Defining Each Bruins “Core”

[NeelyDan]

A good portion of us have come together in this forum during the current Bruins era that is now officially ending, and a new one is now being defined.

The defining elements of the outgoing core could be argued as being:

1. Patrice Bergeron
2. Zdeno Chara
3. Tuukka Rask
4. Brad Marchand

Notice I said “could be argued” - because, really, you could argue for Tim Thomas and/or Marc Savard quite easily - after all, choosing Tuukka over Timmy given Timmy backed us to the lone cup win of this era is certainly worth debate, as an example.

But we are going to cap it at 4 players per era - why? Well because I made the post you milkbags, that’s why.

What I’d like to do is have us suggest the four players that defined each core the same way I just made a suggestion for this one. We have the good fortune of having many members who have either been around for a long time, or are dedicated historians of the club, or both - so I think we can probably accomplish this.

Part of the discussion might even be what years a core is defined as - for this one, I think it would be nearly universally agreed upon that 2007-2023 is the timeline. Others may be shorter. Feel free to define your core that way as well, if you wish. Players man span more than one defined core.

So - you have my submission for current core. Preceding the current core I will define as follows:

Era: 1997-2006

Core:

1. Joe Thornton
2. Ray Bourque
3. Jason Allison
4. Bryon Dafoe

Annnnnnd go!

Click to read more...

 

[EvilDead]

Well the obvious core for the early 70s teams, in my mind, would be:

1. Orr
2. Espo
3. Bucyk
4. Cheevers

And the early to mid 1990s Bruins it was:

1. Bourque
2. Neely
3. Moog
4. Oates

 

[KillerMillerTime]

A good portion of us have come together in this forum during the current Bruins era that is now officially ending, and a new one is now being defined.

The defining elements of the outgoing core could be argued as being:

1. Patrice Bergeron
2. Zdeno Chara
3. Tuukka Rask
4. Brad Marchand

Notice I said “could be argued” - because, really, you could argue for Tim Thomas and/or Marc Savard quite easily - after all, choosing Tuukka over Timmy given Timmy backed us to the lone cup win of this era is certainly worth debate, as an example.

But we are going to cap it at 4 players per era - why? Well because I made the post you milkbags, that’s why.

What I’d like to do is have us suggest the four players that defined each core the same way I just made a suggestion for this one. We have the good fortune of having many members who have either been around for a long time, or are dedicated historians of the club, or both - so I think we can probably accomplish this.

Part of the discussion might even be what years a core is defined as - for this one, I think it would be nearly universally agreed upon that 2007-2023 is the timeline. Others may be shorter. Feel free to define your core that way as well, if you wish. Players man span more than one defined core.

So - you have my submission for current core. Preceding the current core I will define as follows:

Era: 1997-2006

Core:

1. Joe Thornton
2. Ray Bourque
3. Jason Allison
4. Bryon Dafoe

Annnnnnd go!

David Krejci is absolutely a core member, so please change it to include him. Honestly, can't believe you didn't even mention him.

 

[BruinDust]

From 97-2006

Joe Thornton
Glen Murray
Sergei Samsonov
Nick Boynton


Previous era (not sure the range)

Ray Bourque
Cam Neely
Adam Oates
Andy Moog

I don't know enough about the previous eras to comment.

 

[UncleRico]

I’d say there were two cores the 2007-2014 core then the 2015-2023 core

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

From 97-2006

Joe Thornton
Glen Murray
Sergei Samsonov
Nick Boynton


Previous era (not sure the range)

Ray Bourque
Cam Neely
Adam Oates
Andy Moog

I don't know enough about the previous eras to comment.

I might go for Hal Gill over Nick Boynton.

 

[BruinDust]

I might go for Hal Gill over Nick Boynton.

