Talk:Stanley Cup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey, an attempt at building a useful ice hockey resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). Edit this message Ice hockey Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Rideau Canal 2 Duplicate Cups 3 Cup Rings 4 Series vs. Trophy 5 Brawl 6 Stanley Cup Today 7 play-off 8 Playoff ceremony 9 Photo 10 "Coincidence"? 11 Playoff games of note 12 Adrienne Clarkson 13 Jazzier intro 14 Spliting the "Traditions and anecdotes" section 15 Citations needed 16 Lord Stanley's Mug 17 No players with the cup? 18 Trivia? 19 Most recognized symbol? 20 The name Stanley Cup 21 Stanley Cup finals of note 22 Citation 23 1942 Cup

[edit] Rideau Canal

"A member of the 1905 Ottawa Silver Seven tried to see if he could drop kick the Cup across the Rideau Canal. The attempt failed, and the Cup was not retrieved until the next day; luckily the river was still frozen over."

The Rideau canal is a canal, not a river as its name implies. I haven't changed this however because they could be referring to the Rideau River and not the canal.--72.57.229.236 15:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)fred

Hi there!

Can somebody explain the 1927 Games numbers 2-0-2 ?? / 82.182.115.84 17:24, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

During that time, unlike today, tied games may not have been decided with a sudden-death overtime. Before the advent of sudden-death overtime, ties were resolved with full overtimes (this explains one incident where one team scored three goals in overtime in a 5-2 victory) or were not resolved at all (one game in the abandoned Stanley Cup Finals series was a tie). There could also be the case where it was a sudden-death overtime, but the game was abandoned for other reasons. The true cause still eludes me... kelvSYC 17:33, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! So the game was tied in 1927? :) 82.182.115.84 04:00, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I would assume 2 games were tied given the 2-0-2 standings. Remember that back then, they didn't have giant refridgeration units to maintain the ice nor even Zambonis. Much of the time games would end due to environmental reasons and what ever the score was at the time, that was the final outcome. Abmoraz 21:18, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps 82.182.115.84 is from Europe where the convention is Wins-Ties-Losses, as opposed to North America where it's Wins-Losses-Ties (or the ever confusing W-L-T-OTL-SOL-...whatever else they think of next). Anyway, the original writer was probably North American and meant 2 wins and 2 ties. --Grmagne 19:15, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The actual facts in the 1927 series was that the two tied games (as happened with a number of overtime games in NHL history) were called due to curfew laws in both Boston and Ottawa. RGTraynor 03:54, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate Cups

Maybe I'm wrong, which is why I didn't edit, but if anyone can back me up - I remember very clearly reading somewhere that the real Cup is the one presented to the team (I'm very sure about this one, besides, it would be common sense that the winners get the real thing), one duplicate is displayed in the Hall of Fame and used for public displays and promotions, the other duplicate is kept in a vault. --Legalizeit 13:45, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't know about the second duplicate in the vault, but according to this [NHL.com - The Stanley Cup] you are correct, the original gets presented to the team (at least at the Finals), and a duplicate (that doesn't have spelling mistakes) is in the hall of fame. Mtruch 14:03, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Over the years the bowl and top rings have been replaced, and they are in a locked vault in the HHOF. So it's really three-and-a-bit. kelvSYC 06:50, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cup Rings

I think the part about the player with the most stanley cup rings should be reworded, since teams didn't always give out rings in the earlier days.Also, I believe when the Canadiens first gave them out, they would add to the existing ring each year for players who already had a ring (ie add more diamonds or something). I'm not 100% sure about this which is why I didn't edit, but I am fairly sure about at least the first part

I've heard the same thing about the Canadiens adding diamonds to the same ring each time a player won a cup Priester 04:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Series vs. Trophy

This really seems to be two different articles, one on the Stanley Cup series and one on the trophy itself. My thought is that the article should be split as such, perhaps into Stanley Cup finals and Stanley Cup (trophy); any comments or concerns? Jgm 18:29, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Stanley Cup finals, although today is synonymous with the NHL's final series, is (on a technicality) unaffiliated with the NHL. The trustees of the Cup decide who gets to play for the Cup, and typically it's between the two NHL conference champions in the modern days. kelvSYC 21:28, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That's fascinating, can you add that information to the article? Jgm 00:51, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Isn't that the subject of debate (not to mention at the heart of current legal proceedings?) - Cafemusique 01:18, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The trustees have sole control of who gets to play for the Cup - it's firmly established as fact. The question regarding the current legal proceedings is that should the Cup be open to challenge by any other league (as technically, the Cup is still a challenge trophy)? Are the trustees essentially legally bound to award the Cup to the NHL and refuse all other challengers? Previous such arguments in the 60s (with leagues in California - not an NHL market at the time - wanting to go major league) and the 70s (with the WHA and the influence of international hockey) favored the NHL, but some say that with the negative effects of the lockout, things might not go the NHL's way anymore. kelvSYC 04:13, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Brawl

The bit about the Stanley Cup brawl is incomplete. One guy punching a referee is serious, but not a brawl. I read once that this event resulted in benches clearing. Anyone got an old book that says more?

