Where does the Ray Bourque Cup win rank all time in NHL history?

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
85,980
141,565
Bojangles Parking Lot
This concept of a "cheapened" Cup win because Bourque went to a new team near the end is... bizarre.

Not if you were a fan of one of the other contending teams and still mega-salty that the Avs stacked their roster even more than it already was.

I suspect that's where a lot of this sentiment comes from. From a neutral POV it makes no sense to say it was "cheap" for Bourque to win with a contender but perfectly fine for everyone else to win with one.
 

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,364
5,927
It is a bit of semantic, if one agree that Bourque winning with Boston that late would have been more special in a way you agree that it is cheapened, just not versus your average Cup but versus that other potential one.

A bit like James winning with Cleveland being more special than the Heats/Lakers, is reaction was different.
 

The Pale King

Go easy on those Mango Giapanes brother...
Sep 24, 2011
3,193
2,623
Zeballos
The Avalanche - Kings series from that spring is still the most invested I've been in a hockey series. Definite hatred between those teams. Forsberg and Norstrom going at it all series, Potvin and Roy going head to head. Blake's " "betrayal" "... An absolute classic that maybe gets a bit forgotten because the 7th game was a 5-1 blowout. Potvin pitched shutouts in games 5 and 6, a double OT 1-0 Kings win. Legendary stuff.

I loathed the Avs of that era but I certainly respected Bourque, even if at the time it felt like just one more thing going in the ever-blessed direction of that five-year old team. I'm biased as hell. I definitely rooted for the Devils in the Finals.

I don't think Bourque's Cup win was cheapened. I think it's possible that an argument can be made about Blake, but I wouldn't be the guy to do it. Too much pressure from the Player's Union for Blake to get paid.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
Debatable. New overtime rules and two weak expansion teams in the West granted more points than in the mid-1990s, but they were better then.
Nah. The 2001 team was the best they ever iced, and the majority of them cite Bourque's 28 minutes a night as a huge reason why. Sakic enjoyed his greatest season ever and cited Bourque's breakout game as a primary factor in him being able to play a different style. Adam Foot grew into a rock solid stay at home D under Bourque's tutelage.

And it wasn't just that year. The 14 games he played after joining them at the deadline the year before proved revelational. Their shots against dropped from an average of 29 a game to 22 a game and they won 11, lost 2 and had 1 tie. They gave up 29 goals in those 14 games, scored 47....lol. Their final numbers for the season were 233 goals for, 201 against. If you average out their play with Bourque for 14 games, they were on pace for 258 goals for, 168 goals against

If the expansion teams made such a big difference, why did the also stacked Detroit Red wings, Dallas stars and St Louis blues not see a 22 point jump in the standings playing in the same environment? The blues scored 114 the year before expansion and then only 103 points with those two expansion teams to feed on? Could it be that losing Pronger for 31 games hurt them that much? If you say yes, you must acknowledge the effect of adding 80 games of Ray Bourque to the Avs. Why did the stacked red wings squad not see huge leaps? The wings had 3 more points than the year before. Which was 1 more win and 1 OT and their star players scored at basically the exact same pace they did the year before. Same with the stars who had a whole 4 more points.

"From Day 1, he made my job easier. It was like he brought a new energy into the locker room. And I knew he'd give me 30-plus minutes of quality defense each night. Finding a defenseman who can provide that is like finding gold."

"It was almost like adding 23 new players," defense partner Adam Foote says. "His poise, his confidence rubbed off on everybody. I think we all played a little like Ray after he arrived."

Others in the league noticed as well. "It's amazing how their confidence grew," Coyotes center Jeremy Roenick said at the end of last season. "Adam Foote grew into a rock playing alongside Ray, and the forwards clearly took more chances offensively knowing there's a Hall of Fame guy right behind them."


In the end, it was just vindication of the often repeated question "What would happen if Bourque played on a loaded team like Lidstrom". Old man 40 year old Bourque was able to propel his teammates above and beyond and go runner up for the Norris at age 40 when he was a shadow of the player he was in his prime and win the cup all in the same year. Now imagine him in his prime doing it. Likely looking at even more gaudy offensive totals to his already record amount of points for a Dman and 5 or 6 more cups.
 
Last edited:

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
13,494
8,800
Ostsee
Just for the record, Adam Foote had his career years in 98/99 before Bourque's arrival and 02/03 after his departure.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
Just for the record, Adam Foote had his career years in 98/99 before Bourque's arrival and 02/03 after his departure.
Strange statement. You probably should look deeper. Foote only played 35 games in 2001 due to injury and still was only 6 points from his previous best offensive total. but offense wasn't Foote's game. His time on the ice with Bourque for 99 to 2001 showed the best defensive Adam Foote we have ever seen. He cited learning from Bourque turning him into a better defensive and transition game player. So did opposing players who watched him play like the Roenick QUOTE above.

