Why is Boston such a good organization?

[authentic]

When you have a player who isn’t afraid to lick the other team then it gives a sense of freedom that other teams lack

 

[BruinsFan37]

OP is basically saying....

"The Bruins lost a bunch of key pieces with no replacements, how are they still in first place? If my team lost players like that they'd be circling the drain for a lottery pick, but the Bruins are in first, why? why? why? This makes no sense!

 

[wintersej]

Okay. I guess it’s just a difference of opinion.

I simply don’t agree with it that “they have a great thing going”.

I understand that they have a decently good team to always be in contention. That’s a positive.

But isn’t the point to actually win?

Yeah they won in 2011, but other teams have been much more successful.

At this point it’s just a matter of opinion on what people deem as being successful. To some it’s being good enough to make the playoffs and be in contention. To others, it’s winning Stanley cups.

It boils down to what your definition of “successful” and “good” is.

They have more wins than anyone in the cap era and have always been at least a a team in contention for a playoff spot the last day of the season. Sure wish some of those wins could be rearranged to have gotten them more Cups. LA, Pens, Chicago and Tampa won more Cups. Winning more Cups is better.

But what Boston has done is probably more interesting to talk about. Those other teams drafted top cores, surrounded them with talent, won, and then cycled out of contention. The classic normal path.

Bostons ability to cycle through multiple different competitive cores over the last 15 years is certainly interesting and worth talking about. Especially as it appears they are doing it once again with only Marchand being over 30 on the current core and Poitras and Lorhei making good impressions to add to it.

 

[Fenway]

Culture.

And the media is pre-occupied with the other teams in town to really negatively effect the players which can happen with some of the other big market teams.

That indeed plays into the Bruins' favor. The Boston market has seen a seismic shift in how the teams rank in popularity. The Patriots are a clear #1 and the Red Sox are no longer #1A but #2 and the Celtics and Bruins are #3A and #3B.

Celtics fans tend to be wealthier and better educated, you can see this in how commuter trains leaving TD Garden fill up after a game, and that influences the Boston Globe and local TV news. But the Bruins fanbase may be larger and local TV ratings indicate that. Also of note the Bruins and Celtics are hosted by the same radio station and if there is a conflict the Celtics are moved to another station.

This debate has been ongoing for decades.

 

[Fenway]

They have more wins than anyone in the cap era and have always been at least a a team in contention for a playoff spot the last day of the season. Sure wish some of those wins could be rearranged to have gotten them more Cups. LA, Pens, Chicago and Tampa won more Cups. Winning more Cups is better.

But what Boston has done is probably more interesting to talk about. Those other teams drafted top cores, surrounded them with talent, won, and then cycled out of contention. The classic normal path.

Bostons ability to cycle through multiple different competitive cores over the last 15 years is certainly interesting and worth talking about. Especially as it appears they are doing it once again with only Marchand being over 30 on the current core and Poitras and Lorhei making good impressions to add to it.

They should have won at least one more Cup in the 2010s but.....

But they have NOT overpaid the core because they understand you need 19 players every night. Overpaying the core doomed Chicago and you see it today in Toronto.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Bet you they would be a hell of a lot more proud of their team if they weren’t the bridesmaid in almost all of those years.

Bet you they would be a hell of a lot less proud of their team if they were constantly missing the playoffs. Now what?

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Everyone is talking about culture, but also remember their front office is at least a little responsible for this because they made a few big bets and the biggest ones I can remember paid off. As a neutral fan, 3 in particular stand out to me (probably there are more).

1) Trading an elite Joe Thornton during his Hart year for not very much. At the time I couldn't believe how little they got in return, mgmt had Bergeron in the wings and didn't think the team would win with Jumbo as their captain / dressing room leader, in hindsight they were 100% right.

2) Trading 2nd year goaltender (fmr rookie of the year) Andrew Raycroft to Toronto for the rights to Tuukka who was at the time a 1st round pick that was off playing in Finland and hadn't seen an NHL game. Sorry Leafs fans

3) Speaking of Finland, they brought over Tim Thomas and gave him the chance to play / eventually start as a 32 year old, he was a guy who was drafted in the 9th round (217th overall) about ten years before his first NHL cup of coffee. Interestingly enough, the draft now only has 7 rounds, and just as interestingly, Thomas Vokoun, Evgeny Nobokov, and Steve Sullivan were both drafted after Tim Thomas in that same 9th round. Probably the best 9th round in NHL draft history though I haven't poked around on this.

***

But yeah, culture is a big part of the reason, but that front office had some balls and made a few calls that few. if any, would've made at the time. As for the 3 points listed above, you can make the argument the Raycroft trade wasn't unexpected (he really struggled in his second year), but re: the other two points it's hard to imagine many teams trading a superstar during his Hart year or giving a 32 year old his first ever starting gig and then watching him win 2 Vezinas, one at age 34 and another at 36. Has anything like this ever happened before? I honestly can't think of a similar situation. There are probably some other front office wins too, maybe a Bruins fan can add something to this.