I'm not sure this event is worthy of note, and I recommend deletion. Besides which, there have been other players banned for life in the NHL, namely Don Gallinger and Billy Taylor, both for gambling. Hoghee 20:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

The event is worthy of noting, as it is a rare occurence during the Stanley Cup finals. It also lead to the adoption of new arena security policies. Flibirigit 04:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Should "rare" occurences comprise general encyclopedia articles? Perhaps it should be in included instead in an article on "violence in the NHL", not the Stanley Cup. As far as I know, it had no effect on any policies relating to Cup play, though I am interested in your source that it affected "arena security policies." Hoghee 19:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stanley Cup Today

Henri Richard was not "The Rocket". That nickname belongs to his older brother, the late Maurice Richard who was legendary for his offensive hockey skill. As for Henri, he was usually referred to in the english-language media as "the Pocket Rocket". http://www.hhof.com/html/exSCJ_15.shtml

Thanks for your correction! -- user:zanimum

[edit] play-off

I think there could be described in this article how the play-off is organized - the number of teams taking part in it, who plays who in which round, how many games are played and so on. Jan.Kamenicek 21:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Playoff ceremony

I'm not sure how to say this, but shouldn't we put a picture of a team (any team, or maybe just a player we can all think about), holding the standley cup after winning the playoffs? Wouln't that be a good pic, and we could put if for nomination for the pictures! :) paat 22:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Sure, if you can find a non-copyrighted or otherwise PD pic. RGTraynor 00:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

What's PD? paat 00:24, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

public domain, basically no copyright. -- JamesTeterenko 02:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Uhm, how do I find whats the copyright if there is one or not? paat 02:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

If you are grabbing it from another website, look for copyright information on that website. As a warning, most good pictures of athletes available on the web are under copyright and not suitable for Wikipedia. For some sources of free pictures, check out Wikipedia:Public domain image resources. -- JamesTeterenko 02:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photo

I think it would be appropriate if there were a picture of the current Stanley Cup, not just the original one. If anyone has a usable one, please upload it. Patrick 05:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be appropriate if busybodies didn't delete every pic out, too. RGTraynor 14:49, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Coincidence"?

It's an interesting piece of trivia, but is it important, in the grand scheme of things? Does the success of a baseball team really have anything to do with a hockey trophy? Maybe it's just me... Doogie2K 05:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, and reverted. RGTraynor 14:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Playoff games of note

Isn't it odd that only none of the playoff games of note actually focus on the play on the ice? One is about a fight, the two others about events where no one actually played hockey. I think it would be better if there was made a "Years the Stanley Cup was not awarded" section, and a "Playoff series of note" with e.g. the time (1942) the Maple Leafs won 4-3 after trailing the Red Wings 0-3. Or the start of the Islanders (1980) or oilers (1984) dynasties. What do you think? JesperLærke 08:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adrienne Clarkson

I assume this issue must have come up before, but during the lockout then Governor General Adrienne Clarkson threatened to take the cup from the NHL and give it to the best Canadian Womens Hockey Team. She later backed down when the idea wasn't popular and created the Clarkson Cup. This raises an interesting question regarding who is the legal owner of the Stanley Cup, and if it is indeed still held in trust by the people of Canada. Anyone want to add something about this ? Dowew 13:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The NHL is the legal custodian of the Cup and has been for eighty years. The Cup Trustees could, of course, vote to change that, since they have complete legal control over the Cup, but the Trustees have been NHL appointees for decades and consistently vote the way the league wishes. RGTraynor 13:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jazzier intro

I think this article could use a better intro. How do you like the following?

The Stanley Cup is the trophy awarded to the winners of the annual National Hockey League playoffs. It is one of the most-recognized symbols in North American sports and is at the center of several legends and superstitions. The cup is treated like royalty, attended to by full-time chaperones who carry it with white gloves. Unlike the trophies awarded by the other three major professional sports leagues of North America, the Stanley Cup is never copied. The cup winners keep it for only one year, unless they repeat as league champions.

