Management Sweeney addresses media: All Sweeney Talk Here

[member 96824]

1 cup in 49 years.

The 29 straight years of being in the playoffs was a joke at the end. Jacobs wouldn't let the team fall out of playoff contention because he would lose his precious playoff gate.

always makes me think of this

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

1 cup in 49 years.

The 29 straight years of being in the playoffs was a joke at the end. Jacobs wouldn't let the team fall out of playoff contention because he would lose his precious playoff gate.

So, how exactly did he do that? Considering he makes no hockey decisions.

As late as 1993 the Bruins had the 2nd best record in the league. How was it a joke at he end?

 

[lopey]

given the teams they’ve iced, the long playoff streaks they’ve had, the very solid teams of the 2007-2013 period and then rising back toward the top the last 3 years, the 1 Cup in 50 years is pretty damn dismal.

We could be the Leafs? Is that better...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

This organization needs to make multiple moves if they want to get back to true contender status. Yes, they won the president's trophy last year. That doesn't mean they should get a pass this year. Look at the roster. It's a good roster but if you match it up with the Lightning it's really a no-brainer who wins. The Bruins have not improved this team for 2021 at all and really should look into a rebuild/retool.

Like every other team in the league.

 

[BMC]

So, how exactly did he do that? Considering he makes no hockey decisions.

As late as 1993 the Bruins had the 2nd best record in the league. How was it a joke at he end?

Because everyone with at least two functioning brain cells knew the team wasn't good enough to get out of Round 1. IIRC it was one and done for several years.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

We could be the Leafs? Is that better...

Or the Rangers, or the Flyers, or the Sabres, or the Senators, or the Sharks, or the Jets, or the Canucks,,,,,

 

[BruinDust]

So, how exactly did he do that? Considering he makes no hockey decisions.

As late as 1993 the Bruins had the 2nd best record in the league. How was it a joke at he end?

Those last 3 seasons (1995, 1996 and finally 1997) were pretty bad.

Blaine Lacher as your No.1 goalie? Rick Tocchet replacing Neely as the teams top winger? The entire 1997 team except Bourque.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Because everyone with at least two functioning brain cells knew the team wasn't good enough to get out of Round 1. IIRC it was one and done for several years.

In actuality, everyone knows that every team that makes the playoffs has a chance to get out of round one and beyond.

It was the last two seasons (1995 and 1996) the Bruins were one and done. In 1995 the Bruins lost to the Devils. They had the better record and home ice. In 1996 the Bruins were a 91 point team that lost to the 92 point Panthers. I really don't recall anyone saying either of those teams had no chance to get out of the first round.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Those last 3 seasons (1995, 1996 and finally 1997) were pretty bad.

Blaine Lacher as your No.1 goalie? Rick Tocchet replacing Neely as the teams top winger? The entire 1997 team except Bourque.

This is the problem with prolonged success. Bruins fans consider their team pretty bad when they finish 6th (1995) and 8th (1996) in a 26 team league.

In 1997, sure, a bad team. But by design. Let Kasper coach even after he had lost the team. Traded Oates and Tocchet for kids (Allison and Carter), finished last, drafted Thornton, hired Burns, made the playoffs again the next season.

 

[BruinDust]

In actuality, everyone knows that every team that makes the playoffs has a chance to get out of round one and beyond.

It was the last two seasons (1995 and 1996) the Bruins were one and done. In 1995 the Bruins lost to the Devils. They had the better record and home ice. In 1996 the Bruins were a 91 point team that lost to the 92 point Panthers. I really don't recall anyone saying either of those teams had no chance to get out of the first round.

That 1995 team started out hot as Lacher looked like a ROY candidate in the early going. But as the season wore on, the luster fell off Lacher and his true colours showed (not an NHL caliber netminder). Neely got hurt late and didn't play in the playoffs. That team was pretty shallow up front past Oates and Neely, and even the back-end wasn't great with Wesley dealt before the start and Iafrate incapable of playing. That was an average team at best.