Of course the front office isn't perfect (Mitch Miller, 2015 draft, etc), but imo they hit enough to still be a key reason for B's continuing to be good / have success, whatever you want to call it

Additionally as a 1B, the Bruins went all in with Savard and Chara to replace Thornton.

 

[Terrier]

Generally speaking, Boston is a nice city and a great place to play hockey, whether you play for the Bruins or Boston University or Boston College or Harvard or Northeastern(who all play within a subway ride of each other). It's a hockey-rich region where even girls high school teams are commonplace.

 

[BTO]

Okay. I guess it’s just a difference of opinion.

I simply don’t agree with it that “they have a great thing going”.

I understand that they have a decently good team to always be in contention. That’s a positive.

But isn’t the point to actually win?

Yeah they won in 2011, but other teams have been much more successful.

At this point it’s just a matter of opinion on what people deem as being successful. To some it’s being good enough to make the playoffs and be in contention. To others, it’s winning Stanley cups.

It boils down to what your definition of “successful” and “good” is.

I both agree and disagree with this. Yes, absolutely the point is to win. One Cup is good but they should have won more. I'd have been happy with two (but three would have been better). From that perspective, and I agree, they underachieved (however, winning the Cup in 2011 without their previous #1 centre was a helluva achievement in and of itself. People forget that).

But which "other" teams have been more successful? There's two or three:
Pittsburgh, TB, Chicago. LA? Two Cups in three years then fell off a cliff. Even Chicago won their three (which I would obviously have taken lol) then became irrelevant fairly quickly themselves after rewarding Toews and Kane with their contracts. So Boston has been, at worst, the 5th-most successful team post-lockout, but I'd argue more-like the 4th or even 3rd. But that could be argued. One more Cup and they'd have been first or second, alas.

 

[Ladyfan]

This is such an underrated comment. His guidance is responsible for much of our consistent success at goaltending

He even dressed as backup a few years ago.

Bob Essensa is a great goalie coach.

 

[Oneiro]

They're like the Devils post-Niedermayer.

Structured, good goaltending, not enough juice in the playoffs because, after Pasta, they don't have another gamebreaker.

 

[HuGo Sham]

as my Habs eternal rival, they get big props for building the foundation / culture of winning over the last 2 decades.
No excuses, no tanking, good trades, hitting on late 1st round and 2nd round jackpots.
They're to be commended for what they continue to build

 

[Djp]

Everyone is talking about culture, but also remember their front office is at least a little responsible for this because they made a few big bets and the biggest ones I can remember paid off. As a neutral fan, 3 in particular stand out to me (probably there are more).

1) Trading an elite Joe Thornton during his Hart year for not very much. At the time I couldn't believe how little they got in return, mgmt had Bergeron in the wings and didn't think the team would win with Jumbo as their captain / dressing room leader, in hindsight they were 100% right.

2) Trading 2nd year goaltender (fmr rookie of the year) Andrew Raycroft to Toronto for the rights to Tuukka who was at the time a 1st round pick that was off playing in Finland and hadn't seen an NHL game. Sorry Leafs fans

3) Speaking of Finland, they brought over Tim Thomas and gave him the chance to play / eventually start as a 32 year old, he was a guy who was drafted in the 9th round (217th overall) about ten years before his first NHL cup of coffee. Interestingly enough, the draft now only has 7 rounds, and just as interestingly, Thomas Vokoun, Evgeny Nobokov, and Steve Sullivan were both drafted after Tim Thomas in that same 9th round. Probably the best 9th round in NHL draft history though I haven't poked around on this.

***

But yeah, culture is a big part of the reason, but that front office had some balls and made a few calls that few. if any, would've made at the time. As for the 3 points listed above, you can make the argument the Raycroft trade wasn't unexpected (he really struggled in his second year), but re: the other two points it's hard to imagine many teams trading a superstar during his Hart year or giving a 32 year old his first ever starting gig and then watching him win 2 Vezinas, one at age 34 and another at 36. Has anything like this ever happened before? I honestly can't think of a similar situation. There are probably some other front office wins too, maybe a Bruins fan can add something to this.

Of course the front office isn't perfect (Mitch Miller, 2015 draft, etc), but imo they hit enough to still be a key reason for B's continuing to be good / have success, whatever you want to call it

thr Rask trade was 2006

then therr was the Kessel trade 2 1st that became #2 and #9

bruins drafted
2003 Bergeron
2004 Kreci
2006 Kessel ( traded)
2006 Marchand
2024 Pasternik
in 2016 they drafted McAvoy
they butchered 2025 draft picks

this year they benefited from a relatively weak starting schedule

roughly half a teams schedule are against half the teams who made the playoffs. Playoff teams play a little less facing 15 teams, while non playoff teams play a little more. Boston played only 3 playoff teams vs 5 expected value

last year they played a heavy home schedule over their first 30+ games having 20 at home which gave them early season confidence. People forgot they were the last playoff team in 2021-22 so they were forecast to be a playoff bubble team.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

1 cup in 50+ years….

Will be attacked for the comment but it is what it is. An organization doesn’t deserve a dedicated thread for being so “good” with that lack of hardware.

