The 10 Worst Bruins Trades Since 1972
With the Bruins having won their first Stanley Cup since 1972, I thought it might be worthwhile to take a look at how we got here. This will be a two part series: first, the 10 worst trades in Bruin history since 1972.
I'll give you one guess as to what part 2 of the series will be.
(Dis)honorable mention:
These are trades that didn't make the cut, but are frequently mentioned in the "worst trades" conversation, so at a minimum, I owe you, dear reader, an explanation for why these two big deals missed the top 10:
Glen Murray and Bryan Smolinski for Kevin Stevens and Shawn McEachern.
The Bruins got great value in this deal...just not in the way they thought they did. They thought the value was in Stevens, when in fact Stevens was already washed up, but no one outside Pittsburgh knew it. A combination of drugs and rough and tumble play on the ice (most notably having his face shattered after a hit on Rich Pilon) led to Stevens best years being long behind him. However, McEachern was a real find, and on his own, combined with the fact that Murray only became a real NHL sniper after he returned to Boston later in his career, would have made this deal almost acceptable.
I know what you're saying. "But Phunwin, McEachern only played one year in Boston!" Trust me, we're coming to that.
Adam Oates, Rick Tocchet and Bill Ranford for Jim Carey, Jason Allison, Anson Carter and a 3rd round pick.
I will defend this trade to the death. This is the definitive "Harry Sinden is cheap" argument. To be sure, he shipped out a lot of salary without taking much back. And yes, Oates still had plenty of gas in the tank; traded at the age of 34, he would lead the NHL in assists two more times before retiring. But neither Ranford nor Tocchet had much to contribute; in fact, Ranford was busy posting Vesa Toskala-esque GVT numbers (-11.7 and -14.0 from 1995 through '97). Meanwhile, Allison gave Boston three phenomenal years, and Carter was a quality winger as well, both at low cost. When you can get good production at low cost, you're making out well. It doesn't hurt that Allison was ultimately spun for Murray at the peak of his value, nor that Carter was traded in part for Bill Guerin.
Below the fold, the top (or if you prefer, bottom) 10...
10. 16th pick in the 2003 draft for the 21st pick, 66th and 107th.
The 2003 draft was an absolute goldmine of NHL talent. Maybe the best draft of all time. Sitting at 16, the Bruins had shots at Zach Parise and Ryan Getzlaf...and instead traded down to pick Mark Stuart at 21. This isn't a case of hindsight being 20-20, either; Getzlaf and Parise were picked at 17 and 19. That was like reaching into a bag with two $100 bills and a $1 bill, and getting your hands on George Washington's mug.
Mitigating factor: They got Patrice Bergeron in round 2 of that draft, a choice I'm not convinced they would have made without the extra second round pick. That entire Bruins draft was filled with brutes and bangers; the Bergeron pick almost felt like they were saying "we've got an extra second rounder, let's take a flier on this skill guy from the Q."
9. Kyle McLaren and a 4th round pick for Jeff Jillson and Jeff Hackett.
I hated this trade at the time. McLaren had pretty much zero hockey IQ (his cheap shot on Richard Zednik turned the series in favor of the Habs), but he was a big, tough defenseman who could skate. He would give the Sharks another 4 years of quality top 4 play, while the Bruins got zilch from Jillson and Hackett. Worse, the fourth round pick turned into Torrey Mitchell, who is emerging as a quality bottom 6 forward.
Mitigating factor: They subsequently turned Jillson into Brad Boyes, who was, in turn, turned into Dennis Wideman.
8. Kris Versteeg for Brandon Bochenski.
This one rates as Peter Chiarelli's worst trade, and hopefully it will stay that way. Apart from a brief period of productivity, Bochenski did nothing in Boston and ended up as a journeyman. Versteeg went on to play a huge role for the 2009-10 Cup champions and looks like he'll be an excellent 2nd/3rd line forward for another 8-10 years.
Mitigating factor: Bochenski scored 22 points in 31 games after the trade, while Versteeg was still in the minors, so for a little while, the trade looked good. Alas, that was the high water mark of Bochenski's career.
