OT: Big Bad Bruins: Underachievers?

[smithformeragent]

There was a very interesting point made this afternoon by Michael "hot takes" Felger on the radio.

He claimed that the 70s Big Bad Bruins teams underachieved.
He asserted that they should have won four or five Cups along the lines of the Canadiens, Oilers and Islanders dynasties of the 70s and 80s.

Thoughts from those who lived through the time period?

Were they underachievers? Was it a missed opportunity? A combination of losing players to World Hockey, Ken Dryden and Orr's knees?

Click to read more...

 

[LSCII]

I disagree. I was really young during this heyday, but I remember quite a bit of it. The problem wasn't that they underachieved. It was that there were other teams that were damn good. It's not like in the late 70s and early 80s where the Islanders were so dominant and then the Oilers took over and it was an assumed thing that they'd win it all.

I mean, the Bruins won it in 70, then the habs in 71. Back to the B's in 72, and then the habs again in 73. Then two from Philly and the Broadstreet Bullies era, and 4 consecutive by Montreal again. Hard to say that the B's underachieved when they won 2 times and lost two more times against a team in Montreal (and once to Philly) that won the freaking cup 6 times out of 10 seasons and 8 times out of 12 seasons if you go back to 68. Keep in mind that the Bruins made the finals 5 times in that 10 year span. That's pretty damn good, especially when you consider the parity in the league at that point and how frequently the Canadiens were winning.

 

[Agent86]

There was a very interesting point made this afternoon by Michael "hot takes" Felger on the radio.

He claimed that the 70s Big Bad Bruins teams underachieved.
He asserted that they should have won four or five Cups along the lines of the Canadiens, Oilers and Islanders dynasties of the 70s and 80s.

Thoughts from those who lived through the time period?

Were they underachievers? Was it a missed opportunity? A combination of losing players to World Hockey, Ken Dryden and Orr's knees?

Bad timing. The 3 things you listed are it in a nutshell but hey Jacob's also bought the team in '74 so there's the built in reason for the next 37 years of futility and the rallying cry for the "they won the cup inspite of him in 2011" crowd.

 

[JAD]

They might well have won more cups if not for the WHA. The lure of big money stripped the team of several key players; had that not happened there is no telling how great they could have been.
As alway the loss in 71 was extremely disapointing - stunning to an extent. And even still after the WHA they again made the finals in 74 but lost to Philadelphia. Up until that series Philly had never won in the garden, so that again was very frustrating.
Underachieved? I really don't think so after being pillaged by the WHA and then recovered enough to make the finals in 74. It's sports and anything can happen, so no.

Edit to add: they also lost players drafted such as Mark Howe to the WHA - imagine him joining the Bruins defensemen at the time. Such a shame what happened.

 

[Agent86]

I disagree. I was really young during this heyday, but I remember quite a bit of it. The problem wasn't that they underachieved. It was that there were other teams that were damn good. It's not like in the late 70s and early 80s where the Islanders were so dominant and then the Oilers took over and it was an assumed thing that they'd win it all.

I mean, the Bruins won it in 70, then the habs in 71. Back to the B's in 72, and then the habs again in 73. Then two from Philly and the Broadstreet Bullies era, and 4 consecutive by Montreal again. Hard to say that the B's underachieved when they won 2 times and lost two more times against a team in Montreal (and once to Philly) that won the freaking cup 6 times out of 10 seasons and 8 times out of 12 seasons if you go back to 68. Keep in mind that the Bruins made the finals 5 times in that 10 year span. That's pretty damn good, especially when you consider the parity in the league at that point and how frequently the Canadiens were winning.

Habs don't count because this period encompassed their corrupt territorial rights era which tilted the prospect pool in their favour. Scratch those 6 cups.

Crazy part about the Flyers is that a lot of their core players were former Bruins prospects/picks. Off the top of my head Parent, Favell (might of been gone by then), Dornhoefer, MacLesh, Leach, Crisp, Lonsberry, Ashbee, one of the Watson brothers (Joe, I think). Let's be honest these cups were built on our backs, sorry Philadelphia - no cups for you

So by my calculations we really won every cup from 1969-70 through to 1979-80. Go B's Go

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Slight underachievers but a bit of luck played a part. And of course Bobbys health hurt. Wha didn't help.

Team was the best team in nhl for around 6 years so just 2 cups a slight underacheivement

 

[DKH]

There was a very interesting point made this afternoon by Michael "hot takes" Felger on the radio.

He claimed that the 70s Big Bad Bruins teams underachieved.
He asserted that they should have won four or five Cups along the lines of the Canadiens, Oilers and Islanders dynasties of the 70s and 80s.

Thoughts from those who lived through the time period?

Were they underachievers? Was it a missed opportunity? A combination of losing players to World Hockey, Ken Dryden and Orr's knees?

