Best Current Era Red Wing Team

[Offsides 21]

I've been thinking about this today, and I very very rarely post topics, but I was thinking today about all the teams since the beginning of the 90's...basically since the Wings have been successful...and which team is/was the best. Normally we sit and maybe pick apart between the 3 Cups which was the strongest team, or which was the weakest, etc.

I think most people would probably say 2002 Cup Champ team is the strongest team we've had in the last 20 years, but I actually was thinking about it and I'd say the best team was 1995-1996 roster. We didn't win a Cup that year but our team was pretty amazing, and let's face it..we SHOULD have won that year, but really were hampered by injuries by the third round and fell to the Avs. And there was the whole Kris Draper thing.

That team was amazing though, we had the Russian 5, The Grind Line, our D included Vladdy, Lidstrom and Coffey. And of course Dino Cicarelli and Steve Yzerman. I don't know how many were around for that year but it was amazing..and you never got the feeling that we'd lose. 62 wins. We should have won the Cup which was too bad we didn't, but it wasn't anything but bad luck, maybe a destined Avs team, but maybe with a few less injuries...we win that series.

A lot of people would attribute winning the Cup in 97 to acquiring Shanahan, but we could have won in 95 or 96...just wasn't meant to be...but we had the team to do it. Imagine *that* dynasty..haha. Too bad, but that year Sergei won the Selke and Ozzie/Vernon won the Jennings and Bowman won the Jack Adams. The best thing about the team was how many of our awesome players were drafted by us: Yzerman, Fedorov, Osgood, Konstantinov, Kozlov, Lidstrom, McCarty..etc.

I'm sure lots will say 2001-02, but I'm just curious if anyone agrees or thinks perhaps 1997 was better, or this current year...whatever you think, I'd be interested to see people's reactions. Though I'm sure lots of posters weren't around way back then, so it might be hard to guage.

Edited November 15, 2007 by Offsides

[toby91_ca 620]

I disagree, I think most would say 2002, not 2001

Oh, and it can't be 1996, apparently that team wasn't even "stacked." I tried to suggest that it was, but apparently I am wrong

[Offsides 21]

I disagree, I think most would say 2002, not 2001

Oh, and it can't be 1996, apparently that team wasn't even "stacked." I tried to suggest that it was, but apparently I am wrong

2001-2002 yes...

I'm not talking really in terms of all-stars. 01-02 our team was bought, but together they acheived so much in 95-96 that I think they are the best.

[toby91_ca 620]

2001-2002 yes...

I'm not talking really in terms of all-stars. 01-02 our team was bought, but together they acheived so much in 95-96 that I think they are the best.

I agree about 1996, I may lean towards that team instead of 2002. The 2002 team had a lot of HOFers, but the 1996 team had a lot of HOFers that were in their prime.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

For a long time I've said the 02 team, but recently I've switched to the 97 team. Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanny, Larionov, were all better players in 97 than in 02. Likewise, our top 4 defensemen were better in 97, and we had more grit. The biggest advantage for the 02 team is Hasek over Vernon. Likewise, Holmstrom, Robitaille and Hull were huge additions, but don't forget that we didn't have Kozlov on the 02 team, and he was always a great performer in the playoffs. Now that I think about it, the 02 team is more impressive on paper and in the regular season, but in a playoff series I'd take the 97 team.

[BlueMonk 102]

It's tough to pick between the Cup teams. I can't include the '95-'96 team, though. I don't put much stock in the individual stats and regular season awards they won. I really believe the team needed the March 26th bloodbath against Colorado to fully harden into the kind of team that has the tenacity and fortitude to win a Stanley Cup, which is what they went on to do. Bad luck and injuries are a part of why teams don't win a Stanley Cup, but I'm a firm believer that there's a special something teams need to get over the hump and that '95-'96 team hadn't found it yet.

