Hey you know what’s fun?

I just watched the highlights of the Kings’ last ten series-clinching wins. I skipped the Chicago series from 2013. That’s a 10-1 series record over the last three seasons. Ten series wins in 2012, 2013 and 2014. If you wanted to experience ten Kings series wins before 2012, you would have to go back and relive the quarter century from 1975-2001. Before 2012, the Kings’ series record was 11-22. Now it’s 21-23.

Here’s a question (or two) for you. The Kings just won two cups in three seasons. Who was the last team to do that? How many teams have done it since the first expansion in 1967?

  • Kings 2012-14
  • Wings 1997-98 (last team to win back to back)
  • Penguins 1991-92 (back to back)
  • Oilers 1984-1990 (won five cups in seven seasons)
  • Islanders 1980-83 (four in a row)
  • Canadiens 1976-79 (four in a row)
  • Flyers 1974-75 (back to back)
  • Canadiens 1968-73 (four cups in six seasons)
  • pre-1967 it happened all the time, since there were only six teams. (Usually it was the Canadiens, Leafs or Wings, once it was the Bruins, the Rangers and Hawks never did it.)

One thing leaps out at me from that list. You’ve got the Russian-Five era Red Wings, the Lemieux/Jagr era Penguins, the Gretzky/Messier era Oilers, the Bossy era Islanders, the  Clarke/ Parent era Flyers, and the monolithic 70s Canadiens. Those are arguably the greatest teams in hockey history; certainly the greatest post-Original Six.

The Canadiens, Islanders and Oilers are in a different class, and the Kings are not likely to rise to that level (winning four in a row or five out of seven). I’m not even sure that’s possible anymore for any team, given “parity.”

Right now, the Kings are on the cusp of being in the company of those Red Wings, Penguins and Flyers teams. Even that is debatable, but for someone who has endured interminable seasons of hockey hideousness, just the fact that the 2012-14 Kings can be part of that conversation is mind-blowing.

 
  • Throwdeuce

    If they win another cup in next 2 years they can be considered a dynasty. Blackhawks would have to win it next year to be considered that, but even that would be 3 in 6 years and stretching the definition.

  • Echelaunch

    One more Cup (not that I’m greedy) and we could claim to be the greatest American dynasty since the 1967 expansion. That’s how I would put it.

  • http://www.mcsorleys-stick.com/ Quisp

    I think to be a legitimate “dynasty” you would have to at least be within shouting distance of those Oiler/Habs/Isles numbers. For me, the Kings would have to win two of the next four, which would give them four out of seven. Highly unlikely, but no less crazy than winning either of the two cups they already won.

    • toughd

      Doubt we will win 2 due to the Curse of Mike Richards. Richard’s underwhelming value, big cap hit has already cost us Brown’s contract, next up Justin Williams. No way we are replacing Williams $3.65 M cap hit with a player of equal or better value, even if it’s with Williams. Williams has outpointed Richards [and Brown] every year so he’s definitely getting a raise, but he is old and about the same age as Gabs so it’s fairly possible his new contract is gonna have a cap hit between $3.65 and $4.875. But then again a big difference between Williams and Gabs is that Gabs is coming off his most lucrative contract, while Williams is coming off a very economical one, and he just won the Con Smythe. Richards has a $5.75 cap hit, wouldn’t be surprised at all if his next contract is somewhere between a $4.875 and $5.75 cap hit. Furthermore, we gotta expect diminishing returns from Gabs, Williams, and Brownie due to age and of course lousy returns from Richards means we better win the Cup next season, because it’s going to be difficult after that.

      • Toughd

        Forgot Carter had a $5.272 cap hit, so it’s minutely possible someone could offer him between $4.875 and $5.272. Never thought I would be talking about Williams being in the same class as carter or gabs, but with Richards and Browns contract, wouldn’t be surprised if he’s in the latter bracket. So we probably definitely lose some players the season after next. Since we didn’t say no to Richards (or brown), I believe Williams must be the casualty here.

  • http://web.me.com/kakitadoug/geekblog/Blog/Blog.html DougS

    I think “mind-blowing” is a perfectly accurate phrase. These last three seasons have constituted such a sharp break with the team’s history that it’s actually getting harder to reconcile the pre-2012-13 period with everything that has happened since then. Every year that the Kings go deep in the playoffs, it seems a little harder for ghosts of the past to keep haunting me.

  • USHA#17

    Hard to consider LA in same light as some of those great hay day clubs (Lafleur streaking down the slot) but…but, maybe. The thought had struck me. The transition from the Kings of yore to today’s team may have traces of Stockholm Syndrome – NHL style, but now, for the life of me I can’t see any reason to think LA is not capable of a third cup.