quietbruinfan
Salt and light
Based on talent, that Pens team was loaded with the big two and prime 40 goal Neal etc. However feel free to homer away.
Player Discussion What is the Legacy of this Bruins Core?
- Thread starter smithformeragent
- Start date
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,319
- 24,244
If only hockey games were won on paper.
A loaded team that blew a 3-1 series lead to Guy Boucher's 1-3-1 trap. Sounds like they weren't even as good as their regular season record suggests.
Their legacy? I’d say one that the majority of the league would love to have.
I feel they should have had one more Cup. But I felt the same way in the 70s too.
But all in all most years I felt they stood a shot. A tweak here, some luck there, but at least a shot. I wish it had been better but I know it could have been a lot, lot worse.
I feel they should have had one more Cup. But I felt the same way in the 70s too.
But all in all most years I felt they stood a shot. A tweak here, some luck there, but at least a shot. I wish it had been better but I know it could have been a lot, lot worse.
McGarnagle
Yes.
- Aug 5, 2017
- 30,352
- 41,636
Here's my hot take:
The Flyers were the best team in the east in 2011 but Pronger and Carter got hurt and Laviolette didn't trust rookie Bobrovsky and went back to Boucher for the playoffs. Even though we swept them (partially attributable to motivation from the previous year), that team might've been the toughest we faced until Vancouver and we were fortunate that they were hurt and that Boucher gave up some squeakers. But that's karma for the previous year when they profited from our entire team getting injured.
quietbruinfan
Salt and light
I can't go that far. I have never been a Bob guy and we had something to prove. A healthy Pronger would have made it a long series though.
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
At least get your facts straight. Neal was not a 40 goal scorer in 2011
Malkin, Crosby and Staal all missed half the year, and the 2nd leading scorer was Letang with a whopping 50 points. Plus they had that stellar .899 sv% from Fleury in net.
The Bruins roster was easily above that Pens team, that team was Crosby/Malkin/Staal/Letang and a bunch of scrubs. The Bruins had the best D group in the league in Chara, Seidenberg, Boychuk, Ference, McQuaid, Kaberle and a God level Thomas in net.
Fun fact, the 2011 Bruins scored more goals than the Pens and allowed fewer goals
quietbruinfan
Salt and light
okay on neal but you said it yourself they were injured and in the playoffs.
Get YOUR acts straight and go to Hockey reference He was on the team, didn't do much not for long.
Last edited:
Oates2Neely
Registered User
One Cup. Should’ve won more. Core locked up at very reasonable cap hits. GM failed to build around them. 1 Cup. As fun as it was I feel not winning another Cup or more was a complete failure
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2004
- 19,729
- 21,853
i mean different fans have different priorities I guess, but I suspect the average fan (including me) cares way more about winning a Cup than about regular season success. If you would take 2009, 2014 & 2020 over another Cup then more power to ya, but I would gladly trade those 3 excellent regular seasons for another Cup over that span.
The whole point is to win Stanley Cups. If you're grading teams in some arbitrary time window on overall performance then it absolutely comes down to number of Cups won. Everything else is just tie-breakers IMO.
crimsonace
Registered User
This run ... the Bruins have been fun to watch for the last 15 years. This core - Bergeron, Marchand post-2010, Krejci, Lucic for half of it, McAvoy/Pasta for the other half, Chara for most, Rask, Thomas for the first part, Krug in the middle - was just incredible to watch. The Bruins had an identity, retooled, and maintained their status as one of the league's elite teams for 15 years, which is unheard-of in the cap era.
They've left a lot wanting, though. 3 Cup Finals, a President's Trophy and one Stanley Cup in that run ... 2019 will always sting because that was there for the taking, but the two that hurt most next to it were 2012 (when they lost Game 7 in OT at home to a mediocre Washington team and the bracket *completely* broke open after that ... they'd have played the Devils in the second round and I'd have liked their chances against the Rangers/Flyers & Kings) and 2014 (when they were an absolute wagon, but Dennis Seidenberg went out for the year in February and their D was decimated by the playoffs). They hit about 157 posts against Carey Price and every single Montreal scoring chance ended up in the net. Again, you like their chances against the Rangers & Kings in the last two rounds, even with a young and decimated D corps.
2020, there's a whole what-if if the world doesn't come to an end. The Lightning were dealing with injuries, the Bruins were flying ... and after the pause, the B's never really seemed to get their mojo back, Tampa healed up and then Tuukka had to take care of a family emergency. The B's weren't beating the Lightning and a dialed-in Vasilevskiy with Halak in goal. 2021 - that series turned when Carlo got hurt and again, Tuukka was playing hurt (and in hindsight, should've given way to Swayman because of it).