I think if I had to pick, I would go with the '96-'97 team. That team had so much talent and a great mix of talent and toughness. They could beat you any way you wanted to play it, with puck possession or by grinding you down.

[irishtemper14+25 11]

man i love dino cicarelli, i still love his comment after the series was over

[alienanxiety 23]

for some reason I decided to compile the worst possible team using players from the 62 win 95-96 season, and the 97-98 cup championship team.

Knuble-Gilchrist-Sheppard

Errey-Taylor-Lapointe

Major-Walz-Dandenault

Grimson-Laplante-Kocur

Ramsey-Eriksson

Pushor-Bergevin

Golubovsky-Carkner

Hodson-Maracle

Edited November 15, 2007 by alienanxiety

[al48 1]

I've always been partial to the '98 team. They didn't score a whole lot, but they seemed so determined to win that year because of what happened. And, the cap off was Vladdy with the Cup.

[rick zombo 3,739]

The 97 team for sure IMO. That team had it all.

[Rob the Badger 0]

I'd have to say the 97 team. It had everything. Grit. Scoring. Defense. Goaltending. Fighters (not just enforcers). Coaching. There were no weaknesses in that team. The 2002 team had a better offense, imo, but it just wasn't as gritty. I think if there were a magically way of having the 97 team play against the 2002 team, that the 97 team would win.

[Barrie 900]

Out of the Cup teams, I'll take 2001-02. 1996-97 got going at the right time, 2001-02 were flying from start to finish.

Out of the non-Cup teams, you have to take 1995-96, but I think 1999-2000 and 2003-04 should get some mention as well, especially 2003-04.

[Wings_fan_in STL 0]

The 97 team for sure IMO. That team had it all.

I agree, I got to watch all those mid 90's teams play while I was in junior high and high school and 97 is the hands down best team. They were just as skilled as all the other teams but they had way more toughness. And I'm not talking just physical toughness (see Mac beat down claude) I'm talking mental toughness. They had been through some bad losses together and some great victories and they put it all together and ran over a very good Flyers team. 98 was tough too, but the capitals weren't as impressive to beat.

[eva unit zero 271]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

[interminded 1]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

Case closed.

[toby91_ca 620]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

If it were only so easy to explain everything with stats.....but it is usually not that easy and definately not in this case.

Even if I agreed with your approach to analyzing statistically as done above all the stats would show is that the 1998 team was best in terms of their play against the competition in that particular year. This analysis does nothing to show why the 1998 team is actually better than the 1997 team.

[DEVILSWATERBOY 10]

I've been thinking about this today, and I very very rarely post topics, but I was thinking today about all the teams since the beginning of the 90's...basically since the Wings have been successful...and which team is/was the best. Normally we sit and maybe pick apart between the 3 Cups which was the strongest team, or which was the weakest, etc.

I think most people would probably say 2002 Cup Champ team is the strongest team we've had in the last 20 years, but I actually was thinking about it and I'd say the best team was 1995-1996 roster. We didn't win a Cup that year but our team was pretty amazing, and let's face it..we SHOULD have won that year, but really were hampered by injuries by the third round and fell to the Avs. And there was the whole Kris Draper thing.

That team was amazing though, we had the Russian 5, The Grind Line, our D included Vladdy, Lidstrom and Coffey. And of course Dino Cicarelli and Steve Yzerman. I don't know how many were around for that year but it was amazing..and you never got the feeling that we'd lose. 62 wins. We should have won the Cup which was too bad we didn't, but it wasn't anything but bad luck, maybe a destined Avs team, but maybe with a few less injuries...we win that series.

A lot of people would attribute winning the Cup in 97 to acquiring Shanahan, but we could have won in 95 or 96...just wasn't meant to be...but we had the team to do it. Imagine *that* dynasty..haha. Too bad, but that year Sergei won the Selke and Ozzie/Vernon won the Jennings and Bowman won the Jack Adams. The best thing about the team was how many of our awesome players were drafted by us: Yzerman, Fedorov, Osgood, Konstantinov, Kozlov, Lidstrom, McCarty..etc.

