The Habs haven't done anything of note for way too long for you to have this kind of attitude. Your high horse is a miniature pony and it looks ridiculous.
Ranking the Most Successful Franchises in the Expansion Era
- Thread starter Maestro84
- Start date
-
HFBoards is well aware that today is election day in the US. We ask respectfully to focus on hockey and not politics.
The Habs haven't done anything of note for way too long for you to have this kind of attitude. Your high horse is a miniature pony and it looks ridiculous.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
I think too much was put on winning the cup and not enough on winning. LA and Chicago won in the last 15 years--so that eliminates the previous 40 years?
I think win % since expansion needs to be factored in and number playoff of appearances
I think win % since expansion needs to be factored in and number playoff of appearances
simmer down. if pens didn't win the crosby lottery pick, they'd be in arizona
JJ68
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2017
- 1,345
- 1,128
dude, if you wanna say the Habs havent done jack in the past 25 years then fine...but you cant then deny the pens were absoulutely dismal for the first 26 years before the team ever got anywhere....the Habs never had horrible runs that lasted that long...ever.
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,841
- 13,519
Having the Sharks, who've never won a cup, that high invalidates your list. When has Calgary been all that dominant? Last cup was 25+ years ago, had a finals run in 04. Havent done much in the last decade, unless your just counting overall playoff appearances....and Philly? What
List smells fishy, like hockey didnt exist before 2004
gonna have to go with the isles. they've been a joke since the mid 90s but what they did as a young franchise dwarfs everything that has been done since 67. 5 finals in a row? 4 straight cups? unbeaten in 19 playoff series? definitely the most successful in the expansion era.
Syckle78
Registered User
Arizona already had a team at that point. You'd think a fan from the great market of Montreal would know that.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,658
- 6,171
Philly is a good candidate for the top 3 imo.
Regular season Goal for percentage
Bruins: 118.3%
Canadiens: 120.7%
Flyers: 113%
No one else with a lot of game seem to have significantly dominated except those 3.
Winning percentage (1500+ games):
Bruins: .602
Canadiens: .598
Stars: .584
Flyers: .576
Avs: .564
Most wins:
Bruins: 2119
Canadiens: 2100
Flyers: 1988
Rangers: 1914
BlackHawks: 1855
Playoff wins:
Canadiens: 263
Bruins: 230
Flyers: 221
Pens: 206
Hawks: 202
Wings: 194
Playoff GF/GA %
Montreal: 115.5%
Bruins: 107.8%
Cups:
Canadiens: 10
Oilers: 5
Pens: 5
Isles: 4
Wings: 4
Bruins: 3
The answer that is not Montreal seem a bit ridiculous imo, they had arguably the best team of all time in the 70s, doubled everyone else in Cups, best playoff domination, best regular season domination, etc... during that time, they had many of those only 8-16 losts during the year's, that 4 cup in a row run.
Bruins miss the cups, everyone else had bad strech worst than Habs worst stretch without having more success either when they had it.
Syckle78
Registered User
Yea this is nonsense. Kudos on your new age participation trophy ranking methods but it's all about the cups. Any fan that tries to claim champions aren't the be all end all are lying to themselves cause they haven't gotten to the promised land.
Yea having the Flyers and Devils ahead of Pittsburgh and Detroit (who've been the two model NHL franchises over the last 30 years or so) is absurd. Also, having the Sharks and Flames over Long Island, Edmonton and Chicago is even more ridiculous.
Sustained success is important for any franchise, but when comparing it to winning Lord Stanley, that's when it becomes more of a participation trophy than anything
Last edited:
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,658
- 6,171
Flyers did win 2 cups, not that far from Detroit 4. In the first 16 year's of the expansion Detroit made the playoff 2 times and they were far from a .500 team for almost all the year's between 1967-68 to 1991-1992, reverse the period of success and terrible run and I think it would change the perception.
Flyers has the third most win both in regular season and the playoff during that time with the third best goal for/against ratio, 2 cups, the legendary Broadstreet bully, missed the playoff only 11 times vs 18 times for Detroit or 17 times for the Pens.
It is certainly not absurd to have them at number 3. Some do sound like have some bias with giving more value to the 1993 to 2018 period of time than 1967 to 1992 here.
Take this with a grain of salt..
We didn't knew how to suck enough to draft #1.. Though Crosby, the Pens won the lottery after a strike year or somtn, not their fault.. Ourself, we got Price at #5 wich was cool..
Habs are #1, period.
Didn't meant to be rude btw or I would have talked about the Lemieux era and the way the league saved the Pens asses a few times.. Just respect the 'O 6 and stay humble.. The Oilers had way better teams than any Pens teams ever were and had to deal with the Flames wich were also excellent around that time, I know, I lived it in '86 and '89 IIRC.. Just saying.
My opinion..
Last edited:
Habs 5 in 5 tops that
Thouh it was pre exp..
I guess we'll use our 8 cups in 11 years here..
Last edited:
b in vancouver
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2005
- 7,863
- 5,720
I've been watching hockey since the early 70s and felt the exact opposite about 'like hockey didn't exist before 2004' - that was kinda my point.
