Bruins: post mortem

[lexrageorge]

 
Why say it? Because Chiarelli still hasn't learned that you don't have to air everything out, and sometimes it's actually advantageous to keep things close to the vest. For reference see trashing Tyler Seguin at the draft right before he was trying to trade him.

That seems a bit unreasonable.  
 
Let's face it:  it's obvious to all that Lucic's play was not up to snuff; there's nothing Chiarelli could say that would improve or hurt his trade value. It's also obvious that Lucic will command a pretty large sum on the free agent market.  I see Chiarelli's comments more on attempting to kick Lucic in the rear than anything else.  

 

[Ed Hillel]

Joe Haggerty ‏@HackswithHaggs 57s57 seconds ago
Milan Lucic: "I can say for sure the loss of Johnny Boychuk definitely affected me at start of the year. That was a tough one to get over"

 
I'm not sure you want a guy like this back. I can understand feeling some pressure around a trade deadline, but not being able to perform because your second-pairing Dman (at the time) got traded is ridiculous. Why would that impact your on-ice performance in any way? You don't want to pay him top money for his upcoming years anyway. If they re-sign him for the numbers he's talking about now, I'm done with Chia completely. They need to let Lucic walk.

 

[PedroSpecialK]

Or we are just overreacting to a fairly innocuous comment.

 
What bugs me about it is that Lucic has not played up to earning his $6m salary. Regardless of this fact, If the Bruins have any intention of re-signing him, they've just set their starting negotiation position at >$6m.
 
It's safe to say that he will not perform worse in the coming season, so Chiarelli has publicly admitted that the Bruins' valuation (either of Lucic's play, or of what the market will give him coming off an 18 goal, 44 points season) is at least $6.1m.
 
If Lucic has a good season in '15-'16 and the Bruins are trying to re-sign him in the middle of it, the minimum AAV he's looking at is $7.5m in-season.
 
It seems innocuous and may well end up being nothing, but there is nothing to be gained from saying it.

 

[kenneycb]

I think it's a pretty reasonable assumption that the market would value Lucic at over $6.1M as a 27 year-old UFA with his track record.  At least as of today.

 

[NickEsasky]

I think it's a pretty reasonable assumption that the market would value Lucic at over $6.1M as a 27 year-old UFA with his track record.  At least as of today.

This is most certainly true. Probably not much to lose by Chiarelli saying something. However, like PSK says, there is absolutely nothing to gain either - so why not just keep quiet?

 

[kenneycb]

This is most certainly true. Probably not much to lose by Chiarelli saying something. However, like PSK says, there is absolutely nothing to gain either - so why not just keep quiet?

Because he's trying to keep his job and media relations is part of his job.  Not everyone can pull a Belichick, unfortunately.  Plus Canadians are nice and shit.

 

[NickEsasky]

Why can't he say he wasn't up to snuff and leave out the part about the money though? He gives the media something without giving Looch's agents a starting price. 

 

[RetractableRoof]

Chia, on not being aggresive enough: "It could be a personnel issue, or it could be some, uhhhhh, other things as well." Awkward.

I'm not saying there haven't been games or shifts or plays, but as a team, I feel as though they haven't played with the same *consistent* toughness since Thornton got tuned up by Scott. That team toughness feeds/breeds aggressive play. I don't know what to make of it, but it's not there. I can't remember the last time I saw a team intimidated by the hitting of the Bruins - or worn down by the physicality of the team.

The Patriots seem to have decided that a certain amount of penalties were the cost of doing business to have Browner imposing his aggression on the opponents and his teammates as well. I think Lucic went way too soft - whether by his personal design or the teams, but he needs to play slightly on the other side of the line if this season is the result of pulling back.

 

[kenneycb]

Why can't he say he wasn't up to snuff and leave out the part about the money though? He gives the media something without giving Looch's agents a starting price. 

Lucic's agent isn't stupid either.  Lucic on the free market today would easily garner the money.  Every single party privy to the negotiation can freely admit that.  They're not getting him on a discount or cheaper deal than when he was an RFA.  Chia's not hoarding secrets or really saying anything that anybody doesn't already know.  It's about issue #300 in the whole negotiation process with Lucic.