1996 they lost 4-1 to a Cinderella Panthers team. By the playoffs Neely was done, Stevens was a bust and dealt for Tocchet who replaced Neely as Oates's RWer. Lacher was in the minors by mid-season and they ended up bringing back Ranford. You could see the franchise was starting to go off the rails in 1996.

1997 the train finally went over the cliff.

 

[Sheppy]

63-37-28
74-46-88
10-13-Smith
52-68-14
21-26

48-73
79-25
33/67-75
27-86

40-41

I'm sorry but that team is still really good. Not sure why so much doom and gloom.

It's also super soft. Which continues to be an issue.

 

[Don Cherry]

It's also super soft. Which continues to be an issue.

And likely will remain one until we get a new GM. Also, don't forget that our coach loves every opportunity to ice a soft team.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

That 1995 team started out hot as Lacher looked like a ROY candidate in the early going. But as the season wore on, the luster fell off Lacher and his true colours showed (not an NHL caliber netminder). Neely got hurt late and didn't play in the playoffs. That team was pretty shallow up front past Oates and Neely, and even the back-end wasn't great with Wesley dealt before the start and Iafrate incapable of playing. That was an average team at best.

1996 they lost 4-1 to a Cinderella Panthers team. By the playoffs Neely was done, Stevens was a bust and dealt for Tocchet who replaced Neely as Oates's RWer. Lacher was in the minors by mid-season and they ended up bringing back Ranford. You could see the franchise was starting to go off the rails in 1996.

1997 the train finally went over the cliff.

Honestly, did you think the Bruins had little chance of getting out of round one either year?

That was the point. I'm a pessimist but I still felt the Bs could have beaten the Devils and Panthers going in. As it was, their best players fell on their faces in those playoffs.

 

[BruinDust]

This is the problem with prolonged success. Bruins fans consider their team pretty bad when they finish 6th (1995) and 8th (1996) in a 26 team league.

In 1997, sure, a bad team. But by design. Let Kasper coach even after he had lost the team. Traded Oates and Tocchet for kids (Allison and Carter), finished last, drafted Thornton, hired Burns, made the playoffs again the next season.

I was pretty young at the time, but it seemed clear to me that the thing first started going off the rails after the 1993 sweep by Buffalo.

That summer they dealt Moog for Casey, and Casey only lasted a year. Kvartanlonov ended up a one-year wonder.

Juneau for Iafrate at the 1994 deadline.

Wesley gone for picks (although that was excellent value for him)

Going into the 1995 season counting on journeyman Riendeau, a college free agent in Lacker, and a 18 year old rookie Ryabhckov as your goaltenders cause they let Casey walk.

The failed Smolinski/Murray for Stevens/McEachern deal. Stevens didn't last a year, and McEachern was dealt for the great Trent McCleary a year later.

Unable to convince the Oilers to trade them Joseph (who was holding out), ended up settling on the declining Ranford, and he only lasted 14 months.

Just mistake after mistake. Errors in judgement. Bad decisions. They got a small boost when they hired Burns, who was the type of coach that could elevate a team in the short term with his defensive structure, but always wore out his welcome by year 3 or 4. They actually had a decent core of young players in the late 90s but decided to go to war with every decent player who needed a new contract and training camp hold-outs basically became an annual event.

 

[BruinDust]

Honestly, did you think the Bruins had little chance of getting out of round one either year?

That was the point. I'm a pessimist but I still felt the Bs could have beaten the Devils and Panthers going in. As it was, their best players fell on their faces in those playoffs.

No, those Bruins teams weren't good. Their overall record masked two extremely flawed teams. Shallow teams lacking both talent high in the line-up and depth at the bottom. JAGs all over the place, a Sinden staple by then. It was basically Oates and Bourque keeping the ship afloat.

 

[Oates2Neely]

1 cup in 49 years.

