I used Bridge / ACR for years & didn't move to Lightroom until version 4. I'd find it very difficult to move back to the Bridge workflow for photographic work. ( I still use Bridge regularly for none photo projects ).
Yes, as I mentioned there are DAM functionality aspects of LR that Bridge cannot replace. However, the fallacy is that one should use Bridge/ACR or LR to the exclusion of the other as opposed to a combination. While there are specific tasks that one or the other might be better, there are some for which they would work equally well.
I'm not exceptionally LR proficient yet, but the fundamental difference between LR and Bridge is that LR's catalog contains everything and knows where those assets are located while with Bridge, you must either point Bridge to the assets or search for them. But if you structure your assets on a single drive in a hierarchy (even a virtual drive comprised of multiple physical drives), it is a simple matter to search your entire "catalog" in a similar manner to searching the LR catalog!
My assets reside on either my server (multiple 3TB drives pooled to one drive and mirrored) or most recent files which I'm still processing are on a local machine mirror. Hence, it is a simple matter using bridge to search my "CATALOG" in to find files meeting certain criteria. It is not as speedy as searching the local LR catalog, but has the advantage of being able to go directly to the files if I already know where they reside.