Hello? Is Anyone Home?

I know this is “Hockey Trade Rumors”, but all this verbatim reporting of musings that can be found elsewhere are, frankly, boring the teats off of me. It’s not even worth the effort for me to torment anyone…..

So – let’s have a little diversion, and hopefully stir up a little ruckus in the process. That’s what made this place fun, before the “tickertape” took over….

Here’s the assignment: You will be voting on the “Greatest Hockey Dynasty”. I will list teams and years that I deem appropriate, because it’s my article, and I can do that. As usual, you will be free to add your own, and / or ridicule my choices.

I will list teams in chronological order, and will make my vote immediately following.

1.) 1946 – 1949 Toronto Maple Leafs

2.) 1953 – 1955 Detroit Red Wings

3.)1956 – 1960 Montreal Canadiens

4.) 1961 – 1964 Toronto Maple Leafs

5.) 1967 – 1969 Montreal Canadiens

6.) 1973 – 1975 Philadelphia Flyers

7.) 1975 – 1979 Montreal Canadiens

8.) 1979 – 1983 New York Islanders

9.) 1986 – 1988 Edmonton Oilers

10.) Insert your modern day Wings – Devils propaganda here.

My vote: The Islanders. For a very simple reason, devoid of the buttresses of logic and rhetoric. I was there to see most of those games (the home ones, anyway) – and I have never seen a group of individuals who better exemplified the concept of “the sum is greater than the whole of the parts”.

This was not a team of “stars”, although they had them in abundance (Smith, Bossy, Trottier, Potvin, Lafontaine, et al.). My fonder memories are of the “role players” – you never knew on a given night who was going to “step up” – but everyone was capable of it.

Tonelli, Nystrom, Goring, Gillies, Morrow, Langevin, Flatley – I rest my case.

Besides, any goalie who whacks Whine Gretzky on a regular basis is a hero in my book (there’s my gratuitous shot at the alleged “Great One” – gotta do it, it’s in my publishing contract).

Just thinking back, I’m getting “verklempt”. Talk amongst yourselves.

SCTP – “No one was driving, officer – we were all in the back seat singing……”


91 Responses to Hello? Is Anyone Home?

  1. DaMick says:

    it was between The Oil & the Isles…

    so it actually was a tough call.

  2. aaron says:

    The Isles won 4 consecutive Cups, and whipped Gretzky’s Oilers when they had basically the same makeup they did for their entire dynasty. Granted, Gretzky’s Oilers came back and did the same thing the following year, but the Isles were in decline by then.

    It just has to be them. I mean, 4 straight Cups is unbelievable. You could then use the logic that the 60’s Habs won 5 straight Cups, but there were only 6 teams and 2 playoff rounds, so it was a little easier back then.

    I don’t know why the Flyers or modern Wings/Devils are even on there. You need a minimum of 4 Cups to be considered a dynasty (the Oilers only squeak by b/c they won one after Gretzky…Gretzky’s Oilers were not a true dynasty).

    If the Flyers are on there, hell the 90’s Penguins are on there, the 90’s Avalanche are, the 70’s Bruins, the 80’s-90’s Canadians, hell, I’m sure some Toronto fans would even argue the 90’s Maple Leafs are (for entirely different reasons, of course).

    Anyway, to settle this question once and for all, we have “the project” (and d-strate, you’re supposedly signed up, and haven’t been in the project thread…anyone who did sign up, I’d really like to see you actually do something, or this isn’t going to work). If it ever gets up and running, anyway.

  3. amok says:

    I can’t… but then again I’m no ’92-’95 Blazer.

  4. amok says:

    Aaron, I saw your project but didn’t bother signing up because really the only thing even close to a dynasty on the west coast was the Victoria Cougars of the mid 1920s. But if you need someone for that team, I’m your man!

  5. aaron says:

    Hehe, that’s all right. :p Its only on 80’s, 90’s teams anyway. Vancouver didn’t quite make the cut, my apologies.

    I’m thinking about sticking the 93 Kings in, if you know anything about them.

  6. aaron says:

    A good high school team could beat the assorted crap the East has offered the past few years. I agree the Devils are the best team in the NHL the past 4 years, but a dynasty?