 

[RedOctober3829]

They should trade him before the season to get the most value for Lucic.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

He's a center - with Krejci, Bergeron and Soderberg on the team where exactly did you want them to put him? He wasn't going to get an opportunity until one of them got hurt, which is exactly what they should have done. 

What would we do with Willie McGee?

A team should identify and play the players that give it the best chance to win. That didn't happen here. Soderberg was a huge disappointment this year. Campbell was a dumpster fire for 70 games. A team that is short on forward talent can't afford to not play its best 12.

 

[kenneycb]

Spooner looked completely lost in preseason and at the beginning of the year, in both Boston and Providence, so there's a bit of revisionist history going on.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Spooner looked completely lost in preseason and at the beginning of the year, in both Boston and Providence, so there's a bit of revisionist history going on.

No. It's not revisionist to say that he is an NHL caliber player, that he was ready in February, and that the Bruins were ready and willing to trade him for a fraction of his apparent value. Whether it is on the coach or the player development staff or both, it's an organizational failure that it took an injury to get him a look. That he wasn't ready in camp may mean that the Bruins player development process is crap.

 

[lexrageorge]

How do you know that they were willing to just dump Spooner in a trade?  The trade didn't happen, and so all we have to go by are various tweets and rumors, none of which are necessarily convincing. 

 

[jk333]

How do you know that they were willing to just dump Spooner in a trade?  The trade didn't happen, and so all we have to go by are various tweets and rumors, none of which are necessarily convincing. 

 
The "rumor" was that the Bruins offered and were turned down. It's technically a rumor but one that I thought was widely accepted.  

 

[kenneycb]

No. It's not revisionist to say that he is an NHL caliber player, that he was ready in February, and that the Bruins were ready and willing to trade him for a fraction of his apparent value. Whether it is on the coach or the player development staff or both, it's an organizational failure that it took an injury to get him a look. That he wasn't ready in camp may mean that the Bruins player development process is crap.

You can't definitively say that.  Your bias can since it supports your POV.  But you cannot.  Fact is we don't know. 

 

[Eddie Jurak]

You can't definitively say that.  Your bias can since it supports your POV.  But you cannot.  Fact is we don't know. 

I said it was a possibility. Are you saying otherwise? I find it very hard to believe that he wasn't capable of helping the team before Feb 19, but as of Feb 20 he was magically capable of being one of their leading scorers in the stretch run.

 

[kenneycb]

I missed the may.  Ergo I suck and go to the box and feel shame.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

I missed the may.  Ergo I suck and go to the box and feel shame.

 

[mcpickl]

Chiarelli on Lucic:
 
"Wasn't up to snuff this year. Re-signing him will be a difficult decision that will require a lot of thought. He's paid a good salary now and will be paid more."
 
Why say right now - publicly - that he'll be paid more than $6m?

He didn't say this, not at the press conference anyways unless you got it from somewhere else.
 
He said "he gets paid a good salary now, and if we extend him he'll be paid a good salary going forward."
 
Doesn't set the floor at 6M.

 

[PedroSpecialK]

You are absolutely right, I took that from a poster's transcript on another site instead of waiting for the official quote as I was unable to listen from work. Should have known better.
 
Looks like Chiarelli said exactly what you posted, which gives me no qualms about that particular statement.
 
Me right now:
 

 

[TheRealness]

I think we can safely assume that any conditions of Peter's continued employment is that the mustache shown above is never allowed to appear on his face again. Does he not remember Dave Lewis? It's just bad juju.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Seems like the players got a lot of excuses ready to go. Kind of pitiful.

Lucic's in particular. "I mailed in my season because that big meanie GM traded Johnny Boychuk away."

Cry me a river, Milan. And don't let the fucking doorknob hit you on the way out.

 

[steveluck7]

I guess this is Marchand's excuse but i don't know what he's trying to say (and neither does he). The Panthers wanted to eliminate you more than you wanted to make the playoffs??