7. Andy Moog and Gord Murphy for Jon Casey.
This is why you never, ever overreact to a bad playoff loss. Coming off a first round sweep at the hands of the Sabres, culminating in the famous "May Day" goal (you can kiss my ass if you think I'm linking to that damn thing), the Bruins dealt Moog out of frustration. To be fair, Moog was objectively awful in that series, posting a 5.22 GAA, giving way to the immortal John Blue at one point, and looked to be in decline. However, the Bruins turned him into Jon "Technicolor Five Hole" Casey, who gave the Bruins one crummy year before moving on as a free agent. Worse, the Bruins sent Gord Murphy to Dallas for "future considerations", which ended up being the Moog for Casey trade. Murphy wasn't special, but he was a fairly competent defenseman who wouldn't embarrass you in a second or third pair. So, while the trade is remembered as Moog for Casey, it was actually Murphy and Moog for Casey. Moog would have a career renaissance in Dallas, having excellent seasons in 1994-5 and 1996-7.
Mitigating factor: statistically, this made all the sense in the world at the time. Moog's GVT plummeted from 15.7 to 5.6 to 1.2, while Casey, 2 years younger, was coming off a perfectly respectable 8.9. Plus, it did inspire one of Kevin Paul Dupont's best nicknames ever.
6. 1st round pick for Landon Wilson and Anders Myvold.
Somewhere toward the end of his reign, Harry Sinden just decided to stop valuing first round draft picks. (Oh, don't worry, it gets worse.) I don't know why a GM with such a focus on cost control would deliberately deprive himself of the easiest way to repeatedly bring in cheap, young talent, but he did. If you've heard of either of the guys Boston got in this trade, give yourself a pat on the back. Who did that first round pick become? Robyn Regehr. I'm going out on a limb and saying that the Bruins could have used a decade of Regehr's rock-solid defensive play. Hell, it might have even saved them from the boneheaded decision described in #10.
Mitigating factor: Colorado made an even worse trade than this, involving Regehr. They took Regehr in the draft, then shipped him to Calgary with Jarret Stoll, Rene Corbet and Wade Belak for Theoren Fleury and Chris Dingman. Fleury was an Av for about 15 minutes, and then his substance abuse problem started bubbling to the surface.
5. Ray Bourque and Dave Andreychuk for Brian Rolston, Martin Grenier, Sami Pahlsson and a 1st round pick.
Bourque, of course, had another year and a half of all-star level play before going out on top. You knew that. What you might not know is that Andreychuk had 4 more 20 goal seasons in him before retiring. Boston got four pretty good years of Brian Rolston and nothing else. That's a pretty slim return for two Hall of Famers (I assume Andreychuk, he of the 640 career goals, will be in one day). What makes this worse, however, is that Philadelphia was reportedly offering Simon Gagne for Bourque. The Bruins preferred Colorado's package, presumably because Rolston had more NHL experience to his credit.
Mitigating factor: This.
4. 1st round pick, Mariusz Czerkawski and Sean Brown for Bill Ranford.
We're getting into the truly awful deals now. Everything up to this point had at least something resembling a rationale behind it. The Bruins couldn't know that Parise and Getzlaf would be THAT good. The Bourque deal sucked, but they were doing him a favor, etc. This deal, however, was one that made no sense at the time. Czerkawski was an exciting young prospect who was starting to turn into a big time scorer. And for Christ's sake, he was married to a Bond girl. How do you deal a guy like that? Brown was Boston's first round pick from the season before. So, really, they were dealing 2 first rounders and a great young scorer (Czerkawski would go on to score 215 NHL goals, including a 4 season stretch where he had 108), which is a lot, but I could live with it if they were getting a prime goaltender. Here's the problem: they didn't. Rumors were rampant for weeks that the Bruins were going to get Curtis Joseph from Edmonton. Joseph was on the outs with the Oilers, and it was well known that they were going to move him. Yet, when deal time came, it was Ranford, not Joseph, that was headed east. As an added bonus, not only did Boston get a much worse goaltender than they'd been negotiating for, but all the rumors absolutely crushed whatever confidence young Blaine Lacher, who was coming off a sterling rookie season, may have possessed. Ranford was awful in Boston after his acquisition, while Czerkawski and Brown went on to decent NHL careers. And the first round pick? At 19th overall, the Oilers took Matthieu Descoteaux. He did nothing, but two guys picked shortly after that made something of themselves: the 21st pick was Marco Sturm, the 24th was Daniel Briere.
