Why is Boston such a good organization?

[x Tame Impala]

Part of it last year was being propped up by OTL's. They had 15 last year (first place had 16). 12th in the league for Regulation Wins.

They're a consistently good team because their Front Office knows what types of players to draft and trade for, as well as being a historic market for hockey success so people want to play there. They're clearly NOT a great team in the league and haven't been for a long time. 2019 was 6 seasons ago now.

I absolutely agree that not falling off a cliff is impressive and I find the Bruins impressive.

I also find it interesting that in many other discussions there seems to be a binary definition of success in team sports -- championships.

My question was, before we discuss WHY they have been so successful, should we fist define SUCCESS in this context.

Would Pittsburgh apply? They (barely) missed the playoffs twice now, but the Bruins did a couple of years ago too. The Penguins have more cups.

Now, we could argue that the Pens tanked and drafted high, won and are now about to bottom out and that would be a fair position, but it needs to start with an agreed upon definition of success.

So, what is it? Making the playoffs regularly? Being a "contender" (however that is defined)? Not being terrible ever?

16 teams make the playoffs and more are likely to follow as the league expands. Just being a playoff team isn't enough. A successful team wins a Cup and is a legitimate Cup contender for a few seasons or more.

I've always thought the Penguins success to be a little overrated because they were given so much credit just for making the playoffs. They were great in 2008/2009/2016/2017. Other than that they were mostly above average at best, beating weaker early round opponents. In 2013 when they went up against an actual great team they got swept and Crosby/Malkin were held off the point sheet.

The Blues were the weakest Cup winner of the cap era, if Boston was such a good organization and worthy of all this praise they would've won that Cup instead of blowing it.

 

[jgatie]

Okay. He was still a 70pt player in his best years. Those are available every single season.

Picking out one game is very strange.

We don't usually disagree, but I'll say this: Regular season Krejci was not playoff Krejci. David himself once said the regular season was boring for him, and he often looked that way. But playoff Krejci was money.

David was also not that flashy, not fast at all, and thought the game on a more cerebral level. He wasn't blowing by guys, or deking them out of their shorts, so he wasn't making many highlight reels. But somehow he was always where he was supposed to be, and his playmaking ability/hockey IQ made up for his lack of flash and speed.

 

[Ghost of Murph]

1 Cup in the last half century. Think of all the incredible players that have played in Boston during that time.

Just the past 15 years have seen a ridiculous amount of talent on the team. Chara is an all-time great d-man. Bergeron is an all-time great two-way center. Thomas and Rask had all-time elite numbers in various categories. Then throw in all of the other stars during that period, including the ridiculous lineup the season before last that set the all-time NHL points record.

It's rather incredible the team only has one cup in the last half century. The organization has consistently made the playoffs and had good regular seasons over the past decade. They've failed miserably at bringing home the Cup, though.

 

[conFABulator]

Part of it last year was being propped up by OTL's. They had 15 last year (first place had 16). 12th in the league for Regulation Wins.

They're a consistently good team because their Front Office knows what types of players to draft and trade for, as well as being a historic market for hockey success so people want to play there. They're clearly NOT a great team in the league and haven't been for a long time. 2019 was 6 seasons ago now.



16 teams make the playoffs and more are likely to follow as the league expands. Just being a playoff team isn't enough. A successful team wins a Cup and is a legitimate Cup contender for a few seasons or more.

I've always thought the Penguins success to be a little overrated because they were given so much credit just for making the playoffs. They were great in 2008/2009/2016/2017. Other than that they were mostly above average at best, beating weaker early round opponents. In 2013 when they went up against an actual great team they got swept and Crosby/Malkin were held off the point sheet.

The Blues were the weakest Cup winner of the cap era, if Boston was such a good organization and worthy of all this praise they would've won that Cup instead of blowing it.

I don't disagree with any of that. Pittsburgh literally won a lottery and ended up with Malkin, Crosby and Fleury and won, because they should have.

Maybe Boston has been the best, model of high level consistency in this era. I lso consider them a bit of a cautionary tale that you can be in the discussion every year but never win. Boston one once on a crossover year from the old guard to the next crew. That next crew never won.

A lot of people on here are saying that they have lost Lucic, Chara, Krejci and Bergeron and never sucked. That's true. Is not sucking the bar?

 

[JFedol]

Part of it last year was being propped up by OTL's. They had 15 last year (first place had 16). 12th in the league for Regulation Wins.

They're a consistently good team because their Front Office knows what types of players to draft and trade for, as well as being a historic market for hockey success so people want to play there. They're clearly NOT a great team in the league and haven't been for a long time. 2019 was 6 seasons ago now.



16 teams make the playoffs and more are likely to follow as the league expands. Just being a playoff team isn't enough. A successful team wins a Cup and is a legitimate Cup contender for a few seasons or more.

