Where do the Bruins go from here?

[Elvs]

Imagine if HFboards had it's way, 10 teams in the league would try to be competitive and the other 22 would be tanking.

Tanking has become way overrated. There are as many teams who have tried it and failed, as there are teams who had success with it.

Heck, even Boston themselves didn't become this good through tanking. McAvoy was a mid 1st round pick. Pastrnak a late 1st. Both Bergeron and Krejci were 2nd round selections. Marchand was a 3rd.

There are other ways to build than through tanking.

 

[Archijerej]

Good question and an interesting case to observe in the coming years.

At first, I thought a rebuild was in order and that Bruins fans are being a bit delusional. But maybe this isn't the only way forward?

A core of Swayman, McAvoy and Pastrnak could be effective for (nearly) the next 10 years. Why not try and retool around them and have another go at it with a new core?

 

[McVespa99]

Down

My thoughts exactly

 

[Archijerej]

If there's a team that has proven they can retool on the fly, it's the Bruins. They may take a step back next year but I think they continue to try to build around McAvoy/Pastrnak/Ullmark. They just need to be smart with their cap and wait for an opportunity to arrive. You never know when an Eichel situation materializes again.

This is all true, but you have to have assets to capitalize on an Eichel situation. Assuming the Bruins want to keep the core of Ullmark/Swayman, McAvoy and Pastrnak, how do they accumulate those assets if they also want to keep the rest of the roster intact?

Unless they're counting on an UFA #1C, they will have to do some selling to acquire ammunition IMO.

 

[CupsOverCash]

I think Gary bettman or whoever the hockey god is has like a rule or law for the nhl that they aren't allowed to have a bad team. They will win again this year and people will wonder how. I know how...

 

[Five Alarm Fire]

This is all true, but you have to have assets to capitalize on an Eichel situation. Assuming the Bruins want to keep the core Ullmark/Swayman, McAvoy and Pastrnak, how do they accumulate those assets if they also want to keep the rest of the roster intact?

I think that's when you take a year or two to step back and accumulate assets. They did something similar when they moved on from Lucic and Hamilton. Maybe now is when you consider trading Marchand, make a choice between Swayman and Ullmark. Not having a first round pick this year definitely isn't ideal. I just don't think you can abandon the McAvoy/Pastrnak core.

 

[LemonSauceD]

other than Pastrnak, 35 year old Marchand, they don’t have much firepower up front. They’ve got good complimentary pieces though.

They also lack prospect depth. I don’t think they’ll be nearly as good as some predict. Zacha as your first line centre is just not good at all.

Boston should take a look at grabbing Elias Lindholm, Scheifele, or perhaps even JT Miller.

 

[JT3]

They'll be fine. They've got 2 #1D, 2 #1G and a 100pt 50 goal scorer. They add a top 6 C and they're in good shape again.

 

[Archijerej]

I think that's when you take a year or two to step back and accumulate assets. They did something similar when they moved on from Lucic and Hamilton. Maybe now is when you consider trading Marchand, make a choice between Swayman and Ullmark. Not having a first round pick this year definitely isn't ideal. I just don't think you can abandon the McAvoy/Pastrnak core.

Agreed.

I would be pissed off if my management pulled the plug on a Ullmark/Swayman, McAvoy, Pastrnak core.

 

[hamzarocks]

Into a decade of darkness...

Preferably two

 

[McGarnagle]

Long term outlook is short on centers but fairly good elsewhere. If they can get a#1 C through v free agency once the cap goes up or if they get lucky in the draft, they can be a good competitive team. But I think we're well aware that the best years are behind us and they shitted away two golden opportunities in 2019 and 2023 and might not get a chance like that for a long time.

 

[Archijerej]

The Bruins do need to resolve the issue of needing a top six center as they fail repeatedly to draft one.

I'm sorry, but after selecting both Bergeron and Krejci in the 2nd round of the draft, Bruins fans don't get to complain about their inability to draft centers for the next half a century.

It's the rules.

 

[bossram]

Imagine if HFboards had it's way, 10 teams in the league would try to be competitive and the other 22 would be tanking.

Tanking has become way overrated. There are as many teams who have tried it and failed, as there are teams who had success with it.

Heck, even Boston themselves didn't become this good through tanking. McAvoy was a mid 1st round pick. Pastrnak a late 1st. Both Bergeron and Krejci were 2nd round selections. Marchand was a 3rd.

There are other ways to build than through tanking.

The way to build a long-term contender is to acquire elite talent and lock them up at a rate that they're providing huge surplus value.

Boston were able to do this with Bergeron, McAvoy, Marchand, and Pastrnak.

The issue is that you have to be very lucky to find those calibre of players outside the very top of the draft. It's not really a sustainable or bankable strategy. Yes, tanking can fail. But it's the likeliest and most realistic way to acquire elite players.

