Tag: Andy Moog

Glen Sather

Sather compares Kreider’s call-up to when he did the same in Edmonton

Seeing former Boston College star Chris Kreider get the sudden call to play in the New York Rangers’ first round series with Ottawa has been surprising yet tough on the kid. When Carl Hagelin was sat down with a three-game suspension, the Rangers had a dire opening in their lineup and Kreider got the nod. After playing 11:11 in Game 3, Kreider played just 3:29 in Game 4.

It’s tough being put in that position straight out of college, but Rangers GM Glen Sather tells Larry Brooks of the New York Post that he’s done it before when he was in Edmonton and knows it’s tough on the players.

“It’s a whole different mindset,” Sather says. “In Edmonton I brought Esa Tikkanen and Andy Moog in for the playoffs, but Tikk came from the top league in Finland [in 1985] and Moog was in the minors [in 1981].

“I can’t say enough about the way Chris is handling this. You can see how tight he is, but who wouldn’t be? It’s not for lack of effort.”

Kreider certainly isn’t Tikkanen and well, he’s not a goalie either. One thing that might happen for Game 5, however, is the return of defenseman Steve Eminger. If he comes back, Brooks says it’s possible John Tortorella goes with Stu Bickel on the fourth line and sits Kreider, a move Sather supports should it happen.

Kreider will be a big player for the Rangers eventually, but expecting him to be the savior now is asking a lot.

Comparing the 2010-11 Boston Bruins to the 1989-90 version


Much like the Vancouver Canucks (last seen this late in the game in 1994), the Boston Bruins have been waiting a long time for another crack at the Stanley Cup finals. They last made it to the game’s grandest stage in 1990, when the post-Gretzky Edmonton Oilers dispatched them in five games.

Let’s take a look at how this year’s Bruins compare to the Ray Bourque-fueled team from 21 years ago, shall we?

The 1989-90 Boston Bruins at a glance

Record: 46-25-9 (first in Adams division); Goals For: 289 (11th of 21 teams); Goals Against: 232 (1st of 21); PP %: 23.58 (league average: 20.77); PK %: 83.23 (league average: 79.23)

The 2010-11 Boston Bruins at a glance

Record: 46-25-11 (first in Northeast division); Goals For: 246 (8th of 30 teams); Goals Against: 195 (3rd of 30); PP %: 16.17 (league average: 18.02); PK %: 82.64 (league average: 81.98)

From a big picture standpoint, these teams have some interesting similarities – they even earned 46 wins and went 25 games without a point in defeat. (You may recall that the 89-90 Bruins played in the pre-charity point era.) The earlier Bruins squad was even stronger than the current one, winning the 89-90 Presidents Trophy and losing just four games in the three rounds before that Stanley Cup finals series. Obviously, certain statistics are skewed by different eras, but both teams produced similar goal differentials. (89-90 earned a +57 mark, 10-11 earned a +51 one.) In other words, these teams weren’t Cinderella stories.

’89-90 top scorers (offense)

Cam Neely – 92 points (28 in playoffs)
Craig Janney – 62 points (22 in playoffs)
Bob Carpenter – 56 points (10 in playoffs)

’10-11 top scorers (offense)

David Krejci – 62 points (17 in playoffs)
Milan Lucic – 62 points (9 in playoffs)
Patrice Bergeron – 57 points (15 in playoffs)
Nathan Horton – 53 points (17 in playoffs)

As you can see, the 89-90 Bruins forward corps leaned heavily on the play of star power forward Cam Neely. There’s a serious drop-off from Neely to Janney (then again, he wasn’t the team’s real No. 2 scorer, who will get to in a second) while the current Bruins score by committee. Comparing the teams relative to their peers shows that the current Bruins might have had a stronger offense, in some ways. Lucic has a long way to go before he reaches Neely’s level, though.

’89-90 scorers among defensemen

Raymond Bourque – 84 points (17 in playoffs)
Greg Hawgwood – 38 points (4 in playoffs)
Glen Wesley – 36 points (8 in playoffs)
Garry Galley – 35 points (6 in playoffs)

’10-11 scorers among defensemen

Zdeno Chara – 44 points (5 in playoffs)
Dennis Seidenberg – 32 points (8 in playoffs)
Note: Tomas Kaberle had eight points while Andrew Ference had seven in the playoffs.

Both Bruins teams featured one blueliner who stood out among the rest (most literally in the case of Chara because he’s really tall and such). Bourque received the Norris Trophy for that season while Chara is one of the three finalists for the 2010-11 season. Each squad was strong at holding teams off the scoreboard, with the 89-90 Bruins allowing the least amount of goals and the current model coming in third place in their regular seasons. Team defense seems to be the biggest similarity between the two teams.

’89-90 top goalie

Andy Moog

Regular season: 24-10-7, 2.89 GAA and 89.3 save pct.; Playoffs: 13-7, 2.21 GAA and 90.9 save pct.

’10-11 top goalie

Tim Thomas

Regular season: 35-11-9, 2 GAA and 93.8 save pct; Playoffs: 12-6, 2.29 GAA and 92.9 save pct.

During the regular season, Moog (46 games played) was in a rotation with Reggie Lemelin (43 games played). He clearly took over during the playoffs, though, putting up what was then a sterling 90.9 save percentage. In some quarters, Thomas went into the season as an expected backup to Tuukka Rask but he quickly regained his Vezina Trophy form.

Moog was a good-to-strong goalie in his NHL career, but he never won a Vezina. Thomas is the odds-on favorite to take that trophy, which would mark the second time he would earn that award. If the current Bruins are significantly stronger than the older version in one area, it’s definitely in net.


Unlike the wildly different current Canucks vs. ’94 edition, the modern Bruins share a lot of similarities to the ’89-90 team. They both won their divisions, produced strong goal differentials and employed Norris Trophy defensemen. The ’90 version’s offense relied upon Neely and Bourque while the current team spreads its scoring over a couple lines, though.

My guess is that the Bruins might face a similar fate as their predecessors, possibly even down to the 4-1 series score. That’s just my opinion, though. Feel free to share your opinion on how the 2011 Stanley Cup finals will shake out by voting in this poll.