The Final Four - Last Four Cup Winners

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by dammage79

MMM, I'd say the Kings were more of a trojan horse last year.

Yeah, IIRC they were statistically underdogs, while being the hottest team headed into the playoffs.

[nieuwy-89]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I just find it strange though, that these teams can remain good, yet they are built so differently.

The "new NHL" is supposed to be about speed and offence. LA and Boston are bigger and all about defense, while Pittsburgh and Chicago are more the way the "new NHL" is supposed to be.

Yet they still seem to be here year after year. This should make for the best Conference finals in years.

I think Chicago is a much more defensive team than you think. They have a very deep back end with top end talent (Keith) and guys who have stepped up in the past couple of years (Leddy). Quenneville is known to be a systems coach.

I think the success of these four teams show that you can't be one-dimensional, you need offense, defense, good goaltending and depth at all positions. Shows how far teams like the Flames, Oilers, Jets, etc. have to go to become contenders.

[nieuwy-89]

Interesting that we all agree these are four of the top managed teams in the league and these are the same four teams that were rumoured to be in the Iggy sweepstakes.

Not to make this an Iginla thread, but it does show how highly Iginla is viewed among the elite builders and thinkers in today's game.

[Oling_Roachinen]

1945 season saw a semi-finals consisting of the 1941 Stanley Cup Winning Bruins, 1942 Stanley Cup Winning Leafs, 1943 Stanley Cup Winning Red Wings and the 1944 Stanley Cup winning Canadiens. How do you not know that?

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

First time in NHL history (I believe) that the 4 remaining teams are, in fact, the last 4 teams to win the cup.

LA - 2012
Boston - 2011
Chicago - 2010
Pittsburgh - 2009

And, just by coincidence from the way that the conference semi-finals were scheduled, the 5th to last team remaining was Detroit - 2008.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

1945 season saw a semi-finals consisting of the 1941 Stanley Cup Winning Bruins, 1942 Stanley Cup Winning Leafs, 1943 Stanley Cup Winning Red Wings and the 1944 Stanley Cup winning Canadiens. How do you not know that?

The only thing surprising about that is that none of the 6 teams had repeated over those 4 years

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by zamler

My money is still on LA, they have the ability to find ways to win better than any other team.

All things being equal, go with the biggest team.

Chicago though. They have good scoring depth. Better scoring depth than the Kings. Stalberg, Bickell, Shaw, those guys could be the series.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

All things being equal, go with the biggest team.

Chicago though. They have good scoring depth. Better scoring depth than the Kings. Stalberg, Bickell, Shaw, those guys could be the series.

Clifford, Toffoli and King or Richardson along with Nolan could wear those guys down. L.A's Fourth line is just as effective as Chicago's IMO.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Clifford, Toffoli and King or Richardson along with Nolan could wear those guys down. L.A's Fourth line is just as effective as Chicago's IMO.

Yep.

MY point is, can those guys score at the same rate? I'm not sure. In tight games, having a guy who can put it top-cheese vs. in the pads is worth a couple of wins over a series.

I think this is the best final 4 group in years.

[Vedder]

Chicago can't match LA's depth at center and have inferior goaltending. I think the series will be a struggle for them.

[bubbsy]

prettty interesting that this is the first time in history that the past 4 years of cup winners are back in the final four. (naturally you need an even 2 cup winners from each conference over that period for this to work, which does make it a bit more of an anomaly i suppose).

I think anyone who was making predictions at the start of the season looked at the west and had LA, CHI and VAN as your favourites. In the East, pretty safe picks to go with PIT and BOS.

Most years, everyone picks the favourites at the beginning of the year, but there's always a surprise or two. I wonder if in a shortened season, there are less variables (less major injuries or something) that actually reduced the chances of the favourites not getting this far.

in any case, what makes the NHL playoffs different than other major sports is that the underdogs do upset the favoured teams, particularly in the early rounds. We got to enjoy that this year again with first round upsets with the wings, and arguably the sharks (and pretty close for the bruins).