Mitigating factor: they sent Ranford off in the perfectly defensible Allison/Carter deal above, salvaging at least something from this abortion. Plus, the amount of blame one can put on this trade for Lacher's collapse is debatable. It's more likely that the kid caught fire one season, and then everyone just figured him out.
3. Joe Juneau for Al Iafrate.
Ancient by NHL rookie standards, the 25 year old Juneau scored 102 points in his rookie season for the B's, including 70 assists, which remains an NHL record by a left wing. His second season was going much the same way, with 72 points in 63 games, when he was traded to Washington for Iafrate. Iafrate took a polar opposite route to the NHL; while Juneau toiled in college, and was called up largely because of a breakout campaign at the 1992 Olympics, Iafrate was an instant success, making the NHL at 18, and already having 4 all-star games to his credit. He was big, he could skate like the wind, and had a wicked shot. He had 12 points in 13 games and seemed to make the trade justifiable. And then, the injuries happened. Well, they happened again. Iafrate had a medical file thicker than a phone book when he came over in trade. He'd been mostly healthy for the last two years, so the risk seemed minimal. Alas, Iafrate never suited up in Boston again after those 13 games, missing the entire next two seasons to injury, and then retiring from the NHL after a brief period with San Jose. Juneau totaled 572 points over his career, providing quality second/third line play for a decade after the trade.
Mitigating factor: well, at least the Bruins learned that you shouldn't overpay for a puck moving defenseman, right?
2. Shawn McEachern for Trent McCleary and a third round pick.
I remember where I was when I read about this: I was sitting in the computer lab in college, trying my best not to shout a string of four letter words as I read about this trade. The Bruins stumbled onto McEachern mostly as a throw-in to the Stevens deal above. They obviously didn't realize what they had, though, because they turned around and traded him the following offseason. Over his career, McEachern managed 253 goals and 323 assists. McCleary had a rep as a grinder...or at least, I assume he did, because I can't find anything in his minor league numbers that would suggest "hey, this kid's going to be good!" This draft day trade contributed mightily to Boston's dreadful 1996 draft, one that set a new low for incompetence and helped set the stage for the franchise's fall on hard times a few years later. The third round pick, Eric Naud, played not a single NHL game in Boston, but at least he had company; no one else in that draft did either. Who did they pass on? Massachusetts high school product Tom Poti went a few picks later; you'd assume the scouting department had at least a passing familiarity with him. Oh, there was one other guy they passed on, too. You might recognize him.
Mitigating factor: That aforementioned fall upon hard times was what helped Harry Sinden decide to move to the sidelines. Sinden did a tremendous amount for the franchise; you'll notice that there aren't a lot of trades from the 70s and 80s up there. That's not because I'm lazy, it's because Harry Sinden had the magic touch back then. But he was losing that touch by this time, and it showed. Unfortunately, it took another 6 years after Sinden stepped aside before they got a GM who knew what he was doing, but hey, better late than never.
1. Joe Thornton for Brad Stuart, Wayne Primeau and Marco Sturm.
If you don't know why this trade ranks as the worst in the last 39 years of Bruins hockey, we here at Stanley Cup of Chowder would like to welcome you, and we hope you're enjoying your first few days as a Bruins fan. (Please be advised that it's unlikely that every season will end in a Stanley Cup.) Thornton had just been signed to a long term contract extension immediately after the lockout was lifted, and then traded 3 months later in a deal that didn't even rate as a "three quarters for a dollar" type deal. It was more like a dime and two pieces of pocket lint for a dollar.
On a personal note, this trade, coming as it did immediately after a one year lockout, led to me giving up hockey for a couple years. That's right, this trade stunk so badly that I, a Bruin diehard of 20 years, actually threw up my hands and said "forget it. I'm done with this sport and done with that cheapskate Jacobs." It took the Savard/Thomas/Chara trifecta to bring me back.