It's the best sustained Bruins era of my lifetime ... the 1988-92 run was fun, with two Cup Finals. Again, they should've won in 1990 (when they were a better team than Edmonton but never recovered from the 3OT loss) and probably 1991 (when they went up 2-0 on Pittsburgh, but then Ulf Samuelsson's cheap shot on Neely and Milbury overreacting by dressing all of his tough guys the next game flipped the series and a Penguins team they should've beaten went on to beat Minnesota for the Cup. That window slammed shut with "May Day" and the scapegoat trade of Andy Moog that summer and the B's were largely a nonfactor for the next decade and a half (1994 felt like this year - yes, unlike this year, they won a playoff round and won two games against NJ, but they never really felt like a team that could challenge for a Cup).
They've left a lot wanting, though. 3 Cup Finals, a President's Trophy and one Stanley Cup in that run ... 2019 will always sting because that was there for the taking, but the two that hurt most next to it were 2012 (when they lost Game 7 in OT at home to a mediocre Washington team and the bracket *completely* broke open after that ... they'd have played the Devils in the second round and I'd have liked their chances against the Rangers/Flyers & Kings) and 2014 (when they were an absolute wagon, but Dennis Seidenberg went out for the year in February and their D was decimated by the playoffs). They hit about 157 posts against Carey Price and every single Montreal scoring chance ended up in the net. Again, you like their chances against the Rangers & Kings in the last two rounds, even with a young and decimated D corps.
2020, there's a whole what-if if the world doesn't come to an end. The Lightning were dealing with injuries, the Bruins were flying ... and after the pause, the B's never really seemed to get their mojo back, Tampa healed up and then Tuukka had to take care of a family emergency. The B's weren't beating the Lightning and a dialed-in Vasilevskiy with Halak in goal. 2021 - that series turned when Carlo got hurt and again, Tuukka was playing hurt (and in hindsight, should've given way to Swayman because of it).
It's the best sustained Bruins era of my lifetime ... the 1988-92 run was fun, with two Cup Finals. Again, they should've won in 1990 (when they were a better team than Edmonton but never recovered from the 3OT loss) and probably 1991 (when they went up 2-0 on Pittsburgh, but then Ulf Samuelsson's cheap shot on Neely and Milbury overreacting by dressing all of his tough guys the next game flipped the series and a Penguins team they should've beaten went on to beat Minnesota for the Cup. That window slammed shut with "May Day" and the scapegoat trade of Andy Moog that summer and the B's were largely a nonfactor for the next decade and a half (1994 felt like this year - yes, unlike this year, they won a playoff round and won two games against NJ, but they never really felt like a team that could challenge for a Cup).
Last edited:
AngryMilkcrates
End of an Era
- Jun 4, 2016
- 17,511
- 28,262
McGarnagle
Yes.
- Aug 5, 2017
- 30,352
- 41,636
2012 was lost because Nathan Horton got knocked out for the season by Tom Sestito and they got the worst possible matchup in the first round of the playoffs. Agree on 2014, too many posts and Seids' injury was killer.
2020 was an awful experience that in retrospect never should've happened. At the time of the shutdown, the B's were cruising and Tampa was injured. After the shutdown, the B's were rusty, the Bolts were healthy, the format was just terrible. Making them play that little seeding tournament before the actual playoffs started was dumb and caused the president's trophy winners to be a 4 seed. Not that home ice mattered in the bubble, but they had a tough matchup with Carolina where Pasta got hurt, then they had two games postponed on them (once because of the Lightning and Jackets going to friggin' 6 overtimes ahead of them, once because of the riots), then Rask had his family issue and had to leave. It was an ugly couple weeks and as much as we were all dying for some hockey at that point of the lockdown, in retrospect I think it would've been better for everyone if the season were just cancelled outright and start fresh the next year.
In 2021 the Carlo and Rask injuries and Bruce's refusal to go to Swayman cost us, but the real turning point was Lauzon's brutal turnover in OT of game 2. If the Bruins walk out of there up 2-0, they easily win that series. Still think they would've gotten whipped by Tampa in the ECF, but the Isles took them to seven so anything can happen I suppose.
Troublesome 85
TOP RANKED GIRL DAD
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Seems too many posters are saying "should have won" when the correct phrase should be "could have won".
