Leadership builds leadership. Quality breeds quality.

Was just thinking over the red wings/bruins in terms of organizational direction. How important is it for young players to be around people they look up to? I personally think it's HUGE and is the very reason why quality teams with direction keep pivotal icons in positions to mentor the youngsters. Look at it this way, Thornton is suppose to idolize and learn leadership in his position from who? Rob Zamuner? Odonnell? Murray? He knows damn well he has twice the ability as these guys and the aforemention have proven themselves very little in terms of winning. Now turn to detroit. Stevie Yzerman/Brendan Shannahan/Nicklaus Lidstrom/Chris Chelios. And these are only HALF of the leaders on the team!! Thornton can learn something from each and every one. MOC is either missing the boat or in denial on the whole subject IMO. He addressed the teams leadership by saying some need to 'pick up the slack'. well leadership is like trust IMO, it needs to be earned and cant be turned off and on like a switch. We just plain dont have it and it's been one of our biggest downfalls in recent years. I mean seriously-if there was any high degree of dignity and leadership no fricken team would allow themselves to get beaten 9-0 AFTER getting smoked 6-2. Usually that's when a team comes out hellbent for blood after a embarrassing loss...folding up the tent unfortunately is the other path and far too often we have folded instead of risen to the occasion. I'm just curious what people think of our current leadership? Is it as bad as I think it is? Should sammy/joe/boynton have had proven winners alongside them from the start of their carreers? And if so...How much better if at all would they be? :dunno:

You're right. This is part of the reason why I hope O'Connell is canned so this organization can move forward.

Speaking of quality breeds quality, how bout the Avs for example? Look at the players that have since left the Avs after making their name there?

Deadmarsh, Drury, Hejduk, Miller, Klemm, and DeVries come to mind.

Why do you think all of those young players turned out the way they did? Was it all good scouting? I don't think so. I think playing with better players makes you improve as a young player. There are exceptions, but it helps to play with better players. On defense, Boynton is already the best. This bothers me..

A guy like Chelios would be excellent on the Bruins. How about Roman Hamrlik though? Boy, I think the Bruins could use a guy like him. He's the kind of player that could really push Boynton to the next level, and improve the dressing room on the B's. Just a thought.

Was just thinking over the red wings/bruins in terms of organizational direction. How important is it for young players to be around people they look up to? I personally think it's HUGE and is the very reason why quality teams with direction keep pivotal icons in positions to mentor the youngsters. Look at it this way, Thornton is suppose to idolize and learn leadership in his position from who? Rob Zamuner? Odonnell? Murray? He knows damn well he has twice the ability as these guys and the aforemention have proven themselves very little in terms of winning. Now turn to detroit. Stevie Yzerman/Brendan Shannahan/Nicklaus Lidstrom/Chris Chelios. And these are only HALF of the leaders on the team!! Thornton can learn something from each and every one. MOC is either missing the boat or in denial on the whole subject IMO. He addressed the teams leadership by saying some need to 'pick up the slack'. well leadership is like trust IMO, it needs to be earned and cant be turned off and on like a switch. We just plain dont have it and it's been one of our biggest downfalls in recent years. I mean seriously-if there was any high degree of dignity and leadership no fricken team would allow themselves to get beaten 9-0 AFTER getting smoked 6-2. Usually that's when a team comes out hellbent for blood after a embarrassing loss...folding up the tent unfortunately is the other path and far too often we have folded instead of risen to the occasion. I'm just curious what people think of our current leadership? Is it as bad as I think it is? Should sammy/joe/boynton have had proven winners alongside them from the start of their carreers? And if so...How much better if at all would they be? :dunno:

I agree its huge, but it has to start again somewhere. In Detroit it started again with Yzerman. He had nothing around him. Here, it needs to start with Thornton, someone who idealized Yzerman growing up.

In addition, you can bring in Orr, Bourque, etc to mentor Thornton.

Organizationally, it takes the courage to sit people who don't pull their weight. Coaches and mgt need to be accountable as welll. You need buy in from Thornton, which I think would be there if, and only if, the B's show they are committed to winning......and there in lies the rub.

Net, net, you can wish for you were in Detroits/Colorado's shoes, or you can take the first steps to getting there.

(police intercom: son, step away frrom the soapbox)

You make a valid point. The Red Wings have a strong nucleus of veterans. (In fact, I think they were the oldest team in the league last year.) And younger players look to the veterans for leadership.

What makes the Red Wing nucleus of veterans special is their Stanley Cup rings. They are winners, part of a winning tradition. Their value as mentors and leaders isn't measured in personal stats.

Let's turn to the home team. How many veteran winners are on the Bruin's roster? I believe Marty Lapointe has a ring. Zino has won world championships. Who else?

I would have offered Adam Oates a contract this past summer, but I guess there's bad blood between him and MOC...