Felger is correct

I went to many games back then and they should have won 5+ Cups

Expansion
WHA
Alan Eagelson
Partying

All cost them

I'll expound later on this but I used to look up at the 2 banners and be disgusted

 

[DKH]

Slight underachievers but a bit of luck played a part. And of course Bobbys health hurt. Wha didn't help.

Team was the best team in nhl for around 6 years so just 2 cups a slight underacheivement

I completely disagree

I bet from 1966-1982 I averaged 10-30 games in person and then from 1983-1896 missed maybe 5 a the most due to weddings; I'm a 25ish guy know

When Cashman hurt his back and his wife Lynn didn't go my mother took her seat and I went in my moms seat

Not kidding I bet I could write a best seller on that team but I couldn't put the good stuff in- they were insane (the first Cup my old man was tossed in shower and for historic sake when Orr scored OT goal my mother's hands are first ones up as they sat front row in that corner over clock till 1983 when I took over full time till last game they played there)

As insane as this sounds my kid will support it because her grandmother used to talk about it, but the Eagelson's used to stay at our home often when they came here- I can remember as a kid eating breakfast yapping with Eagelson (he was likeable when you were a kid)

Anyways I am adamant that group should have won 5-7 Cups but their was no one reason just very bad bad timing and traded (Leach & McLeish long term killed them)

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

He was saying the players alone essentially choked easy Cups away. Felger didn't have much substance to his points; he was desperate to prove his point that the '01 Pats were the most significant team in Boston history and some callers refuted that in favor of earlier Bruins and Celtics teams.

Whether his point is true or not, Felger was being Felger.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

I completely disagree

I bet from 1966-1982 I averaged 10-30 games in person and then from 1983-1896 missed maybe 5 a the most due to weddings; I'm a 25ish guy know

When Cashman hurt his back and his wife Lynn didn't go my mother took her seat and I went in my moms seat

Not kidding I bet I could write a best seller on that team but I couldn't put the good stuff in- they were insane (the first Cup my old man was tossed in shower and for historic sake when Orr scored OT goal my mother's hands are first ones up as they sat front row in that corner over clock till 1983 when I took over full time till last game they played there)

As insane as this sounds my kid will support it because her grandmother used to talk about it, but the Eagelson's used to stay at our home often when they came here- I can remember as a kid eating breakfast yapping with Eagelson (he was likeable when you were a kid)

Anyways I am adamant that group should have won 5-7 Cups but their was no one reason just very bad bad timing and traded (Leach & McLeish long term killed them)

I guess I wasn't clear... we don't disagree based on what I hear you say. club was the best in nhl for a long period of time and could have won a cup every year. of course, we know hockey is played on the ice and not on paper... the best team often doesn't win

there does need to be puck luck bouncing in your favor in addition to being the best team. the best team needs a little less luck than the next best team and thus has the edge that they should win but there simply is no guarantees in the world of sports.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I completely disagree

I bet from 1966-1982 I averaged 10-30 games in person and then from 1983-1896 missed maybe 5 a the most due to weddings; I'm a 25ish guy know

When Cashman hurt his back and his wife Lynn didn't go my mother took her seat and I went in my moms seat

Not kidding I bet I could write a best seller on that team but I couldn't put the good stuff in- they were insane (the first Cup my old man was tossed in shower and for historic sake when Orr scored OT goal my mother's hands are first ones up as they sat front row in that corner over clock till 1983 when I took over full time till last game they played there)

As insane as this sounds my kid will support it because her grandmother used to talk about it, but the Eagelson's used to stay at our home often when they came here- I can remember as a kid eating breakfast yapping with Eagelson (he was likeable when you were a kid)

Anyways I am adamant that group should have won 5-7 Cups but their was no one reason just very bad bad timing and traded (Leach & McLeish long term killed them)

Didn't realize you were so scarred.

Anyway, they should have won in 71, that was the best team they had and they let the Habs take the Cup away from them. So they should have won 3 in a row. But after 72 there was no underachieving. Espo got hurt in 73 and they lost to the Rangers. But the Canadiens (10 regular season losses) were a better team than the B's that year anyway. And they lost to the Flyers in the finals in 74. They were a pretty even match that season and I'd hardly say they choked. After that they were never the clear top team in the league again.

 

[LSCII]

He was saying the players alone essentially choked easy Cups away. Felger didn't have much substance to his points; he was desperate to prove his point that the '01 Pats were the most significant team in Boston history and some callers refuted that in favor of earlier Bruins and Celtics teams.

Whether his point is true or not, Felger was being Felger.

Exactly. He was discounting other teams out of hand because it went against his point. Fact is, the Red Sox finally winning in 2004 was by far the most significant win in Boston sports history at this point. It essentially turned around the view of that team as the choke artist losers who would blow it every time to front runners people expect to win and compete every year.

