Management Harry Sinden speaks..............

[McGarnagle]

The fact that Harry is allowed in the building after wasting two HoF players careers is unforgivable.

While Pissburgh went out and added Francis to their roster
Harry brought in Moe Lemay and Mats Naslund on the cheap.

The guy is a carny sideshow fleecing money maker for multi millionaires.

If the Bruins players don't go out and choke in the finals in 1990, is his legacy different?

As for Pittsburgh getting Francis, that was pure corruption from Ed Johnston who went from Pittsburgh to Hartford, traded the Penguins the Whalers' two best players, got fired and went right back to Pittsburgh. I believe Baldwin hired him in Hartford, sold the Whalers, went to SJ for a minute, then went to Pittsburgh as a minority owner where they brought Johnston back. It wasn't an open competition for Francis, it was fixed from the start.

 

[Number8]

Montreal will indeed have a reality check vs LV. Montreal did play surprisingly physical, especially their defence.

Putting that aside, Montreal was neither going to beat Toronto nor the Jets so say the critics.
On the poll here on HF however I took the Habs to beat the Leafs in 6.
Montreal tweaked here and there and grabbed a guy like Cory Perry and put him on the fourth line. Instantly that line has become an important aspect to their success so far.

Meanwhile with our lines 3-4 it was a rotation of AHLers playing with guys like Coyle who needs quality guys around him.

We are a far cry from what we had in 2011 when Therrien rolled 4 lines throughout a game.
Bruce was benching the 4th line or the 3rd and juggling the other two.

Oh I agree. There are lessons to be learned and we can even learn from the dirty Habs. I agree they have a more rounded 4 lines than we do. Amazing to think that, but they do.

I was just commenting on the fact that the North was the North. Les Habs have a long road ahead. Which makes me a happy.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You realize Sinden left the Bruins originally after the 1970 Cup in a contract dispute right? Sinden is a hypocritical, lying cheapskate who made himself and JJ rich at the cost of championships. He and Monty Burns should be held in nothing but contempt by Bruins fans.

Please explain how they got rich by not winning championships?

When you win championships in Boston one can raise the prices on everything from tickets to trinkets. And fans will still buy it and beg for more.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You witnessed his cheapness first hand and you still stand up for him? On top of being a massive player in multiple work stoppages. Jacobs sucks. Payroll confirmed.

Work stoppages were necessary for the survival of the league.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

If the Bruins players don't go out and choke in the finals in 1990, is his legacy different?

As for Pittsburgh getting Francis, that was pure corruption from Ed Johnston who went from Pittsburgh to Hartford, traded the Penguins the Whalers' two best players, got fired and went right back to Pittsburgh. I believe Baldwin hired him in Hartford, sold the Whalers, went to SJ for a minute, then went to Pittsburgh as a minority owner where they brought Johnston back. It wasn't an open competition for Francis, it was fixed from the start.

Like I've said before, I love a good conspiracy theory.

 

[Fenian24]

Please explain how they got rich by not winning championships?

When you win championships in Boston one can raise the prices on everything from tickets to trinkets. And fans will still buy it and beg for more.

You don't add needed players players always being "just short" of winning a championship. If you don't pay for a second line RW behind Neely but make the finals and save millions on payroll you make more money which has always been Monty Burns and Harry's real goal. Winning cups never was because if it was Sinden never would have lasted 27 years as GM without winning 1 cup. However if the only goal was to maximize profits JJ Harry was genius.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You don't add needed players players always being "just short" of winning a championship. If you don't pay for a second line RW behind Neely but make the finals and save millions on payroll you make more money which has always been Monty Burns and Harry's real goal. Winning cups never was because if it was Sinden never would have lasted 27 years as GM without winning 1 cup. However if the only goal was to maximize profits JJ Harry was genius.

So what you seem to be saying is Sinden was such a great GM that he could have easily won multiple cups but he'd rather save payroll money.

That's ridiculous.

In 1990-1991, Wayne Gretzky was making $3 million, Lemieux was making $2 mil. No one else was close, so no one was saving millions by not having a better second line RW. Certainly nowhere near the money the team could make as the Stanley Cup champions.

Neely himself was making $750,000, 10th in league in salary. Bourque was 5th making $1.1 mil. Boston was the only team other than Pittsburgh that had 2 players in the top 10 salaries.

 

[Fenian24]

So what you seem to be saying is Sinden was such a great GM that he could have easily won multiple cups but he'd rather save payroll money.

That ridiculous.

