Divergent paths for Bruins/Canucks

[VanJack]

The Canucks and Bruins went a marathon seven games in the Stanley Cup Final of 2011. Since then the two franchises have been on totally divergent paths.

Whereas the Bruins have totally rebuilt and re-tooled and look like they're headed back to the final this year, the Canucks have basically withered away and are locked in lottery land.

What are the reasons why the Bruins have reinvented themselves and the Canucks have stagnated? Meddling owners? Bad trades and drafting? Firing Gillis too early after only one bad season? Or all of the above?

I can't believe the owner Aquilini hasn't at least wondered why the Bruins have succeeded and the Canucks flopped?

Click to read more...

 

[geebaan]

Jim Benning

 

[Hit the post]

Jim Benning

I would argue not having Chiapet around was a more of an impact (positive) for the the Ruins.

 

[tyhee]

I figure the answer to this is simple and that all but the die-hard optimists would agree, but ...

The Bruins' improved their management despite the recent Cup win.

The Canucks hired incompetent management with a misguided policy, either dictated by the owner (most likely) or the new managers, to make the playoffs each and every year. In order to do so the Canucks focussed on players who were intended to help either immediately or within a season and made poor judgments about the value of players, resulting in a dismal record of free agent mistakes and generally poor trades.

In each case the ultimate credit or blame rests with the guys that hired the management.

 

[StreetHawk]

The Canucks and Bruins went a marathon seven games in the Stanley Cup Final of 2011. Since then the two franchises have been on totally divergent paths.

Whereas the Bruins have totally rebuilt and re-tooled and look like they're headed back to the final this year, the Canucks have basically withered away and are locked in lottery land.

What are the reasons why the Bruins have reinvented themselves and the Canucks have stagnated? Meddling owners? Bad trades and drafting? Firing Gillis too early after only one bad season? Or all of the above?

I can't believe the owner Aquilini hasn't at least wondered why the Bruins have succeeded and the Canucks flopped?

Older roster. Look at who was on each team in 2011 and look where those guys are now.

Bruins have more guys who are in the prime like Marchand, Bergeron, Kreiji.

Think realistically Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis are the only ones who will be in the nhl roster next season. Kesler on LTIR with his hip. Luongo, no clue what FLA will do. He could end up on LTIR. Schneider injury plagued for a couple of seasons. Seems like he will be the mentor to Blackwood.

Bruins drafted better. Hit in 2014&2016 and while they didn’t get the best guys in 2015 they got productive guys in DeBrusk and carlo.

Canucks were trying to maintain what they had but there was no pipeline to fuel the next wave but they refused to believe it. Made more stop gap moves. Didn’t commit to a rebuild.

Management. Aquaman hired a yes man. Can’t recall who the other candidates they interviewed back in 2014 but you wonder what those candidates were selling during their interviews vs Benning.

Sentiment. Aquaman too concerned about a couple of names on the back of the jersey rather than the crest. Compared to the rangers who committed to rebuild despite King Henrik in the roster. Did what was best for the team to contend again one day.

 

[Snatcher Demko]

The biggest difference is the Bruin's core is still (largely) the Bruin's core, while after 2012 the Canucks core declined. Management and ownership ineptitude obviously hasn't helped us.

 

[Fire Benning]

They've been able to constantly churn out younger talent to supplement their older players.

After winning the president's trophy in 2014, they drafted David Pastrnak, Danton Heinen and Ryan Donato. The next year they missed the playoffs, recognized the opportunity to move on from Lucic one year out from his contract expiring. They flipped Martin Jones who they got for Lucic to the Sharks and got Sean Kuraly and an extra first round pick in the following season, they also drafted Jake Debrusk and Brandon Carlo. After missing the playoffs again they drafted Charlie McAvoy in the first round in 2016.

That's 5 fairly significant complimentary/young core pieces added in a 3 year span in addition to elite core they already had in place from their cup win. Donato they ended up flipping for Coyle who's been a good add for them this season.

Seeing Boston and San Jose stay relevant for so long and only miss the playoffs 3 times between them over the past 11 seasons has made me come to the realization that the concept of "windows" may not be as doomsday-ish as it's portrayed if you're able to regenerate your roster every year with fresh names.

 

[thekernel]

The Sedins and Luongo were past 30 when we made that run. Sedins are literally retired now lmao

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

Boston's core players are basically the same and they just added young players + kept acquiring add ons via trading young talent like Seguin, Hamilton, etc.

 

[Hit the post]

We have Fredo Corleone running "the family" here while the Bruins are run by Emilio Barzini (Jacobs).

 

[vancityluongo]

The Sedins and Luongo were past 30 when we made that run. Sedins are literally retired now lmao

And how old were Chara and Thomas, the two best players for the Bruins? Lol.

 

[Knight53]

Look at the age of the cores.

8 years later Bergeron and Krejci are 33, and Marchand is 31. At the time having a stud goalie at age 24 behind Thomas who is 32 today in Rask

Then they draft a superstar in Pastrnak and a fantastic find in Krug to round out that still excellent core.

