The 1962 to 1971 Black Hawks: No cups

[Davenport]

What's interesting is the fact that the 1960-61 edition of the Hawks - which hoisted the Cup - was not the best edition of the Hawks in the 1960s, at least on paper. The edition of the Hawks which finished first in 1966-67 was probably the best. Unfortunately - in the playoffs - Chicago faced off against Imlach's Leafs, who had the personnel and know-how to win in the postseason.

Because of Chicago's lack of playoff success - after 1961 - Bobby Hull doesn't get the credit he deserves for rising to the occasion. The fact that he could put up the numbers he did - given the extraordinary effort made to contain him (google Claude Provost) - is quite incredible.

 

[VaCaps Fan]

I feel like the wirtz family didn’t help either…

 

[The Macho King]

Anyway my understanding was always that Mikita and Pilote didn't maintain their level of play in the playoffs, while Hull and Hall largely did. They had depth issues but I could believe that in a regular season, the star power of Hull and Mikita was really hard for the bad teams to contain, but in the playoffs they had to go through much stronger rosters.

I'm sure there's a lack of depth but... like star players played a lot back then, so Mikita and Hull were probably on the ice for like 45 minutes a game. There *is* something that stinks here.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Anyway my understanding was always that Mikita and Pilote didn't maintain their level of play in the playoffs, while Hull and Hall largely did. They had depth issues but I could believe that in a regular season, the star power of Hull and Mikita was really hard for the bad teams to contain, but in the playoffs they had to go through much stronger rosters.

I'm sure there's a lack of depth but... like star players played a lot back then, so Mikita and Hull were probably on the ice for like 45 minutes a game. There *is* something that stinks here.

I mean
1962 - finished 3rd, beat Montreal (who finished 1st), lost to Toronto (who finished 2nd)
1963 - finished 2nd, lost to Detroit (who finished 4th), the top four were really bunched together in standings
1964 - finished 2nd, lost to Detroit (who finished 4th)
1965 - finished 3rd, beat Detroit (who finished 1st), lost to Montreal (who finished 2nd)
1966 - finished 2nd, lost to Detroit (who finished 4th)
1967 - finished 1st, lost to Toronto (who finished 3rd)
1968 - finished 4th, beat New York (who finished 2nd), lost to Montreal (who finished 1st)
1969 - finished last, no playoffs
1970 - finished 1st, beat Detroit (who finished 3rd), lost to Boston (who finished 2nd)
1971 - switched divisions and finished 1st against former expansion teams, beat Philadelphia and New York (who finished 2nd in East), lost to Montreal (who finished 1st in East)

Add in 1961 itself where they finished 3rd and beat Montreal (who finished 1st) and Detroit (who finished 4th)

There are really only a couple seasons that stand out as big individually isolated disappointments. On the whole, of that 1959-1973 stretch you'd have probably liked.. 2, 3 Cups from that era based on their regular seasons, taking into account they essentially got one they shouldn't have. So it's a bit disappointing but it's not crazy out of line with regular seasons overall.

 

[overpass]

I mean
1962 - finished 3rd, beat Montreal (who finished 1st), lost to Toronto (who finished 2nd)
1963 - finished 2nd, lost to Detroit (who finished 4th), the top four were really bunched together in standings
1964 - finished 2nd, lost to Detroit (who finished 4th)
1965 - finished 3rd, beat Detroit (who finished 1st), lost to Montreal (who finished 2nd)
1966 - finished 2nd, lost to Detroit (who finished 4th)
1967 - finished 1st, lost to Toronto (who finished 3rd)
1968 - finished 4th, beat New York (who finished 2nd), lost to Montreal (who finished 1st)
1969 - finished last, no playoffs
1970 - finished 1st, beat Detroit (who finished 3rd), lost to Boston (who finished 2nd)
1971 - switched divisions and finished 1st against former expansion teams, beat Philadelphia and New York (who finished 2nd in East), lost to Montreal (who finished 1st in East)

Add in 1961 itself where they finished 3rd and beat Montreal (who finished 1st) and Detroit (who finished 4th)

There are really only a couple seasons that stand out as big individually isolated disappointments. On the whole, of that 1959-1973 stretch you'd have probably liked.. 2, 3 Cups from that era based on their regular seasons, taking into account they essentially got one they shouldn't have. So it's a bit disappointing but it's not crazy out of line with regular seasons overall.

