Love the Hawks and am someone who actually remembers the 1961 Cup, and of course all the heartbreak of the 60s and 70s. I know they current logic that says in the salary cap era, 3 wins in 6 years is a dynasty. Tyo me that's a stretch.
When I think of the word "dynasty", I'm thinking of something that is multi-generational. The Yankees, Canadiens and Celtics are about all that qualify. The Islanders won 4 Cups; the Oilers 5; the Giants have won 3 WS recently. None of those are dynastic, nor is what the Blackhawks have done. Even the Jordan Bulls weren't.
Sports has this aching need to use superlatives whenever possible. The word "superstar" is assigned to a guy who hits 24 HRs and hits .298; or a QB who piles up stats but can't win (Manning and Marino). So now we need to find a dynasty. If you have to call them a dynasty, go ahead. But then you've rendered the word essentially meaningless. They are a great team; the decade's best. And perhaps their coaching and management will in fact be so much better than everyone else that they'll continue winning like this for another 15 - 20 years. At that point we can talk.
When I think of the word "dynasty", I'm thinking of something that is multi-generational. The Yankees, Canadiens and Celtics are about all that qualify. The Islanders won 4 Cups; the Oilers 5; the Giants have won 3 WS recently. None of those are dynastic, nor is what the Blackhawks have done. Even the Jordan Bulls weren't.
Sports has this aching need to use superlatives whenever possible. The word "superstar" is assigned to a guy who hits 24 HRs and hits .298; or a QB who piles up stats but can't win (Manning and Marino). So now we need to find a dynasty. If you have to call them a dynasty, go ahead. But then you've rendered the word essentially meaningless. They are a great team; the decade's best. And perhaps their coaching and management will in fact be so much better than everyone else that they'll continue winning like this for another 15 - 20 years. At that point we can talk.
