| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
 Posted - 05/29/2007 : 05:35:39
|
Poll Question:
OVERALL, if you absolutely had to say one or the other, which do you feel has been more important in the modern history of the NHL (since the '63-64 season)?
|
|
Edited by - andyhack on 05/29/2007 06:59:56
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 05:45:41
|
http://www.rauzulusstreet.com/hockey/nhlrecords/yearbyyear.html
You may want to take a look at the above site (it only goes up to 2003 though).
I know that there are all types of ways to look at this stat but in the 40 years from 1964 to 2003, the Cup-winning team was the leading offensive team in the regular season only 9 times. 9 out of 40 so that's less than 25%. Sometimes it was pretty close though (the Cup-winning team was only a goal or two away from being the most offensive team in the regular season).
The teams which did it are as follows:
1) 1970 - Bruins
2) 1972 - Bruins
3) 1977 - Habs
4) 1978 - Habs
5) 1981 - Isles
6) 1984 - Oilers
7) 1985 - Oilers
8) 1987 - Oilers
9) 1992 - Pens
Edit - I made a mistake in the initial post and put up the '86 Oilers (forgot that they didn't win that year - WELL THEY SHOULD HAVE )
Edit 2 - The reverse isn't all that much better though - my quick calculation now shows the best defensive team in the regular season winning the Cup only 11 out of 40 times. |
Edited by - andyhack on 05/29/2007 06:22:28 |
 |
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 06:35:39
|
You'd have to be "insane" to say anything other than defense. 
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 06:49:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
You'd have to be "insane" to say anything other than defense.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
I just edited the question slightly (always looking out for my fellow insane souls ) |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 07:34:04
|
Very interesting. If Andyhack's math is correct 11 times the Cup winner was the best defensive team and 9 times the winner was the best offensive team. Does defense really win championships??
Also intersting that the teams that people talk about in the best ever catagory are the teams listed. Those being highly skills offensive teams.
Ya'll know me, I said offense. It hold true today. Most often, the team that scores the first goal wins the game. Two goal leads are huge. You can't win if you can't put the puck in the net.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 08:22:06
|
I think it's very interesting to look at the goal differential of those teams.
Boston and Montreal were excellent both offensively and defensively as attested to by these stats.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Guest7418
( )
|
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 08:57:45
|
| They are both very important, but the easy answer is GOALTENDING. A close second is Offense. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 09:06:11
|
| In the last 25 years, how many teams can you recall that won the cup based on D? I agree that 'Defense wins championships' is the cliche default motto, but does it ring true for the Stanley Cup? Personally, I think not. You certainly need a well rounded team and good/great goaltending, but offense wins Stanley Cups. I havent done any research on this at this point, but I can certainly, off the top of my head, think of more cup winners with great offenses and poor/mediocre defenses in the last 25 than visa versa. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 09:13:26
|
As a side-note.. I believe the same in Baseball. Pitching of course is paramount, but offense wins Championships too.
However, in both Basketball and Football the opposite is true - Defense is the key.
There is no strict science here of course, and opinions are made on averages, tendencies, and the type of game it is... |
|
|
|
I´m also Cånädiön
Rookie
Sweden
217 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 09:39:33
|
I don´t know about the entire modern NHL history but I think that a solid blueline defence could get you far.
(Time differance Pickuphockey-Sweden approx +9 hours 1min 5sek......so I can always blame it on Jetlag.) |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 09:55:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by I´m also Cånädiön
I don´t know about the entire modern NHL history but I think that a solid blueline defence could get you far.
(Time differance Pickuphockey-Sweden approx +9 hours 1min 5sek......so I can always blame it on Jetlag.)
I don't debate that, and I agree with you. :) If I were a GM and starting to build a team, this is exactly where I would start (right after finding a top notch goaltender of course). This, to me, would be how to build a strong franchise and be competitive. The next step would be to decide when my team had a good chance at the cup - and when that opportunity came, I would be working at all angles to try and improve the offense of my club. |
Edited by - tctitans on 05/29/2007 11:27:24 |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 11:14:11
|
We're excluding too many teams from the mix by only considering the most offensive and most defensive from these stats.