[Dion]

Originally Posted by kirant

So...Penguins are winning the Cup?

The Kings are going to win it

[sa226]

I love plucky underdogs as much as the next guy, but there is something cool about watching great players and teams be just that. Great.

With still a lot of hockey left to be played there are some big names on all sides. I think the potential for more epic story lines involving the best players is almost a certainty.

Toews, Kane, Keith, Kopitar, Doughty, Crosby, Malkin, Iginla, Chara and the list goes on.

Not to mention Sutter, of the Darryl variety.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by dammage79

MMM, I'd say the Kings were more of a trojan horse last year.

I thing the 8th seed is an underdog no matter how you look at it.

[macrov]

Heres the way I see it. A player is drafted at 18 and lose their impact by around 33. So they have around 15-years as a career. Each draft features 1-4 franchise players. So in total, you get 60 or so of those players at any time in the league. And some are better than others. So each team should have 2 of them, and some could have 3. By definition, you can build a team around any 2 franchise players. With that definition, lets see how many franchise players each team has...

Not only do they have significantly more than 2, but they have the higher quality franchise players.

Pitsburgh has 4 - Letang, Crosby, Malkin, Iginla
Boston has 3 - Chara, Bergeron, Rask. Seguin
LA has 5 - Quick, Richards, Carter, Kopitar, Doughty
Chicago has 4 - Kane, Toews, Keith, Hossa

Do a list of each NHL team, and what the total is. Its about 60 by my count, and these 4 teams have 17 of them.

Now, ask yourself how they got those players:

Drafted in the 1-5 slot: Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, Doughty
Traded using players drafted 1-5: Richards (Schenn), Carter (Johnson), Seguin (Kessel)
Obvious pick outside the 1-5: Kopitar (everyone knew he should have gone top 5)
UFAs that chose them because they were amazing. Spoils go to the best: Iginla, Hossa
Signed as a UFA: Chara
Skilled drafting: Keith, Quick, Letang
Fleecing Toronto: Rask, Seguin

Summary: Its about getting lucky enough to draft multiple top 5 picks in good vintage years, drafting a couple of gems down the draft, and fleecing Toronto. Calgary is at a natural disadvantage because we're the one team that actually gets fleeced by Toronto.

[doctajones428]

Fun fact: The last team eliminated in the second round was Detroit, the team that won the cup in 2008

[OILFAN #81]

Not to be a debbie downer but this is the 2nd time in NHL history that this has happened.

I don't think this needs a new thread but thought it would be fun to do. Of the 4 remaining teams, what is your order of wanting them to win? For me:

1. Chicago
2. Boston
3. LA
4. Pittsburgh

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by nieuwy-89

Interesting that we all agree these are four of the top managed teams in the league and these are the same four teams that were rumoured to be in the Iggy sweepstakes.

Not to make this an Iginla thread, but it does show how highly Iginla is viewed among the elite builders and thinkers in today's game.

Yeah him and 50% of everybody with a hockey pool I don't think this was a tough one to figure out.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

Not to be a debbie downer but this is the 2nd time in NHL history that this has happened.

I don't think this needs a new thread but thought it would be fun to do. Of the 4 remaining teams, what is your order of wanting them to win? For me:

1. Chicago
2. Boston
3. LA
4. Pittsburgh

Usually I'd prefer markets that could use the boost or a city that has not won it yet that's not called Vancouver.

But since all these teams are such recent winners, that stuff doesn't matter much.

1. LA
2. Pittsburgh or Boston
3. Chicago

It'd be cool for Darryl to be the first coach to repeat championship since Scotty Bowman in 97-98. Also a hockey boom in tinseltown could raise the visibility of the sport in the States. But really, no big preferences.

[Hockey]

For me it goes

1. Pittsburgh









2.LA





3.Chicago