Mitigating factor: Without this trade, we never would have seen this. Other than that...I got nothing.
81 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
some trades redeem themselves
when trades happen again and draft picks develop, but its hard to make a list like this with some many variables and wait-and-see players. thumbs up
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
Disagree w/Thornton Trade
If B’s do not trade Thornton, Chara/Savard do not come here. Thornton until this year has been a playoff no show. Marco Sturm maybe scored one of the biggest goals in recent Boston history – Game 6 vs. Montreal in 2008, sure the B’s lost in 7 that year but it brought the fans back to hockey
Why don’t they come? That team had a TON of cap room, they didn’t have to trade Thornton. They had plenty of room to get Chara and Savard.
ummm prob not
chara at least wouldnt. maybe savvy but chara was paid alot and promised the C and some say in the direction of the team.
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
They’d have worked it out. And if they really, truly wanted to push the reset button on the franchise, they could have gotten a lot more for Thornton than they did.
idk about that.
good point that they didnt blow up the team but chara and thornton will never be on the same team. too high a price tag.
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
That’s what bothered me; it seemed like they just took the first offer they got for big Joe and ran with it. I didn’t even hate Primeau (he had heart), Sturm or Stuart — in fact, I liked all three of them back then — but I just couldn’t understand making that trade. What irked me before that was when they didn’t re-sign anyone from the pre-lockout season and we lost Rolston, Gonchar, Nylander, Knuble, etc. So frustrating!
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
The failure to keep that really good 2004 team together was a killer. I really wanted to find some way to discuss that, but it just didn’t fit in the context of an article about trades.
Thornton trade marked a fundamental shift in team ideology. Argue the Chara/Savard points ad nauseum, fact remains that Kessel, Lucic, Bergeron, et al needed leaders to learn from, and Thornton wasn’t that guy.
by Ryan Durling on Jun 27, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. I know I’m in the minority here, but I never really saw Thornton as happy here, and I just didn’t feel like there was ever a great effort from him. Some people may see that as ridiculous, but it just never seemed to me like he wanted to be a Bruin.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I was convinced we were going to win it that year...
then there was that crazy series against Montreal, and in game 7, I think everyone knew first goal was gonna win. I was so bummed.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Thornton deal..
Personally in the end I wasn’t upset that they made the deal, really Thornton had never really impressed me with his leadership. I was annoyed with the return. To me that was the kicker. Not one draft pick came back, not one young top guy (maybe could argue Stuart was that) but it seemed like no one knew he was available at all, and pretty much the first person to call got the deal done. If I remember correctly this deal happened almost immediately after that game in NJ where Thornton lost the draw and the Devils won the game off the shot from the lost draw.
-On a side note, to this day I still think O’Connel thought he was trading for Keith Primeau and not Wayne.
The Thornton trade, in return for him the Bruins got Marco Sturm, Wayne Primeau and Brad Stuart. They traded Stuart (who was never going to re-sign with Boston when his contract was up) and Primeau to Calgary for Chuck Kobasew and Andrew Ference. The Bruins flipped Kobasew to the Wild for Alexander Fallstrom (?), Wild 2nd round pick in 2011 and Craig Weller. The Bruins sent Weller along with Byron Bitz and a 2nd round pick to Florida for Dennis Seidenberg, Matt Bartkowski. So in the end, directly and indirectly the Bruins did end up with 2 of their 6 current defensemen for Thornton
straight up tho...
talent wise, pretty stacked against us
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
They got a mediocre defenseman and an above-average defenseman for one of the 10 best players in the NHL. That lessens the sting a little, I guess, but it’s still awful even in that light.
i like the trade now
but how could ANY fan like that trade right after it happend
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
I still question the Thornton and Chara/Savard meme. They had to pay Sturm and Stuart, in addition to what they ended up paying Savard. So while it would have been unrealistic to end up with Chara, Thornton AND Savard, we have to remember, Savard never made it past the second round either.
I think they could have worked the cap to wind up with Thornton and Chara. Would Chara have come if he wasn’t the clear cut best player? Would be interesting to know.
