Boston Bruins 2023-24 Roster and Salary Cap Discussion VI

[Dennis Bonvie]

All true. I enjoy watching them win on a regular basis, but it's about playoff success to me.

I understand winning the cup is the hardest thing in sports to do, but can we at least get out of the first round with all this winning that happening.

Regular season hockey and playoff hockey are two different animals.

They did get to game 7 of the finals during Sweeney's tenure.

Only 12 of the 32 teams in the league have been to a final in that time.

Buffalo hasn't been in the playoffs since the Bruins last won the Cup. Its been 18 years since they won a single playoff round. Leafs haven't been to the finals in 55 years.

For many teams playoff success simply means making the playoffs.

 

[Gordoff]

I always thought the idea was to win.

Since Don Sweeney has been GM, the Bruins:

Have the best record in hockey. By far.

First in goals against. By far.

First on the PK.

4th on the power play.

7th in goals for.

In a 32 team league.

Just saying...

Oh okay, so I've been living in Tristan Da Cunha ... How many Cups in that time period? Just asking. I suppose that they'll win another in '24?

 

[Therick67]

They did get to game 7 of the finals during Sweeney's tenure.

Only 12 of the 32 teams in the league have been to a final in that time.

Buffalo hasn't been in the playoffs since the Bruins last won the Cup. Its been 18 years since they won a single playoff round. Leafs haven't been to the finals in 55 years.

For many teams playoff success simply means making the playoffs.

I'd be happy with getting past the first round, even though we've been able to celebrate such great regular seasons..


.

 

[Gordoff]

If the Bruins won the Cup in 2013, 2019 and/or 2023 I wonder what the bonus $$$ against the Cap would be?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Oh okay, so I've been living in Tristan Da Cunha ... How many Cups in that time period? Just asking. I suppose that they'll win another in '24?

That's not a time period, is it?

Trick question?

I'd be happy with getting past the first round, even though we've been able to celebrate such great regular seasons..


.

Me too.

 

[Gordoff]

at least we'll be picking first in the draft... oh wait we're in freaking first place.

They wouldn't anyway, they spent all of the first round picks until 2025. Too bad they neutered the players they blew those picks on.

That's not a time period, is it?

Trick question?


Me too.

Nah, it's pretty simple. How many Cups on Don Sweeney's resume since he's been GM?

 

[Oates2Neely]

They did get to game 7 of the finals during Sweeney's tenure.

Only 12 of the 32 teams in the league have been to a final in that time.

Buffalo hasn't been in the playoffs since the Bruins last won the Cup. Its been 18 years since they won a single playoff round. Leafs haven't been to the finals in 55 years.

For many teams playoff success simply means making the playoffs.

Boston Redsox ownership would hire you on the spot

 

[UncleRico]

I always thought the idea was to win.

Since Don Sweeney has been GM, the Bruins:

Have the best record in hockey. By far.

First in goals against. By far.

First on the PK.

4th on the power play.

7th in goals for.

In a 32 team league.

Just saying...

Is the goal to be the best regular season team in the league every year though?

Best record over the past decade, but the other top 5 teams have all won a cup in that span while the bruins haven’t.

There’s an obvious disconnect there as to why the other top regular season teams have been able to win but the bruins haven’t.

Unfortunately it’s becoming more and more evident that they are built to be a regular season team.

Boston Redsox ownership would hire you on the spot

Would they? I’m pretty sure the Red Sox organization would much rather the 4 championships with mixed in down years as opposed to 1 championship with sustained regular season success

 

[hrdpuk]

I prefer regular season wins over the SC.

From a players perspective I can understand them wanting the cup.

 

[PB37]

Is the goal to be the best regular season team in the league every year though?

Best record over the past decade, but the other top 5 teams have all won a cup in that span while the bruins haven’t.

There’s an obvious disconnect there as to why the other top regular season teams have been able to win but the bruins haven’t.

Unfortunately it’s becoming more and more evident that they are built to be a regular season team.



Would they? I’m pretty sure the Red Sox organization would much rather the 4 championships with mixed in down years as opposed to 1 championship with sustained regular season success

Not getting a SC is a feather Sweeney is missing from his cap as the GM. I think he's done good work getting the team there - but ultimately, it's the players who decide the games. 2019 should have been it. Possibly last year too.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

They wouldn't anyway, they spent all of the first round picks until 2025. Too bad they neutered the players they blew those picks on.


Nah, it's pretty simple. How many Cups on Don Sweeney's resume since he's been GM?

We all know the answer is zero. What's the point? He's doing a crappy job?

