Why is Boston such a good organization?

[TheDoldrums]

if we're only measuring cups as success, but 30 teams every year don't win a cup so there have to be other ways to measure success

anyone who knows also knows that generally teams don't win cups when they consistently miss the playoffs, which is something the bruins have avoided a lot the last 15 years of the current cultural make up.

If you talk about the last 50 years, you're now also talking about multiple drivers at the helm and then the premise of this thread falls apart because I believe the OP is referring to the current rendition of the Bruins, not the Joe Thorton or Harry Sinden Bruins that had structural and philosophy issues

they haven't won more than a round since before Covid and have two 1st round exits in a row including after the best regular season ever so the recent history isn't great either

 

[Strangle]

I could be wrong, but I thought I saw a stat the other day that they were in the top 5 for most penalized teams this season.

Anyone watching Bruins games all season should tell you goaltending has helped them win a lot of games they shouldn't even be in.

Make whatever excuses help you sleep at night, everyone knows the bruins have the officials in their back pockets.

I’m pretty sure I made my post back in November, so whatever is happening this year isn’t what I was talking about, but the refs have ways to manage games and give out meaningless penalties to the bruins that won’t hurt them too much

 

[danpantz]

they haven't won more than a round since before Covid and have two 1st round exits in a row including after the best regular season ever so the recent history isn't great either

This makes it seem like Covid was decades ago lol

 

[TheDoldrums]

This makes it seem like Covid was decades ago lol

that's your weird interpretation, pretty sure everyone else realizes it was 4 years ago. You might expect a franchise being considered so good to have done more recently. They've won one more round than the justifiably mocked Leafs in the past 4 playoffs.

 

[danpantz]

that's your weird interpretation, pretty sure everyone else realizes it was 4 years ago. You might expect a franchise being considered so good to have done more recently. They've won one more round than the justifiably mocked Leafs in the past 4 playoffs.

And 5 years ago they made it to game 7 of the cup finals. But if you leave that out then sure.

 

[KnightofBoston]

they haven't won more than a round since before Covid and have two 1st round exits in a row including after the best regular season ever so the recent history isn't great either

i could be wrong but it seemed like the OP was talking about the current rendition of the bruins which organizationally has been pretty consistent since 2006, not the post chara bruins, or post rask bruins, or past bergeron/krejci bruins, or post merlot line bruins that won the cup. Just the last 15 or so years. They've been very successful over all despite not having a lot of high draft picks and seemingly having multiple facets that would make it hard to attract high end players according to discussions frequently had on this board.


we keep seeing, particularly within our own fanbase, that the bruins are going to drop off, most of us thought they would be a bubble team this year, they aren't so far. Most of us thought they would struggle a bit and fight for a wild card or 3 seed last year and they dominated the league, despite losing out to a panthers team that should be respected as well.


So like I said I could be wrong, but I think the OP's post is more about how the new organization, helmed by the jacobs, neely, sweeney, and other management that has stayed consistent at lower levels, despite having not a lot of high draft picks, high state taxes, not a terribly attractive location compared to some other cities like LA or New York or better weather, consistent roster turn over with young guys stepping up and playing above expert expectations. The athletic etc consistently gives the bruins low grades for their farm systems, people write their obituaries in one way or another - yet they continue to be successful financially, regular season, with middling success in the playoffs but still knocking on the door every year. There are quite a few fanbases that would be very happy with that level of consistency.

Bruins fans of course want a cup, but it can't be the only thing you put your hopes on because that's just setting yourself for failure given only one team out of many can win and injuries play a gigantic role in stanley cup success

 

[John Price]

I don't get how they see considered a good organization or where this came from. they fired a coach who ended up winning a Stanley cup, and they tried to hire a bully who ended up being cut after peer pressure from the fans. what's so good about Boston?

 

[nbwingsfan]

they haven't won more than a round since before Covid and have two 1st round exits in a row including after the best regular season ever so the recent history isn't great either

They also had, as you said, the greatest regular season in NHL history, which can’t be viewed as a bad season regardless of how the post season turned out

 

[KnightofBoston]

I don't get how they see considered a good organization or where this came from. they fired a coach who ended up winning a Stanley cup, and they tried to hire a bully who ended up being cut after peer pressure from the fans. what's so good about Boston?

Cassidy is a good coach but he needed a good heavy team like Vegas to win with the style he employs, I do also find it fascinating that people tend to always think about things in a vacuum. Cassidy's failures here in Boston are directly connected to his eventual successes. People generally improve from the experience of a failure. Cassidy was no longer the right coach for Boston and Im glad he found success elsewhere. He even brought the cup back and shared it with the family of a girl suffering some health issues he became close with.