 

[BNHL]

I completely disagree

I bet from 1966-1982 I averaged 10-30 games in person and then from 1983-1896 missed maybe 5 a the most due to weddings; I'm a 25ish guy know

When Cashman hurt his back and his wife Lynn didn't go my mother took her seat and I went in my moms seat

Not kidding I bet I could write a best seller on that team but I couldn't put the good stuff in- they were insane (the first Cup my old man was tossed in shower and for historic sake when Orr scored OT goal my mother's hands are first ones up as they sat front row in that corner over clock till 1983 when I took over full time till last game they played there)

As insane as this sounds my kid will support it because her grandmother used to talk about it, but the Eagelson's used to stay at our home often when they came here- I can remember as a kid eating breakfast yapping with Eagelson (he was likeable when you were a kid)

Anyways I am adamant that group should have won 5-7 Cups but their was no one reason just very bad bad timing and traded (Leach & McLeish long term killed them)

I think they shoulda coulda won 4 cups.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I guess I wasn't clear... we don't disagree based on what I hear you say. club was the best in nhl for a long period of time and could have won a cup every year. of course, we know hockey is played on the ice and not on paper... the best team often doesn't win

there does need to be puck luck bouncing in your favor in addition to being the best team. the best team needs a little less luck than the next best team and thus has the edge that they should win but there simply is no guarantees in the world of sports.

Probably only in 71 & 72.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think they shoulda coulda won 4 cups.

I'd say shoulda won 3, coulda won 4.

 

[BNHL]

I'd say shoulda won 3, coulda won 4.

Probably where I'm at. I think they could've beaten Philly and Montreal.

 

[DKH]

Didn't realize you were so scarred.

Anyway, they should have won in 71, that was the best team they had and they let the Habs take the Cup away from them. So they should have won 3 in a row. But after 72 there was no underachieving. Espo got hurt in 73 and they lost to the Rangers. But the Canadiens (10 regular season losses) were a better team than the B's that year anyway. And they lost to the Flyers in the finals in 74. They were a pretty even match that season and I'd hardly say they choked. After that they were never the clear top team in the league again.

Scarred?

I'm scarred from 1971, 1774, 1975, and 1979

2013 grrr

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Scarred?

I'm scarred from 1971, 1774, 1975, and 1979

2013 grrr

Is that all worse than being in the actual presence of hockey's Lucifer?

 

[KrejciMVP]

Historically the Bruins are certainly underachievers. Very grateful we got that cup in 2011. It's the only one I've ever seen us win

 

[wintersej]

Scarred?

I'm scarred from 1971, 1774, 1975, and 1979

2013 grrr

1774? Still bitter about the Brits closing down the Boston ports, eh?

 

[DKH]

Is that all worse than being in the actual presence of hockey's Lucifer?

We also had Marcel Pronovost and Paul Henderson stay over

Before Orr we would go over players 'rented' apartments or homes and my folks had the big home but after Orr they got paid and 'helo Lynnfield & Boxford'

I think they saved on hotels but the Eagles wife liked to hang with my mother

You remember Andy Hebenton? I remember piling into their station wagon as a kid and actually driving around Neighborhoods looking at Christmas lights

The worst part of Eagelson was the Walton deal I believe he was behind to get Mike here at the expense of Rick MacLeish

I still want to hurl

 

[vjcsmoke]

There was a very interesting point made this afternoon by Michael "hot takes" Felger on the radio.

He claimed that the 70s Big Bad Bruins teams underachieved.
He asserted that they should have won four or five Cups along the lines of the Canadiens, Oilers and Islanders dynasties of the 70s and 80s.

Thoughts from those who lived through the time period?

Were they underachievers? Was it a missed opportunity? A combination of losing players to World Hockey, Ken Dryden and Orr's knees?

If you can't beat the Canadiens, you're not going to win a Stanley Cup. That's the bottom line. This team is cursed when it comes to the Canadiens.

There's gotta be a way to get rid of that monkey, an exorcism maybe?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

We also had Marcel Pronovost and Paul Henderson stay over

Before Orr we would go over players 'rented' apartments or homes and my folks had the big home but after Orr they got paid and 'helo Lynnfield & Boxford'

I think they saved on hotels but the Eagles wife liked to hang with my mother

You remember Andy Hebenton? I remember piling into their station wagon as a kid and actually driving around Neighborhoods looking at Christmas lights

The worst part of Eagelson was the Walton deal I believe he was behind to get Mike here at the expense of Rick MacLeish

I still want to hurl

Paul Henderson, true Canadian Hockey Hero.

Scored the first NHL goal I ever saw live, on Eddie Johnston.

Don't recall Andy Hebenton.

 

[DKH]

Paul Henderson, true Canadian Hockey Hero.

Scored the first NHL goal I ever saw live, on Eddie Johnston.

Don't recall Andy Hebenton.

You going to Hockey East or Beanpot love to meet you sometime

 

[oreillyisgod]

Dont forget in 1969 it was generally accepted that they were a better team than Montreal but in a short series the Canadiens be the Canadiens. Had they got past Habs their chances were very good.