The 29 straight years of being in the playoffs was a joke at the end. Jacobs wouldn't let the team fall out of playoff contention because he would lose his precious playoff gate.

The majority of teams who’ve won multiple Cups since the 80’s had generational players leading them (with some exceptions of course).

Most recent example being Crosby/ Malkin. Toews/ Kane while excellent players aren’t exactly generational, but they were top draft picks. The Bruins will have to completely tank to draft that high.

The last generational player the Bruins have had was Ray Bourque.

 

[Fenian24]

We could be the Leafs? Is that better...

That statement validates everything wrong with Jacobs and the Bruins, Leafs are a pure for profit team who had a lunatic owner in Ballard then a conglomerate. Have had a parade of bad GM's over the years and Dubas is just as bad as some of them.

Bruins won two Cups in the early 70's because they found the second coming in Parry Sound and Esposito bitched his way out of Chicago. 2011 was with outside manager who was very good his first few years and then either had the rug pulled out from under him or more likely as shown by his results in Edmonton needs good assistant GM's to evaluate and push him (yes I know Sweeney was one of them).

Since 1974, the beginning of the Jacobs regime the 4 GM's they have had , three of them failed as badly as the Leafs. Sinden never won a thing, lots of Adams division titles and 5 trips to the finals with no wins. O'Connell may go down as one of the worst GM's in hockey history and even in the "old boys network" of NHL GM's he has never been given an NHL job coaching or GM job again. Sweeney is on the MOC path, once he gets done in Boston I doubt anyone will ever hire him again. Hopefully this is Sweeney's last season here and we can find out.

 

[maxl7]

And likely will remain one until we get a new GM. Also, don't forget that our coach loves every opportunity to ice a soft team.

Then why has Chris Wagner been a staple in the lineup?

 

[member 96824]

We could be the Leafs? Is that better...

1 cup in 49 years vs. 1 cup in 53 years

I mean...

 

[KnightofBoston]

1 cup in 49 years vs. 1 cup in 53 years

I mean...

eh, that's a misleading way to put it

they have one cup in the last 53 years, we have two in the last 48.... and two finals appearances

 

[lopey]

1 cup in 49 years vs. 1 cup in 53 years

I mean...

Not just cups , been to 3 finals and won one. Playoff success as well. I know we all want the cup every year, but lets be realistic, it doesn't work that way. Patriots are the exception to the rule in sports IMO

 

[Fenian24]

eh, that's a misleading way to put it

they have one cup in the last 53 years, we have two in the last 48.... and two finals appearances

6 final appearances 77-78-88-90-11-19, lost all of them but 1

 

[Fenian24]

Not just cups , been to 3 finals and won one. Playoff success as well. I know we all want the cup every year, but lets be realistic, it doesn't work that way. Patriots are the exception to the rule in sports IMO

Since 1995 New Jersey 3 Cups, LA 2, Tampa 2, Chicago 3, Pittsburgh 3, Detroit 4. Seems like other teams do ok with multiple Cups.

Of course they have better management and ownership.

 

[lopey]

6 final appearances 77-78-88-90-11-19, lost all of them but 1

That's not success? Lost to a dynasty in MTL and Edmonton. I will give you the Blues. Hate that we lost to them...

 

[Fenian24]

That's not success? Lost to a dynasty in MTL and Edmonton. I will give you the Blues. Hate that we lost to them...

Habs and 88 Oilers I will give you, the 77-78 Bruins were probably the second best team in the world but why wasn't a move made to put them over the top, you went six games with Montreal in 78, 7 in 79 Semi's. where were the added player or two to put them over? 88 Oilers were a machine 90 Oilers had lost Gretzky and Petr f****** Klima was the difference in the series with Bruins castoff Ranford, winnable series. Granted it was a miracle any team with Milbury as coach did anything but I digress.

Blues is the one I hate as well, tougher team, better coach they win in 5. Last hurrah for this core.