Stupidest argument in team sports: How many championships has he won?

 

[UncleRico]

Not getting a SC is a feather Sweeney is missing from his cap as the GM. I think he's done good work getting the team there - but ultimately, it's the players who decide the games. 2019 should have been it. Possibly last year too.

But it’s also the types of players the GM brings in and the construction of the roster he creates.

The most glaring one pertaining to the bruins being built for the regular season is the goalie tandem which is an elite scenario for the regular season, but the opposite for the postseason. As they’ve finished the last couple postseasons with $5m allocated to a goalie who ended the season riding the bench.

Then there’s the lack of toughness he’s been unable to address.


His rosters are constructed for presidents trophies not Stanley cups.

 

[RoccoF14]

Oh okay, so I've been living in Tristan Da Cunha ... How many Cups in that time period? Just asking. I suppose that they'll win another in '24?

We've won 1 Cup in 50 years.

The beloved Don Cherry teams of the mid-late 70s, that many posters on this board are nostalgic for (myself included) won 0 Cups. Those teams had some of my heroes. O'Reilly, Middleton, Park, Wensik, Jonathan, Secord....We played a tough, physical game and nobody f***ed with us. We just couldn't get past those soft, cheating Habs. 0 Cups but that's OK because we knocked the shit of people. Am I right?

Fast forward to the late 80s-Early 90s. Beloved Teams that many posters are nostalgic for. Again, 0 Cups. Bourque, Neely, Byers, Burridge etc. A little more skilled, but still gritty. Yet 0 Cups. That's OK though, because we still knocked the shit out of people when we had to.

2011. Cup winner. Beloved team that many posters are nostalgic for, and tons of revisionist history gets tossed around regarding that team's toughness. Mainly because we pushed around a soft Vancouver team in the Final in seven games. Bottom line is that we came within a whisker of getting bounced in the first round, and Tim Thomas carried that team on his back. Nevertheless, they won, and they are legends.

Since then, as @Dennis Bonvie pointed out, we've basically been one of the winngest franchises in the NHL. But we aren't knocking the shit out of people like we used to and people miss that. I get it. I like the physical game too.

If you wanna shit on this roster and the current front office for a lack of toughness. I'm cool with that. But lack of Cups? Come on.

 

[CDJ]

We all know the answer is zero. What's the point? He's doing a crappy job?

Stupidest argument in team sports: How many championships has he won?

It is clear to me that Reilly Smith is better than David Pastrnak, just gotta look at the rings!

 

[UncleRico]

We all know the answer is zero. What's the point? He's doing a crappy job?

Stupidest argument in team sports: How many championships has he won?

I would say pointing to regular season success is the stupidest arguement in sports because the number 1 objective of a team will never be to have the best regular season record.

I think Bruce Cassidy said it best when he said

“ “I don’t have my name on it,” Cassidy told The Athletic. “I don’t want to say it’s everything, but in terms of my career, it is everything to win the Cup. Those (trophies) are all great. They are. They’re accomplishments, but they’re not the Stanley Cup. People talk about Stanley Cup champions, not Jack Adams winners or Presidents’ trophy winners.”


It may be the stupidest arguement to you and the jacobs. But it’s far more important to everyone who plays and coaches the game than regular season success

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

We've won 1 Cup in 50 years.

The beloved Don Cherry teams of the mid-late 70s, that many posters on this board are nostalgic for (myself included) won 0 Cups. Those teams had some of my heroes. O'Reilly, Middleton, Park, Wensik, Jonathan, Secord....We played a tough, physical game and nobody f***ed with us. We just couldn't get past those soft, cheating Habs. 0 Cups but that's OK because we knocked the shit of people. Am I right?

Fast forward to the late 80s-Early 90s. Beloved Teams that many posters are nostalgic for. Again, 0 Cups. Bourque, Neely, Byers, Burridge etc. A little more skilled, but still gritty. Yet 0 Cups. That's OK though, because we still knocked the shit out of people.

2011. Cup winner. Beloved team that many posters are nostalgic for, and tons of revisionist history gets tossed around regarding that team's toughness. Mainly because we pushed around a soft Vancouver team in the Final in seven games. Bottom line is that we came within a whisker of getting bounced in the first round, and Tim Thomas carried that team on his back. Nevertheless, they won, and they are legends.

Since then, as @Dennis Bonvie pointed out, we've basically been one of the winngest franchises is the NHL. But we aren't knocking the shit out of people like we used to and people miss that. I get it. I like the physical game too.