 
 
“That’s tough. The fact that we let that moment slip from us, I don’t know what happened in between that period that we came out and had the period that we did,” forward Brad Marchand explained Monday on the Bruins’ breakup day at TD Garden. “I think it just showed how much more Florida wanted to knock us off than we wanted to beat them and get in. That’s a tough one to explain. I don’t think I have an answer for that one. You stumped me.”

Link

 

[mwonow]

I'm not saying there haven't been games or shifts or plays, but as a team, I feel as though they haven't played with the same *consistent* toughness since Thornton got tuned up by Scott. That team toughness feeds/breeds aggressive play. I don't know what to make of it, but it's not there. I can't remember the last time I saw a team intimidated by the hitting of the Bruins - or worn down by the physicality of the team.

The Patriots seem to have decided that a certain amount of penalties were the cost of doing business to have Browner imposing his aggression on the opponents and his teammates as well. I think Lucic went way too soft - whether by his personal design or the teams, but he needs to play slightly on the other side of the line if this season is the result of pulling back.

 
Seconded. Teams have styles, and the Bruins style is physical bordering on/over nasty. When they don't play that way, they lose their identity - and games. 

 

[Myt1]

"I can't explain why a team that could only play spoiler had more desire than we did to actually make the playoffs?"
 
I don't know why that was complicated.

 

[veritas]

 
Seconded. Teams have styles, and the Bruins style is physical bordering on/over nasty. When they don't play that way, they lose their identity - and games. 

 
This sort of attitude is why Campbell and Paille got such a long leash and why Miller was playing over Bartkowski when he was healthy.
 
They didn't score enough this season, that's why they're not in the playoffs. Period. Overall they struggled to get the puck out of their own end and struggled to get the puck in the net when they did have possession. The lack of elite offensive talent is something they've always overcome in the past because they've just dominated everyone 5 on 5 in possession. But that didn't happen this season for various reasons.
 
The whole "the Bruins were tougher back in the day" line is kinda bullshit anyway. I mean look at their lines the year they won the cup:
 
Marchand-Bergeron-Recchi
Lucic-Krejci-Horton
Kelly-Peverley-Ryder
Paille-Campbell-Thornton
 
I see Bergeron, 4 finesse players who don't play physical at all, 5 guys that everyone here wants to get rid of 3 years ago, a 42 year old who could barely skate at the time, and poor crippled Nathan Horton.

 

[kenneycb]

You do realize that last paragraph is more or less made up?

Horton missed two games that year and was a power forward until getting railroaded in Game 3. Lucic was still a power forward. Thornton was decent, people were pleased to indifferent about acquiring Campbell and most had accepted that Paille wasn't going to be the player we thought he'd be, but he was still a dynamo on the PK. You're directionally correct about Ryder and Kelly, though I think Kelly ingratiated himself during the playoffs and into the following year, echoing how Sens fans said (at the time of the trade) that we'd love having him on the team.

You also conveniently omitted Chara, Seidenberg, McQuaid and Boychuk, all of whom could lower the boom. Hell even Ference had a nice amount of jam in his game as he certainly wasn't a finesse guy. Considering the B's set the physical tone from the back end and the scariest guy in the NHL was the most important non-goalie on that team, and maybe the league, I can see why you omitted 30% of the roster as it conveniently disregards your point.

 

[veritas]

You do realize that last paragraph is more or less made up?

Horton missed two games that year and was a power forward until getting railroaded in Game 3. Lucic was still a power forward. Thornton was decent, people were pleased to indifferent about acquiring Campbell and most had accepted that Paille wasn't going to be the player we thought he'd be, but he was still a dynamo on the PK. You're directionally correct about Ryder and Kelly, though I think Kelly ingratiated himself during the playoffs and into the following year, echoing how Sens fans said (at the time of the trade) that we'd love having him on the team.

You also conveniently omitted Chara, Seidenberg, McQuaid and Boychuk, all of whom could lower the boom. Hell even Ference had a nice amount of jam in his game as he certainly wasn't a finesse guy. Considering the B's set the physical tone from the back end and the scariest guy in the NHL was the most important non-goalie on that team, and maybe the league, I can see why you omitted 30% of the roster as it conveniently disregards your point.

