NY POST (Larry Brooks) - Boston Bruins’ snub of all-time great is ridiculous

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
69,347
101,305
Cambridge, MA
Brooksie isn't wrong


Slap Shots.
Exposing one injustice at a time.

Boston Bruins' snub of Frank Brimsek is ridiculous

One and only one of the Original Six has not retired No. 1, and that team is the Bruins, who apparently are laboring under the misapprehension that Mr. Zero, Frank Brimsek, wore 0 on his uniform.

The snub makes no sense. Brimsek, a Hall of Famer, was the preeminent goaltender of his time — winning the Stanley Cup twice in 1939 and 1941, named to the first- or-second All-Star team in each of his first eight seasons of his career, and winning the Calder Trophy and two Vezina Trophies while finishing in the top five of Hart Trophy voting three times.

It does not line up. The Bruins aren’t one of those franchises to ignore anything that happened in the NHL’s formative, pre-World War II days. They have retired the No. 2 for Eddie Shore (1926-40), No. 3 for Lionel Hitchman (1925-34) and No. 5 for Dit Clapper (1927-47).

Brimsek, born in Eveleth, Minn., was the first American goaltender to be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame. He was among the inaugural class of players inducted into the U.S. HHOF. So what gives?

A trusty well-informed observer in Boston reports that upon returning to the B’s following his service for the Coast Guard in WW II, Brimsek had personal issues and repeatedly clashed with management before he was sent to Chicago for his final season in 1949-50, so he could be closer to home.

Art Ross, yes, Mr. Trophy himself, was GM for three decades into the mid-1950s and oversaw the number retirements of the three vintage Bruins. But not Brimsek. When the goaltender’s longtime teammate, the beloved Milt Schmidt, served as GM for the five seasons that included the 1970 and 1972 Cup championships, he did nothing to rectify the wrong.

It is time for current club president Cam Neely, steeped in the tradition of his franchise, to make matters right and put No. 1 up in the rafters in Boston.
 
Last edited:

incidental otter

Registered Spraint
May 27, 2015
197
229
I want to know who gave him the idea

The "trusty well-informed Boston source" may have simply read Brimsek's HoF story.

I agree with Brooks that the number ought to be retired, and would love to ask Milt Schmidt about the seeming snub.

Also, "fans unhappy with star goalie after family issue" is a bit of a recurring theme for this franchise, it seems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The National

Jdavidev

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
1,946
1,569
Los Angeles, CA
Oh please, no more retiring player numbers. Actually, unretire them all. We've got 4 to 5 from this generation to add the the group. Pretty soon, there won't be enough numbers left.

Put their name and numbers in the rafters, take that number out of circulation for a few years, but let the next generation take it up again. Who's Lionel Hitchman? I don't know. But you know what, if the Bruins allowed someone to wear #3, they could talk about him and I might know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oates2Neely

Shroud of Orrin

Come on, Bob
Apr 29, 2020
943
1,397
Haligonia
Assuming whatever Mr. Zero did to earn the snub wasn't heinous, it's likely time to turn that page and do the right thing. He served his team incredibly well, won it all, was highly decorated by the league and served his country. Too bad this wasn't done a few years ago before he passed.

Its also time for Larry to do the right thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dueling Banjos

Tampbear

Registered User
Apr 10, 2015
1,662
389
Tampa
Going forward, what determines if a number should be retired? Eventually we will run out of numbers if we retire every great player that spends a long time here although that is a long time off. Bergeron seems like a lock, but what about Chara, Marchand, and Krejci? For the record I think 1 should definitely be retired and his accomplishments acknowledged, but going forward it is hard to see who should or shouldn't be.
 

BMC

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2003
70,315
61,219
The Quiet Corner
The best goalie in Bruins history and still one of the best American players of all time should have his number retired.

Meanwhile, O'Reilly and Middleton are up there- it makes retiring numbers a joke.

O'Reilly and Middleton were great Bruins even if not considered great NHLers so in a way I can understand retiring their numbers.

IMO it's a no brainer if the player is in the HHOF, it should be automatic .
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,795
18,355
Connecticut
O'Reilly and Middleton were great Bruins even if not considered great NHLers so in a way I can understand retiring their numbers.

IMO it's a no brainer if the player is in the HHOF, it should be automatic .

Middleton was a great NHLer also.

Played for Canada in two Canada Cup tournaments.
 

RoccoF14

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 1, 2016
5,712
8,581
Chicago, IL
I don't want this to become a huge debate on who deserves to have their number in the rafters and who doesn't. I'll just say this:

Given the resume of some of the other players who have their numbers retired, Frank Brimsek most definitely deserves to be there.