They could have easily obtained Ference through other channels, and Seidenberg was available to the Bruins the summer they signed Morris. I should also repeat that beyond Chara, defensive personnel is not a strength of this roster. By the time they were a contender, Sturm had two knee injuries and ended up being traded for future considerations.
by Michael Taylor on Jun 27, 2011 12:10 PM EDT reply actions
I remember that Morris/Seidenberg thing. That was poor resource management. They gave up a second rounder for a player they could have had for a song in the offseason. It worked out in the end, of course.
at least all the
pain is lessen by a cup shaped band aid
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
by muffinman2 on Jun 27, 2011 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
For sure. I know Chara makes him look better, but I still maintain my claim that Seidenberg is a stud.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
i like sides
he and ference were horses when the playoffs came around. theyre big game players now 3 game 7s? i think this d can only get better
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
I love Sides!
I can’t believe this talk about Seidenberg only being above-average. Yes, Chara makes him look better, but he is an extremely good defensemen. I think some people on this board need to watch some other teams in this league. Maybe then you’ll realize how badly underrated he is. Other then the first 2 games vs TB, Seidenberg played unbelievable.
About the Thornton trade, I will never forget where I was when I read it. Ironically I was in a Computer lab around midnight doing work. I instantly dropped what I was doing and heading to the pub across the street. Obviously at that moment I was bitterly upset, but maybe it was the beers, but I decided pretty fast it would be ok. I never really believed in Thornton, the playoff loss to Mtl the year before was soul-crashing. It was unacceptable to lose to that team, as it was in 2002. It was time for a change in my opinion. All that being said, it was still an AWFUL trade.
by MTLsBiggestBsFan on Jun 28, 2011 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I Agree
what you wrote for that joe thornton trade sums me up as well. i left and didn’t come back untill acquisitions were made to get the team back to respectability at least. i still think jacobs real motive with the savard and chara signing was to knock some of the at that point OVERWHELMING feeling that he was in it all for the money. only time will tell if we keep bergeron, lucic, marchand, seguin, rask or if this just fell into jacobs lap and he will milk some mediocre seasons for a while to keep his accountants happy.
Why trade thornton if you are going to pay savard almost as much the next year? BS!
by singing the brues on Jun 27, 2011 12:11 PM EDT reply actions
How about this… If the Sharks put Thornton on the market now, 6 years later, they would get back a better haul then the Bruins did.
they would get a better deal if they traded him for chris drury
by singing the brues on Jun 27, 2011 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t mind the Bourque trade to Colorado, the thought of him winning a Cup in Philly would have been too much for me.
Neither did I. I was happy for him when it happened. But I was trying to look at value given, value received, and opportunity costs, and leave sentiment out of it.
re: the Bourque trade – I think Rolston was a big part of the Bruins and played REALLY well for us. I was bullshit when they didn’t re-sign him…. all goes back to ’04, heh heh.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
The Thornton trade was a prime example of why you never let a GM that is potentially on his way out trade your franchise guy. This happens a lot in sports, and it almost always turns out terribly. A failing team tells their GM to “turn things around” so he goes for the big move because he needs something quick. In doing so, he focuses on the near short term (which is what happened here) and the trade brings back awful value.
Middling GMs (which is what O’Connell was) are much easier to come by than franchise players. In this situation, you fire the GM, and let the new guy make the decision on the franchises direction. Now, this probably means we don’t wind up with Chiarelli. But at the same time, they probably hire a GM, who if they make the same evaluation about Thornton as a leader, knows he has the time to make the right deal, which in this case, would have been multiple first round picks and high end prospects.
by Michael Taylor on Jun 27, 2011 12:23 PM EDT reply actions
I can remember the day...
that the Thorton trade went down. I was visiting my now ex-girlfriend in St Johns NFLD and was just watching some TV when shit hit the fan. I was and am still a big Thorton fan. That trade alomst had me becoming a San Jose fan (which they are my rooting interest in the west) partly because we got nothing in return. I know there are a lot of people saying its ok because it paved the way for other players to sign here etc. I agree that we did get a small benefit for it but when the cap was at $40 million and you ship a guy thats getting big dollars you have to take salary in return. We got hosed on that deal and there is nothing else to say. We couldnt even pry one first round pick from them to also get some future returns on that trade. That trade goes down as the worst in Bruin history and quite possibly one of the worst trades in hockey.