If you wanna shit on this roster and the current front office for a lack of toughness. I'm cool with that. But lack of Cups? Come on.

Excellent post.

 

[PB37]

But it’s also the types of players the GM brings in and the construction of the roster he creates.

The most glaring one pertaining to the bruins being built for the regular season is the goalie tandem which is an elite scenario for the regular season, but the opposite for the postseason. As they’ve finished the last couple postseasons with $5m allocated to a goalie who ended the season riding the bench.

Then there’s the lack of toughness he’s been unable to address.


His rosters are constructed for presidents trophies not Stanley cups.

There is no magic button to push to spit out a SC winning team. Things like a goalie getting hot, luck, and injuries loom large in how a series will go. Sweeney built teams that should have won ( 2019 and again last year ) but it's the players who play. Last year's trade deadline was focused on players to help the team be a continuation of the regular season juggernaut - not sure how anyone can argue that point.

 

[UncleRico]

There is no magic button to push to spit out a SC winning team. Things like a goalie getting hot, luck, and injuries loom large in how a series will go. Sweeney built teams that should have won ( 2019 and again last year ) but it's the players who play. Last year's trade deadline was focused on players to help the team be a continuation of the regular season juggernaut - not sure how anyone can argue that point.

I know there’s no magic button.

However the bruins are the top regular season team in points over the last decade. All the other teams in the top 5 regular season points have cups during that span.

There is a direct correlation to regular season success resulting in postseason success for every team close to the bruins in points over the last decade, but the bruins are the anomaly.

Why does it translate for all the other top teams but not the bruins?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I would say pointing to regular season success is the stupidest arguement in sports because the number 1 objective of a team will never be to win have the best regular season record.

I think Bruce Cassidy said it best when he said

“ “I don’t have my name on it,” Cassidy told The Athletic. “I don’t want to say it’s everything, but in terms of my career, it is everything to win the Cup. Those (trophies) are all great. They are. They’re accomplishments, but they’re not the Stanley Cup. People talk about Stanley Cup champions, not Jack Adams winners or Presidents’ trophy winners.”


It may be the stupidest arguement to you and the jacobs. But it’s far more important to everyone who plays and coaches the game than regular season success

Winning th Cup is the ultimate, no doubt about it. Its everyone's goal, of course.

But to use winning the Cup as the ultimate way of judging an individual GM, coach or player's success is just wrong. Which it is being used for by posters here to rag on Don Sweeney beacuase he's made this team so soft.

Maybe its Sweeney's fault the whole NHL is getting softer and softer every season.

 

[TobanWest]

We've won 1 Cup in 50 years.

The beloved Don Cherry teams of the mid-late 70s, that many posters on this board are nostalgic for (myself included) won 0 Cups. Those teams had some of my heroes. O'Reilly, Middleton, Park, Wensik, Jonathan, Secord....We played a tough, physical game and nobody f***ed with us. We just couldn't get past those soft, cheating Habs. 0 Cups but that's OK because we knocked the shit of people. Am I right?

Fast forward to the late 80s-Early 90s. Beloved Teams that many posters are nostalgic for. Again, 0 Cups. Bourque, Neely, Byers, Burridge etc. A little more skilled, but still gritty. Yet 0 Cups. That's OK though, because we still knocked the shit out of people.

2011. Cup winner. Beloved team that many posters are nostalgic for, and tons of revisionist history gets tossed around regarding that team's toughness. Mainly because we pushed around a soft Vancouver team in the Final in seven games. Bottom line is that we came within a whisker of getting bounced in the first round, and Tim Thomas carried that team on his back. Nevertheless, they won, and they are legends.

Since then, as @Dennis Bonvie pointed out, we've basically been one of the winngest franchises is the NHL. But we aren't knocking the shit out of people like we used to and people miss that. I get it. I like the physical game too.

If you wanna shit on this roster and the current front office for a lack of toughness. I'm cool with that. But lack of Cups? Come on.

Big difference between winning a ton of games and winning a bunch of cups IMO. All here can agree that we'd love to see cup wins. Some are ok with settling for winning a ton of games.
Again the theory that everyone on the other side want 5 tough guys is different than the fact that most just want some tough to play against players added. Hell I'd settle for one at the moment. It is needed for the playoffs. Much like it was needed for 2011. Timmy was amazing but they also had skill, talent and toughness.

 

[Number8]

If you'd have told me in August that the main gripe as of December 22, 2023 would be that we are not a physical enough team I would not have believed you.

Anyone who had us flip flopping with the Rangers for leading the East I tip my hat to you.

