Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ABNuck

Why "star" laidened teams rarely win the Stanley Cup

38 posts in this topic

With Minny picking up both Parise and Suter, some have wondered if they are now a stacked team. Well in reality even a stacked team isn't necessarily the team to beat. We only need look at the 2000-2002 Rangers stacked team when they brought in a whole hockey sock full of superstars (Messier, Fleury, Lindros, Bure, Kovalev, Rucinsky, Holik etc.) and failed to even make the playoffs. But this is the Cap-era...so let's break it down capwise (the top player's salaries are the combined figure of the highest paid 6 forwards, 4 dmen and starting goalie):

2009-10 Champs (Chicago)

Top player's Salaries: 43.725m

Players making 6.0m and above: 1 (Campbell)

2010-11 Champs (Boston)

Top player's Salaries: 44.455m

Players making 6.0m and above: 1 (Chara)

2011-12 Champs (LA)

Top player's Salaries: 47.607m

Players making 6.0m and above: 2 (Doughty, Kopitar)

2012-13 Minnesota Team

Top player's Salaries: 51.755m

Players making 6.0m and above: 5 (Parise, Suter, Heatley, Koivu, Backstrom)

2012-13 Vancouver Team

Top player's Salaries: 47.85m

Players making 6.0m and above: 2 (Sedins)

It has been stated over and over again...star-laidened teams don't win Cups, teams with depth win Cups. Not to say that Minny won't have a good year, just saying that we, with our deep team, should not be all that concerned with them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like our depth... the only thing that needs to happen is come playoff time all our players need to be playing well just like how all four lines for the Kings were producing offence

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like our depth... the only thing that needs to happen is come playoff time all our players need to be playing well just like how all four lines for the Kings were producing offence

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how you stoped just before the years Pittsburgh and Detroit won the cup, just saying

also each of those teams you mentioned had one at least one all-star level Dman, we may have that already in Edler (or even Hamhuis or Garrison) but if none of our current D steps up to that level this is something the team needs to address.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can be a star and not make 6 Mill. I would say Kane, Towes, Byfuglien, Keith, Niemmi all played like all stars in Chicago's run.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chicago had a glut of stars, they were just a year off the big paydays while still on their young deals.

Pens had a ton of stars, Detroit had a bunch that take discounts. The past dynasties were star powered, Rangers beat us by buying a cup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that depth is very important, but those two teams has stars. Just because you're making less than 6 mil doesn't mean you're not a star. For example Chicago has Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook, and Hossa. Also you conveniently left out Detroit and Pittsburgh, two of the most stacked (AND deep) teams in the league who won the Cup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a salary argument, not a star power argument. Boston might have been the most balanced in that regard, but all the rest had serious talent that wasn't being paid to their ability at the time. This is a known factor, which is why MG is trying to have some young talent in our lineup. Unfortunately we have no stars out performing their ELC's right now, and that's unlikely to change. Luckily we do have a lot of journeymen and veterans who are paid well under their market value.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how you stoped just before the years Pittsburgh and Detroit won the cup, just saying

also each of those teams you mentioned had one at least one all-star level Dman, we may have that already in Edler (or even Hamhuis or Garrison) but if none of our current D steps up to that level this is something the team needs to address.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously cap management is important when building a cup contending team, but for most of those teams, they'd have players over 6m, but they are signed to long term deals (Richards, Carter, Hossa, Keith, etc)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2007-08 Red Wings had Lidstrom (7.6), Datsyuk (6.7) and Rafalski (6). That was only $50 million as opposed to the $70 million it is, now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because brett hull is a cheater; that's why.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good points made by all above, but some of your arguments do support what I was trying to imply. Just like some of the stars on those other teams being paid less than their production worth, we essentially have that too with most of our stars taking the homer discount. However Minny cannot say the same thing. Will Heatley and Parise perform this year as 7.0mil plus players...I doubt it. And if we went out and got Weber at 8mil would that guarantee us a Cup more than what we have now? Again, I doubt it. My point was that we have no need to fear Minny (yet, anyways). No more so than we do Edmonton who really DOES have a bunch of future stars currently underpaid compared to their worth. I think Minny will finish second in the NW with us first again. But I also feel that this year is the pivotal year for GMMG and company. If we want to continue our dominance of the NW Div (5 straight titles) and therefore guarantee us some extra hockey in April...we will need to make some moves coming up next off-season. And sadly, in this F/A market we've seen thus far, we might actually HAVE to lay out some big coin to keep pace with team's like the Wild and the Oil (who will be handing out some star-worthy contracts soon). Maybe we'll see a first line in a couple of years of Sedin-Sedin Eberle (or Hall)? Then soon after it might be Jensen-Kesler-Eberle (or Hall)...who knows?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can be a star and not make 6 Mill. I would say Kane, Towes, Byfuglien, Keith, Niemmi all played like all stars in Chicago's run.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like our depth... the only thing that needs to happen is come playoff time all our players need to be playing well just like how all four lines for the Kings were producing offence

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I learned from your post is that teams that overpay free agents don't win the Cup. We don't hand out ridiculously overpaying deals to over-hyped Free-Agents.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a salary argument, not a star power argument. Boston might have been the most balanced in that regard, but all the rest had serious talent that wasn't being paid to their ability at the time. This is a known factor, which is why MG is trying to have some young talent in our lineup. Unfortunately we have no stars out performing their ELC's right now, and that's unlikely to change. Luckily we do have a lot of journeymen and veterans who are paid well under their market value.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't cherry pick the Rangers from pre-lockout and fail to mention who was actually winning Stanley Cups back then. It was star laden teams like Dallas, Detroit, Colorado, New Jersey who had more than three times the payroll of the Canucks.

Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Roy, Foote, Hedjuk - Colorado

Modano, Hatcher, Hull, Belfour - Dallas

Yzerman, Federov, Lidstrom, Shanahan - Detroit

Brodeur, Niedermayer, Stevens - New Jersey

Richards, Lecavalier, Khabibulin, - Tampa Bay

Those were the Stanley Cup winners from '95-'04. A small number of teams who were stacked with top end talent.

If you want to make a point you can't ignore information which refutes the point you were making. A lot of the teams since the lockout that have won Cups had players on rookie salaries (e.g. Blackhawks, Ducks) which you fail to mention.

Arguably the most dominate win since the end of the lockout were the Duck in '07 who had Pronger, Niedermayer, a fromer Conn Smythe winner in Gigeure, and a young group of talented forwards supplemented by Mcdonald, Selanne, Pahlsson, etc. They didn't have much depth if any on defense but it didn't play much of a factor when they were able to have either Pronger or Niedermayer on the ice at all times.

You also equate salaries with a players star power, which is not necessarily always the case. Luongo, Kesler both have under 6 m cap hits and are considered stars league wide. Same with players like Getzlaf, Perry, Tavares, Kesler, etc.

The salary cap has increased so dramatically year to year that comparing one year to another is also difficult.

Do I think Minnesota is going to win a cup anytime soon? Nope but they definitely improved and it's an exciting time for their franchise. Suter is completely overrated and he will be exposed for his true ability on a weaker team. Parise is a star player though.

Having top end talent is a necessity to win cups, we have it, but the real question is for how much longer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BUT the Oilers had Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Fuhr, Anderson, and so on and so forth.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.