Perhaps taking the top 25% from each category would be more indicative. The top 25% defensively from each year and the top 25% offensively each year and compare the number of cup wins from there.
Is Pucknuts up to the challenge of putting these stats together?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 11:26:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
We're excluding too many teams from the mix by only considering the most offensive and most defensive from these stats.
Perhaps taking the top 25% from each category would be more indicative. The top 25% defensively from each year and the top 25% offensively each year and compare the number of cup wins from there.
Is Pucknuts up to the challenge of putting these stats together?
I agree that these stats will shed some light on the discussion but a question/clarification is needed to better use the results of these stats. Up until now I have selected Offense and I stand by that based on my initial perception of the question - however, I need a clarification. Andyhack, did you intend goaltenders to be part of the equation? If you were (which I havent up to this point), then surely a goaltender is your most important defensive player, and probably swings the vote heavily to the defensive side of this poll. When I originally read the question I thought it only pertained to the offesnive/defensive skaters.
If goaltenders are to be omitted for the sake of argument, then I think the defensive stats of a team have less of a direct impact as they are highly affected by the talent level of your netminder.
If goaltenders are included as part of a teams' defense, then I'll switch my vote over to the Defense side.
|
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 13:37:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
Andyhack, did you intend goaltenders to be part of the equation?... When I originally read the question I thought it only pertained to the offensive/defensive skaters.
If goaltenders are to be omitted for the sake of argument, then I think the defensive stats of a team have less of a direct impact as they are highly affected by the talent level of your netminder.
If goaltenders are included as part of a teams' defense, then I'll switch my vote over to the Defense side.
Yes, I see your point TC. I should have clarified that matter. I was only thinking about the five players other than the goalie. I agree that the goalie is the most crucial defender though. But, yes, I was more interested in what people thought about the offense vs. defence question without regard to goaltending.
As for the stats, actually, I am NOT a stat guy but I thought since I put out the one about the best offensive teams not often winning the Cup, it would only be fair to put out the opposite too. But I can understand if you think an analysis of G.A. is influenced in too big a way by the presence or lack of an exceptional goaltender.
To answer your question about which teams "won on defense" in the last 25 years, I'd say the Devils did for sure (looking at it overall of course - that saying can't be looked at too literally - of course teams need a certain amount of offense too), and I'd argue that a lot of teams in those years probably owe their championships slightly more to defense (HOW DO YOU SPELL THAT FREAKING WORD ANYWAY - S or C?), meaning team defense not just defensemen, than to offense, starting with the Islander Dynasty and maybe even including the 1988 and 1990 Oilers (that may surprise some but my recollection is that the key for them in the later years shifted to team defence). The 2001 Avs -they won cause of defence a little more than offense I think - cause of Blake-Bourque-Foote. Of course, also Roy, but we are excluding him for discussion purposes as you say. There may be others in the last 25 years.
Going further back, the Hab Dynasty of the 70s and the Broad Street Bullies too.
Again, I am talking OVERALL - of course, the Habs were amazing both ways. That's why I think they were the best ever.
|
Edited by - andyhack on 05/29/2007 14:50:05 |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 14:08:23
|
So Andy-san, are you asking defensemen vs forwards or are you asking defensive style teams vs. offensive style teams?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 14:18:11
|
Willus-sama (even more polite than "san") - I am asking which you think, overall, has been more important to the success of teams, defense or offense. So you shouldn't think about the question as "defensemen vs. forwards", but rather you should think of whether the defencemen and forwards together, overall, owe the success of their team more to defense than to offense or vice versa.
Edit - for example, I make a distinction between the early Oiler Cup teams (which overall won more on offense than defense in my opinion) and the later Oiler teams (which though still very offensively talented, OVERALL, may owe their victory more to defense than offense) |
Edited by - andyhack on 05/29/2007 15:38:31 |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 14:20:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
So Andy-san, are you asking defensemen vs forwards or are you asking defensive style teams vs. offensive style teams?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
Agreed... this is a key point. :) Very offensively talented players can still be coached to play team D. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 14:23:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Willus-sama (even more polite than "san") - I am asking which you think, overall, has been more important to the success of teams, defense or offense. So you shouldn't think about the question as "defensemen vs. forwards", but rather you should think of whether the defencemen and forwards together, overall, owe the success of their team more to defense than to offense or vice versa.