And Foote was +11 in the 14 games he played with Bourque in 99-2000 and he ended the season +5, so clearly he was a minus player prior to Bourque's team galvanizing arrival
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
I don't think it's strange, 1999 and 2003 were also the only years he received Norris votes.
Lol. In 99 he got a single low placed throwaway Norris vote, which tied him with Alexander karpovtsev in the "I saw a name and just threw it on because I already voted for my top 2" category.

At least in 2003, after he had applied what he learned from a consensus top dman of all time(Bourque) foote got 8 throwaway votes. Which is actually impressive for a defensive dman.

We get it. You don't like Bourque. But all the experts and former players and coaches disagree. He's a consensus top 4 all time defenseman by like everyone in the world except you. And none of those experts think of him like a Joe Thornton/Marcel dinner. Bourque was considered money in the playoffs
 
  • Like
Reactions: jigglysquishy

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
13,494
8,800
Ostsee
That's still 23 votes more than he got with Bourque which is 0. He was good with and without Bourque, before and after. The whole "Adam Foote is creation of Ray Bourque" narrative is fabricated.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
That's still 23 votes more than he got with Bourque which is 0. He was good with and without Bourque, before and after. The whole "Adam Foote is creation of Ray Bourque" narrative is fabricated.
Nah. It's was on the lips of announcers, broadcasters, coaches, players, analysts and commentators at the time.

There is nothing fabricated about that Jeremy Roenick quote. That guy rarely, if ever, praised his competition. Adam Foote himself praised Bourque as someone he is sponging knowledge off of. Sakic did as well as he cited his ability to play a different game with the 2nd best defenseman of all time behind him.

Of course Foote didn't get Norris votes. Defensive defensemen are decidedly unsexy and he wasn't well known at that time. He was a minus player in 1999-2000 until Bourque arrived and propelled him into the plus column. He then missed over half the 2000-01 season. Even if he hadn't, bourque sponged all the votes and attention on defense for colorado

His single throwaway vote in 98-99 by a Colorado journalist isn't a point in your favor, nor does it mean anything.

Consensus top 4 all time dman and a playoff warrior. Deserved to finally get that cup
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
14,359
19,646
Las Vegas
That's still 23 votes more than he got with Bourque which is 0. He was good with and without Bourque, before and after. The whole "Adam Foote is creation of Ray Bourque" narrative is fabricated.

Say it with me now since you insist on being obtuse and trolling.

Foote...played...35 games...with...Bourque

No one not named Bobby Orr is getting a Norris vote for 35 games.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
29,489
17,574
The 2001 team was the best they ever iced, and the majority of them cite Bourque's 28 minutes a night as a huge reason why.

it's an interesting question, and i think we had a thread about this once upon a time

that 2001 team had the highest face cards, but was comically top-heavy and shallow, especially after forsberg ruptured his spleen

tanguay - sakic - hejduk
nieminen - drury - hinote
messier - yelle - podein
dingman - reinprecht - reid

foote - bourque
de vries - blake
skoula - klemm

roy
abby


compare the top line + drury to some of the avs teams of the second half of the 90s, which went three lines deep with competent scoring forwards

or the bottom three of klemm, de vries, and skoula all playing below 15 mins a game vs foote, lefebvre, krupp, gusarov, ozolinsh sheltered at ES, leschyshyn and wolanin sharing the #6 spot, and aaron miller stepping in and working his way up the lineup
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hockey Outsider

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
Say it with me now since you insist on being obtuse and trolling.

Foote...played...35 games...with...Bourque

No one not named Bobby Orr is getting a Norris vote for 35 games.
It was obvious he was just a hater, or trolling after he made the "not on par with Zubov" comment lol
Generally, the only folks who hate on Bourque, again universally considered among the top 4 Dmen of all time and a great playoff performer, are Bruins haters or Lidstrom supporters looking to garnish Lidstrom's plate because Bourque is the only one above him in terms of longevity, consistency and Bourque had a stronger peak to boot.

Given this guy has posts like
Gordie Howe (silent), Wayne Gretzky (boomer), Mario Lemieux (gen x) and Sidney Crosby (millennial) are generational. Orr isn't.
is this guy the Swedish Stan Fischler?
Yzerman scored 300 points more than Coffey and Bourque during their mutual time in the league, including six 100-point seasons. Bourque didn't have even one.
lol, comparing forwards to Dmen by points alone.
Orr wouldn't even be the best overall defenseman in Boston with Bourque in team.
looool

oh and in his "top 5 dmen of all time"
Lidström
Karlsson
Bourque
Salming
Coffey
3 Swedes, No orr, Lidstrom and Karlsson over Bourque LOL
 

Hockey Outsider

Registered User
Jan 16, 2005
9,375
15,390
LOLOL Lidstrom and Karlsson over the second greatest defenseman of all time (Bourque) and no Orr... What a f***ing joke...:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

I think there's an argument for Lidstrom over Bourque. You'd have to place a big emphasis on counting trophy wins without context (7 Norris's > 5), counting Stanley Cups, and exaggerating Lidstrom's small edge in defensive play. I think it's a weak argument, but it can be made.