 
Yeah my last paragraph is kinda bullshit too. I was being somewhat facetious. The point I was trying to make is that there were plenty of soft, skilled players on that team. And the "tough" ones are the same ones people have been trying to run out of town for the past couple years. And I was a fan of the guy, but let's not over romanticize the Nathan Horton era. He had 53 points in a full season and was criticized for most of it for his lackadaisical play until the playoffs started.
 
I didn't mention defense because I don't think there's much of a difference in toughness between then and now. Chara, Seidenberg, and McQuaid are still here. Boychuk is a big loss as far as his physical presence, but Kevan Miller replaces that. He's just a bad NHL player while Boychuck was a very good one. The bigger difference on defense (IMO) which I alluded to earlier in my post is that the talent level just isn't there anymore. Seidenberg has fallen a long way since then, and Chara has too. Chara's still a very good player, but he doesn't completely dominate the game for 25 minutes a game like he used to.

 

[j44thor]

The point you are missing is that the fourth line and Kelly were excellent during the cup year. That doesn't mean four years later they are still effective, two of the aforementioned have since broken legs and Thornton had his head caved in by a glorified boxer on skates.

The biggest issue I see with chia is that he consistently holds onto marginal talent a year too late instead of letting them go a year too early.

 

[pappymojo]

Is there any hope or anything the team can do to persuade the league to allow some relief from the Savard contract?

 

[cshea]

There are some rumblings that they will trade Savard this summer. Arizona has interest since he would help them get to the cap floor without actually spening a penny.

I'm a bit torn. The Savard contract sucks over the summer, but it is a nice cushion to have during the season.

 

[Toe Nash]

Why do you say this?  Your statement contradicts statements that the Bruins have made in the past, so I think you need to back your assertion up a little bit. 

They played Campbell too often, traded for Talbot, Bergeron was like 7th on the team in TOI and is one of the best possession players in the league, Seidenberg led the Dmen in even-strength TOI while Hamilton was a possession monster, they traded Seguin and blamed a lot of it on his not being clutch in the playoffs, not understanding how shooting percentage works...need more?
 
Edit: Oh oh, they tried to trade for Chris Stewart, they played Kevan Miller with a busted shoulder instead of giving Trotman a shot...this is a team that doesn't highly value analytics. Unless they have some special analytics that are telling them that possessing the puck is not a good thing.

 

[behindthepen]

 
Seconded. Teams have styles, and the Bruins style is physical bordering on/over nasty. When they don't play that way, they lose their identity - and games. 

Not sure that's the Bruins style anymore.  Definitely not nasty, and just above average physical.  And the pipeline of younger players don't look that way either.

 

[lexrageorge]

They traded nothing to get Talbot, who was >>>> Campbell.  
 
It's typical for forwards to get less ice time than defenseman.  Crosby was 6th, Malkin 8th for Pittsburgh.  Bergeron was 3rd among forwards, but the difference between his ice time and Eriksson's (21 seconds) and Krejci's (2 seconds) is not significant or indicative of anything.  Krejci is their #1 center and part of the first power play unit; Eriksson saw lots of time on the power play as well.  
 
The difference in ice time between Seidenberg and Hamilton is also insignificant.  
 
Seguin was traded for a lot of reasons; it had nothing to do with a lack of understanding of shooting percentages. 
 
EDIT:  I'll add that I agree with you on one item:  they played Campbell too often.  But that fact alone does not mean the team ignores statistical methods. 

 

[RIFan]

They played Campbell too often, traded for Talbot, Bergeron was like 7th on the team in TOI and is one of the best possession players in the league, Seidenberg led the Dmen in even-strength TOI while Hamilton was a possession monster, they traded Seguin and blamed a lot of it on his not being clutch in the playoffs, not understanding how shooting percentage works...need more?
 
