I've read numerous articles over the last two days on this exact topic.

In my opinion, when the Blackhawks win two Cups in a row, then we will talk. Until then, nope...

There has been a lot of talk that a Stanley Cup finals berth earns the Chicago Blackhawks a seat at the dynasty table. As they prepare for their third finals series in six years, this one with the Tampa Bay Lightning, Scott Burnside and Craig Custance debate the matter. Blackhawks: dynasty or not?

Burnside: Hello, Craig. Have your bags packed for a little Tampa-Chicago travel tango, once the Stanley Cup finals begin on Wednesday? How good is Team ESPN.com coming up with the two Cup finalists as part of our consensus pick jamboree at the start of the playoffs? You’ll notice how I’m strangely (or not so strangely) silent on my whining about not giving the Anaheim Ducks any love. In the end, Chicago was just too much, well, Chicago for the Ducks. And that brings me to a hot discussion this week: Whether a Blackhawks team vying for a third Cup since 2010 and a team that has gone at least to the conference finals level five times since 2009, counts as a dynasty? Maybe we should backtrack a little too, in terms of what we consider a dynasty and whether that terminology has a new meaning in the salary-cap world, given what were readily accepted dynasties in the 1970s, '80s and '90s by the Montreal Canadiens, New York Islanders and Edmonton Oilers. So, let’s start there. What is a dynasty and do the Blackhawks qualify?

Custance: To me, that’s the big question, because "dynasty" appears to mean different things to different people. To me, a dynasty is a team that continues winning championships for an extended period of time that stretches through roster changes.

continued