In addition to their playoff failures, Chicago also had a reputation for choking when it came to winning the league in the regular season, which meant more back then than it does now. In those seasons when they finished 2nd or 3rd, they were frequently in 1st place for much of the season and then lost it in the final month or so.

So I'm not sure it's accurate to say they weren't really expected to win the Cup because they didn't win the league. There were several seasons where they were expected to win the league for much of the season, and no doubt expectations were high for the Cup as well.

1962-63
Late collapse. As of February 24, 1963, Chicago was in first place with a 30-15-14 record and 74 points. Montreal was second with 66 points, and Toronto third with 65. Then the Hawks finished with only 2 wins in their final 11 games, including 2 losses to Toronto who beat them by 1 point in the final standings.

Bobby Hull missed 4 of the final 11 games and only scored 1 goal in 0 assists in the 7 games he played. Glenn Hall allowed 35 goals in 10 games.

1963-64
They were close all season with Montreal and lost by 1 point. No collapse.

1964-65
Another late collapse. As of February 24, 1965, the Hawks were 32-20-6. They were in 1st place, 3 points ahead of Montreal and 8 points ahead of Detroit and Toronto. Although they had played 2-3 games more than the others, they were also first in W% (0.603 to Montreal's 0.598). Then they only won 2 of their final 12 games, including 5 straight losses to finish the season. Detroit won 12 of their final 15 and finished 11 points ahead of Chicago. Montreal was just 7-5-2 to finish but that still put them 7 points ahead of Chicago in the end.

Bobby Hull scored only 1 goal and 4 points in the final 10 games. The whole team scored only 7 goals in those last 5 losses.

1965-66
Yet another late collapse. Halfway through the season, on January 13, 1966, the Hawks were 21-10-4 and led Detroit and Montreal by 4 points each. On Feb 16, they were 28-16-7 and still led Montreal and Detroit by 4 points (Montreal had 2 games in hand). Through March 2, they were 32-18-7 and led Montreal by 1 point, and Montreal had a game in hand so they were essentially tied. And then, once again, they lost it down the stretch, going 5-7-1 while Montreal went 10-4-0 and easily won the league.

Some said the team wore themselves out trying to get Bobby Hull to 50 goals. Hull scored his 50th goal on March 2 when they were leading the league.

1966-67
The Hawks finally won the league for the first time in club history. They went wire to wire and closed strong, going 8-4-3 in their final 15, and finishing 17 points clear of second place.

1967-68
A second half collapse. After a terrible 0-6 start, the Hawks went 20-4-9 in their next 33 games and were in first place by 3 points on January 7, 1968. Then they went 12-16-4 to finish the season and dropped to 4th.

1968-69
Another second half collapse. On January 8, 1968 they were 22-14-3 and in 3rd place, only 4 points behind Montreal for first. Then they went 12-19-6 in the remaining games and dropped all the way to last place in the East division among the Original Six teams.

1969-70
Success again. After losing their first 5 games, they kicked it into high gear for the rest of the season and won the league for a second time.

1970-71
Another good season. Finished 3rd in the league. Nobody was catching the Bruins but the Rangers overtook them for 2nd with 5 games to go.

To summarize, Chicago was leading the league late in the season in 4 of 5 seasons from 62-63 through 66-67, was a very close second in the other season, and only won the league once. And then in 67-68 and 68-69 they looked like contenders to win the league and the Cup through the first half of the season, and then collapsed in the second half of the season.

From 1962-63 through 1970-71, the Hawks looked like contenders at the halfway point of every single season. If you just look at the final regular season finishes and compare to their playoff results, it doesn't really capture the expectations they had built each season, or the disappointing late season finishes.