I'm sure lots will say 2001-02, but I'm just curious if anyone agrees or thinks perhaps 1997 was better, or this current year...whatever you think, I'd be interested to see people's reactions. Though I'm sure lots of posters weren't around way back then, so it might be hard to guage.

[gowingsgo 3]

The 97' team for sentimental reasons. We had Vladdy out there

[Zymz 0]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

Eva, I respect your attempt at an objective, statistical argument for any given team, but there is at least one big flaw in your method:

There is no accounting for strength of schedule. Just as a small example, one could make an argument that the '96 Avs and '97 Flyers teams were significantly better than the '98 Capitals and '02 'Canes, thereby skewing your 'clutch modifier' with closer goal differentials for the '96 and '97 series than the '98 and '02 (not sure if this is actually true, but it's just to illustrate my point.) Perhaps this strength of schedule averages out over an entire regular season/playoff run, but I doubt it.

Also, there are numerous smaller things that could be accounted for - such as injuries, payroll, etc. - which would paint a more accurate team vs. team comparison.

One last thing: I can't put my finger on exactly why, but it seems the clutch modifier carries more weight than it should (the '98 Wings get a 79% bonus based on one category while the '96 Wings take a 64% hit???)

Edit: typo and clarification

Edited November 15, 2007 by Zymz

[Guest LivingtheDream]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

That's all fine and dandy, but can you actually PREDICT something, or do you just run retrospective stats?

Edited November 15, 2007 by LivingtheDream

[Barrie 900]

I love the 1996-97 team as much as the next guy, but I think some people are just looking at the Post Season. The Regular Season was decent, but not great. The 1997-98 and 2001-02 teams won the cup, but also had better overall regular seasons. From Opening night to the Stanley Cup those two teams were more consistant than 1996-97. Remember that stretch in December 1996 to January 1997 were we only won 1 game in 9 tries and 4 of 15? True the 2001-02 team had a bad finish, but #1 overall was clinched already and Bowman was resting the team for the playoffs.

The 1996-97 team got hot at the right time and were due after 1995 and 1995-96. I'm not knocking them, but overall 1997-98 and 2001-02 were better I think. Prior to the playoffs in 1996-97 we were ready to run Vernon out of town, and I don't think anyone expected he was going to be starting in the playoffs. I've always wondered if it was done all over again, if Vernon could have repeated that performance.

Another thing that stands out to me when comparing the 3 cup winners is the offensive production of Draper and Maltby. Draper and Maltby in 1996-97 combined for 11 goals. In 1997-98 and 2001-02 they combined for 27 and 24.

To each their own when comparing teams, but I'd take 1997-98 or 2001-02 over the 1996-97 squad because overall I think the goaltending was better, we were more consistant, and we had a more balanced attack.

when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

I have no problems with an argument saying 1997-98 was the best of the 3. The scoring was so spread out. I mentioned Draper and Maltby already; Brown had 19 goals, Gilchrist 13, and Murphy 11 to go along with Shanahan, Yzerman, Lidstrom, McCarty, Lapointe, Kozlov, Larionov. 12 guys had atleast 10 goals.

Edited November 15, 2007 by Barrie

[WingsZR2 1]

The 97' team for sentimental reasons. We had Vladdy out there

Beat me to it

[Offsides 21]

There are really four contenders for this.

The 62-win team in 95-96 is the only non-champion team worth considering, and the Cup champs in 96-97, 97-98, and 01-02.

So let's go through and consider what we need to evaluate;

Offense, Defense/Goaltending, Clutch play.

We'll take a look at each of those three categories.

First off, as the number of goals per game fluctuates from year to year, we'll see how the Wings compared to the average of all other teams rather than using a straight number. We'll start by establishing the benchmark averages for GF and GA.