    We made it to the finals in 3 out of 4 seasons from 1995-1998 too, playing in a better conference. That doesn’t make us a dynasty any more than it does you. And we at least made the playoffs every year between, and have been an elite regular season team on top of a playoff team (finished top 3 in our conference pointswise every year since 1991. That’s 12 seasons at an elite level, 3 President’s Trophies in that span, and a span of making it to the Cup finals 3 times in 4 years, back to back Cups, and a total of 3 Cups.

    We equal every accomplishment the Devils have ever made, and we exceed the Devils by far in several others. We’ve done so in a far superior conference (when you face Colorado or Dallas in the playoffs 7 times in 8 years, and win at least 4 of those 7 matchups, come and we’ll talk).

    However, despite all this, the Detroit Red Wings are not a dynasty, and they will barely, maybe, qualify for one if they win next year (a weak dynasty). It takes more than a decade of regular season success, 3 Stanley Cups, and 4 Cup finals to make a dynasty. And all the Devils can lay claim to are 3 Cups and 4 Finals, and making 4 finals ain’t all that special in the East (like the year you got to play the #8, #7, and #6 seeds to get there, I mean wtf is that?)

    Now, I have great respect for the Devils as a team, but to say that they’re better than the Wings have been, is crazy. And to say either team is a dynasty is even crazier. Hell, at least the Wings have made the playoffs for more than 7 straight years.

  7. rojoke says:

    My list would go as follows;

    1975 – 79 Canadiens – Going a whole season and losing 8 games, and they were the prime example of fire-wagon hockey that everyone longs for today, while still being a solid team in their own zone.

    1979 – 83 Islanders – They were a combination of skill, bangers and defense that fell apart too soon. If Bossy’s back hadn’t given out on him, they may have been able to grab another Cup or two.

    1986 – 1988 Oilers – If not for Steve Smith, they may very well have matched the Canadiens’ five straight Cups. If not for the economics, they may have had a second shot at it.

    1996 – present Red Wings. Led by the best coach to step behind the bench, Scotty Bowman showed that he could take a group of 90’s players and coach like he did in Montreal in the 70’s. Making Sergei Fedorov a defenseman, asking Steve Yzerman to check. Throw in management’s keen ability to identify key players to fill out the roster, and you have one of the most successful and envied franchises in the league today. If only the Rangers were as successful.

    1996 – present Avalanche – Thanks primarily to Mario Tremblay and Pierre Lacroix. Mario for letting Patty get shelled that cold December night, and Lacroix for drafting well, and trading even better. Yeah, the Cups aren’t there in spades, but in today’s NHL, 8 division titles is pretty damn close to a dynasty.

  8. Rampage_Winger says:

    Hold on let me get ready for this.


    Okay, with that comfortably out of the way, everyone knows the human race has only got 80 years left due to the nuclear holocaust that will occur. The ‘Nucks and the Blue Jackets, due to sheer luck of the draw, will be the first to go. Make it 70 years if Ayatollah Bush gets reelected.


  9. aaron says:

    So, iow, the only qualifier for how good a team is is how fun they were to watch? Wow, so then we should all be praising the New York Rangers for their run and gun, 80’s throwback, no regard for defense, star studded style of play, huh? And McSorely must be the greatest player to ever play the game too.

  10. Goldenscud says:

    And you watch hockey for what????? Entertainment is what I am talking about. The Rangers suck, McSorley sucks, and your response sucks.

  11. Kashin says:

    I would like to got with choice number 8) but Montreal just wants me to salivate. The guys who they had. WOOO. Great D. Great fowards. I can only imagine what they would do todayHowever I saw a better choice. The unwritten choice which is choice 11) The Rangers 97,98-???. Hopefully that ?? will one day replaced with an infinity. jk. I really think Montreal is the best.

  12. mikster says:

    Nope, not even if they win it next season. If you talk about 96,97 then yeah…i think nowadays winning it two in a row is very impossible….that’s why it should be two wins considered a dynasty.