Edit: Oh oh, they tried to trade for Chris Stewart, they played Kevan Miller with a busted shoulder instead of giving Trotman a shot...this is a team that doesn't highly value analytics. Unless they have some special analytics that are telling them that possessing the puck is not a good thing.

I'm not sure most of those would prove that the stats team didn't have much say. I'm spitballing, but perhaps Bergeron's TOI was limited because analytics showed an X% drop off in performance after a certain threshold. We scratch our heads over Campbell, but maybe it's because they had a stat set that said a left shot center man creates a value in certain situations. Without the knowledge of exactly what data they are looking at you could leap to the opposite conclusion that they were too reliant on in house analytics. I think it's reasonable to assume that teams are not relying on just standard advanced stats, but are trying to develop their own stats to gain an advantage.

TLR it's impossible to say if they under utilized or over analyzed stats.

 

[kenneycb]

How the hell is not playing an unproven rookie defenseman over Miller indicative of anything analytics related?

 

[pappymojo]

They played Campbell too often, traded for Talbot, Bergeron was like 7th on the team in TOI and is one of the best possession players in the league, Seidenberg led the Dmen in even-strength TOI while Hamilton was a possession monster, they traded Seguin and blamed a lot of it on his not being clutch in the playoffs, not understanding how shooting percentage works...need more?
 
Edit: Oh oh, they tried to trade for Chris Stewart, they played Kevan Miller with a busted shoulder instead of giving Trotman a shot...this is a team that doesn't highly value analytics. Unless they have some special analytics that are telling them that possessing the puck is not a good thing.

 
Really?

 

[soxhop411]

 
Mike Cole ‏@MikeColeNESN  3m3 minutes ago
Interesting stuff from @FriedgeHNIC about the Bruins in his 30 thoughts column http://ow.ly/LB2A3 

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I'm a liar, so I'm deleting this.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Last summer? So after they gave him $16 million?

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Last summer? So after they gave him $16 million?

 
Yes.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I'm a liar, so I'm deleting this.

 

[RetractableRoof]

There is so much I'd love to know about what the modeling is telling them - and how granular it is. Does player X that the model hates suck out of the gate in each game? Or is there a huge drop off after Y minutes of TOI? Is there a drop off after Y minutes on ice per period and they are vulnerable in the last 2-3 minutes of a period? Are they more or less vulnerable with other lines/pairings? Is the player a particular liability on longer shifts? On longer shifts with the further bench? On Tuesdays? When playing a faster team are they at a disadvantage? Or a heavier team?

Then is Julien too old school to make use of the numbers? Or are the numbers accurate but injuries and/or trust preventing him from oerating on what those numbers are offering. I heard PC make a reference to loyalty in the press conference. How does that play into a coaches decision making... and should it? Building confidence in ones players might go hand in hand with showing them loyalty... at what point is it a positive and again at what point is it a negative?

What a wonderful and crazy world coaches/GMs/teams live in now...

 

[FL4WL3SS]

I think he's full of shit.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

KFP or his mole?

 

[FL4WL3SS]

KFP

 

[FL4WL3SS]

I find it hard to believe he had this information since last year and just sat on it and didn't say anything. Specifically the very interesting part about the Bruins using advanced statistical analysis, that would have been a very interesting conversation piece here. So now that Campbell and Seidenberg had a rough year and it fits his narrative all of a sudden he has some big inside scoop?
 
I don't know, whatever.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I find it hard to believe he had this information since last year and just sat on it and didn't say anything. Specifically the very interesting part about the Bruins using advanced statistical analysis, that would have been a very interesting conversation piece here. So now that Campbell and Seidenberg had a rough year and it fits his narrative all of a sudden he has some big inside scoop?
 
I don't know, whatever.

 
I'm sure you'll be looking forward to my next post about my doctor friend who keyed me in on Chara's PCL tear years ago.
 
I live to retroactively impress RMPS.
 
While it's only tangentially related, I did mention this last August regarding NHL teams analytic's departments, which I learned in one of my conversations about the Bruins.
 
Or I planted that post 8 months ago and just played the waiting game. You all fell right into my trap.

 

[kenneycb]

.