Now, that said -- with the exception of the fact that goalies can and do steal Cups (thank you Tim Thomas 2011) -- I still do not believe we are a real concern for a Cup. I just don't think we are deep enough to last the meat grinder.

But I'm not going to rip management for that. What I'm going to ask management to do is make any TDL moves with real caution and to spend any 1st and 2nd round picks we have left only for verifiable slam dunk steals.

Restock the cupboard, let's get back to enjoying this season's unexpected riches, look forward to some cap relief, and root for our goalies to stymie, frustrate, and irritate the rest of the league.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I know there’s no magic button.
However the bruins are the top regular season team in points over the last decade. All the other teams in the top 5 regular season points have cups during that span.
There is a direct correlation to regular season success resulting in postseason success for every team close to the bruins in points over the last decade, but the bruins are the anomaly.
Why does it translate for all the other top teams but not the bruins?

Vegas - Jack Eichel 2nd overall pick
Colorado - Nate MacKinnon first pick overall Cale Makar 4th overall
Tampa - Stamkos first pick overall Victor Hedman 2nd overall
St Louis - Jay Bouweester 3rd overall Alex Pietrangelo 4th overall
Washington - Ovechkin first overall Backstrom 4th overall
Pittsburgh - Crosby first overall Fluery first overall Malkin 2nd overall
LA - Doughty 2nd overall Gaborik 3rd overall
Chicago - Kane first overall Toews 3rd overall

These are certainly some of the factors.

 

[RoccoF14]

Big difference between winning a ton of games and winning a bunch of cups IMO. All here can agree that we'd love to see cup wins. Some are ok with settling for winning a ton of games.
Again the theory that everyone on the other side want 5 tough guys is different than the fact that most just want some tough to play against players added. Hell I'd settle for one at the moment. It is needed for the playoffs. Much like it was needed for 2011. Timmy was amazing but they also had skill, talent and toughness.

I think what many posters want is SOMEONE on the roster who can knock the crap out of someone else. Its literally that simple. If we just went out and got a Ryan Reeves on our roster, that would be enough for many.

There's a tradition of Bruins teams always having a guy like that, and people miss that. Its a big reason why so many lost their shit when Lucic came back. Its real and it touches on our less rational and more emotional side of being a fan. People LIKE seeing a Bruin player, pound the crap out of the opposition and I get the desire to want to have that. I'd just like to see people simply admit it and leave it at that.

Where you lose me, is when you try to make the argument that having that element significantly improves your chances of winning a Cup.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think what many posters want is SOMEONE on the roster who can knock the crap out of someone else. Its literally that simple. If we just went out and got a Ryan Reeves on our roster, that would be enough for many.

There's a tradition of Bruins teams always having a guy like that, and people miss that. Its a big reason why so many lost their shit when Lucic came back. Its real and it touches on our less rational and more emotional side of being a fan. People LIKE seeing a Bruin player, pound the crap out of the opposition and I get the desire to want to have that. I'd just like to see people simply admit that and leave it at that.

Where you lose me, is when you try to make the argument that having that element significantly improves your chances of winning a Cup.

Well said.

And its not like this GM hasn't brought in any such players.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

We all know the answer is zero. What's the point? He's doing a crappy job?

Stupidest argument in team sports: How many championships has he won?

Yet that's often the most asked question when comparing great players.

Some players play for money, some play for money and championships.. some fans get enough entertainment from the regular season and some only deem the season a success if you win the big one.

I think when it comes to GM's if they build a team with a chance to win every year, that's a success, as it ultimately comes down to the players performing in crunch time. In Don Sweeney's tenure, I would say he's easily one of the best GM's in the sport. Most years he puts together teams with a shot to win, that's really all he can do. It's up to the players to bring it home.

I think what many posters want is SOMEONE on the roster who can knock the crap out of someone else. Its literally that simple. If we just went out and got a Ryan Reeves on our roster, that would be enough for many.

There's a tradition of Bruins teams always having a guy like that, and people miss that. Its a big reason why so many lost their shit when Lucic came back. Its real and it touches on our less rational and more emotional side of being a fan. People LIKE seeing a Bruin player, pound the crap out of the opposition and I get the desire to want to have that. I'd just like to see people simply admit it and leave it at that.

Where you lose me, is when you try to make the argument that having that element significantly improves your chances of winning a Cup.

I think it really helps. Players that are tough generally don't mind paying the price in the play-offs. I think it also makes you more mentally tough when things are on the line. I don't think tough is a one word fits all though. Guys that can fight aren't always tough, and vice versa but you aren't winning a cup if toughness is your biggest attribute