I've always thought the Penguins success to be a little overrated because they were given so much credit just for making the playoffs. They were great in 2008/2009/2016/2017. Other than that they were mostly above average at best, beating weaker early round opponents. In 2013 when they went up against an actual great team they got swept and Crosby/Malkin were held off the point sheet.

The Blues were the weakest Cup winner of the cap era, if Boston was such a good organization and worthy of all this praise they would've won that Cup instead of blowing it.

Facts lol, especially about Pittsburgh. It's not their fault that the East aside from Washington and maybe NY was full of paper tigers for a majority of their tenure but the Pens of this era really should've been the team that was supposed to be winning at least 4-6/7 cups with Peak Crosby/Malkin/Letang if they truly were a DOMINANT trio that people will be talking about in the future when compared to other trios, if that make sense. Their success is still the standard and 3 Cups is wowzers, but that 6 year gap from 2010-2015 looks ugly and it also f***ed them over badly in the history books. Making the playoffs only means so much until the 1st/2nd round chokejob exits start to ware off and as father time continues to creep on your core players doors soon. IMO, What Chicago did in a 6 year span during the dynasty days was 100% way more impressive and insane then Pittsburgh's run. Injuries did heavily played with a factor with Crosby/Malkin, we can't deny that. Edmonton may have a greater run of dominance than Pittsburgh by the time it's 2030.

Pittsburgh's has been above average, but that's mainly due to having 3 guys carry a boat load of your offense without having the strong depth that other strong contenders/president trophy teams mainly have. This is the same team that at one point had the worst winger depth in the entire league for a contender lmao.

The Bruins have never ever been undisputed favorites for a cup run aside from 2023 and maybe 2019 with Tampa choking. Their really just in the mix of teams that you could realistically expect a cup run from them and it wouldn't shock you in the slightest, but they've never really had that DOMINANT vibe if that makes sense. Boston doesn't even have a true game breaker ala McDavid/Draisaitl/Kucherov/Mackinnon so their routinely 2nd round exits aren't surprising. Bergeron was overrated as a playoff performer. They've always been overrated in terms of reverance and praise and absolutely fraudulent come April.

 

[Hank Plank]

It's rather incredible the team only has one cup in the last half century. The organization has consistently made the playoffs and had good regular seasons over the past decade. They've failed miserably at bringing home the Cup, though.

No team has lost more in the Cup final not sure how that makes Boston such a good organization.

 

[PaulD]

Okay. He was still a 70pt player in his best years. Those are available every single season.

Picking out one game is very strange.

yea. like I based my opinion on the one game .......even though I mentioned the two times he lead the NHL in play off scoring ......about 55 games and one Cup.

 

[LiseL]

I’m a lifelong Bruins fan with a huge soft spot for the Sens. I wish Ullmark absolutely nothing but success in Ottawa, and I don’t think you will be disappointed with him.

Good luck this season.

I've liked the Bruins since the days of Orr and Bourque. The only team I truly hate are the Leafs.

 

[wintersej]

Scott Wheeler has Boston’s prospect Pool ranked at 30th.
He gave them a C+ as their post draft rating.
Prospecting has Boston dead last in NHL prospect Pool rankings.
Lindholm contract is awful. Guy hasn’t been “good” since 21-22 season when he had Tkachuk and Gaudreau on his wings.
He’s not a 1C and stats show his best years are behind him.
Jim Montgomery has never won 2 rounds and has a losing record in the playoffs.
Marchand only getting older and will leave a gaping hole once he’s gone. A hole your prospects can’t fill evidently.
Can you possibly address those issues via trade or FA? Sure. But they’ll eventually be a team with pasta swayman and Charlie surrounded by very average players.

I remember when the Athletic said that Hampus Lindholm's contract was an F and one of the worst in the league... and now its quietly a B.

In remember when the Athletic said Matt Poitras was a guy that "maybe had a chance to play some games" and then the next year it was "Were it not for the graduation of Matt Poitras to the NHL at 19, the Bruins’ pool would likely rank a few slots higher. Without Poitras, though, their system is light on quality prospects.".

 

[VaCaps Fan]

Harry Sinden and Jeremy Jacobs can get a little cheap despite the great culture they built.

 

[Gee Wally]

Harry Sinden and Jeremy Jacobs can get a little cheap despite the great culture they built.

They definitely were back in the day. However since the introduction of the Cap the Bruins have always spent to the limit and sometimes over with one way contracts sent to the ‘A’.

