you no longer have your star players, your franchise will once again be on life suppport. Habs are always gonna be in that upper tier. Even when last, they matter.

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

lol Habs are never irrelevant boy. When you no longer have your star players, your franchise will once again be on life suppport. Habs are always gonna be in that upper tier. Even when last, they matter.

for them to matter outside of canada they have to actually be... good

they haven't mattered since 93

it's better to be lucky than good, the pens happen to be both lol

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

arguing the devils or flyers over the pens is almost as silly as the guy arguing tampa is the closest team to a dynasty since the lockout

 

[Howe Elbows 9]

Did you just chop off the first of Pittsburgh's back-to-back cups by accident or for convenience?

I created my list in reply to a post that considered it relevant to list the most successful teams since the league expanded from 21 to 30 teams. The first season with more than 21 teams was the 1991-92 season.

 

[Based Anime Fan]

arguing the devils or flyers over the pens is almost as silly as the guy arguing tampa is the closest team to a dynasty since the lockout

Normally I would disagree with you, but can't find any fault. Both very consistent franchises (62.86% Playoff appearances per season for NJD vs 66.67% for PIT). Devils had better defense and Goaltending for most of that, the Pens had better forwards.

Although, the Flyers have had more playoff appearances than either franchise (76.47% of seasons), with no massive gaps in between them (5 in-a-row for both PHI and NJD, 6 for PIT).

Ultimately these three teams are the most consistent of the 5 ex-Atlantic Division teams (PIT-PHI-NJD-NYR-NYI), with the NYI being, outside of their 4-peat, the least consistent of all 5. If we want to include the 1982+ Patrick division, the team most consistent team is actually the Capitals, with a 80.56% playoff appearance record.

Ultimately that all means nothing as this thread is about success and not prolonged consistency. So the list for me is, ultimately:

1. Montreal (10 cups since expansion, been lean on winning as of late)
2/3/4/. Edmonton (5 cups in a very short time), Islanders (4 cups in a row), Penguins (5 cups, but spread out with decent consistency),
5/6. Detroit (4 cups with average consistency, but a large number of bad seasons), New Jersey (3 cups with decent consistency, a number of bad seasons)
7/8/9/10. Chicago (3 cups in a short time, stretches of futility), Kings (2 cups in a short time, years of futility), Flyers (2 cups, good consistency), Colorado (2 cups in a short time, decent consistency)

I can, at least, place the most successful teams into tiers that combine literal success, and consistency (which is also an indicator of success). Ultimately making the playoffs for a billion years but never doing anything means you're successful, but ultimately the goal is to win championships. Teams like Detroit and NJD were good most of the 90's and 00's, but have taken a dive lately as years of success ultimately catch up to any team regardless of drafting/scouting skill. Edmonton had a very good run early on, as did the Islanders, but were hampered by terrible management/scouting/drafting.