You look at the other dynastic-ish teams of the cap era, and they necessarily acquired some of their core, elite players at the top of the draft.

COL - Mackinnon, Makar, Rantanen, Landeskog
TB - Hedman, Stamkos (used #3 overall Drouin to acquire Sergachev)
PIT - Crosby, Malkin
LA - Kopitar, Doughty
CHI - Toews, Kane

 

[GOilers88]

Ah, simply finding a #1C to replace one of the best to ever play. With zero prospects, not many draft picks, no cap space and no trade assets.

Seems easy enough.

It’s better than tearing down an entire team that still has lots of good talent to suck for a few years hoping you strike prospect gold and those prospects all pan out. The only people in the world who think tearing everything down and starting from scratch just because a team isn’t a clear cut championship contender on paper are fans on the internet. It’s the weirdest thing, and it’s becoming more and more prevalent. I wonder how many times people have to watch organizations struggle to pull out of this tank nosedive before they realize that good scouts and a good development team are a far more optimal way to go than simply sucking for years hoping you land a couple of top 2 picks. Especially given how random the lottery is.

 

[HFpapi]

Swayman, Carlo, Debrusk... selective criticism taking place here.

The Bruins do need to resolve the issue of needing a top six center as they fail repeatedly to draft one.

Aside from that the defense and goaltending are near league best the next several years....

You're just naming players now. What about those guys? Literally every team has a bunch or players of their caliber.

I also think Boston's goaltending is getting severely overrated.

Near the leagues best? I know this sounds stupid since he's literally the reigning Vezina winner but honestly does anyone have confidence that Ullmark is actually a top 10 goalie on ability?

The Bruins have had 3 separate Vezina winners in the past 13 years. What does that tell you about their structure and team D? And guess who was at the forefront of that identity ? The 6 time Selke winner that just retired.

Ullmark was a nobody prior to last season so I'd say let's pump the break on calling the Bruins goaltending among the leagues best.

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

if i were them id rebuild or at least retool

i dont think theyre better than Ottawa or a healthy Detroit; definitely not Buffalo!

plus youll be losing Marchand soon too so whats to build towards?

well see though! idt Sweeney is the right guy for the job anyhow

 

[Elvs]

The way to build a long-term contender is to acquire elite talent and lock them up at a rate that they're providing huge surplus value.

Boston were able to do this with Bergeron, McAvoy, Marchand, and Pastrnak.

The issue is that you have to be very lucky to find those calibre of players outside the very top of the draft. It's not really a sustainable or bankable strategy. Yes, tanking can fail. But it's the likeliest and most realistic way to acquire elite players.

You look at the other dynastic-ish teams of the cap era, and they necessarily acquired some of their core, elite players at the top of the draft.

COL - Mackinnon, Makar, Rantanen, Landeskog
TB - Hedman, Stamkos (used #3 overall Drouin to acquire Sergachev)
PIT - Crosby, Malkin
LA - Kopitar, Doughty
CHI - Toews, Kane

Of course there's been teams who had success with it. I even noted it in my previous post. Though I don't count Kopitar (#11 overall) or Quick (who must be mentioned in the Kings core and was drafted in the 3rd round) as results of tanking. The Kings tried to be competitive (had Frolov, Brown, Cammalleri, Conroy, Demitra, Visnovsky in the first couple of years post lockout). So while Doughty was a #2 overall pick, I don't consider the Kings success coming from tanking. On the other hand, we could add Washington to that group, imo.

But on the other end of that spectrum, there's Arizona, Florida, Columbus and Buffalo, who have tanked, failed, tanked again, failed again... And meanwhile we've seen a few teams win cups without tanking. It's one way to build, but it's not the only way.

As for the bold part, tanking is the likeliest way to acquire elite talent. Boston has done a great job developing their core players selected later. Part of it is luck, but defenitely a big part of it is also being able to notice prospects who fit their identity/culture/system and develop them.

And they're just one center away from having a complete core. They could find that guy with the #14th or the #22nd overall selection. I'd run my chances with that rather than tanking and having to find a #1 center AND #1 winger AND a #1 defenseman through tanking.

Then there's also the lottery. I think I heard somewhere Detroit has the worst record in the NHL combined over the last handful of years, and yet has never picked in the top 3 in those years.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Man, that's a wonderfully obscure callback.

 

[Fantomas]

There are other ways to build than through tanking.

Some drafts are deeper than others.

 

[EdmFlyersfan]

Decade of darkness is coming...

 

[tarheelhockey]

Everyone's being so dramatic, this is Boston, they're gonna be fine lol

Will they fall down the standings? Yeah probably but this is still a playoff team.

There just seems to be a strong parallel to Detroit years ago, when Lidstrom finally retired and they were suddenly a team build around an aging Datsyuk/Zetterberg and a bunch of grinders. At that time a lot of people were like "lol it's Detroit they'll just call some guys up from Grand Rapids and keep winning as usual". The reality was that they were shedding HOF-level talent year over year, and quickly became a middle-seed, one-round-and-out type of team. And after a few years it was more like a low-seed, one-round-and-out team.