Philly only has two Cups and made the Finals 8 times. Boston only has three while going 9 times. However they've probably been the two most consistent teams, year in year out, since expansion. Both teams have made multiple Finals and conference Finals, had great HHOF players, lots of 100+ and 105+ (I'd think them and Montreal probably have the most) seasons so their fans have gotten to watch great competitive hockey for a lot of years.
If I'm going to watch hockey during those cold winter nights - I'd rather the games mean something and I'm entertained and not spending a decade or two or three watching some team that's an after-thought.
Why factor in winning percentage, playoff appearances, President trophies and conference finals?
That should actually be a knock to a franchise if they have the best numbers of these and still haven’t won a cup or just 1 or 2.
Like someone said, too many people in this world Have that “participation mode” mentality. Searching for ways to win at something when some shit is only meant for one team or individual.
The main goal in hockey is to win the Stanley Cup. I don’t care if a team went 82-0-0 in the regular season. If they can’t win the cup, then it’s all for not.
Someone ask a Patriots fan if going 16-0 in the regular season was fun to end up losing in the Super Bowl and end up 18-1 and losing the Super Bowl. Guarantee every single one of them would say how horrible it was and how much of a black eye it was to those within the organization.
Only one team can win every year in sports. That’s what makes them such a grueling endeavor and so special. That main point is to hoist a trophy at the end. In the terms of that NHL, only one team is a winner at the end of the year. While the other 30 are all losers. No other way to cut it.
That should actually be a knock to a franchise if they have the best numbers of these and still haven’t won a cup or just 1 or 2.
Like someone said, too many people in this world Have that “participation mode” mentality. Searching for ways to win at something when some shit is only meant for one team or individual.
The main goal in hockey is to win the Stanley Cup. I don’t care if a team went 82-0-0 in the regular season. If they can’t win the cup, then it’s all for not.
Someone ask a Patriots fan if going 16-0 in the regular season was fun to end up losing in the Super Bowl and end up 18-1 and losing the Super Bowl. Guarantee every single one of them would say how horrible it was and how much of a black eye it was to those within the organization.
Only one team can win every year in sports. That’s what makes them such a grueling endeavor and so special. That main point is to hoist a trophy at the end. In the terms of that NHL, only one team is a winner at the end of the year. While the other 30 are all losers. No other way to cut it.
GoJetsGo55
Registered User
Tuna Tatarrrrrr
Here Is The Legendary Rat Of HFBoards! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Jun 13, 2012
- 1,978
- 1,987
Okay how about no? The Montreal Canadiens are not the Jets, this is the more legendary and historical team ever. A status that your poor Jets will never reach unfortunately for you.
GoJetsGo55
Registered User
No No No NO! Don't get me wrong. Unless we win the cup, we won't get the press that Montreal gets WHEN THEY ARE GOOD! Montreal has an AMAZING legacy that goes back decades and no one can beat that; but to say "Even when last, they matter." that's delusional. I've heard as much about Montreal as I have about Ottawa this year. Both conversations are "wow they aren't as bad as people thought!" To say that you're always in the top tier of importance around the league is arrogant and flat out wrong. No one is really talking about Lafleur at the moment.
The arrogance to say "we're important even when we aren't" is astounding.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,658
- 6,171
Not sure what important would mean when talking about pro-sport teams but yes the Leaf/Habs being bad for a stretch would probably be an major talking point.
Well one could have this exact ranking:
Stanley Cup Champs-Expansion Era
| Montreal Canadiens | 10 |
| Pittsburgh Penguins | 5 |
| Edmonton Oilers | 5 |
| Detroit Red Wings | 4 |
| New York Islanders | 4 |
| Chicago Blackhawks | 3 |
| Boston Bruins | 3 |
| New Jersey Devils | 3 |
| Los Angeles Kings | 2 |
| Colorado Avalanche | 2 |
| Philadelphia Flyers | 2 |
| Washington Capitals | 1 |
| Anaheim Ducks | 1 |
| Carolina Hurricanes | 1 |
| Tampa Bay Lightning | 1 |
| Dallas Stars | 1 |
| New York Rangers | 1 |
| Calgary Flames | 1 |
But having a good season making the playoff tend to be more fun than not making the playoff, winning at least a round a more fun subjective experience than not winning one. And fun is all that matter, it is not like winning the Stanley Cup have anything real other than some fun attach to it, it is just a bit more fun version than a nice playoff run.
Tuna Tatarrrrrr
Here Is The Legendary Rat Of HFBoards! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Jun 13, 2012
- 1,978
- 1,987
Ottawa is nothing compared to Montreal in the hockey World.
And like it or not, this is the answer.
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
GordieHowsUrBreath
Nostalgia... STOP DWELLING ON THE PAST
- Jun 16, 2016
- 2,044
- 588
all those teams have been a joke for the last 25 years, i don't care about the "O 6" you guys need to get over yourselves nobody cares about you being the first 6 teams in the league
when talking about the "modern era", the present and recent past matters a lot more than ancient history when those teams actually had a pulse
you didn't know how to suck enough to draft number 1? that's ok the last 25 years have made up for it
and yes you did mean to be rude
Anisimovs AK
Registered User
This might be easier if we break up the expansion era itself. Considering the first wave happened from 67-79 and the second wave from 92ish-2000