Mwalcoff 03:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The lead section should also include a very brief paragraph about it originally being the Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you think the intro really needs a whole paragraph on the original name? Personally, I think the original name can simply be mentioned in the history section. -- Mwalcoff 22:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Only if you or someone else plans on eventually promoting this to either good article status or featured article status. As per Wikipedia:Lead section, the intro should "give a broad overview of the subject", which in my opinion includes how it was originally used as a challenge cup. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

OK -- how would you work that in? -- Mwalcoff 23:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

If you would like, you can add your idea for the intro, and I'll add my idea after you. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The problem with the current lead is that it contradicts the lower claim about the current cups; the intro says it's never been copied, and then the lower section says there are actually two copies. According to NHL.com, the original trophy is still awarded; according to the Hockey Hall of Fame, the original bowl was retired (although it doesn't say when it was retired), which means that the current trophy awarded and carried around by the winning team is not necessarily the one that's been drop-kicked, urinated in, etc. It would be nice to have an authority on the Cup rewrite these parts and clarify exactly what the truth is. - dharmabum 22:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I found a little more; the original bowl and collar were retired in 1962 according to this. - dharmabum 22:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I tried to modify the lead a bit to clarify it. However, as you probaly noticed based on your recent edits, this article needs to be cleaned up becuase of the lack of references or source. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spliting the "Traditions and anecdotes" section

I am thinking about spliting the "Traditions and anecdotes" section into a seperate article -- primarily the lists of adventures, misadventures, and engraving error, which all could go on forever. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Its part of the Stanley Cup's history. No one is going to look for a separate article for the traditions and anectdotes relating to the Stanley Cup. It should stay here. --The Animal 20:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I concur with The Animal. The section should remain part of the article. Flibirigit 01:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I concur with The Animal as well. The section should remain part of the article. -- P199 13:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I concur with The Animal as well. The section should remain part of the article. -- Jimerb 13:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citations needed

1. The Stanely Cup is infact duplicated, three identical ones currently in the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame, 2. The NHL "adopted" the Stanley Cup as the Championship trophy in 1947 not 1926 3. There was no agreement between the NHL and the PCHA 4. The following statement is inaccurate that needs a reliable source “After the Portland Rosebuds joined the PCHA in 1914, the trustees declared that the Cup was to be symbolic of world hockey supremacy” First the desition was made in 1915, secondly it wasn’t the trustees that made that desiction it was the Governement of Canada 5. There in no agreement in place and never has been that the Stanley Cup could only be awared to an NHL champions.--StanleyPuck 04:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I looked at my sources again, clarified and reconfirmed it. If you have any sources that differ, please include it. Otherwise, you have no proof and thus it stays. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Stanley's Mug

I took out the description of "Lord Stanley's Mug" as a colloquial expression because it is not commonly used in speech. It's tired journalistic wit. Not a crucial point but I thought I'd better explain it. John FitzGerald 01:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

And how the Cup is depicted in the media is at least as important as otherwise. Sheesh, 95% of the recorded nicknames in player articles are media inventions. A bunch of hockey fans in a bar would never have referred to the "Stratford Streak" or "Mr. Hockey" or "The Great One." RGTraynor 04:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with what your saying, execpt for the "The Great One", Whayne Gretzky is commonly referred to as "The Great One". Marcus1060 04:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Not in ordinary conversation between three-dimensional people (grins). RGTraynor 14:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No players with the cup?

Why? An article about the Stanley Cup and there isn't a single picture of a player rasing the cup? --Krm500 20:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Many such photographs are copyrighted. If you have a photo that is public domain , please add it. Flibirigit 20:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Check the article on Wayne Gretzky. That's a damn good picture to use if you ask me. --Wafulz 00:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

And so it has been done. Flibirigit 03:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

...except that it is currently tagged as {{Fair use in}}, and only has a fair use rationale for the Gretzky article. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia?

I think it would be worthwhile, with the vast history of the cup, to have a trivia section similar to other articles on the Wikipedia. For example, unless I'm mistaken, the Stanley Cup is known as the oldest continuously contested trophey in sports.--Mike Melzer 02:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

There is some controversy over trivia sections in general, see Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles. Also, the essential gist of "the Stanley Cup is known as the oldest continuously contested trophey in sports" is already currently mentioned this article's lead introduction section. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I stand (sit?) corrected. I missed that statement in the write up, and was unaware that trivia was frowned upon. Thanks for the info. I'll go back and reread the posting guidelines before making any further posts.--Mike Melzer 16:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Most recognized symbol?

"it is the most-recognized symbol in North American sports"

At the very least, this requires a citationCheesy 04:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The name Stanley Cup

I want to include the mention of the Cup being referred to as the Stanley Cup as early as 1899, as cited in Hockey: Canada's Royal Winter Game (available in full at the Library and Archives of Canada site here). However I can't find the perfect place for it to fit in. So I'm hoping someone has the skill to weasle it in, as it would seem somewhat important to include how early it was being referred to as the Stanley Cup, and not just the Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup. Kaiser matias 10:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stanley Cup finals of note

What is the criteria for choosing which notable finals to list in this section? Otherwise, it seems more POV and original research. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation

Reply: It is the only game in history of the Stanley Cup final where a game was unfinished and there was circumstances beyond their control.

NHL.com has a citation in the History section. [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.118.108.222 (talk) 19:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] 1942 Cup

There is a contradiction. It says they were the first team to win on the road in a game 7 finals, but the game listing shows they played at home. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raguv2000 (talk • contribs).

I am removing it. The source that is cited actually does not say it either. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)