    Let’s say you win 2 games in a row. That’s a 2 game winning streak. Lets say you win 1 out of 2……that’s not a winning streak.

  13. defenestrate says:

    I knew you were one of those closet MILF freaks…

  14. defenestrate says:

    What say we bring back Tiger Williams?

  15. defenestrate says:

    You didn’t think this was about our “personal preferences and opinions?”

    What site are you on?

    If that’s the case, we need an insurrection to throw out all these Rangers and Leafs nin-cow-poops…

    SCTP – “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”

  16. defenestrate says:

    Now you are being trying, and you are interrupting me trying not to try, which is trying my patience…

    SCTP – “Sodomizing Mr. Weatherbee”

  17. defenestrate says:


  18. defenestrate says:

    Which is the one Canucklehead uses to try and “joik us off”…

    Unfortunately, Mr. Rampage, the Canucks will live forever, since they are gentically identical to cockroaches (just like their fans – explains a lot, don’t it?)

    SCTP – “Toxic Avenging for fun and profit”

  19. Goldenscud says:

    I’ll see your Tiger Williams and raise you a Nick Fotiu!

  20. defenestrate says:

    I said “boring the teats off of me” – I didn’t say they were mine – use your imagination (you obviously have had a lot of practice).

    The Flyers you are referring to were the Syracuse Bulldogs of the NHL.

    SCTP – “It’s Time For – The Brown Hornet!”

  21. defenestrate says:

    Now I see why your women keep coming here for vacation….

    As far as torment, you are “catching” and not “pitching” (just like when you were in prison!!).

    “You’re built too low – I say too low – to the GROUND, son! You got a HOLE in your GLOVE, boy!”

    “That – I say that – is no way to build a paper air-e-o-plane, son!”

    The only “verge” you are on is coherence…

    SCTP – “Because I’m your Father, that’s why!”

  22. defenestrate says:

    I had a ’95 Blazer – it leaked fluids (just like Matteo after “that night !!”

    SCTP – I got your Pep Boys right here…”

  23. defenestrate says:

    John Wensink! Derek Sanderson!

    TONY TWIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  24. Goldenscud says:

    Don’t make me pull out Pelle Eklund!

  25. amok says:

    Try adding the third “O”. It makes all the difference in the world.

  26. amok says:

    Probably just as much as anyone else on the site who was a teen during that time. If you need to contact me, but if someone else wants the Kings then by all means let ’em..

  27. bender says:

    Did I just see you comment on the “Oilers” being a dynasty??…………………………Bender has heart attack and falls over…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

  28. bender says:

    I gotta say the Denver Broncos with John Elway and Terrell Davis……lol

    I’m gonna have to say it’s a tie between the late 70s and early 80’s Islanders and 80’s Oilers…

    Both teams were pretty impressive in those days, and one passed on the torch to the other.

    Infact the Oilers were soooo good, I got bored of watching them and starting cheering for the Flyers, after I saw them lose the first cup to the Oilers.

  29. defenestrate says:


    I like it – I was gonna try four, but it’s kinda scary…

  30. MantaRay says:

    Aaron, Aaron, Aaron….

    So your saying an assortment of HS teams could be any team in the West?

    I don’t see where your coming with the West as being a better conference. I think the West is actually a much weaker conference.

    We are better than the Wings, least we forget the only time we met in finals we swept you guys easily.

    In regard to the seeds we played in the playoffs, didn’t you guys lose to the #8 seed this year?

    I doesn’t matter how you do it, everyone has the same opportunity when they playoffs start, its what you do with it.

  31. MantaRay says:

    I can still recall the scuffle between Lindy Ruff and Battling Billy during a Sabres/Isles playoff match.

  32. aaron says:

    The Rangers are actually among the most talented teams in the league. Its just they can’t win b/c they try to play 80’s style hockey, which everyone seems to want to bring back. They do suck, of course, but they’d be entertaining if those damn trap bastards would let them play the right way, so they must qualify as a dynasty (since you seem to be ignoring number of Cups in your qualification). ANd McSorely…you say you like old school goon hockey, and he sure is an old school goon. You see how he freakin’ knocked off that Brashear guy? That was skill like I’ve never seen. By your judgement, where the Flyers are a dynasty b/c they played goon hockey, that must make McSorely one of the best players in the league!

