Why did the Bruins fall apart in 2005-2006?

Trap Jesus

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
28,686
13,456
Young goalies more than disappointing, complete flops on the Zhamnov and Isbister signings, Leetch on his last legs too as a UFA signing, Murray being not as well suited for the new NHL, and then of course mainstays like Thornton and Samsonov being dealt, who weren't their usual selves. Bergeron, Boyes and eventually Sturm were the only good parts of that team, and who didn't fall short of expectations. It says something where the second best player that year (Boyes) wasn't even supposed to have a roster spot going into the year. Going into that year Boston had an argument as the 2nd best team in the league on paper behind Ottawa, but the lockout made things SO unpredictable.
 

KlausJopling

Registered User
Feb 17, 2003
6,121
3,019
CT
Visit site
i try to forget those years.
wasnt it because we didnt resign guys because of the lockout??
not sure.

Yes, Bruins knew the lockout and a salary cap were coming. As a result they decided to go for it in 03-04 (trading for Gonchar and Nylander were pretty big additions), didnt resign either of them and also let useful players like Rolston and Knuble go. Believing that with a salary cap a lot of teams would need to give away players, then the roll back on salaries happened and teams didnt need to trade anyone. The Bruins then signed guys that were on the wrong side of there careers and the year away from the NHL pretty much ended them (Zhamnov, Leetch, McEachern), or guys that couldnt play in the league after the rules changes (Scatchard).

That was the party line atleast, it could have been as simple as they knew a lockout was coming and wanted as little players under contract as possible (why pay even small signing bonuses if as Jacobs you know there is going to be no NHL that season).
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigGoalBrad and BMC

BigGoalBrad

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
9,908
2,684
Defense was garbo

The " in their prime" core leaders of the team ( Thornton, Raycroft, Boynton, Samsonav ) were hurt or traded or both.

Goaltending was atrocious

Yup.

Not sure the D should have been 'that' bad.

HOFer Brian Leetch was on the back 9 but more in the tank than Coffey.

Boynton in his prime and was very good last season before the lockout.

Brad Stuart had been a 1st pairing guy at time of the trade. Also in his prime.

Andrew Alberts was a good player

Dallman and Sleghr had skill.

And Tanabe.
 

McGarnagle

Yes.
Aug 5, 2017
28,435
37,670
Jacobs, MOC, and Sinden made a plan to go into the lockout with as few contracts on the books as possible because they assumed that with the salary cap, they'd have their pick of the litter on the FA market while other teams got crunched. They got caught with their pants down when the NHLPA agreed to a 24% salary rollback. Which means not only did other teams have more money to play with, but the Bruins absolutely missed their chance to extend guys like Rolston, Knuble, Nylander, Gonchar, etc. at 3/4 market value. Not to mention Thornton, who they still had to re-up as an RFA.

Then when it came to the market, they spent all their time courting Mike Modano, who strung them along for a while before deciding to go back to Dallas. At that point the best center left was Zhamnov. Leetch honestly wasn't as bad as he's made out to be. Certainly not his prime self, but he wasn't Paul Coffey in 2000 bad or anything. The rest of the defense around him just blew. MOC then filled out the rest of the roster with another miscalculation trying to recreate the 2002-2004 Bruins by getting heavier guys like Isbister, Scatchard, Lacouture instead of adapting to the new NHL.

The icing on the cake is that the locker room was just toxic. Joe Thornton and his clique around him were not showing great leadership and Mike Sullivan was not putting them in their place. The only guy who stood up to them and tried to hold them accountable was Dave Scatchard, and they got him traded. All of this reached a breaking point where they had to do something, and they made the Thornton trade.

Afterwards, the limitations of the roster that remained was complicated by Zhamnov breaking his ankle, which left the team without a #2 center. They were pretty much resigned to become sellers and tank at that point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KlausJopling

PB37

Mr Selke
Oct 1, 2002
25,297
19,299
Maine
Yup.

Not sure the D should have been 'that' bad.

HOFer Brian Leetch was on the back 9 but more in the tank than Coffey.

Boynton in his prime and was very good last season before the lockout.

Brad Stuart had been a 1st pairing guy at time of the trade. Also in his prime.

Andrew Alberts was a good player

Dallman and Sleghr had skill.

And Tanabe.

It was a pile of junk. No legit number one guy to lead the way. Leetch wasn't that guy anymore and Stuart, while flashing signs that he could be, simply wasn't. Boynton was injured, his struggles with diabetes, and the Inmates Running the Asylum incident derailed his season.

Alberts - spare 7/8th dman Jag.
Dallman and Sleghr - One was not good enough for the NHL and the other was wrapping up his NHL career.
Tanabe - All skates, no brains

Stuart -- XXXXX
XXXX -- Boynton
Gill -- Leetch

For that defense to be acceptable, it needed a clear number one guy and 2nd pairing guy with Boynton. Even then, Boynton was not good in the 05 season and only played 50 games, so another 2nd pairing guy would have been needed. But they had none of that, rolled out crap, and got crap results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McGarnagle

dafoomie

Registered User
Jul 22, 2005
14,772
1,500
Boston
The Bruins had (I think) 3 guys under contract coming out of the lockout and were considered so toxic that top tier free agents like Forsberg and Modano took less money to go somewhere else.

They also misread the shift to speed/skill and brought in guys like Scatchard and Isbister who couldn't adapt.
 

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
68,593
98,285
Cambridge, MA
Amazing how JJ got caught with his pants down, considering he was the leading force behind the lockout in the first place....

Papa Jacobs THOUGHT Harry had a foolproof plan and MOC rubber-stamped it

Charlie convinced Papa that Harry had to be retired and Chia as an outsider was brought in.

Chia bet the farm on the 2014 team to win a second Cup and they should have but they underestimated Poutineville yet again

I was the camera op for this and 6 years later I still want to :cry:

 
  • Like
Reactions: BMC

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->