Ok.. I'm assuming that we are not talking extremes here then (ie. Awesome offense, crappy Defense, or visa versa).
Also, i'll assume in both cases that there is a cup worthy tender in goal.
Now, my original opinion stands.. A team with great offense and a decent defense is more important than a team with great defense and a decent offense. Albeit the difference is quite marginal and the O vs D discrepancies can vary dramatically (ie. unlimited permutations). |
Edited by - tctitans on 05/29/2007 14:25:26 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 16:04:30
|
I gotta agree with tctitans on this. A great offensive team with an average defense, in my opinion, has a better shot at the Cup that a team with great defense and an average offense.
All things considered, I think the formula is pretty much the same. A Stanley Cup team needs at least:
1-Great Goalie (or an average goalie playing great like Roloson last year)
1-Effective scoring line
1-Effective shut down line
2-other lines that are skating well and responsible defensively.
I think you could look at almost every Cup winning team and put together that formula. You don't need stand out defense, just a solid shut down line and responsible players. But you do need pucks in the net.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 16:46:46
|
Okay, your formula makes some sense. But what I am trying to get at is that OVERALL (can't stress that word enough) teams have often won more because of their team defence (I don't mean just defenseman by that). If I HAD TO put an O for Offense or D for Defense beside the Cup-winning teams since 1970 (as an OVERALL assessment of the reason they won - ASIDE from goaltending), here's how it would look for me:
Edit - for "HAD TO", imagine the gun to your head scenario mentioned in my later post (of course it's difficult not to call the Habs of the '70s a great offensive team, but if you HAD TO put an O or a D beside them, which would it be)
70 – Bruins - O
71 – Habs - D
72 – Bruins - O
73 – Habs - D
74 – Flyers -D
75 – Flyers - D
76 – Habs - D
77 – Habs D
78 – Habs - D
79 – Habs - D
80 – Isles - D
81 – Isles - D
82 – Isles - D
83 – Isles - D
84 – Oilers - O
85 – Oilers - O
86 – Habs - D
87 – Oilers - O
88 - Oilers - D
89 – Flames - O
90 - Oilers - D
91 - Pens - O
92 - Pens - O
93 - Habs - D
94 - Rangers - O
95 - Devils - D
96 - Avs - O
97 - Wings - O
98 - Wings - O
99 - Stars - D
00 - Devils - D
01 - Avs - D
02 - Wings - O
03 – Devils – D
04 – T.B. - O
06 – Canes - O
* would need to think a bit more about the Habs of the early '70s - (willus - any input there?) and would also want to think a bit about those Wings teams (though I think overall, the O may be correct)
** even the Penguins, particularly in '92, could arguably have been given a D in my opinion - Bowman taught those guys how to play defense and that was a huge factor in their victory |
Edited by - andyhack on 05/30/2007 05:38:37 |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 18:21:31
|
I want to vote, but I think it is a combination of offence, and defence that wins games...
Third choice could be a little of both...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 18:28:40
|
I think you need another letter designation.
B for blend.
I think most fall into that category. I would say very few have won with just one or the other. The most glaring examples that have I would say are the Oilers for offense and the Devils for defense.
The late 70's Habs i would have a hard time saying they were defensive only. They pioneered the trap and that is a defensive system, but there were far too many talented offensive guys on that team. Their GF and GA for their seasons really show how well balanced they were. They were dominant in both categories. It seems odd as french canadien players are known to be high flying skilled guys. But that team was incredibly good at both.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 19:24:01
|
1918 to 2006 during the regular season:
Only four teams have won the Cup with more GA than GF.
1967 Toronto -7
1949 Toronto -14
1938 Chicago -42
1918 Toronto Arenas -1
59 of the 87 winning teams finished in the top 2 the year they won for GF-GA.