In 1990-1991, Wayne Gretzky was making $3 million, Lemieux was making $2 mil. No one else was close, so no one was saving millions by not having a better second line RW. Certainly nowhere near the money the team could make as the Stanley Cup champions.

Neely himself was making $750,000, 10th in league in salary. Bourque was 5th making $1.1 mil. Boston was the only team other than Pittsburgh that had 2 players in the top 10 salaries.

Yeah, this is pointless. The Bruins under Harry were cheap and not built to win but "compete".

You support Harry and Dr. Evil, I have a different opinion and i was enabling those bastards because I had season tickets then.

 

[Saxon Eric]

It's Harry's fault Wesley missed the net

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yeah, this is pointless. The Bruins under Harry were cheap and not built to win but "compete".

You support Harry and Dr. Evil, I have a different opinion and i was enabling those bastards because I had season tickets then.

I understand.

Facts are pointless.

 

[Saxon Eric]

A trip down memory lane
Win Cup 1972 4-2
Lose Cup 1974 with Bobby Orr 4-2
Lose in what was Conference Finals 1976 4-1
Lose Cup Finals 1977 4-0
Lose Cup Finals 1978 4-2
1979.... too many men on the ice
1980 lose to Islanders who were just starting their dynasty of 4 straight Cups
1981 humiliated by the Minnesota North Stars 3-0 the end of the Big Bad Bruins
1983 we're back baby! But lose to NYI in Conference Finals 4-2
1984-1987 Dark days that won't be written about here
1988 Vengeance! Redemption! But ultimately just happy to be there and lose to Edmonton in a completely one sided Cup final 4-0
1990 Harry goes all in but Wesley misses the net and Moog shit's his pants it's another one-sided Cup loss to Edmonton 4-1
1991 beginning of the Pittsburgh dynasty lose in Conference Finals 4-2
1992 unfortunately it's Pittsburgh again this time it's 4-0
1993 4th line scrub blows by Ray Bourque and it's May Day! May Day!
1994-1996 team in decline, Harry in decline
1997 the inevitable happens, Bruins fail to make playoffs, imo Harry's last great trade at the deadline gives us hope
1998 well built team gets screwed vs Washington
Harry starts to fade into the distance....

 

[BruinDust]

Harry wins a cup in 1991 if it wasn't for Ulf Samuelsson. You'll never convince me otherwise. Cam Neely was on another level in the playoffs that year.

 

[BruinDust]

Also keep in mind Harry's team ran into 4 consecutive dynasty-level teams from 1977 to 1992. They were eliminated by the Habs in 77, 78 and 1979. The Islanders in 80 and 83. Oilers in 88 and 90, followed by Pittsburgh in 91 and 92.

So that's 9 times in 16 years they were eliminated by a dynastic Stanley Cup champion. Some of Harry's problem was bad timing and a stretch in the NHL where just 6 franchises won cups over a 20 year period and only one team (Calgary) won less than two cups in that time period.

And by the time that stretch ended in 1993-94, the Bruins franchise was in decline.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

A trip down memory lane
Win Cup 1972 4-2
Lose Cup 1974 with Bobby Orr 4-2
Lose in what was Conference Finals 1976 4-1
Lose Cup Finals 1977 4-0
Lose Cup Finals 1978 4-2
1979.... too many men on the ice
1980 lose to Islanders who were just starting their dynasty of 4 straight Cups
1981 humiliated by the Minnesota North Stars 3-0 the end of the Big Bad Bruins
1983 we're back baby! But lose to NYI in Conference Finals 4-2
1984-1987 Dark days that won't be written about here
1988 Vengeance! Redemption! But ultimately just happy to be there and lose to Edmonton in a completely one sided Cup final 4-0
1990 Harry goes all in but Wesley misses the net and Moog shit's his pants it's another one-sided Cup loss to Edmonton 4-1
1991 beginning of the Pittsburgh dynasty lose in Conference Finals 4-2
1992 unfortunately it's Pittsburgh again this time it's 4-0
1993 4th line scrub blows by Ray Bourque and it's May Day! May Day!
1994-1996 team in decline, Harry in decline
1997 the inevitable happens, Bruins fail to make playoffs, imo Harry's last great trade at the deadline gives us hope
1998 well built team gets screwed vs Washington
Harry starts to fade into the distance....

Also

1970 win Cup
1971 best Bruins team ever loses to Montreal in first round

Dark days of 1984-87, Bruins made the playoffs all 4 seasons (not too spoiled, eh?)