But if that's the case, there's no argument whatsoever for Karlsson over Bourque (since Bourque won more Norris trophies, more Stanley Cups, and was far better defensively). If the argument for Karlsson over Bourque is peak or talent, then you can't have Lidstrom above Bourque either. It's a self-contradictory list.
 

Mr Burns

LOL U MAD BRO? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Aug 9, 2020
558
663
I think there's an argument for Lidstrom over Bourque. You'd have to place a big emphasis on counting trophy wins without context (7 Norris's > 5), counting Stanley Cups, and exaggerating Lidstrom's small edge in defensive play. I think it's a weak argument, but it can be made.
Lidstrom had the chance to play with great Red Wings teams in the 90's and 00's. Those teams were far better than Bourque's Bruins. The only comparable team for Bourque was the 00-01 Colorado Avalanche team and he won the Cup. I'm pretty sure if Bourque had played with the Red Wings instead of Lidstrom, they win as many if not more Stanley Cups.

Concerning Norris trophies, Lidstrom started to win his bunch of Norris trophies when most of the top defensemen in the 80's and 90's were past their prime or retired. The competition was worse by far in the 00's, it's not even comparable to what Bourque had to compete against in the 80's and 90's for the Norris compared to Lidstrom in the 00's. And despite of it, Bourque still won the Norris more than anyone else during the 80's and 90's.
 

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
13,494
8,800
Ostsee
LOLOL Lidstrom and Karlsson over the second greatest defenseman of all time (Bourque) and no Orr... What a f***ing joke...:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

That post is from a thread called "name your top 5 defensemen of all time". Compiling posts from different threads for an argumentum ad hominem attack is considered bad manners.

If you are genuinely interested in why I regard Erik Karlsson so highly, however, he is the only defenseman in modern history to have led the league in assists and was as high as 4th in total points, ahead of the likes of Ovechkin and Panarin and only three short of Sidney Crosby, all in their prime.

As you can see I also do hold Ray Bourque in rather high regard, it is merely that he joined a ready contender in Colorado and overblown aftermath like his jersey retirement or completely absurd narratives like this one about Adam Foote being his product do a disservice to what he did achieve.
 

Mr Burns

LOL U MAD BRO? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Aug 9, 2020
558
663
That post is from a thread called "name your top 5 defensemen of all time". Compiling posts from different threads for an argumentum ad hominem attack is considered bad manners.

If you are genuinely interested in why I regard Erik Karlsson so highly, however, he is the only defenseman in modern history to have led the league in assists and was as high as 4th in total points, ahead of the likes of Ovechkin and Panarin and only three short of Sidney Crosby, all in their prime.

As you can see I also do hold Ray Bourque in rather high regard, it is merely that he joined a ready contender in Colorado and overblown aftermath like his jersey retirement or completely absurd narratives like this one about Adam Foote being his product do a disservice to what he did achieve.
Still laughable no matter what, no Orr and Lidstrom and Karlsson over Bourque please...
 

Mr Burns

LOL U MAD BRO? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Aug 9, 2020
558
663
Orr did lead the league too and was a legit star player, but during a time when it was at its weakest in the post-war era.
A legit star player? He is largely considered the second greatest player ever and even the greatest for some people then I'm sure he is more than just a "legit star player" right.
 

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
13,494
8,800
Ostsee
A legit star player? He is largely considered the second greatest player ever and even the greatest for some people then I'm sure he is more than just a "legit star player" right.

To each his own. To me the 1970s post-expansion NHL watered down with more than twice as many teams of only Canadian players and the NHL-WHA split is not very appealing. The O6 era has its own charm, but not that.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
To each his own. To me the 1970s post-expansion NHL watered down with more than twice as many teams of only Canadian players and the NHL-WHA split is not very appealing. The O6 era has its own charm, but not that.
ahh yes. you are one of those guys who craps on older players because everything prior to Lidstrom's first norris win sucked eh?
In the 1980s the whole league was much weaker.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,904
2,060
Moose country
That post is from a thread called "name your top 5 defensemen of all time". Compiling posts from different threads for an argumentum ad hominem attack is considered bad manners.

If you are genuinely interested in why I regard Erik Karlsson so highly, however, he is the only defenseman in modern history to have led the league in assists and was as high as 4th in total points, ahead of the likes of Ovechkin and Panarin and only three short of Sidney Crosby, all in their prime.

As you can see I also do hold Ray Bourque in rather high regard, it is merely that he joined a ready contender in Colorado and overblown aftermath like his jersey retirement or completely absurd narratives like this one about Adam Foote being his product do a disservice to what he did achieve.
and yet if Erik Karlsson played in the 80's, odds of him being #1 in assists were nonexistent with Gretzky around
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad