Bruins bring back NHL trophy superstition |

Bruins bring back NHL trophy superstition

Jonathan Bombulie
Boston Bruins players pose with the Prince of Wales trophy and Bill Daly, deputy commissioner of the National Hockey League, following Game 4 of the Eastern Conference finals against the Carolina Hurricanes in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, May 16, 2019. Boston won 4-0 to advance to the Stanley Cup Final.

Despite the best efforts of Sidney Crosby and Alex Ovechkin, a championship NHL superstition just won’t die.

After the Boston Bruins defeated the Carolina Hurricanes 4-0 Thursday night to complete a sweep of the Eastern Conference finals, captain Zdeno Chara did not touch the Prince of Wales Trophy.

In 1997, Philadelphia Flyers captain Eric Lindros started the superstitious practice of not touching the conference championship trophy, the idea being that it’s bad luck to celebrate any accomplishment short of a Stanley Cup.

Over the past three seasons, however, Crosby and Ovechkin handled the trophy without reservations, and their teams went on to capture the ultimate prize.

The Bruins’ logic for not touching the trophy was shaky at best.

“Every team has got their different, I guess, superstitious rituals,” David Krejci told “We’ve been there with Z before and we’re 50-50.”

The Bruins did not touch the Prince of Wales Trophy when they won it in 2011 and 2013. In 2011, they beat Vancouver. In 2013, they lost to Chicago.

If the winner of the Western Conference finals between the San Jose Sharks and St. Louis Blues wants a superstitious advantage in the Stanley Cup Final, they should handle the Clarence S. Campbell Bowl when it’s presented to them.

According to a study conducted by, since 1997, in series where one Stanley Cup finalist touched the conference championship trophy and the other didn’t, the touchers are 6-3.

Jonathan Bombulie is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jonathan by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | NHL
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.