    Yes, of course the Rangers suck and McSorely sucks. If you still manage to miss sarcasm around here despite SCTP going off every other post, you must have been through a true Lindrosian number of concussions in the past year.

    Entertainment does not make a dynasty: winning makes a dynasty, and the Flyers won twice. Ooh…break out the champagne. I’m completely impressed.

  33. aaron says:

    7 seed.

    If you honestly think that the East is stronger than the West…that is just insane. I’m sorry, there is no excuse for being that hockey blind. The best teams besides the Devils the East has had to offer in the past few years are the Sabres, Flyers, Capitals, and Penguins the only teams that have had any sort of consistant playoff success. You don’t have any teams, besides the Devils, that even APPROACH the Avs and Stars. If the Wings played in the East instead of the Devils, we would have made the Finals every year from 1995 to now.

    I also realize the Wings have lost in the first round several times. I was pointing out that you have too, so your supposed playoff “advantage” over us is flush, and we beat you in every other aspect except that one head to head, and the Wings sucked ass in 1995. I try not to even acknowledge the pre-1997 teams, except for their regular seasons, b/c 1997 is the first time the Wings actually grew a playoff backbone, instead of running an Ottawa Senators style team (great regular seasons, total sh*t in the playoffs).

    If the Wings had played up to their potential and talent in the early 90’s, we’d be spoken of in the same breath as the 80’s Oilers and Islanders. Instead, we have to have this debate over who was better, the Wings or the Devils who couldn’t even make the playoffs for 8 years running. It makes my brain sad. Oh well, so it goes.

  34. aaron says:

    The Canadians were firewagon hockey? They were just so much better than the rest of the league, they didn’t have any contest. Didn’t they still get the top 3 French Canadian picks of every draft back then? Considering French Canadians were about the only ppl to play in the NHL back then, it would be hard for a GM to be so incompetant to lose with that system in place. Not that they weren’t a dynasty. But firewagon hockey? They said their intersquad scrimmages were harder than actual games. That was their top line players who said that. They just freakin’ dominated, nothing else to it.

    Wings aren’t a dynasty, though if you were going to call them a dynasty, you’d stretch back to the 1991-1992 season, the beginning of their streak of always being in the top 3 of their conference.

    Avs aren’t even close. 2 Cups in 5 years does not a dynasty make.

  35. amok says:

    I’m still waiting for someone else to take the plunge before I add that fourth O. When I was a wee child the village elders used to speak of a kid who tried to use the fourth O and she ended up possessed by Satan and getting it on with a crucifix.

  36. Goldenscud says:

    Now, this post doesn’t suck – I actually enjoy it.

    What the hell does SCTP stand for?

    P.S. I like “Lindrosian” -classic

  37. JStatic87 says:

    Half of the teams in the Eastern Conference would not make the playoffs in the west. New Jersey has been the only team that has put a string of good years together. Your competition? Look at this:

    Philly: Can’t score in the playoffs. If they do score, then they can’t keep pucks out of their own net. Their best team in the past ten years were swept by the Wings.

    Toronto: No D. Couldn’t beat the Flyers, couldn’t beat the Hurricanes, needed goon tactics to beat the Islanders. No semblance of a cup team in TO.

    Ottawa: No Backbone, started to get one this year but then crumbled. Need more grit to become a playoff team.

    Compare those teams to a great Dallas team, A great Colorado team, an always competetive St. Louis team, a hot Vancouver team, and an always competetive Edmonton team, who has the better conference? Any one of the Eastern Teams I mentioned above would lose a playoff series to the top 5 western teams 9.5 times out of 10.

  38. defenestrate says:

    SCTP – “Savoir Fair ees Everywhere”…..

  39. Goldenscud says:

    rack em!

  40. rojoke says:

    The NHL instituted the entry draft in its current form with the first expansion teams in 1969. Any team could draft any eligible player, regardless of where they were born.

  41. rojoke says:

    And who passed it to the Islanders?

Leave a Reply