 

[nbwingsfan]

David Krejci


Krejci is tied 51st with Bergeron in all time playoff points. Tied with Kane at 42nd for most assists. Higher PPG than guys like Datsyuk, Forsberg, Stamkos, Thornton, the Sedins, etc. Led playoffs in points twice. The 7th player to lead the playoffs in points more than once in the last 30 years along with Sakic, Forsberg, Kopitar, Malkin, McDavid, and Kucherov. Only 6 players had more playoff points from 2007 to 2023. Easily the most underrated player on these boards.

That’s a lot of words that still don’t change he was a 70pt player (at his best) in the regular season…

He was very good, but far from an irreplaceable player like everyone you just mentioned

We don't usually disagree, but I'll say this: Regular season Krejci was not playoff Krejci. David himself once said the regular season was boring for him, and he often looked that way. But playoff Krejci was money.

David was also not that flashy, not fast at all, and thought the game on a more cerebral level. He wasn't blowing by guys, or deking them out of their shorts, so he wasn't making many highlight reels. But somehow he was always where he was supposed to be, and his playmaking ability/hockey IQ made up for his lack of flash and speed.

For sure he was great, especially in the post season.

But he isn’t near the level of irreplaceable like players as Rask, Thomas, Chara, Bergeron or even Thornton if you want to go back that far.

That is of course in theory, because somehow Boston has managed to replace every single one of them. I swear if Lindholm turns into Bergy lite with the Bruins culture I’ll be furious. Detroit needs a way into the playoffs somehow!

 

[nbwingsfan]

Part of it last year was being propped up by OTL's. They had 15 last year (first place had 16). 12th in the league for Regulation Wins.

They're a consistently good team because their Front Office knows what types of players to draft and trade for, as well as being a historic market for hockey success so people want to play there. They're clearly NOT a great team in the league and haven't been for a long time. 2019 was 6 seasons ago now.



16 teams make the playoffs and more are likely to follow as the league expands. Just being a playoff team isn't enough. A successful team wins a Cup and is a legitimate Cup contender for a few seasons or more.

I've always thought the Penguins success to be a little overrated because they were given so much credit just for making the playoffs. They were great in 2008/2009/2016/2017. Other than that they were mostly above average at best, beating weaker early round opponents. In 2013 when they went up against an actual great team they got swept and Crosby/Malkin were held off the point sheet.

The Blues were the weakest Cup winner of the cap era, if Boston was such a good organization and worthy of all this praise they would've won that Cup instead of blowing it.

So was Tampa only a great organization 4 times since 2004?

Pretty bad IMO.

I don't disagree with any of that. Pittsburgh literally won a lottery and ended up with Malkin, Crosby and Fleury and won, because they should have.

Maybe Boston has been the best, model of high level consistency in this era. I lso consider them a bit of a cautionary tale that you can be in the discussion every year but never win. Boston one once on a crossover year from the old guard to the next crew. That next crew never won.

A lot of people on here are saying that they have lost Lucic, Chara, Krejci and Bergeron and never sucked. That's true. Is not sucking the bar?

Again, it’s that every team has eventually sucked at some point. The Bruins haven’t since like 2007.

It’s rather impressive.

The only other example currently is the Pens, and their time is coming

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

First round picks since 2008, when both teams really became relevant as top teams again:

Boston: 14, with like 5 of those coming from trading good players away for picks due to cap constraints

Pens: 9, only one coming from trading a good player

It’s really not the discrepancy that you think it is. Boston retooled for two seasons trading away players they identified as not part of their core, and now are continuing going strong.

Pens are about to enter some dark dark ages


Who are they going to “swap out” that’s going to contribute as much as Crosby right away at that cap hit?

There’s absolutely no denying they’re going to collapse very shortly, especially if all of Crosby/Malkin/Letang decide to retire a Pen

And Boston has not near as much to show for it as the Penguins do. Yeah it’s nice Boston has a somewhat competitive team still. But who really cares if they aren’t good enough to win?

 

[conFABulator]

Again, it’s that every team has eventually sucked at some point. The Bruins haven’t since like 2007.

It’s rather impressive.

The only other example currently is the Pens, and their time is coming

Let me start by reiterating that I agree it and Boston are impressive.

I personally challenge the definition of success in professional team sports is to "not suck". The bar should be higher. The Patriots, the Dodgers, the 80's Islanders, the 70's Habs, Jordan's Bulls.

The Bruins are a model franchise, something for others to aspire to, sure...they are not MY definition of bar for SUCCESS.

 

[LiseL]

Thanks, I don't disagree with the assessment IF that is the definition of successful. Is that the definition? "Keeping it going?"

We consider teams successful if they make the playoffs ten out of 12 seasons without winning a cup?

You are also guessing that the Pittsburgh decline is starting to gain speed. They could swap out some vets and re-tool. I don't think that's the plan, but I do think that until they start to crater the argument could be made that they have had the better past dozen or 15 years.