It took way too long for the Wings to acknowledge that it was time to rebuild, and the late stage of the process was visibly traumatic to the organization and fanbase. The Bruins are potentially facing the same sort of thing having lost Bergeron, Krejci, Rask in quick succession and Marchand in the near future. Instead of Datsyuk/Zetterberg it's going to end up being Pastrnak/McAvoy and a bunch of filler. And that's going to create issues for the organization if they choose to just keep grinding forward as if nothing has changed.

I'm not saying this is set in stone, but it's a strong parallel up to this point. The organizational decisions being made over the next 12 months (along with the standard draft/trade/injury luck which is always a factor) will determine how the rest of it plays out.

 

[bossram]

Of course there's been teams who had success with it. I even noted it in my previous post. Though I don't count Kopitar (#11 overall) or Quick (who must be mentioned in the Kings core and was drafted in the 3rd round) as results of tanking. The Kings tried to be competitive (had Frolov, Brown, Cammalleri, Conroy, Demitra, Visnovsky in the first couple of years post lockout). So while Doughty was a #2 overall pick, I don't consider the Kings success coming from tanking. On the other hand, we could add Washington to that group, imo.

But on the other end of that spectrum, there's Arizona, Florida, Columbus and Buffalo, who have tanked, failed, tanked again, failed again... And meanwhile we've seen a few teams win cups without tanking. It's one way to build, but it's not the only way.

As for the bold part, tanking is the likeliest way to acquire elite talent. Boston has done a great job developing their core players selected later. Part of it is luck, but defenitely a big part of it is also being able to notice prospects who fit their identity/culture/system and develop them.

And they're just one center away from having a complete core. They could find that guy with the #14th or the #22nd overall selection. I'd run my chances with that rather than tanking and having to find a #1 center AND #1 winger AND a #1 defenseman through tanking.

Then there's also the lottery. I think I heard somewhere Detroit has the worst record in the NHL combined over the last handful of years, and yet has never picked in the top 3 in those years.

I'm not saying you can't win without tanking. I also literally said tanking is not always successful.

But you agree that tanking is the likeliest way to find elite talent, and you need elite players to be win the Cup.

Boston could make 15 2nd round draft picks and they're not going to find another Patrice Bergeron there. It's largely luck. Even trying to find a 1C or 1D calibre player in the middle of the first round...is largely not going to be successful.

If you lose the lottery repeatedly...yeah that sucks.

 

[Sigh]

Decade of darkness is coming...

Yup, better trade everyone and become the new Sabres.

 

[HFpapi]

There just seems to be a strong parallel to Detroit years ago, when Lidstrom finally retired and they were suddenly a team build around an aging Datsyuk/Zetterberg and a bunch of grinders. At that time a lot of people were like "lol it's Detroit they'll just call some guys up from Grand Rapids and keep winning as usual". The reality was that they were shedding HOF-level talent year over year, and quickly became a middle-seed, one-round-and-out type of team. And after a few years it was more like a low-seed, one-round-and-out team.

It took way too long for the Wings to acknowledge that it was time to rebuild, and the late stage of the process was visibly traumatic to the organization and fanbase. The Bruins are potentially facing the same sort of thing having lost Bergeron, Krejci, Rask in quick succession and Marchand in the near future. Instead of Datsyuk/Zetterberg it's going to end up being Pastrnak/McAvoy and a bunch of filler. And that's going to create issues for the organization if they choose to just keep grinding forward as if nothing has changed.

I'm not saying this is set in stone, but it's a strong parallel up to this point. The organizational decisions being made over the next 12 months (along with the standard draft/trade/injury luck which is always a factor) will determine how the rest of it plays out.

Very well said and perfect parallel with Detroit.

They got extremely lucky being able to plug in Datsyuk and Zetterberg for Yzerman/Fedorov all the while having Lidstrom there through it all.

Bruins plugged Mcavoy in for Chara and have had Bergy and Marchand as constants.

This isn't a model that works in perpetuity.

When a team is good for so long it just feels meant to be and like everything will work itself out but reality will hit for Boston just as it did for Detroit.

In my very humble opinion, Boston has the opportunity to look long-term and get way ahead of the curve here and end up with maybe the best prospect pool/young asset base in the entire league by selling off right now.

 

[PaulD]

What all teams do who age out after a long run of success. Obviously there won't be a ton more immediate success. They'll fight for the playoffs this season, and trend downwards after that unless Sweeney can make some amazing moves. Then they'll have to re-tool and assimilate younger players into the lineup and sell off anything valuable for futures.

Young Hart trophy finalist.
Young Norris trophy candidate.
Good youth with size on back end.
Great young goaltending.
Elite first line winger.
Savy GM
Bruins will be alright.