For me, 1971 was the only real should have won.
For me, 1971 was the only real should have won.
crimsonace
Registered User
1971, 1979, 1990, 2019 all fall in the "should have won" camp.
1969, 1974, 1991, 2012-14, 2020 in the "could have won" bucket.
LSCII
Cup driven
Their legacy is that they won one cup, probably should have won at least one if not two more and ultimately quit on two head coaches. They were a talented bunch that sadly did not seem to give their best efforts in the right times, aside from the finals vs Vancouver.
quietbruinfan
Salt and light
1990 we were outclassed and seriously outcoached. I actually agree with Mr. Bonvie. 1971 was the only should have won. Edit I tried to argue 79 in the history section but no dice.
Last edited:
Flannelman
Quiet, Gnashgab.
- Dec 3, 2006
- 13,880
- 3,148
Won’t disagree w the “shoulda won more” takes. 19 still haunts my dreams.
That said, I think most of the league would rather have had the consistent “possibility “ of a cup run that we have come to expect.
Dunno - for me it was dark times for this franchise after that 03/04 playoff loss. The. The lockout. Dave Lewis and key signings like Jamie Fuggin York… I mean, at that time, could you have imagined them having three cup final appearances? No.
In 2011 would you have sold your soul to the devil for a guarantee cup? Well…
That said, I think most of the league would rather have had the consistent “possibility “ of a cup run that we have come to expect.
Dunno - for me it was dark times for this franchise after that 03/04 playoff loss. The. The lockout. Dave Lewis and key signings like Jamie Fuggin York… I mean, at that time, could you have imagined them having three cup final appearances? No.
In 2011 would you have sold your soul to the devil for a guarantee cup? Well…
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,319
- 24,244
True, and me personally I can find satisfaction in seasons where they didn't win cups. Heck 2007-08 is one of my favorite seasons ever and they never even won a round.
I prefer to look at the entire body of work. If the roles were reversed (Boston and LA) and we were here staring at 8 years of no playoff victories and 5 DNQs in that timeframe, this thread we are conversing in doesn't even exist. Because the success was so long ago the Bruins would of already been back on the Island of Irrelevancy where the LA Kings currently exist and have been for awhile now.
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2004
- 19,729
- 21,853
there's some truth to this but the Kings also have one of the most stacked prospect pools in the NHL and are on the up-swing so there's a good chance they'll be back in the thick of it when the Bruins are mired in mediocrity over the next few years.
rocketdan9
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2009
- 20,415
- 13,210
It pains me to say
Atlanta Braves of the nhl
Bergeron is easily a future hof. Marchand on his way.
Atlanta Braves of the nhl
Bergeron is easily a future hof. Marchand on his way.
Spooner st
Registered User
- Jan 14, 2007
- 12,945
- 8,101
I'm in the group of winning cups are more important than having a chance at the cup for x number of years. I rather have 2 to 3 cups since 2010 than being one of the best teams in the past 15 years. Cups should always be the ultimate goal... most people don't remember who finnish second or third.
IMO we failed as an organization since 1970. 3 cups in 52 years... is nothing to be proud of. when will be the next one? Since this organization is happy with simply participating in the playoffs.
When your team puts more importance to have a good regular season team than having a team built for the playoffs... you know the next cup might not be in your lifetime.
We always make fun of the Leafs... in 52 years we got 3 cups, the Leafs in 52 years had 13 cups. Sure it was a different league back then, but still we only got 3 from 24 to 69...Then they became what they are today.
IMO we failed as an organization since 1970. 3 cups in 52 years... is nothing to be proud of. when will be the next one? Since this organization is happy with simply participating in the playoffs.
When your team puts more importance to have a good regular season team than having a team built for the playoffs... you know the next cup might not be in your lifetime.
We always make fun of the Leafs... in 52 years we got 3 cups, the Leafs in 52 years had 13 cups. Sure it was a different league back then, but still we only got 3 from 24 to 69...Then they became what they are today.
Last edited:
Morris Wanchuk
.......
Bs1011
Registered User
- May 27, 2019
- 2,180
- 2,047
The 80s core only had Bourque Neely and Oates. The owner Mr Burns and his lackey Sinden refused in the no cap era to spend the money to put the Bruins over the top. That’s why you get the takes on the owner today that he’s cheap even if he spends to the cap. Fans that followed those teams were begging for them to do something we will never forgive or forget. The best day for this organization will be when they sell the team.