 

[overpass]

I'll suggest another reason for the Hawks performing better in the regular season than the playoffs. The change in scheduling and days between games from the regular season to the playoffs was not to their advantage.

Chicago was the best team in the league playing on 0 days of rest in the regular season. But in the playoffs, almost all games were on 1 or 2 days rest, where the Leafs and Habs were better performers.

The table below shows the change in scheduling from the regular season to the playoffs. From 61-62 through 70-71, looking at the Original Six clubs only, 32% of regular season games were played with 0 days of rest, and 52% were played with 1-2 days of rest. In the playoffs, only 8% of games were played with 0 days of rest, and 82% of games were played with 1-2 days of rest.

1961-62 through 1970-71, number of games

	RS	RS%	PO	PO%
0 days rest	1409​	32.4%​	29​	7.7%​
1 day rest	817​	18.8%​	209​	55.6%​
2 days rest	1446​	33.3%​	101​	26.9%​
3 days rest	480​	11.0%​	25​	6.6%​
4 days rest	192​	4.4%​	12​	3.2%​
Total	4344​	100.0%​	376​	100.0%​

Per the table below, Chicago was the best regular season team in the league with 0 days of rest - a situation which rarely occured in the playoffs. With 1-2 days of rest, Toronto and Montreal were both better than Chicago. Both Toronto and Montreal were much better with 1-2 days of rest than they were on 0 days of rest. In fact, Toronto was the worst Original Six team on 0 days of rest, possibly because they had the oldest roster in the league.

1961-62 through 1970-71, regular season W%

	Chicago	Detroit	Toronto	Montreal	Boston	Rangers
0 days rest	0.607​	0.554​	0.417​	0.546​	0.442​	0.543​
1 day rest	0.545​	0.435​	0.591​	0.711​	0.497​	0.434​
2 days rest	0.589​	0.443​	0.627​	0.649​	0.445​	0.490​
3 days rest	0.636​	0.585​	0.538​	0.557​	0.489​	0.620​
4 days rest	0.556​	0.426​	0.688​	0.707​	0.556​	0.368​

However, the scheduling doesn't explain Detroit's 3 upset victories over Chicago in the 4 seasons from 1963-1966.

(You can find these statistics using the Days between games report at nhl.com)

 

[VanIslander]

The 1980s Chicago drought was a whole other level of pain. And i as a Canucks fan was all there for it. Misery loves company.

 

[overpass]

I'll suggest another reason for the Hawks performing better in the regular season than the playoffs. The change in scheduling and days between games from the regular season to the playoffs was not to their advantage.

Chicago was the best team in the league playing on 0 days of rest in the regular season. But in the playoffs, almost all games were on 1 or 2 days rest, where the Leafs and Habs were better performers.

I looked into this a little more and it looks like the details of scheduling due to the particular geography of the league are to blame for the difference in winning percentage with 0 days of rest. Toronto and Montreal played almost all their road games against American teams on 0 days of rest, which explains their lower winning percentage in these situations.

On the other hand, most of Chicago's games with 0 days of rest were home games, and they played most of their road games with 2 days of rest.

That said, you could still make the case that the regular season scheduling - especially playing most road games with 0 days of rest - was unfavourable to Toronto and Montreal in particular, and they performed better in the playoffs in part because they had at least 1 day between each game.

 

[57special]

Do the 60s only, which is what this thread is about. Pointless post.


The 1950s were a bleak period for the Chicago Blackhawks. The team consistently languished at the bottom of the NHL standings, struggling to find their footing amidst strong competition from the other Original Six teams. Between the 1949-50 and 1958-59 seasons, the Blackhawks finished last in the league six times. A combination of poor management, lack of star power, and inconsistent play contributed to their woes. The Blackhawks' home games at the Chicago Stadium were sparsely attended, reflecting the disillusionment of a dwindling fan base.