95-96 average GF: 255

96-97 average GF: 239

97-98 average GF: 215

01-02 average GF: 213

Average GF: 230.5

95-96 average GA: 260

96-97 average GA: 241

97-98 average GA: 217

01-02 average GA: 216

Average GA: 233.5

So now that we've established offensive averages for the other teams, we can normalize the offense by adjusting based the percentage.

Normalized output:

95-96 Wings: 294 GF, 163 GA, +131 differential

96-97 Wings: 244 GF, 191 GA, +53 differential

97-98 Wings: 268 GF, 211 GA, +57 differential

01-02 Wings: 272 GF, 202 GA, +70 differential

Now that we've established comparable offensive and defensive markers, we can move on to clutch play. We will establish clutch play by taking the team's average goal differential in the postseason and comparing it to their actual goal differential in the regular season.

95-96 Wings: +144 differential, +1.76 per game

96-97 Wings: +56 differential, +0.68 per game

97-98 Wings: +54 differential, +0.66 per game

01-02 Wings: +64 differential, +0.78 per game

95-96 Wings playoffs: +12 differential, 19 games, +0.63 per game, 0.36 clutch modifier

96-97 Wings playoffs: +20 differential, 20 games, +1.00 per game, 1.47 clutch modifier

97-98 Wings playoffs: +26 differential, 22 games, +1.18 per game, 1.79 clutch modifier

01-02 Wings playoffs: +25 differential, 23 games, +1.09 per game, 1.40 clutch modifier

Now we will apply the clutch modifier to the normalized differential:

95-96 Wings: +47

96-97 Wings: +78

97-98 Wings: +102

01-02 Wings: +98

So we have established that, when all major factors are taken into consideration (offense, defense, goaltending, and clutch performance) that despite having lost Konstantinov, the 1998 Wings were the best overall team.

Your stats confuse the H-E-Double Hockey Sticks out of me

[eva unit zero 271]

Eva, I respect your attempt at an objective, statistical argument for any given team, but there is at least one big flaw in your method:

There is no accounting for strength of schedule. Just as a small example, one could make an argument that the '96 Avs and '97 Flyers teams were significantly better than the '98 Capitals and '02 'Canes, thereby skewing your 'clutch modifier' with closer goal differentials for the '96 and '97 series than the '98 and '02 (not sure if this is actually true, but it's just to illustrate my point.) Perhaps this strength of schedule averages out over an entire regular season/playoff run, but I doubt it.

Also, there are numerous smaller things that could be accounted for - such as injuries, payroll, etc. - which would paint a more accurate team vs. team comparison.

One last thing: I can't put my finger on exactly why, but it seems the clutch modifier carries more weight than it should (the '98 Wings get a 79% bonus based on one category while the '96 Wings take a 64% hit???)

Edit: typo and clarification

You're right; a strength of schedule modifier is probably needed; perhaps modify the differential from each series against that opponent's differential vs other opponents? For example, Detroit went 14-11 against St. Louis in 2002; St. Louis went 13-5 vs Chicago. That might merit some adjustment upwards...more when I have time.

[LeftWinger 5,129]

2001-2002 yes...

I'm not talking really in terms of all-stars. 01-02 our team was bought, but together they acheived so much in 95-96 that I think they are the best.

...please explain to me how that team was BOUGHT? Luc signed here when noone else wanted him. Brett signed here when noone else wanted him (he even took less money to come here) Olausson, well nobody wanted him. Dom Hasek was TRADED for, we traded Kozlov and pick(s) for him, just how was he bought? Pretty much the rest of the team had been around for a while... 2002 Cup was NOT bought, it was earned...

...1996 was not stacked, it was bought...

...lest we forget the team that started this entire Hockeytown, the 1995 team that lost to the Devils. They won 33 out of 48 games and won the Presidents Trophy that year... I think of all the teams since, this was the most important one because they learned how to lose...

Edited November 15, 2007 by LeftWinger