Lol, can see you're definitely a good is the enemy of great guy.

One of the best records in the NHL over the last 13 seasons, including
a SC titlle, 2 other apoearances, 3 Presidents Trophies and a record
wins and point totals last year. They don't deserve a thread for for being so good?

Its a miracle some people can find their way home from school or work everyday.

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Lol, can see you're definitely a good is the enemy of great guy.

One of the best records in the NHL over the last 13 seasons, including
a SC titlle, 2 other apoearances, 3 Presidents Trophies and a record
wins and point totals last year. They don't deserve a thread for for being so good?

Its a miracle some people can find their way home from school or work everyday.

No they simply don’t. Unless you want to make a thread for a handful of other teams that have simply been more successful than them in that same time frame.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

No they simply don’t. Unless you want to make a thread for a handful of other teams that have simply been more successful than them in that same time frame.

You can't be taken seriously.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

They don’t go hand in hand? How can you be a good organization while being unsuccessful at the very thing you are meant to be doing? Which is winning cups.

If it’s just creating a positive locker room and running things the right way, we could make this thread about a handful of others.

You want to tell us WTF you do in life. Are you one of the "best" in whatever you do?
Extremely doubtful you are buddy. Are you therefore unsuccessful and a loser in life?

Your entitled to your opinion but its borderline trash with your standard.

 

[daver]

Look no further than the player who wears the C on his jersey.

 

[KillerMillerTime]

thr Rask trade was 2006

then therr was the Kessel trade 2 1st that became #2 and #9

bruins drafted
2003 Bergeron
2004 Kreci
2006 Kessel ( traded)
2006 Marchand
2024 Pasternik
in 2016 they drafted McAvoy
they butchered 2025 draft picks

this year they benefited from a relatively weak starting schedule

roughly half a teams schedule are against half the teams who made the playoffs. Playoff teams play a little less facing 15 teams, while non playoff teams play a little more. Boston played only 3 playoff teams vs 5 expected value

last year they played a heavy home schedule over their first 30+ games having 20 at home which gave them early season confidence. People forgot they were the last playoff team in 2021-22 so they were forecast to be a playoff bubble team.

They didn't have Lindholm, Krejci and Zacha for the entire year in 2021-22. Those are
substantial missing pieces. Not remotely the same team as 2021-22 RS.

 

[PainForShane]

thr Rask trade was 2006

then therr was the Kessel trade 2 1st that became #2 and #9

bruins drafted
2003 Bergeron
2004 Kreci
2006 Kessel ( traded)
2006 Marchand
2024 Pasternik
in 2016 they drafted McAvoy
they butchered 2025 draft picks

this year they benefited from a relatively weak starting schedule

roughly half a teams schedule are against half the teams who made the playoffs. Playoff teams play a little less facing 15 teams, while non playoff teams play a little more. Boston played only 3 playoff teams vs 5 expected value

last year they played a heavy home schedule over their first 30+ games having 20 at home which gave them early season confidence. People forgot they were the last playoff team in 2021-22 so they were forecast to be a playoff bubble team.

Oooh I forgot about the Kessel trade. Maybe more addition by subtraction given how polarizing he is in the locker room. Even though he won three cups (though as a complementary rather than core piece, the distinction does matter).

Also just looked it up, those draft picks became Tyler Seguin and Dougie Hamilton (!!!), both traded away for what ended up being nothing as well -- Dougie was traded away for one of those 2015 1st rounders that missed, Seguin for Loui Eriksson who at the time was a good player but subsequently didn't produce on the Bs.

And re: @PatriceBergeron fan, forgot about Savard too, that guy was amazing, thx for that. Not a lot of teams can lose a point-a-game 1C due to injuries and stay good as well, if anything we should probably give this team even more credit than we already are.

Good team over there

 

[Video Nasty]

They have won 1 cup in like the last 50 years

So what?

They’ve missed the playoffs just seven times during the past half century, have been under .500 just four times, and have played in eight Cup Finals. They are constantly in the mix and have achieved this without ever really tearing a roster down.

How can any fan of the sport not admire the kind of consistency they’ve had?

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

You want to tell us WTF you do in life. Are you one of the "best" in whatever you do?
Extremely doubtful you are buddy. Are you therefore unsuccessful and a loser in life?

Your entitled to your opinion but its borderline trash with your standard.

Dude, are you okay?

Please find me where I said that the Bruins franchise is awful. I’ll help you out. You won’t be able to because I didn’t say it.

For you to jump to whatever the hell tangent you just went on shows how fragile you are mentally.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Starts with the owners and works its way down. You never realize how impactful a good owner is until they're gone. The Lakers haven't been the same since Jerry Buss died.

 

[WarriorofTime]

No they simply don’t. Unless you want to make a thread for a handful of other teams that have simply been more successful than them in that same time frame.

You are welcome to start another thread.

 

[wintersej]

last year they played a heavy home schedule over their first 30+ games having 20 at home which gave them early season confidence. People forgot they were the last playoff team in 2021-22 so they were forecast to be a playoff bubble team.

What people forgot was they were a 50 win team that added Lindholm and Krejci.