A day or two after the Bruins eliminated the Lightning to win the Eastern Conference two years ago, general manager Peter Chiarelli held a press conference. He was asked early on how he felt when the seconds ticked down and the Bruins -- thanks to a Nathan Horton goal and a Tim Thomas shutout -- were conference champions. Chiarelli explained he was excited, proud, determined, you name it. And then he realized that his team had a chance at winning the Stanley Cup. Because he’s good at his job, Chiarelli didn’t get distracted by the Cup until it was in the picture. That’s the right way for a GM to think. But for those of us who watch the games as outsiders, you can probably start talking and thinking about the Stanley Cup once the local team is in the conference finals. Now the Bruins are. Again. One of the last four teams standing (once things are figured out over in the Western Conference) will win it all. And two years ago, that it seemed plausible the B’s could

NEW YORK -- If this is an overreaction, cool. It will be the first time anyone’s overreacted to something in sports ever. Going into Game 4 of the Eastern Conference semifinals, a comparison made the rounds: The Bruins had beaten a Canadian team in seven games in the first round (with the series-clincher coming in overtime) and then had the opportunity to sweep an Atlantic Division team in the second round. It was a lot like 2011, when they won the Stanley Cup. Nope. Nope nope nope nope nope nope nope, a bajillion times nope. Watching what the Bruins have done this postseason has been fascinating, really. They’re not as deep offensively as they’ve been in the past, their young superstar has done very little and they’re getting miraculous minutes out of rookie defensemen because one of the best defensemen in the league hasn’t been able to play at all this series. They don’t look unbeatable, but they’re winning. Honestly, it’s the type of

So the Bruins’ next win will come in what, Game 6? It shouldn’t. When it comes to closing out teams, the Bruins haven’t exactly been a mess (after all, they’ve done it), but they’ve hardly been efficient. In case you forgot, they have absolutely no business even being in this series. They blew a 3-1 series lead in the first round and would have been eliminated had the Maple Leafs not turned in one of the biggest single-game collapses in modern sports history. (Forget the Bruins’ three-goal comeback -- the fact that the Maple Leafs couldn’t get the puck out of their zone with a two-goal lead and less than a minute and a half to play makes that game more telling on Toronto’s end than Boston’s.) But this is a different series and a different opponent. This isn’t the upstart Maple Leafs. It’s the Rangers, who once upon a time (January) were the favorites to win the Stanley Cup. After winning the Rick Nash sweepstakes, they were

NEW YORK -- You know how they say the best offense is a good defense? That’s supposed to mean that having a strong defense is worth more to a team than scoring a bunch. Quieting the other team is more important than blowing them away -- something like that. Yet that’s not what it means this postseason for the Bruins. In the Bruins’ case, the best offense is a good defense because their offense is coming from their defense. There was plenty that stood out in the Bruins’ 2-1 win against the Rangers. The Bruins beat Henrik Lundqvist on the night that he played well enough to steal a game. The Merlot Line once again showed that it matters way more than your average fourth line. Tuukka Raskonce again was superb as he continues a start to this postseason that is statistically better than where Tim Thomas was through 10 games in the 2011 postseason. Yet the thing that stands out -- the thing that continues to stand out -- is all of the scoring that is coming from