They did it for Savy, they did it for Horton, they did it for each other, they did it for us. I give you the 2011 Stanley Cup Champions....The Boston Bruins!!
Bingo!
That’s what I never understood, if they were blowing up the team, which they did by not re-signing anyone have the lockout, why didn’t they get draft picks and prospects! Brutal trade
by MTLsBiggestBsFan on Jun 28, 2011 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
No Thornton trade =
No Chara or Savard.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jun 27, 2011 1:24 PM EDT reply actions
i dunno.....
If that not for that Thornton trade, they could have never signed Chara. Without Chara, we don’t win the cup…
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
SCOC - Bruins Analyst
Minor League Ball - Minor League Baseball Analyst
Why couldn’t they have signed Chara? They wound up signing Savard that offseason for $5m over the next 4 seasons. Thornton’s cap hit at the time was 6.6m. That also doesn’t take into consideration the salary they took on in the deal with Sturm (2m) and Stuart (1.9m). Those 3 players were worth 8.9m in salary. So the Bruins would have had 2.3m to bring in a winger and a defenseman, but at the same time, they weren’t exactly cup contenders at that point, so they could have waited on the complementary parts. By the next year, they had extra useless salaries in Manny Fernandez and Peter Schaefer that they might not have taken on had they had Thornton and Chara on the roster instead of Chara and Savard. It wasn’t until 2010 that the difference between Savard and Thornton’s salaries was truly significant (7.2m vs. 4m).
by Michael Taylor on Jun 27, 2011 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions
savvy likes to play ith chara
charas signing had EVERYTHING to do with the savvy signing
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
I think it had as much to do with the Peter Chiarelli signing as anything. I’m sorry, I’m just not prepared to accept that Chara would have refused to sign with Boston if Thornton was there and Savvy was not.
agree wo disagree?
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
I agree with this view, even though I’m not a huge Big Joe fan.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Not that the Thornton trade was a good trade, but...
If they don’t trade Thornton, maybe they don’t feel the need to go out and get Chara or Savard. A lot of people think the team went out and paid big money for those guys in response to the outrage caused as a result of the Thornton trade. Also, if the Bruins don’t trade Thornton and the team ends up being decent with him that year…who says O’Connell still gets fired? If O’Connell is still the GM, would he have gone after Chara? Would Chara have wanted to come here if he wasn’t going to be named captain, or would he have taken slightly lesser pay to play for another team that would make him their captain? Too many variables to say that this team could’ve kept Thornton and end up where they were today. It’s not like Thornton’s Sharks have been more successful than the Bruins have post-trade (especially in the playoffs). That’s especially true now that the Bruins have a Cup.
Dunno guys. If they don’t trade thornton, do they get savard and chara? Oh what’s that? The last 10 comments all said that? Hmmm.
Your 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins
Hockey Blog Adventure: New Post: 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins: YES!!! (I'm also on Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)
by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Jun 27, 2011 5:15 PM EDT reply actions
Phunwin - What about 2001 -2002?
You wanted to talk about keeping the 2004 team together, but I’ve often thought about what might have happened if Bourque was still with Boston in 2001 – 2002. That team was pretty darn good, and I can’t help but think that Ray might have gotten a cup with Boston with that team. Yeah, I know if he were still there that things might not have fallen together with Guerin, etc, but that team was really close, I think.
Fair point. Throw another log on the “Bourque trade was bad for the team” fire. I’m all for it. Maybe having Bourque’s steady hand around keeps that team from imploding after game 4 of the Montreal series. Maybe Kyle McLaren doesn’t commit assault and battery on Richard Zednik and they don’t trot out PJ Stock on a power play as a giant Eff You. I am absolutely open to that argument.
