(Photo Credit: China Wong - Getty Images)
Since 2007-2008, the Boston Bruins have been a perennial playoff participant - qualifying in 15 of 17 seasons.
In that time, they've been to 3 Stanley Cup Finals (winning once), won 3 Presidents' Trophies, and have collected the MOST regular season wins (776) in the NHL.
Now with such success, comes a target on the back - especially for an Original-6 team, that all other fanbases love to hate.
But look, please don't misinterpret the point here - which is not to say that Boston has been the most successful team since 2007-2008 - because they haven't been.
Over the same span of time, the Chicago Blackhawks, and Pittsburgh Penguins have each won 3 Stanley Cup Championships, while the L.A. Kings, and Tampa Bay Lightning (4-total SCF appearances) have each have won 2 Stanley Cups.
RATHER, it's to illustrate that the hockey world - outside of New England- is quick to identify reasons for an impending downfall of the Bruins.
For nearly two decades, Boston has had unmatched regular season success (postseason failures and reasoning for a separate blog), and yet for the better half of the last decade, their success has come as a "surprise" to many.
"The Bruins are too old"
"Boston's time is done"
"This is the Bruins last dance"
"Boston has no good prospects"
Now, to be fair - some of this commentary - in the moment - wasn't untrue.
While still highly competitive - Boston did ice some older teams, without concrete succession plans in place.
There was a time - not too long ago - where Zdeno Chara, Tuukka Rask, Patrice Bergeron, David Krejci, and others were still playing key roles on a Bruins' roster while in their 30's - or 40's, in Chara's case - and it was unclear which internal, young players/prospects, or external additions were to replace them.
In particular, following the conclusion of the 2022-2023 season, doubting Boston's immediate future was certainly understandable.
They had a LOT of turnover, with little cap space available to replace what was lost.
Specifically, the retirements of Bergeron, and Krejci alone were enough to cause skepticism in Boston's ability to remain a playoff team.
Who's going to replace them? Charlie Coyle? Pavel Zacha?
Boston's goaltending and defense was, and is still strong, they still have David Pastrnak and Brad Marchand - but would that be enough? Would they be competitive enough not to plunge in league standings, but not complete enough to remain a postseason team?
Additionally, there lacked excitement and optimism for the possibility of any young prospect to emerge and make the NHL roster.
All of these concerns were valid.
But then what happened?
They finished 7th in the NHL's overall standings, 4th in the Eastern Conference, 2nd in the Atlantic Division, and made it to Game 6 of the Eastern Conference Semi-Final, before falling to the eventual Stanley Cup Champion, Florida Panthers.
Marchand seamlessly stepped in as the franchises' 27th captain
Coyle, and Zacha had career years, offensively, temporarily replacing Bergeron and Krejci.
Pastrnak, Charlie McAvoy, and Jeremy Swayman took another step in their development as some of the league's best players at their positions
Matt Poitras, Johnny Beecher, and Mason Lohrei all made the team at the ages of 19, 22, and 22 respectively - spearheading a youth movement ON THE FLY.
Trent Frederic, Morgan Geekie, and Justin Brazeau, all 26, emerged as effective and productive middle-six forwards with increasing upside - while Andrew Peeke, also 26, and Parker Wotherspoon, 27, were welcomed in-season additions, and improvements to Boston's 3rd D pair.
THEN
In the offseason, the Bruins dramatically improved their roster by acquiring free agents Elias Lindholm, and Nikita Zadorov, among others.
SO ...
Why is it, that the Bruins - who just got SIGNIFICANTLY better after ANOTHER top-10 regular season finish - are yet again being doubted?
Get a kick out of this poll ..
Seriously , what are we even doing here?
Why are the Bruins an option?
Did Nathan, here, or other doubters even pay attention to the Bruins over the past year, and their surprisingly positive personnel developments?
Clearly not.
Let's start with his two parameters factoring into this ask.
CURRENT CORE.
This prong ALONE, should exclude Boston from being mentioned in this survey.
Pastrnak, McAvoy, and Swayman are all in their PRIMES, and ELITE players in the world at their respective positions. Marchand still has effective, and productive seasons left as the teams veteran leader, and captain. Brandon Carlo, Hampus Lindholm, Zacha, Coyle, Poitras, Lohrei, E. Lindholm, Zadorov, and potentially Fabian Lysell will all additionally make up the teams core over the next 5+ seasons.
Despite where they were just a few seasons ago, Boston is far from the older team they once were. In fact, entering the 2024-2025 season, the Bruins are projected to be the 6th YOUNGEST TEAM IN THE NHL.
Now being the 6th youngest team, in and of itself wouldn't mean as much if the team wasn't any good. BUT, Boston is ONCE AGAIN expected to be a high-end regular season team WHILE having the 6th youngest team.
How does that translate to a dull future?
If anything, it's the opposite.
Which leads us to Nathan's 2nd parameter.
PROSPECTS.
According to The Hockey Writers, Boston enters the 2024-2025 season having the worst prospect pool in the NHL - 32 out of 32.
Entering the 2023-2024 season, the Bruins were ranked 28th in the league by the same publication.
That ensuing season, the Bruins had 3 prospects make the NHL roster and were impact players - Poitras, Lohrei, and Beecher.
Lohrei snipes a highlight-reel goal in Game 1 of the ECSF
Beecher opens the scoring in Game 1 of the ECQF
Poitras does it all scoring his 3rd career-goal in his 6th NHL game
Shows how much The Hockey Writers know.
Loheri is also going to be a regular top-6 defensemen in 2024-2025, likely at times, playing top-pair minutes - and The Hockey Writers STILL have him listed as a "prospect" ...
In any event, prospect pools matter, but are overrated, and here's why.
So much can happen between the time a prospect is signed/drafted, and when they make the NHL as a regular player. IF they ever do.
Most of the time prospects either ..
Never play an NHL game
Get traded before playing an NHL game
Play some NHL games but never make it long term
Get traded, and play their career for a team(s) they weren't drafted by
It's RARE that an NHL team, even teams with the richest, and high-end prospect pools, EVER convert MULTIPLE prospects into NHL players in a given year.
Well guess what?
The Bruins, in a year where their prospect pool ranked 28th, produced THREE.
So, to put TOO much stock in prospect pools is a little bit out of touch, and misguided.
It's not that having high-end prospects isn't important, it just isn't as indicative of a teams future as prospect experts would like to think.
Furthermore - with Boston being the high-end team that they are - while simultaneously being the 6th youngest team in the league - why is there so much importance on the caliber of their prospects?
Clearly, with the youthfulness, and core talent of their current NHL roster, they have time to improve their prospect cupboard.
At the end of the day, the Bruins, like all teams, have their holes, and questions - both long term, and short term.
Can E. Lindholm be a No. 1 center on a contending team? If not, who will be Boston's No. 1 center of the future? Is he already in the system? Who will play 2nd-line RW?
But these are all questions about whether or not they can win the Stanley Cup - not about whether their future is bright, and competitive. That much isn't a question.
Improvement is always sought after, but Boston's future is still undoubtedly bright.
Comments