1997 may have been one of Harry's finest hours. Normally would have fired the coach (Steve Kasper) by New Year but stayed with him and as mentioned made a great deadline trade for young guys (Allison & Carter) while giving up Oates and Tocchet. It was subtle tanking to get the top pick, Joe Thornton. Also drafted Samsonov. Traded for Defoe in the off season, hired Pat Burns as coach. Allison was their best player in 1998 and, as mentioned, right back in the playoffs, to be screwed vs. Washington.

 

[Fenian24]

Harry wins a cup in 1991 if it wasn't for Ulf Samuelsson. You'll never convince me otherwise. Cam Neely was on another level in the playoffs that year.

91 falls squarely on Milbury, nobody else.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

91 falls squarely on Milbury, nobody else.

Really?

Based on what?

 

[BruinDust]

91 falls squarely on Milbury, nobody else.

In all honesty I was too young at the time to know anything about Milbury as coach or what part he played in losing that year.

All I know is Cam Neely got hurt in Game 3 with a 2-0 series lead and had he not been hurt, he would of shattered the all-time goal record in a single playoff (the record is 19 and he already had 16 when they got eliminated). I think a healthy Neely they win that series and smoke the upstart North Stars.

 

[bp13]

It's Harry's fault Wesley missed the net

Yeah because that was Game 7 OT.

 

[Fenian24]

Also

1970 win Cup
1971 best Bruins team ever loses to Montreal in first round

Dark days of 1984-87, Bruins made the playoffs all 4 seasons (not too spoiled, eh?)

1997 may have been one of Harry's finest hours. Normally would have fired the coach (Steve Kasper) by New Year but stayed with him and as mentioned made a great deadline trade for young guys (Allison & Carter) while giving up Oates and Tocchet. It was subtle tanking to get the top pick, Joe Thornton. Also drafted Samsonov. Traded for Defoe in the off season, hired Pat Burns as coach. Allison was their best player in 1998 and, as mentioned, right back in the playoffs, to be screwed vs. Washington.

Then refused to pay Allison, Jim Carey was also part of that deal don't forget, Kasper is probably the worst coach in Bruins history and a stain that will never be removed from this franchise.

Happy Harry was also just the coach in 1970, the team was built by Schmidt and Harry, (in the ultimate bit of irony) left in a contract dispute and had nothing to do with the 71 or 72 teams, from 84 to 87 played a total of 15 playoff games losing each year in the first round, so what is your standard of success and "being spoiled" based on, the 76 Capitals?

Sinden never won a Cup in Boston as GM....but facts mean nothing I guess.

 

[Fenian24]

Really?

Based on what?

You love Milbury too right?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Then refused to pay Allison, Jim Carey was also part of that deal don't forget, Kasper is probably the worst coach in Bruins history and a stain that will never be removed from this franchise.

Happy Harry was also just the coach in 1970, the team was built by Schmidt and Harry, (in the ultimate bit of irony) left in a contract dispute and had nothing to do with the 71 or 72 teams, from 84 to 87 played a total of 15 playoff games losing each year in the first round, so what is your standard of success and "being spoiled" based on, the 76 Capitals?

Sinden never won a Cup in Boston as GM....but facts mean nothing I guess.

84-87 was described as dark days. The vast majority of hockey fans don't consider having playoff teams four years in a row "dark days".

No one claimed Sinden won a Cup as GM, did they?

Also correct, Harry was "just the coach" when they won the first Cup. Duh.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You love Milbury too right?

Excellent answer.

 

[Fenian24]

84-87 was described as dark days. The vast majority of hockey fans don't consider having playoff teams four years in a row "dark days".

No one claimed Sinden won a Cup as GM, did they?

Also correct, Harry was "just the coach" when they won the first Cup. Duh.

21 teams in the league from 84-87, 16 made the playoffs. I can see where you would consider this a success as you think Harry and Milbury are successful in managing hockey teams. Your bar for what you deem success is pretty low, but hey.....JJ is rich so there is always that..

 

[BigGoalBrad]

I understand.

Facts are pointless.

Sinden and Jacobs gas lit Boston fans into accepting being the Oakland A's of the NHL for decades.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

21 teams in the league from 84-87, 16 made the playoffs. I can see where you would consider this a success as you think Harry and Milbury are successful in managing hockey teams. Your bar for what you deem success is pretty low, but hey.....JJ is rich so there is always that..

Nowhere did I say they were a success. I used "not Dark Days". You keep claiming I called them successful.

Doesn't matter that 16 teams made the playoffs. All 4 of those Bruins teams were over .500. So they were middle of the pack at worst. Hence, not Dark Days.