Our guys are either retired or broken down.

 

[vancityluongo]

I can't believe the owner Aquilini hasn't at least wondered why the Bruins have succeeded and the Canucks flopped?

I'm sure he has. In fact, I think this is probably the reason he's kept Benning around.

Jim and John have likely used the BUT GILLIS argument to tout their "drafting" abilities, pointing to the Bruins 2006-2013 drafted core of Kessel, Lucic, Marchand, Hamilton, and Seguin as reasons why the Bruins have been so good. The age gap strategy. Who did the Canucks draft over that timeframe???!!!!!????

Eventually you'd think Aquilini would figure out that Benning wasn't actually there for 2006, which was run by Jeff Gorton, and that Hamilton and Seguin only came from the Kessel trade. And that the Bruins drafting from 2007-2013 was probably the only team worse than the Canucks over that stretch. Since Benning left, they unearthed Pastrnak, Donato, Heinen, Debrusk, Carlo, and McAvoy. Still f***ing blew the three 2015 picks, but whatever.

The rest is the difference in management. Frankie should maybe ask why Don Sweeney wasn't allowed to leave but Benning was.

 

[thekernel]

And how old were Chara and Thomas, the two best players for the Bruins? Lol.

I love how you think you're being clever because you said the names of two also-old guys. Way to completely and utterly miss the point lmao

Before you confuse yourself further, I'm just going to say the names Marchand and Bergeron and leave you with that

 

[vancityluongo]

Look at the age of the cores.

8 years later Bergeron and Krejci are 33, and Marchand is 31. At the time having a stud goalie at age 24 behind Thomas who is 32 today in Rask

Then they draft a superstar in Pastrnak and a fantastic find in Krug to round out that still excellent core.

Our guys are either retired or broken down.

Lol. You don't need a max return on the Sedins or on any aging assets to build a good team 8 years after a Cup run. Our top two centers right now are 24 and 20 and are the best part of the team. Third line center could've been 23 if they kept McCann, who was acquired using our Bergeron equivalent, a now 34 year old Ryan Kesler. We had a stud young goalie too, but rightly moved him for that 24 year old first line center, and managed to get a replacement starter who was our team MVP this year using the old aging, future HHOF goalie.

We don't have a Marchand, who is a bonafide top-10 winger in the league. But Nik Ehlers could've bridged that gap a little bit compared to our best non-Boeser winger being a toss up between Josh f***ing Leivo, Tanner Pearson and Sven Baertschi. Or y'know, Matt Tkachuk...

Without even getting into the absolutely awful management of what they did have, if the Canucks draft Tkachuk and Ehlers, the consensus picks at the time, and just humor the idea that they still get Boeser and Pettersson ignoring any butterfly effect bullshit:

Tkachuk-Pettersson-Boeser
Baertschi-Horvat-Ehlers

is a top-6 that competes with the Bruins. You have a completely different team dynamic with two extra star wingers. But alas, the master drafting squad only hit on 2 of their 4 top-6 draft picks.

 

[vancityluongo]

I love how you think you're being clever because you said the names of two also-old guys. Way to completely and utterly miss the point lmao

Before you confuse yourself further, I'm just going to say the names Marchand and Bergeron and leave you with that

Bergeron is a year younger than Ryan Kesler lol, both of whom were the third best players for their teams that run. If you're comparing Toews and Kane to the Sedins, sure. But the Bruins four best players during that run (Krejci is the fourth) were cumulatively older than the Canucks four best players.

We didn't have a Marchand, but we've had eight years since 2011 to find one. 5 now since Benning started. That one player is not the difference between a team about to win a Cup and a team picking in the top-10 for the 4th straight year and 5 of the last 6.

 

[krutovsdonut]

The Canucks and Bruins went a marathon seven games in the Stanley Cup Final of 2011. Since then the two franchises have been on totally divergent paths.

Whereas the Bruins have totally rebuilt and re-tooled and look like they're headed back to the final this year, the Canucks have basically withered away and are locked in lottery land.

What are the reasons why the Bruins have reinvented themselves and the Canucks have stagnated? Meddling owners? Bad trades and drafting? Firing Gillis too early after only one bad season? Or all of the above?

I can't believe the owner Aquilini hasn't at least wondered why the Bruins have succeeded and the Canucks flopped?

uh, define "reinvent". the bruins core has outlasted the canucks core. chara, bergevin and marchand are still leading that team. who is left in the league anywhere from the canucks core of 2011 who is still an impact player? edler is the closest thing and the guy has never been a true core player or leader the way those three guys are. even hansen is retired. you might argue luongo has one more run in him but i honestly doubt it. hamhuis dressed for six playoff games this year averaging 13 minutes and change.