Crosby is still playing very well but the remaining stars are either injured or getting slow. I don't see them making the playoffs again this year. NJD and Washington both improved their rosters, NYR should lead the way again, NYI have great goaltending so even getting a wild card spot will be tough.

 

[conFABulator]

Crosby is still playing very well but the remaining stars are either injured or getting slow. I don't see them making the playoffs again this year. NJD and Washington both improved their rosters, NYR should lead the way again, NYI have great goaltending so even getting a wild card spot will be tough.

I agree. I only see one direction for Pittsburgh. I was surprised Dubas took that job. I think he would have got an offer somewhere else this year has he waited.. he might have looked better too, since he said publicly he wasn't going to be taking a job right away.

Anyway, he can either try to win around An aging Crosby with an aging support cast which seems pretty impossible really or he could be the guy that trades the franchise Icons away in the name of a rebuild. Either way it's a no win.

So he pursues Option A, they don't win a cup (or possibly even make the playoffs again) and they go into a rebuild with no pieces.

Wait it out and take Carolina or Edmonton or Utah or Ottawa. They are all better gigs.

 

[Look Up]

Swayman putting this organization to the test. I am very curious how they handle this, wouldn't want to be dealing with this with my team.

 

[PaulD]

Part of it last year was being propped up by OTL's. They had 15 last year (first place had 16). 12th in the league for Regulation Wins.

They're a consistently good team because their Front Office knows what types of players to draft and trade for, as well as being a historic market for hockey success so people want to play there. They're clearly NOT a great team in the league and haven't been for a long time. 2019 was 6 seasons ago now.



16 teams make the playoffs and more are likely to follow as the league expands. Just being a playoff team isn't enough. A successful team wins a Cup and is a legitimate Cup contender for a few seasons or more.

I've always thought the Penguins success to be a little overrated because they were given so much credit just for making the playoffs. They were great in 2008/2009/2016/2017. Other than that they were mostly above average at best, beating weaker early round opponents. In 2013 when they went up against an actual great team they got swept and Crosby/Malkin were held off the point sheet.

The Blues were the weakest Cup winner of the cap era, if Boston was such a good organization and worthy of all this praise they would've won that Cup instead of blowing it.

Bruins are a great team. A fantastic organization.
Three quarters of the league aspire to be like the Bruins and continually fail.

 

[voyageur]

I'll say it's tradition. Bobby Orr put the Bruins on the map. After he retired, the Bruins were still a powerhouse organization, bringing in guys who fit the mold of playing in the smaller confines of Boston Garden, but they were stumped from the late 70s to 1988 getting over the hump of beating the Canadiens, in a Molsons run league. Cam Neely became the new Terry O' Reilly. Ray Bourque wasn't Bobby Orr, but he was an elite defenseman that few teams could boast.

After 1988 the team had a different swagger. Where they were the team to beat in the Adams, and then later the East. It's always been a team that had appeal, because they treat their players right.

Young players who didn't fit the mold of Bruins hockey, like Thornton, Seguin, Hamilton and Kessel were moved out.

Being consistently a good team is something that every team aspires for. A lot of teams now have to bottom out to get franchise players, and then go on their run, but the Bruins find guys who fit the mold, of the winning tradition, and build around them., I think.

 

[PaulD]

Swayman putting this organization to the test. I am very curious how they handle this, wouldn't want to be dealing with this with my team.

posturing . This deal gets done and Swayman will be a main stay in the Bs bet for a good stretch. Like Rask was.

 

[McPoyle]

How long can Boston ride the coattails of a 2011 cup? We are nearing 15 years separation (same as Oilers dynasty to start of Cap era).

 

[I am Bettman]

How long can Boston ride the coattails of a 2011 cup? We are nearing 15 years separation (same as Oilers dynasty to start of Cap era).

32 team league, cups can’t be used to accurately determine success anymore.

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

Ownership.

The fish rots, or doesn’t, from the head.

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

32 team league, cups can’t be used to accurately determine success anymore.

I have thought for a long time playoff round wins are as important or more so than cups.

Like, winning a Stanley Cup is so f***ing hard. It takes two months of the toughest most merciless hockey you’ll ever play, and getting so much luck when the other team doesn’t.

A post here, a save there, a broken stick, a missed call, blown tire, whatever it is. The game is too random and shit happens when you party on ice.

People laugh at the sharks but from 2000 onward, they’ve made it out of the first round 11 times. They’ve been to five conference finals.

So they didn’t win a cup. They mattered a lot and gave their fans a lot of quality meaningful hockey that created fans for life.

They went to a final and lost.

C’est La vie.

Would that the Calgary Flames would fail their way to 16 playoff appearances and 17 playoff rounds won over the next 25 years.