You're right. If Thornton played under Sakic or Yzerman I would say without hesitation that he would blossom into one of the greatest players ever. Now, he'll be breathtaking, but a legend...that is up to him. Thankfully, he played with Bourque for some time: so he knows what the real deal is like.

but it takes vision and commitment

You're right. This is part of the reason why I hope O'Connell is canned so this organization can move forward.

Speaking of quality breeds quality, how bout the Avs for example? Look at the players that have since left the Avs after making their name there?

Deadmarsh, Drury, Hejduk, Miller, Klemm, and DeVries come to mind.

Why do you think all of those young players turned out the way they did? Was it all good scouting? I don't think so. I think playing with better players makes you improve as a young player. There are exceptions, but it helps to play with better players. On defense, Boynton is already the best. This bothers me..

A guy like Chelios would be excellent on the Bruins. How about Roman Hamrlik though? Boy, I think the Bruins could use a guy like him. He's the kind of player that could really push Boynton to the next level, and improve the dressing room on the B's. Just a thought.

yep. avs/wings/devils...too much of a coincidence that not only do they all have top notch high end ball$ to the walls leaders-but they keep pumping out quality kids year after year IMO

All Thornton learnt from Bourque is how to be a traitor and jump a sinking ship as the captain.

i fear you may be right. but that is bruins' management fault for not being committed moreso then bourques-atleast IMHO.

All Thornton learnt from Bourque is how to be a traitor and jump a sinking ship as the captain.

I'm afraid that you might be right.

The Bourque as traitor talk just doesnt wash.

He carried a franchise for two decades, and did far more to push the franchise towards a championship than the owner and GM ever did.

Stuck on a team that wasnt going to contend his last few years, he should just quietly float down stream?

Nonsense.

The Bourque as traitor talk just doesnt wash.
He carried a franchise for two decades, and did far more to push the franchise towards a championship than the owner and GM ever did.
Stuck on a team that wasnt going to contend his last few years, he should just quietly float down stream?
Nonsense.

I have been a bruin fan for longer than Bourque has played, should I be allowed to go cheer for a Stanley Cup winner without the term
"Bandwagoner" stamped to my arse?

While I do not agree with Ray being a traitor, I do suggest that it is completely understandable to see how he could be percieved as such.

Bruin 4 life dont you know..

All Thornton learnt from Bourque is how to be a traitor and jump a sinking ship as the captain.
Too bad. This was an interesting thread that brought out some thoughtful responses about leadership until we got side-tracked by an (unfounded) accusation that Bourque was a traitor...

If you go back to the old press accounts, I think trading Ray was a win-win situation all around. Remember Ray had the right of first refusal and many fans (including this one) thought he deserved a Stanley Cup ring after a long and storied career. The Avalanche and Ray got their Stanley Cup. The Bruins got an injection of youth to help rebuild -including Rolston.

Leadership is an interesting thing. As we all know, the best leaders are not always the best players. (and vice versa.)

Mentoring directly benefits some human beings, while others need to find their own way. Can you imagine anyone trying to "lead" Brett Hull?

When a player reaches the NHL, he's already built a lifetime of great hockey success.

Leadership at this level might be most valuable when it helps a young player overcome his first taste of failure, or teaches habits that contribute to consistent success.

Welcome to the NHL, man. Everyone is just as big, fast, and talented as you are, now go make it happen.

Nobody in sports "deserves" a championship, just like nobody "deserves" anything in all other aspects of life. You're either hungry enough to "get" it yourself or lucky enough to have it "given" to you.

I think what Misterjaggers meant was that Ray deserved one more shot at the playoffs for a chance at the Cup. And yes, through hard work, being a good person, and tireless effort some can deserve that. The Bruins were in a predicament where Ray was most likely going to call it quits and because they respected Ray so much as a player they granted him that one last opportunity to go to a contender.

Hope that clears it up for you.....

Nobody in sports "deserves" a championship, just like nobody "deserves" anything in all other aspects of life. You're either hungry enough to "get" it yourself or lucky enough to have it "given" to you.

I agree completely with Mr Jaggers.

If I'm Sinden/MOC, I don't trade Ray, out of loyalty. But considering he was at the end of his career and wanted to go to a contender, we made out great by getting value in return. Ray didn't demand a trade, he asked for one. I would do this every time.

Nobody in sports "deserves" a championship, just like nobody "deserves" anything in all other aspects of life. You're either hungry enough to "get" it yourself or lucky enough to have it "given" to you.

It doesn't matter how hungry you are, you can't "get" anything yourself when you're play on a team.

Or are you implying that Borque just wasn't a good enough defencemen (or hungry enough) to earn some time with the cup. If so, I have to wonder what team you've been watching for the last 25 years.