 

[lawrence]

Having Bergeron best 2 way player in the game, and a guy like chara, one is the best defensive dman in the game helps too. We don’t have that and nothing close, no dman of that caliber, we had Kesler but he didn’t want to stay, it’s too bad for us.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

Jim Benning

So Benning being with the Bruins after the 2011 run is the problem with our tam today? Gillis locked up an aging core, rather than trade off pieces like Burrows, Higgins, etc when he had the chance and they had value. Also Gillis having terrible drafting(aside from one pick) didn't help either. JB has not been a great GM by any means, but he was left with a steaming pile of poop when he joined. Mixed with an owner who thought the twins could still keep us in the playoffs every year, he made moves to try and make that happen. He fails at that and wasted picks, but our young core is looking strong at least.

 

[Fire Benning]

We didn't have a Marchand, but we've had eight years since 2011 to find one.

Had a primo opportunity to draft one..lol

 

[Knight53]

Lol. You don't need a max return on the Sedins or on any aging assets to build a good team 8 years after a Cup run. Our top two centers right now are 24 and 20 and are the best part of the team. Third line center could've been 23 if they kept McCann, who was acquired using our Bergeron equivalent, a now 34 year old Ryan Kesler. We had a stud young goalie too, but rightly moved him for that 24 year old first line center, and managed to get a replacement starter who was our team MVP this year using the old aging, future HHOF goalie.

We don't have a Marchand, who is a bonafide top-10 winger in the league. But Nik Ehlers could've bridged that gap a little bit compared to our best non-Boeser winger being a toss up between Josh ****ing Leivo, Tanner Pearson and Sven Baertschi. Or y'know, Matt Tkachuk...

Without even getting into the absolutely awful management of what they did have, if the Canucks draft Tkachuk and Ehlers, the consensus picks at the time, and just humor the idea that they still get Boeser and Pettersson ignoring any butterfly effect bull****:

Tkachuk-Pettersson-Boeser
Baertschi-Horvat-Ehlers

is a top-6 that competes with the Bruins. You have a completely different team dynamic with two extra star wingers. But alas, the master drafting squad only hit on 2 of their 4 top-6 draft picks.

From someone who believes Pettersson will be a top 5 player in this league, we aren't competing for the cup with him as a rookie. We will have to wait until he is a 90-100 point superstar. So probably 1-2 years.

When that happens, we're talking about a Sedin/Kesler level one-two punch down the middle with EP/Horvat and will be able to compete.

That line-up you proposed just simply isn't as good or experienced enough to be at the Bruins level yet, but it would in due time.

Lets just say the Sedins were in there early to mid 20's in 2011 like Marchand/Bergeron/Krejci were.

We're talking about 31-33 year old superstar Sedins in 2019. We'd be competing for the cup as well. Age of the cores(mainly the franchise players) is the biggest reason for where both organizations are in 2019.

 

[TruGr1t]

uh, define "reinvent". the bruins core has outlasted the canucks core. chara, bergevin and marchand are still leading that team. who is left in the league anywhere from the canucks core of 2011 who is still an impact player? edler is the closest thing and the guy has never been a true core player or leader the way those three guys are. even hansen is retired. you might argue luongo has one more run in him but i honestly doubt it. hamhuis dressed for six playoff games this year averaging 13 minutes and change.

This all comes down to correct management moves, regardless. I will continue to argue that if the Canucks had managed the situation correctly the Sedins would still be playing (they just ran the BMO marathon, I think they're fine). They would obviously not be Bergeron or Marchand, but they could be Joe Thornton. Meanwhile, Boston also obviously moved on from the right players ... for very Chara and Bergeron there is a Lucic and McQuaid. People focus on the 4-5 guys still hanging around there, but in reality the roster has turned over and is filled with younger players added through various successful drafts.

Basically, the Bruins managed everything correctly and had a few good breaks. They drafted well, traded guys at their peak, and generally optimized the roster. The Canucks have managed everything poorly and had some bad breaks. They have held onto players too long, drafted marginally, and done very poor work in free agency and trade.

At the end of the day, Boston quickly moved on from Chiarelli & Co. even though they won a Cup for them very recently. There are probably not a lot of franchises that would have the guts to do that. Certainly not our ownership.

Chiarelli was basically fired for making similar moves to what Benning is currently doing in Vancouver. Within 4 years of winning a Cup.

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

one team is owned by the chairman of the league BOG, the powerful and long-tenured commissioner's closest ally, and a self-made billionaire. The other is owned by Franceso, whose accomplishments include being the son of a slumlord and buying his own "overwatch team." On a really basic level one organization is run by a dumbass and the other isn't.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Boston's drafting has been very good during this period. They rank top ten of avg P/gp of players that have played 40 or more games that were drafted in the 2nd to 7th rounds for forwards and defencemen. They rank 3rd for forwards and defencemen taken in the first round.

 

[Hit the post]

At the end of the day, Boston quickly moved on from Chiarelli & Co. even though they won a Cup for them very recently. There are probably not a lot of franchises that would have the guts to do that.

heh, Habs *demoted* Al MacNeil after winning the Cup as a rookie head coach for them. Tough crowd.