The 1960s marked a period of significant change for the Blackhawks. The turnaround began with the astute management of Tommy Ivan, who became the general manager in 1954. Ivan's strategic vision and keen eye for talent were instrumental in revitalizing the team. One of his most significant moves was the acquisition of future Hall of Famer Glenn Hall in 1957. Hall, known as "Mr. Goalie," provided the Blackhawks with the stability and reliability they desperately needed in the net. His consistency and skill earned him numerous accolades and solidified the team’s defense.

Another pivotal figure was Bobby Hull, who debuted with the Blackhawks in 1957. Hull's explosive speed, powerful shot, and scoring prowess quickly made him one of the league's most electrifying players. He won the Art Ross Trophy as the league's leading scorer multiple times during the 1960s, becoming the face of the franchise and a fan favorite. Hull's partnership with Stan Mikita, another emerging star, created one of the most dynamic duos in NHL history. Mikita's playmaking abilities complemented Hull's goal-scoring talent, and together, they transformed the Blackhawks' offensive capabilities.

The culmination of the Blackhawks' resurgence came in the 1960-61 season when they won the Stanley Cup, their first championship since 1938. This victory was a testament to the team's improved performance and the effective strategies implemented by the management. The Blackhawks defeated the Detroit Red Wings in the finals, showcasing a blend of solid defense, stellar goaltending, and high-powered offense.

Throughout the 1960s, the Blackhawks remained a competitive force in the NHL, consistently finishing near the top of the standings and making several deep playoff runs. The decade also saw the development of other key players like Pierre Pilote, a defenseman who won the Norris Trophy as the league's best defenseman three times, and Phil Esposito, who later became a star in his own right.

​

The transformation of the Chicago Blackhawks in the 1960s from a struggling franchise to a championship team is a remarkable story of strategic rebuilding, effective management, and the emergence of key talent. The foundations laid during this decade not only brought immediate success but also established a winning culture that would benefit the organization for years to come. The contrast between the dismal performance of the 1950s and the triumphs of the 1960s underscores the impact of visionary leadership and the importance of building a cohesive and talented team.

The Scooter Line – Chicago Blackhawks (1960s)​

Doug Mohns-Stan Mikita-Ken Wharram

"While Bobby Hull and Stan Mikita put up astronomical numbers with the Blackhawks, they weren’t even linemates. Mikita centered the Scooter Line, with Wharram and a revolving winger (Ted Lindsay, who was replaced by Ab McDonald and later Mohns).

Wharram played parts of 14 NHL seasons, all with the Hawks, and scored at least 20 goals in seven consecutive seasons from 1962-69. He was a member of two All-Star teams and was known for his speed as a skater."

I believe Pit Martin centered Hull in the mid late 60's, don't know who before then.

 

[Moose Head]

The Scooter Line – Chicago Blackhawks (1960s)​

Doug Mohns-Stan Mikita-Ken Wharram

"While Bobby Hull and Stan Mikita put up astronomical numbers with the Blackhawks, they weren’t even linemates. Mikita centered the Scooter Line, with Wharram and a revolving winger (Ted Lindsay, who was replaced by Ab McDonald and later Mohns).

Wharram played parts of 14 NHL seasons, all with the Hawks, and scored at least 20 goals in seven consecutive seasons from 1962-69. He was a member of two All-Star teams and was known for his speed as a skater."

I believe Pit Martin centered Hull in the mid late 60's, don't know who before then.

I think Hull’s centers were Hay, Espo and then Martin. Not sure before Hay

 

[overpass]

I think Hull’s centers were Hay, Espo and then Martin. Not sure before Hay

I think Hull himself was the centre for his first two NHL seasons, before he moved to LW. From the scoring logs, it looks like his wingers included Ed Litzenberger, Eric Nesterenko, and Ron Murphy.

 

[Section 104]

One thing I was wondering about: in the 1950s and 1960s how were teams getting from one city to the next: by airplane or train? If it was by train, with Chicago being the farthest west, would they be tired and that would explain the poor performance late in the season and in the playoffs?
I remember a couple decades ago HBO had a film about the NFL in the 1950s. Pat Summerall, who was with the Chicago Cardinals for much of the decade, said they had a three day train trip when they went out to California to play either Los Angeles or San Francisco.