Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Pittsburgh and Chicago are pretty irrelevant at this point. They won cups almost ten years ago on the backs of teams they started building almost 15 years ago.
In that time many teams have tried and failed to do the same thing. Hell, no team since Pittsburgh has successfully replicated the same approach. They’ve all done it completely different or started similar and had to significantly retool to push themselves over the top.
I’m confident the next 5 years of winners are going to look quite different than the last 5-10. When the Flames are next ready to compete, it might be a very different conversation around what it takes to build a championship calibre team. So there’s limited value in reaching as far back as 15 years ago to try to figure out what the Flames need to do to be a winner 20-25 years after those data points.
|
Agreed.
There seems to be this belief that you can look back, identify teams (usually cup winning teams) and say ‘that’s how you do it’.
It’s probably more accurate, and worth while, to understand the uniques circumstances that each faced. You’ll probably find it goes beyond’pick in the top 5’.
Also, what about the successful teams that didn’t win? What about SJ or Vancouver, or more recently, Carolina? Each of these teams put themselves into cup contention for periods of time that certainly is worth looking at.