Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
The one consistent though is you need a guy who is a top 10 center in the NHL to win. And you generally need to draft that guy. And generally you draft them in the top 5. But it's not impossible to get them in other ways, but you just need to have that guy to have any chance at winning a cup.
|
I think it’s more accurate to say that most teams who have won have had a centre playing like one of the top 10 centres in the league. If you look at all the teams who have made the finals in the last decade (which I would qualify as “having a chance to win”) in addition to the teams that won, it’s a little less definitive. Top 10 centre, top 10 defenceman, and top 5 goaltender. Oh, and a great coach.
I’d argue that a hot goaltender is a much more crucial “must have.” But any team that doesn’t check all of these boxes is going to struggle to have a chance. And none of them really require a specific pedigree, they just need to hit an elite level, together, at the right time.
Part of the problem in just looking at winners is that some guys get that winner “bump” in reputation, despite it being a team game. The same thing that happens to middle six wingers happens to top centres and goaltenders, but the difference is that we kind of make a joke about middling guys earning that reputation. Chicago didn’t win because of Toews alone, but Toews’ reputation certainly benefited from winning. Not saying he was a whole lot worse than his reputation, but there’s no denying the revisionist history than happens (look at O’Reilly and Ovechkin, for clearer examples).