Actually, you have a good point…
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point
I’m 100% convince they beat Montreal in 2002 if Bourque is on that team.
by MTLsBiggestBsFan on Jun 28, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Flame Me
But I was glad when we got rid of ‘Big Joe’. I never felt like he commanded the ice. I mean this, and I’m not talking hindsight, I always had the feeling that he didn’t want to do the heavy lifting of leadership, and I thought, as it was happening, that he faded into obscurity during his playoff games with the Bruins.
I think a lot of people would agree with you, including me. The problem was not getting rid of Joe, it’s what we got in return
by MTLsBiggestBsFan on Jun 28, 2011 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions
How can anyone defend the Thornton trade?
It is by far one of the worst trades in NHL history and by far the Bruins worst trade ever. Those of you making the argument that the Bruins can’t pay for free agaents Savard and Chara are wrong. The B’s could have easily moved 3 and 4 million dollar players such as Glenn Murray who had very little skill other then his shot. He didn’t use his size at all and was even worse then big Joe come playoff time. I think the fact that O’connel said he woke up and Thought he had a dream that he had traded Thornton says it all. He was clearly tipping back on the bottle with Harry the night the trade went down.
but in the end....
alls well that ends well. bad trade, but Bruins won the Cup before the Sharks even played for one.
My point exactly. I thought this then, and I still think this now. Joe Thornton is NOT a clutch, mentally tough, player. Skilled yes, force of will, no.
I'm absolutely not defending the trade,
just pointing out that I’m not a Joe Thornton fangirl.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Either through one individual, or collectively, winning teams have it. It may not be fair to Thornton, but I think its telling that he is on a team with incredible regular season totals for what, 5 years in a row now, and they have still yet to make a finals? Like I said, flame me all you want, but at the time I thought Thornton was mentally soft, and was NOT sorry to see him leave.
I wasn't sad to see him leave at all,
but I was hoping we would have got more in return for him.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
All the talk is about the Thornton trade, but...
Joe Juneau for Al Iafrate was awful, just awful. Forget Iafrate’s ridiculous balding mullet, Juneau was such a quality player. One has to wonder what Iafrate’s medicals looked like when the Bruins got him. Also, I had mass amounts of Joe Juneau rookie cards, trading him broke my heart.
Honestly, I considered that for #1 until I took a look at Juneau’s numbers. He never quite achieved the heights he did those first couple years in Boston. But yeah, this was another one where I was like, “wait, really? Juneau’s awesome, what the hell is Harry doing?” This was my first clue that Sinden was starting to slip.
Worse, and I meant to mention this in the article and forgot: there may have been a Juneau for Ed Belfour deal on the table, and they went for Iafrate instead. If indeed they turned down Belfour and went for Iafrate, then hey, move over Joe Thornton.
I remember reading The Sporting News (at the time, my only real source of information, this being the pre-internet days) and they said that there were serious discussions about Belfour for Juneau. I have no idea how serious they were, but it passed the bullshit test enough for a major print publication to go with it.
Juneau was pretty pro on the ‘Bonanza Line’ – I think keeping him here would’ve been better than Iafrate for sure- Al was a medical mess and on top of that, we had Bourque, and could you really ask for a better puck mover (without mentioning the likes of Orr or maybe an Oilers Coffey)? I dunno.
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Phunwin and I have discussed this trade a few times,
it’s my least favorite Bruins trade. It really boggles the mind – what the fuck was Harry thinking?
Suck it, Felger!
by phonymahoney on Jun 27, 2011 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
knew it.
i almost want to be the one to make it
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
Depending on how far back things go, I can think of three candidates …
Getting one of the best players of all time for nothing.
If I was doing all time, the Espo and Hodge for a bag of pucks deal isn’t just the best deal in Bruins history, (better even than the ongoing Neely heist) it might be the best in NHL history. They got one Hall of Famer and one guy who should be a Hall of Famer for nothing.
nifty was a great trade
got rid of a declining hodge for quite the goal scorer
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
Oh hey, I spy Byron Bitz in that last link.
I can't seriously be asked to summarize my sports fandom in a short blurb for all to see, can I?
by Johnny Appleseed on Jul 4, 2011 11:27 PM EDT reply actions

by 



