Was just thinking over the red wings/bruins in terms of organizational direction. How important is it for young players to be around people they look up to? I personally think it's HUGE and is the very reason why quality teams with direction keep pivotal icons in positions to mentor the youngsters. Look at it this way, Thornton is suppose to idolize and learn leadership in his position from who? Rob Zamuner? Odonnell? Murray? He knows damn well he has twice the ability as these guys and the aforemention have proven themselves very little in terms of winning. Now turn to detroit. Stevie Yzerman/Brendan Shannahan/Nicklaus Lidstrom/Chris Chelios. And these are only HALF of the leaders on the team!! Thornton can learn something from each and every one. MOC is either missing the boat or in denial on the whole subject IMO. He addressed the teams leadership by saying some need to 'pick up the slack'. well leadership is like trust IMO, it needs to be earned and cant be turned off and on like a switch. We just plain dont have it and it's been one of our biggest downfalls in recent years. I mean seriously-if there was any high degree of dignity and leadership no fricken team would allow themselves to get beaten 9-0 AFTER getting smoked 6-2. Usually that's when a team comes out hellbent for blood after a embarrassing loss...folding up the tent unfortunately is the other path and far too often we have folded instead of risen to the occasion. I'm just curious what people think of our current leadership? Is it as bad as I think it is? Should sammy/joe/boynton have had proven winners alongside them from the start of their carreers? And if so...How much better if at all would they be? :dunno:Gary - excellent post. One closely related issue with the quality of leadership is roster longevity. I have complained about this in the past. Those teams you mentioned, Detroit, Colorado, NJ etc, have instilled leadership not only by signing and acquiring their key players, but by keeping them over the long haul. Every one of them has ensured their team has strength in leadership and longevity.

The Bruins, on the other hand, have had a different history over the past 7 years, and money has been smack dab in the middle of it. The B's don't want to overpay, and they would rather sign their players to short term deals to keep from large outlays. The year-to-year contracts have created a situation that is more challenging to manage, and their policies which place a greater emphasis on the bottom line that building winning teams has had a dire effect.

Either way, the B's currently do not have a single player on their team for more than 6 seasons. That pales in comparison to the length of stay and ultimate leadership presence that key players like Sakic, Forsberg, Brodeur, Stevens, Yzerman and Shanahan have. While that is not a crime in of itself, the consistent drift over the last 6 years hasn't been acceptable. The B's have to show they really (finally) have a plan for the future.

In my opinion, the Bruins need to build around Thornton, Samsonov, Boynton, Axelsson, Stuart, Toivonen and whoever else ends up being part of their core. They need to keep this group together while they eventually build out the roster and achieve true contender status. No excuses. Anyone who departs should be in the cause for strengthening the group and furthering the cause, not dumping salaries. My view is, as this core marches further into the playoffs, their combined leadership, presence and longevity will establish the level of team integrity that we've been lacking.

Gary - excellent post. One closely related issue with the quality of leadership is roster longevity. I have complained about this in the past. Those teams you mentioned, Detroit, Colorado, NJ etc, have instilled leadership not only by signing and acquiring their key players, but by keeping them over the long haul. Every one of them has ensured their team has strength in leadership and longevity.

The Bruins, on the other hand, have had a different history over the past 7 years, and money has been smack dab in the middle of it. The B's don't want to overpay, and they would rather sign their players to short term deals to keep from large outlays. The year-to-year contracts have created a situation that is more challenging to manage, and their policies which place a greater emphasis on the bottom line that building winning teams has had a dire effect.

Either way, the B's currently do not have a single player on their team for more than 6 seasons. That pales in comparison to the length of stay and ultimate leadership presence that key players like Sakic, Forsberg, Brodeur, Stevens, Yzerman and Shanahan have. While that is not a crime in of itself, the consistent drift over the last 6 years hasn't been acceptable. The B's have to show they really (finally) have a plan for the future.

In my opinion, the Bruins need to build around Thornton, Samsonov, Boynton, Axelsson, Stuart, Toivonen and whoever else ends up being part of their core. They need to keep this group together while they eventually build out the roster and achieve true contender status. No excuses. Anyone who departs should be in the cause for strengthening the group and furthering the cause, not dumping salaries. My view is, as this core marches further into the playoffs, their combined leadership, presence and longevity will establish the level of team integrity that we've been lacking.


Exactly gentlemen! In the old days the Bruins were winners because Terry O'Reilly, Ray Bourque, Bobby Orr, or Wayne Cashman were always right there insisting that if you wear the uniform - you earn it!

I swear that if I see the same cycle of late and watch Samsonov and Thornton get traded after an extended hold out/ that'll be it for me and my 30 years of rooting for the Bruins. I just couldn't stomach it.

The Bourque as traitor talk just doesnt wash.

He carried a franchise for two decades, and did far more to push the franchise towards a championship than the owner and GM ever did.

Stuck on a team that wasnt going to contend his last few years, he should just quietly float down stream?

Nonsense.

Yes, like many others have done.

It doesn't matter how hungry you are, you can't "get" anything yourself when you're play on a team.

Or are you implying that Borque just wasn't a good enough defencemen (or hungry enough) to earn some time with the cup. If so, I have to wonder what team you've been watching for the last 25 years.

I think he's been listening to gangsta rap.