The Miller things seems like an odd cherry pick especially considering that they handled it by reviewing the process and terminating the contract. If they dragged it out, your point would hold more weight, as it stands, the point along with your first one just seems like a weak attempt to argue with the OP

 

[nbwingsfan]

that's your weird interpretation, pretty sure everyone else realizes it was 4 years ago. You might expect a franchise being considered so good to have done more recently. They've won one more round than the justifiably mocked Leafs in the past 4 playoffs.

That’s the point. The Bruins have still managed to be a good- great team for 15 years without having to go through a rebuild like the Leaf’s and having gone through Franchise level players retiring /aging out.

 

[TheDoldrums]

They also had, as you said, the greatest regular season in NHL history, which can’t be viewed as a bad season regardless of how the post season turned out

where did I say it was a bad season? What a strawman.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Smart organization with competent people in charge. Are they the most accomplished organization in the last 2-3 decade, no. But they've also avoided any period of being horrible like Ducks or Canes or Caps. Id say they are similar to the blues in just being stoicly competently run but not having both the luck of a generational talent/aggressive high risk-high reward moves that might win multiple cups. And obviously they've never being a clown organization like the leafs/oiler.

 

[nbwingsfan]

where did I say it was a bad season? What a strawman.

“the recent history isn’t great either” were your exact words

 

[GirardSpinorama]

That’s the point. The Bruins have still managed to be a good- great team for 15 years without having to go through a rebuild like the Leaf’s and having gone through Franchise level players retiring /aging out.

Helped by the fact the leafs traded them seguin, hamilton AND rask to help them win a cup and maintain competitiveness.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Smart organization with competent people in charge. Are they the most accomplished organization in the last 2-3 decade, no. But they've also avoided any period of being horrible like Ducks or Canes or Caps. Id say they are similar to the blues in just being stoicly competently run but not having both the luck of a generational talent/aggressive high risk-high reward moves that might win multiple cups. And obviously they've never being a clown organization like the leafs/oiler.

I mean they have done some pretty high risk moves (Lindholm, Seguin, Lucic, Hamilton, Nash) it’s just outside of Lindholm they haven’t really worked out.

 

[TheDoldrums]

“the recent history isn’t great either” were your exact words

so not "bad," thanks for confirming

 

[GirardSpinorama]

I mean they have done some pretty high risk moves (Lindholm, Seguin, Lucic, Hamilton, Nash) it’s just outside of Lindholm they haven’t really worked out.

I wouldnt say lindholm was high risk. Very very smart move with limited downside and worked out. High risk imo is like signing those super long cap circumventing deals (see kovy, see dipetro). Could be franchise crushing if it doesnt work out but great if it does (see crosby, hossa, keith).

 

[John Price]

Cassidy is a good coach but he needed a good heavy team like Vegas to win with the style he employs, I do also find it fascinating that people tend to always think about things in a vacuum. Cassidy's failures here in Boston are directly connected to his eventual successes. People generally improve from the experience of a failure. Cassidy was no longer the right coach for Boston and Im glad he found success elsewhere. He even brought the cup back and shared it with the family of a girl suffering some health issues he became close with.

The Miller things seems like an odd cherry pick especially considering that they handled it by reviewing the process and terminating the contract. If they dragged it out, your point would hold more weight, as it stands, the point along with your first one just seems like a weak attempt to argue with the OP

Cassidy shouldn't have been fired. His successor is okay but has yet to win a playoff series.

And the mere thought of the Bruins considering Miller is a bad mark.

That said I've been saying the Bruins are trending downhill especially since that Cassidy move and been proven wrong. I think they're a decent organization but let's not sugarcoat it, there was a time not so long ago where Bruins fans wanted Sweeney and Neely gone lol

 

[easton117]

They’re very similar to the Steelers. Stable ownership (maybe not likeable sure), management generally isn’t overly reactive and they have an expectation of their employees for how they are to represent the team.

If you have those things it doesn’t guarantee success but I think it goes a long way.

Are they going to win every year? No. Will they be competitive? Yes, most of the time.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

This makes it seem like Covid was decades ago lol

Intentionally so. Imagine comparing Toronto to Boston.

 

[Ivo]

Helped by the fact the leafs traded them seguin, hamilton AND rask to help them win a cup and maintain competitiveness.

When they won the cup, Hamilton was playing in juniors, Rask was a backup who played 0 minutes in the playoffs and Seguin was a healthy scratch much of the playoffs (although he did have 1 monster game in the conference finals).

 

[NVious]

Just draft 2 hall of famers in the 2nd and 3rd round

#ItsTheLittleThings

 

[CupsOverCash]

They have pictures of Gary Bettman with someone else. I'm sure this has been brought up.

 

[Bocephus86]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: being in the mix every year is so much better than being crap with the hope of being great in the future. I watch the Red Sox be garbage. The bruins giving me a game to care about every day has solidified that competing is 100% better than being good for 2-4 years.

 

[bandwagonesque]

They drafted Lucic, Bergeron, Krecji and Marchand outside the 1st round in a span of four years, and players seem to like the city. There are other factors but those are probably the most important.