I choose Boynton (the other guy I considered was Kyle McLaren), because at one point for a period of time, he was the No.1 D-man here (not to be confused with a true No.1 D-man). I remember reading an article in 2002 in a newspaper around the time of the 2002 Olympics speculating on who would comprise the 2006 Canadian Olympic team and Mr. Boynton was one of the D-men listed in the article. He did have some cred at one point as a pretty good player.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I choose Boynton (the other guy I considered was Kyle McLaren), because at one point for a period of time, he was the No.1 D-man here (not to be confused with a true No.1 D-man). I remember reading an article in 2002 in a newspaper around the time of the 2002 Olympics speculating on who would comprise the 2006 Canadian Olympic team and Mr. Boynton was one of the D-men listed in the article. He did have some cred at one point as a pretty good player.

True.

But Gill was there for the entire time period (1997-2006). Played 626 games.

Boynton only played 299 games during that period. Really only 4 seasons.

 

[BruinDust]

True.

But Gill was there for the entire time period (1997-2006). Played 626 games.

Boynton only played 299 games during that period. Really only 4 seasons.

Gill was universally underrated. Although at the end of the 2005-06 season, I was glad to see him leave.

 

[NeelyDan]

David Krejci is absolutely a core member, so please change it to include him. Honestly, can't believe you didn't even mention him.

Lmao - I won’t change it because you asked, I think you’ve missed the point my dude

Feel free to express yourself tho haha

 

[KillerMillerTime]

Lmao - I won’t change it because you asked, I think you’ve missed the point my dude

Feel free to express yourself tho haha

No point missed, just the basic fact of not including Krejci in the core means its so flawed as to be considered extremely lacking as he was as important as Rask and way more so than Savard whom you mention.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Lmao - I won’t change it because you asked, I think you’ve missed the point my dude

Feel free to express yourself tho haha

He was the highest scoring Bruin of that era, he was the 1C and led the league in playoff scoring in 2011 and he wrote an 'A'

 

[Mainehockey33]

If I was going to rate this core in order of importance.

1. Chara
2. Bergeron
3. Krejci
4. Marchand
5. Thomas

Thomas would be higher if he played more seasons for the Bruins, but his peak is unmatched. 2 Vezina’s, Conn Smythe, cup.

 

[NeelyDan]

He was the highest scoring Bruin of that era, he was the 1C and led the league in playoff scoring in 2011 and he wrote an 'A'

I’m not arguing he’s not a valid choice, I just went with Marchy over him by a slim margin

Debate is the entire point here folks

 

[DaBroons]

I disagree, but If you go only by the length of time that players were on the team, the late 60s-early 70s core consisted of 13 players:

Cheevers, EJ; Orr, Dallas Smith; Awrey, Ted Green. Esposito, Hodge; Bucyk, Stanfield, McKenzie; Sanderson, Westfall. These players were on every team from 67-68 through 71-72; that's 5 years.

Cashman would replace Ron Murphy at LW on Esposito's line; and there was a revolving door at LW on Sandy's line: Tommy Williams, Eddie Shack, Swoop Carleton, and Shaky Walton. On the Black Aces, the first group was Glen Sather and Skip Krake; then Cashman replaced Krake before replacing Murphy on the 1st line. The first Stanley Cup year, Jim Lorentz replaced Sather, along with Ace Bailey(injured most of the year) and Don Marcotte.

On defense, it was Doak as the 5th; then he was joined by Rick Smith; and then by Bill Speer after Green's injury in a 69 pre-season game. R Smith went in the Vadnais trade in 72.

There was so much stability on the team that, after winning the first of their two cups, they only invited an extra 5-6 players to training camp, essentially one per position!

Many of them were very good, but were replaced rather easily, such as Awrey by Al Sims and Stanfield by Gregg Sheppard. Even Cheevers was replaced ably by Gilles Gilbert.

Sinden's retooling of the team after the massive losses to expansion and the WHA, to get back to the final in 74 was superb. Both goalies had to be replaced, and only 3 dmen (Orr, D Smith, and Vadnais) and 4 forwards (Cash, Espo, Hodge, and Bucyk) remained from the 72 team.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

I’m not arguing he’s not a valid choice, I just went with Marchy over him by a slim margin

Debate is the entire point here folks

I don't call laughing at someone's response to you "debate".

 

[NeelyDan]

I don't call laughing at someone's response to you "debate".

Do you like me more than just a friend

 

[Bruinswillwin77]

Replace Rask with Krejci on the OP. That would be mine of the last era.

 

[BruinDust]

If I was going to rate this core in order of importance.

1. Chara
2. Bergeron
3. Krejci
4. Marchand
5. Thomas

Thomas would be higher if he played more seasons for the Bruins, but his peak is unmatched. 2 Vezina’s, Conn Smythe, cup.

The Thomas vs. Rask is interesting because the perception is Rask played way more games for the Bruins, but Thomas sits 5th all-time in the regular season (378 to Rask's 564) and is nearly 100 games ahead of 6th place (Dafoe). Playoffs and regular season combined, Rask is 668 to 428 for Timmy.

But 42 of those games came in the previous era (up to 2005-06) for Thomas. So now your down to 668 vs. 386 for Thomas. That, combined with nearly double the number of playoff games for Rask, puts Rask ahead for me if the era is 2007 to present.

Really the era could be split in half. Giving Thomas the 1st half and Rask clearly the 2nd.

To me, the 2015-16 season onward could be considered it's own era. But that wasn't what was posed in the OP so I'd have to go Rask 2007-to-present. But the debate is probably closer than some think because of where Thomas sits in games played all-time for this franchise. I think most agree his peak was higher but it's really only two seasons.

 

[Bruinswillwin77]

If I was going to rate this core in order of importance.

1. Chara
2. Bergeron
3. Krejci
4. Marchand
5. Thomas

Thomas would be higher if he played more seasons for the Bruins, but his peak is unmatched. 2 Vezina’s, Conn Smythe, cup.

ah your first sentence changes my list lol.

Not to say I would change my list but in the context of importance, that would be a different list.

 

[Mainehockey33]

The Thomas vs. Rask is interesting because the perception is Rask played way more games for the Bruins, but Thomas sits 5th all-time in the regular season (378 to Rask's 564) and is nearly 100 games ahead of 6th place (Dafoe). Playoffs and regular season combined, Rask is 668 to 428 for Timmy.

But 42 of those games came in the previous era (up to 2005-06) for Thomas. So now your down to 668 vs. 386 for Thomas. That, combined with nearly double the number of playoff games for Rask, puts Rask ahead for me if the era is 2007 to present.

Really the era could be split in half. Giving Thomas the 1st half and Rask clearly the 2nd.

To me, the 2015-16 season onward could be considered it's own era. But that wasn't what was posed in the OP so I'd have to go Rask 2007-to-present. But the debate is probably closer than some think because of where Thomas sits in games played all-time for this franchise. I think most agree his peak was higher but it's really only two seasons.

For me when I think of importance in the cap era I have to go with Thomas over Rask. His elite play that won him two Vezina’s and the Conn Smythe happened in this era and without that, we would probably be looking back on this era much differently. I think being MVP on the cup winning team alone is a decent argument to put him on this list, especially after the chokes they’ve had since.

 

[BruinDust]

For me when I think of importance in the cap era I have to go with Thomas over Rask. His elite play that won him two Vezina’s and the Conn Smythe happened in this era and without that, we would probably be looking back on this era much differently. I think being MVP on the cup winning team alone is a decent argument to put him on this list, especially after the chokes they’ve had since.

That's an excellent point.

Really close between those two goaltenders. Shows how lucky we as fan's have been considering many teams haven't had one goalie like these two during that same time period.

 

[DaBroons]

Why not have 2 goalies, both Thomas and Rask, in the core?

 

[Bruinswillwin77]

Why not have 2 goalies, both Thomas and Rask, in the core?

Because only 4 players for this thread.

 

[NeelyDan]

Why not have 2 goalies, both Thomas and Rask, in the core?

You can, that’s the magic of this exercise friend