Top 10 GF-GA Cup Winners
1 Montreal 1977 +216
2 Montreal 1978 +176
3 Montreal 1976 +163
4 Montreal 1973 +145
5 NY Islanders 1982 +135
6 Montreal 1979 +133
7 Edmonton 1984 +132
8 Calgary 1989 +128
9 Boston 1972 +126
10 Montreal 1944 +125
Still working on some other stats…
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 19:42:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I think you need another letter designation.
B for blend.
I think most fall into that category. I would say very few have won with just one or the other. The most glaring examples that have I would say are the Oilers for offense and the Devils for defense.
The late 70's Habs i would have a hard time saying they were defensive only. They pioneered the trap and that is a defensive system, but there were far too many talented offensive guys on that team. Their GF and GA for their seasons really show how well balanced they were. They were dominant in both categories. It seems odd as french canadien players are known to be high flying skilled guys. But that team was incredibly good at both.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
Yes, many teams won by being great at both, including the Habs and Islanders. I'm just saying that if a guy came into my room right now with a gun, and put the gun to my head and said, "Which do you think better describes the reason the Habs and Isles succeeded, Offense or Defense, and if you say both, I'm blowing you away", I'd respond by saying "Defense". I'd then advise the guy to seek some therapy.
|
|
|
|
SlowShot
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
264 Posts |
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 21:05:18
|
I would have used to say d but nowadays the power play is so critical ill go with offence since you can't play go defense when your shorthanded all game
GO DUCKS. YAY GIANTS |
|
|
|
Guest4024
( )
|
Posted - 05/29/2007 : 22:31:36
|
i said deafense. lol the votes are dead even
10-10
|
|
|
|
I´m also Cånädiön
Rookie
Sweden
217 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 00:58:57
|
I think it depends on what type of offensive style you play, a more puckcontrolling offense that spends most of the time in the offensive zone is more forgiving on a bad defence than some other styles.
(Time differance Pickuphockey-Sweden approx +9 hours 1min 5sek......so I can always blame it on Jetlag.) |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 03:22:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Very interesting. If Andyhack's math is correct 11 times the Cup winner was the best defensive team and 9 times the winner was the best offensive team. Does defense really win championships??
Also intersting that the teams that people talk about in the best ever catagory are the teams listed. Those being highly skills offensive teams.
Ya'll know me, I said offense. It hold true today. Most often, the team that scores the first goal wins the game. Two goal leads are huge. You can't win if you can't put the puck in the net.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
Yeah but then the team that can hold off the other team from scoring the first goal would have the same result,, look at the devilsn how do they win they score first then close the door
Pasty |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 08:30:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I think you need another letter designation.
B for blend.
I think most fall into that category. I would say very few have won with just one or the other. The most glaring examples that have I would say are the Oilers for offense and the Devils for defense.
The late 70's Habs i would have a hard time saying they were defensive only. They pioneered the trap and that is a defensive system, but there were far too many talented offensive guys on that team. Their GF and GA for their seasons really show how well balanced they were. They were dominant in both categories. It seems odd as french canadien players are known to be high flying skilled guys. But that team was incredibly good at both.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
Yes, many teams won by being great at both, including the Habs and Islanders. I'm just saying that if a guy came into my room right now with a gun, and put the gun to my head and said, "Which do you think better describes the reason the Habs and Isles succeeded, Offense or Defense, and if you say both, I'm blowing you away", I'd respond by saying "Defense". I'd then advise the guy to seek some therapy.
I think what the Isles won on is very debatable. I might even give the edge to the O. |
|
|
|
manninm
PickupHockey Pro
USA
347 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 09:25:14
|
It can be either, and that's what makes hockey great. Great offensive teams like Edmonton have done it, great defensive teams like Jersey have done it.
Because the demands on a goalie are mostly mental, it means that for a goalie, the biggest enemy is himself." ~Ken Dryden |
|
|
|
stastnysforever
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
301 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 15:35:34
|
If there is no offense there is no reason for defense, if there is no defense then you still want some offense
what do Calgary and a tea bag have in common- they're both only good for one cup |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Offense vs. Defense 
