(Photo by Lisa Gansky)
This year’s Boston Bruins have shocked much of the hockey world; what was originally expected to be a period of rebuilding has become a time of flourishing success for one of hockey’s most storied franchises.
Without a flashy superstar, many casual fans would write off the B’s as simply not having enough talent to make a run deep into the postseason, but history disagrees. Digging a little deeper into the last 10 Stanley Cup champs, here’s what I found: 20% of teams had 90+ point-scorers, 50% had 70+, 0% had players with 50+ goals, 20% had 40+ goal-scorers, and 60% had 30+ goal-scorers. Let’s break down these statistics considering that the top point-getter for the B’s is Patrice Bergeron, on pace for a career-high 81. Thus, this year’s Bruins fall into the 50th percentile of Cup winners over the last 10 seasons in terms of individual points. Considering the fact that Bergy is also slated to score 40 goals for the first time in his career, Boston is in the (ELITE) 80th percentile for goal scoring.
So now that we’ve debunked the idea that they don’t have enough sexy starpower to get it done deep into the postseason, let’s talk about the x-factor: coaching. To me, Bruce Cassidy is the Brad Stevens of the NHL. Cassidy took over after several mediocre seasons that came on the heels of a legendary championship run led by an overrated coach. After the Bruins failed to repeat as Cup champs in 2012, Claude Julien began to resonate less and less with the players, leading to his eventual firing in 2017 and heavy criticism of his coaching style. The same is true for Stevens, who stepped into office after Doc Rivers’s tenure fizzled out in Boston despite a historic Finals run in 2008. Cassidy’s coaching style has allowed him to get the most from veterans and young players alike (see Stevens and Isaiah Thomas, Jae Crowder, Marcus Morris, Terry Rozier etc.). The best example of this aspect of Cassidy’s coaching is the rejuvenation of Patrice Bergeron and Zdeno Chara. Early on in his career, Bergeron posted a couple 70+ point seasons, but since then he’s been pretty much a 50-60 point guy. This year, he’s already at 51, just two points back from last year’s total and on pace for more than 80.
Chara’s impact can be best measured by arguably the most important stat in hockey: plus/minus. Chara was once a defensive stud and perennial contender for the Norris Trophy, but his last three seasons have produced plus/minuses of 0, +12, and +18 respectively, and drummed up conversation about the end of the Slovakian’s career. Now, by no means am I saying that Chara is elite again. Maybe he ate some of Tom Brady’s avocado ice cream, but nothing can save this lumbering giant’s creaky frame from Father Time. His plus/minus is back at +27, and he certainly deserves a ton of credit for the success of ROY-candidate Charlie McAvoy, as the two have been the number one d-pair for the B’s all season. All I’m saying is that Cassidy has found a way to maximize whatever gas is left in big Z’s tank, and it’s had a big impact on the team.
Aside from elevating the play of the two leaders of this franchise, Cassidy has also breathed life into the once (and maybe still) mental case that is Tuukka Rask. Motivated by the stellar play of backup Anton Khudobin, Tuukka has elbowed his way back into the Vezina conversation after three seasons of crapping his pants in big games despite sporting one of the most lucrative contracts in the sport. He currently has a .924 save percentage, putting him at #3 among goalies who have played at least 35 games. In terms of coaching, Cassidy’s early-season move to bench Tuukka for less-than-stellar play certainly played into Tuukka’s midseason surge.
The way I see it, the Bruins have lightning in a bottle right now with all of the components necessary to win a Cup: four lines getting it done for 200 feet on the ice, solid defense, effective leadership, and great goaltending.
Finally, young studs like Charlie McAvoy, Danton Heinen, and Jake DeBrusk have thrived under the flexible leadership of Cassidy. While the veterans have been playing exceptionally, so too have the younger members of this lineup. Contributions from players like Riley Nash and Tim Schaller have given the Bruins a level of depth that nobody expected.
All of this is important because, although there’s a solid core of young players in the Bruins clubhouse, the ones carrying the brunt of the load are the vets (as it should be). But these vets don’t have a whole lot of tread left on their tires; Chara is 40 and Bergeron is 32, and even Marchand (who I still consider to be a young buck) is 29. So, how much longer do the Bruins have with Chara and Bergeron playing at this level? Two, maybe three years? Or is this the last one? The way I see it, the Bruins have lightning in a bottle right now with all of the components necessary to win a Cup: four lines getting it done for 200 feet on the ice, solid defense, effective leadership, and great goaltending. Given the age of their vets, the window is small. Sure, the future is bright given the young talent on the roster, but without Bergeron and Chara, I bet the Bruins would be sitting at or near the bottom of the Eastern Conference.
Since December, the B’s have demonstrated that this success isn’t just a mirage--it’s sustained enough to consider them legit contenders. There’s no doubt they’re capable of taking down any team if they play the way they have over the last couple months; the only question we should be asking is whether or not they’re peaking at the wrong time.
Comments