I LOVED Terry O'Reilly and Cam Neely as players. In fact O'Reilly is one of my all-time favorite Bruins. That said, I don't think either of them should have had their numbers retired. I'm fine with the fact that they are, but once you set the bar at that level its hard to justify others not making it as well and pretty soon you start diluting the honor........aka Montreal.
 

BMC

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2003
70,315
61,219
The Quiet Corner
I don't want this to become a huge debate on who deserves to have their number in the rafters and who doesn't. I'll just say this:

Given the resume of some of the other players who have their numbers retired, Frank Brimsek most definitely deserves to be there.

I LOVED Terry O'Reilly and Cam Neely as players. In fact O'Reilly is one of my all-time favorite Bruins. That said, I don't think either of them should have had their numbers retired. I'm fine with the fact that they are, but once you set the bar at that level its hard to justify others not making it as well and pretty soon you start diluting the honor........aka Montreal.

This ^ :nod:
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,836
18,827
Las Vegas
Simply put, Brimsek is one of the most decorated Bruins in history, so no retiring his number isnt "watering it down". The fact that both he and Tiny Thompson aren't retired is a joke.

Brimsek:

2x Vezina
2x Cup
ROY
2,3,5 Hart finishes
2x AS-1
6x AS-2
GAA Top 10: 1,1,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,6

And on top of all that the man spent 2 years fighting in WW2 mid career
 

jgatie

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 22, 2011
11,499
12,166
Retiring goalie numbers is tough, especially back in the day. Why? Ask any goalie who played youth hockey in the 50's, 60's, 70's or 80's. Back then, you didn't buy new jerseys every year, you used the same ones. And the oversized jersey worn by the 2 goalies only came in 2 numbers, #1 or #30. So every goalie up until the 90's or so wore #1 or #30 their whole amateur career, and if you retire #1 or #30, you are taking the number(s) that multiple generations of superstitious, whackadoodle goaltenders grew up wearing. As if goalies weren't in the upper echelon of weirdos to begin with, now you are going to make them them wear a different number? No coach/GM/owner wants to deal with that.
 

Therick67

Registered User
Apr 6, 2009
12,665
7,350
South of Boston
This team should have its own HOF. Too bad JJ couldn’t have found some space when he was building his hotel/supermarket/movie theater.

it should also have a ring of honor or something like that.

It’s not the first time they’ve screwed up honoring it’s great players...
 
  • Like
Reactions: inactive user

missingchicklet

Registered User
Jan 24, 2010
36,589
34,464
Simply put, Brimsek is one of the most decorated Bruins in history, so no retiring his number isnt "watering it down". The fact that both he and Tiny Thompson aren't retired is a joke.

Brimsek:

2x Vezina
2x Cup
ROY
2,3,5 Hart finishes
2x AS-1
6x AS-2
GAA Top 10: 1,1,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,6

And on top of all that the man spent 2 years fighting in WW2 mid career
Agree about both. Thompson was ridiculous. Held the goalie wins record for the Bs up until Rask topped it. 252 wins for Tiny in only 10 full seasons with the Bs, and shorter ones at that. 4 Vezinas in those 10 seasons, and a Cup. His GAA was plain sick -- 1.99 (Brimsek's was 2.57 for reference).

The Bs sure had a heck of great goalie situation with Thompson for 10 full seasons, followed by Brimsek for the next 9.
 

Bruins4Lifer

Registered User
Jun 28, 2006
8,759
731
Regina, SK
Retiring goalie numbers is tough, especially back in the day. Why? Ask any goalie who played youth hockey in the 50's, 60's, 70's or 80's. Back then, you didn't buy new jerseys every year, you used the same ones. And the oversized jersey worn by the 2 goalies only came in 2 numbers, #1 or #30. So every goalie up until the 90's or so wore #1 or #30 their whole amateur career, and if you retire #1 or #30, you are taking the number(s) that multiple generations of superstitious, whackadoodle goaltenders grew up wearing. As if goalies weren't in the upper echelon of weirdos to begin with, now you are going to make them them wear a different number? No coach/GM/owner wants to deal with that.
Good points here. Seems to be the most likely reason they haven't retired a goalie number yet.

If you retire #1 for Brimsek, you need to include Thompson with him as well. And do you consider doing #30 as well for Cheevers? with Thomas?

There's a lot of potential jerseys to go up there, on top of #37, #33 and #63 that will be up there too in the next decade.
 
Last edited:

Lobster57

Registered User
Nov 22, 2006
7,815
6,099
Victoria, BC
I don't see why you can't hang a jersey from the rafters but still allow it to be used.

just make sure the next guy to wear it understands what it means and that it's an honour he needs to live up to every time he puts it on
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad