http://www.thefourthperiod.com/news/bos140604.html
I don't know anything abut this site. Is it legit?
I don't know anything abut this site. Is it legit?
Bruins shopping Marchand?
- Thread starter The Napkin
- Start date
Wouldn't be surprising. A guy like Marchand has a shelf life. While I personally like him, I can see how the organization would be tired of his antics.
#1 in Even Strength points/60
#2 in CORSI For% behind Bergeron
Signed at $4.5m thru '16-'17
If it's for something like Coyle + a 1st with Krejci moving on for a winger to give Bergeron/Söderberg/Coyle/Spooner a shot at the top 3 center spots, I'm listening. However if they sell low on Marchand for some poor on-ice discipline and a mediocre playoffs I'll be very peeved.
#2 in CORSI For% behind Bergeron
Signed at $4.5m thru '16-'17
If it's for something like Coyle + a 1st with Krejci moving on for a winger to give Bergeron/Söderberg/Coyle/Spooner a shot at the top 3 center spots, I'm listening. However if they sell low on Marchand for some poor on-ice discipline and a mediocre playoffs I'll be very peeved.
Marchand's Corsi numbers are excellent, but I've always wondered how much of it can be attributed to him being joined to Bergeron's hip.PedroSpecialK said:
Where/who would you want to move Krejci for? Watching Minnesota in the playoffs I was very impressed with Coyle. This would be a major shake-up for the team but maybe they could lose some salary commitments and build through the trade market with the defensive depth and the picks they have (including the 1st from Minn.)PedroSpecialK said:
This is a good question. Here is a link to his With or Without You numbers for '12-14 at 5-on-5(WOWYs): http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1215&withagainst=true&season=2012-14&sit=5v5cshea said:
As you can see Marchand played 1367 of his 1697 min with Bergeron. So first of all you're going to run into sample size issues looking at times he was on the ice without him. In those times his CF% drops from 61.9 to 49.4 which is a huge drop. Obviously we know Bergeron is a great possession player and Marchand clearly isn't as good without him out there.
However, I'd suggest it's not as bad as it looks and I think Marchand is still a good possession player (and someone to keep unless they get bowled over) for the following reasons:
1. Bit of a circular argument, but having one of the best possession lines in hockey is probably a good thing to keep together even if one guy is doing most of it. Bergeron is still good without Marchand but as you can see from the link his CF% drops to 56% when Brad's not there. They work really well together whether it's Seguin, Smith, Jagr on the other wing.
2. Without Bergeron, Marchand had a big portion of his TOI with Kelly (99 min) and Campbell (80 min) who are both poor possession players (for the Bruins). Marchand with Kelly had a 44.7 CF% and with Campbell had a 42.8 CF% (Ouch). But those centers didn't put up much better numbers with other wingers. Marchand's numbers with Krejci (51.9) and with Soderberg (55.6) are good in smaller samples, so he doesn't tank otherwise good players.
3. He kills penalties and scores shorthanded goals.
4. As PSK noted he has the best p/60 at even strength on the team. I'm not sure why he wasn't put on the power play this year but his point numbers would have looked a lot better if he had.
5. As for the "antics," isn't that part of the role he is expected to play? "Agitator" is still a job description and he ends up drawing more penalties than he takes overall. Maybe they have told him to tone it down and he hasn't. But I would suggest the coaching staff should be the ones to work on this rather than just trading the player.
It could be that the coaching staff is just tired of trying to get him to walk the line between "agitator" and "distraction." He's a good player but I can well imagine he's exhausting to have around as well. He's also got a pretty lousy rep around the league now, the officials are never going to give him the benefit of the doubt in regards to calls any more and several times this year he's done something that the coaching staff hasn't liked at all. Add to that the complete playoff no-show and it's easy to see why the Bruins would at least explore moving him for a proper return.
Which just infuriates me with the way other things are called/not called but that's probably my own issue at this point cause it ain't gonna change.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
It's the same reasoning that led to trading Seguin. And now a year later the FO is lamenting that they didn't have enough speed.
Good coaches and teams work with what they have and find the best opportunities and roles for them.
I'm not sure why Marchand gets singled out for his playoffs when plenty of other players "disappeared" as well. Marchand had 7.9 shots / 60 in the playoffs with a 0% SH%, and 6.8 in the regular season with a 17% SH%. Gee, I wonder if he was snakebitten (like everyone else). He had similar possession numbers to the regular season and while he was on the ice 5-on-5 they outscored opponents 6-3. For long stretches that was the only line generating any offense. Basically the only bad thing he did was take a few penalties. If that's disappearing I think Krejci an Lucic would love to disappear like he did.
Yes, they should be shopping anyone for the "proper return," the question is just what that return is.
Good coaches and teams work with what they have and find the best opportunities and roles for them.
I'm not sure why Marchand gets singled out for his playoffs when plenty of other players "disappeared" as well. Marchand had 7.9 shots / 60 in the playoffs with a 0% SH%, and 6.8 in the regular season with a 17% SH%. Gee, I wonder if he was snakebitten (like everyone else). He had similar possession numbers to the regular season and while he was on the ice 5-on-5 they outscored opponents 6-3. For long stretches that was the only line generating any offense. Basically the only bad thing he did was take a few penalties. If that's disappearing I think Krejci an Lucic would love to disappear like he did.
Yes, they should be shopping anyone for the "proper return," the question is just what that return is.
Marchand has 19 of his 39 playoff points in one playoff season (the Stanley Cup run).
The rest of the time he has the following line:
41GP 5G 15A.
Hint: That's not good.
Whether or not that speaks to anything isn't my place to decide. It's a data point though.
Edit: during the Cup run he had 25GP 11G 8A.
Hint: that's really good.
The rest of the time he has the following line:
41GP 5G 15A.
Hint: That's not good.
Whether or not that speaks to anything isn't my place to decide. It's a data point though.
Edit: during the Cup run he had 25GP 11G 8A.
Hint: that's really good.
Toe Nash said:
I liked Seguin too, but he went 1-2-3 in 6 games in the playoffs and his team got booted in the 1st round. He's not the answer.
I do really wonder if it just boils down to Claude and Chia being tired of Marchand. He had a terrible playoffs which doesn't enamour him to anyone, and he certainly didn't use his speed to his advantage during them. Of course you don't want to scapegoat one guy for the 2nd round exit, but at the same time it was clear after that series that changes needed to be made in team construction. Montreal skated them right out of the building, and they put in a terrible effort in Games 6 and 7. Of course changes had to be made. Hopefully they'll make the right ones.
Is that even that poor? For his regular season career (after his rookie year) he's at .66 P / G. Those numbers give him .49 P / G against better teams and goalies. If you don't cherrypick out his best year, he's at .591 P / G for his career in the playoffs.
Toe Nash said:
Seguin? Yeah, that's poor. He's supposed to be a number 1 center and an offensive powerhouse, he needs to do better than that in the postseason.
6 games on a borderline playoff team and you're writing him off? I know that ship has sailed so I'll drop it but that's a terrible argument against Seguin.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
The point isn't even about him but about the team's decision-making process, which seems to be flawed if they're continually trading their young, good, cost-controlled players based on the small sample of the playoffs or "character" questions. I know they haven't traded Marchand yet, so hopefully they won't.
No, I don't think it is, actually. He's expected to be a top 6 forward and score goals. The extra-curricular stuff is unnecessary and detrimental to the team as a whole.Toe Nash said:
It's not a reason to trade him, but players of Marchand's ilk typically have shelf lives. The Sean Avery's of the world don't play their entire career on one team.
Briere is probably a good comparable for Marchand.
Actually Toe, I quite like Seguin, but he's not going to help your argument here. He's been a recent postseason disappointment.
The team needs to improve. Their footspeed on defense is sorely lacking. And they need to play smarter; against Montreal they really played dumb much of the time and spent far too much time chasing instead of possessing the puck. Trading Marchand doesn't necessarily solve all those problems, but if they can flip what could be an attractive player to another team to shore up needs I'm all for it. Frankly I'm tired of Marchand's act as well, but mostly because he was dogshit in the playoffs this year.
The team needs to improve. Their footspeed on defense is sorely lacking. And they need to play smarter; against Montreal they really played dumb much of the time and spent far too much time chasing instead of possessing the puck. Trading Marchand doesn't necessarily solve all those problems, but if they can flip what could be an attractive player to another team to shore up needs I'm all for it. Frankly I'm tired of Marchand's act as well, but mostly because he was dogshit in the playoffs this year.
Another way to look at this:
The team could use an upgrade to their Top 6 forwards, especially if Iginla leaves. Not mandatory, as they could upgrade elsewhere instead (defense, 4th line). But of their current crop of forwards, Marchand may be the easiest to trade and get good return. Shopping him to see what he could fetch on the trade market seems like a smart thing to do. And I do think the concerns about his shelf life are legit.
If his trade value is really low, then they should keep him. But there's no way to know that without shopping him.
It has nothing to do at all with Seguin, who's presence may or may not have helped this team in the playoffs (keep in mind that if Seguin was here, there would have been no Smith, Ericksson, or Matt Fraser).
The team could use an upgrade to their Top 6 forwards, especially if Iginla leaves. Not mandatory, as they could upgrade elsewhere instead (defense, 4th line). But of their current crop of forwards, Marchand may be the easiest to trade and get good return. Shopping him to see what he could fetch on the trade market seems like a smart thing to do. And I do think the concerns about his shelf life are legit.
If his trade value is really low, then they should keep him. But there's no way to know that without shopping him.
It has nothing to do at all with Seguin, who's presence may or may not have helped this team in the playoffs (keep in mind that if Seguin was here, there would have been no Smith, Ericksson, or Matt Fraser).
God forbid they have a perpetual 25-30+ goal scorer with speed on the team for a while. We hate that.FL4WL3SS said:
As for the playoff performance, why are people focusing on the point production? I posted reasons why Marchand was pretty much the same this playoffs (actually, took more shots) outside of shooting percentage. To the eye test he looked dangerous all playoffs. Is missing open nets and hitting posts anything other than bad luck? Maybe the open nets can suggest that he was "wound too tight", but I don't know if we can prove that or if it's predictive at all. It's not like he has always choked in the playoffs as his 2011 run shows. It's a questionable "clutch" argument based on a small sample size and I'd expect better from a statistically-inclined board.
Similar thing with Seguin who was 4th in the entire NHL in shots in the 2013 playoffs even though he was mostly playing with Kelly and Peverley instead of the teammates he was used to (Bergeron and Marchand). To my eyes he looked dangerous and people said "Oh he's not scoring, he's just shooting it into the goalie's chest!!!" while ignoring that (even if true) a ton of playoff goals are scored because someone flung the puck at the net and got lucky or got a rebound. And it's become gospel that he "isn't a playoff performer" based on 6 games this year (and who knows if he'll get a chance to shed that title next year on that team).
Again, I bring up Seguin, as I did originally, not because I want to re-hash that trade argument. I know it's done and I know they wouldn't have had Loui or Smith. I brought it up because focusing on the small sample of the playoffs and the luck that is involved in the point results is not a good way to decide whether or not to trade a player. Even if it has some validity, it's often post-hoc reasoning for questionable decisions (remember how the stories about Seguin partying during the playoffs didn't come out until after the playoffs were over?) and it's not applied equally (Rask didn't have his best playoffs, but we're not entertaining trading him so no one is pointing that out).
When fans do it, whatever. When the front office does it, it's a bad sign.
Because you don't win a playoff series by registering more shots than the other team?Toe Nash said:
As for your eye test, maybe you should get glasses. Marchand was dogshit all playoffs, and many posters here saw that and commented on it as it was happening. You might be the only person in existence who thinks he looked dangerous all playoffs.
At the very least, this is probably being done as motivation. I never read anything about him coming to camp out of shape, but it was pretty clear he didn't start the year ready to play. He never developed any consistency through he season and usually that points to focus and/or work ethic. I don't have a problem with them shopping him, but I am concerned it would be selling low. I trust the FO to know this as well and that's why I think this is more as a way to give him a kick in the ass than to remove him from the team.
Who is this directed at, exactly? I don't see anyone in this thread advocating for a trade, but very fairly analyzing the merits of trading Marchand. This subject obviously pushed some sort of button for you for which you feel you need to constantly bring up Seguin in a Marchand thread.Toe Nash said:
If you're upset at the FO for floating his name, then you should probably come right out and say that. Otherwise, you're arguing against a straw man in this thread.
Chia basically did the same thing earlier this season when he said out of the blue that they're not trading Marchand and he started to play like the Rad Marchand we're used to after it, so there might be some merit to that theory.RIFan said:
Can you explain why his SH% dropped from 17% to 0%? It was a small sample size and Price was good. He had similar possession numbers to the regular season and more shots. They just didn't go in. He missed a couple sitters. Is that predictive?TheShynessClinic said:
That series is over but if they replayed it a million times the Bruins probably win it 550k times. Moving forward, there is no reason to focus so much on 6 games. There's so much luck involved and you should 1. Take if for the SSS it is and 2. look at the whole picture within those games, not just whether he scored or not. That's my point.
The possession numbers largely back up my eye test, so maybe we are just looking for different things.
Anyway, the motivation thing makes some sense and as I said a few posts ago, it's fine to "shop" anyone. So, wait and see.
His SH% went down because he wasn't taking good shots. He had two gimmes he missed, but everything else was awful.Toe Nash said:
And you're discounting his other 41 games of terrible playoff performance and focusing only on the Montreal series.
Outside of the 2011 run, he has been awful in the playoffs, all metrics considered.
Seguin was going out and getting shitfaced to the point that he showed up to the rink in the same clothes three days in a row while he was doing shit in the playoffs.Toe Nash said:
Nice to see that the Bruins aren't a good team and don't have a good coach though.
Honestly, I thought after a Cup and another finals appearance, the, "Clode hates offensive players," would die down a bit.
Myt1 said:
Not as long as people keep forming their opinion based on what Mike Felger tells them to think. "The Bruins would rather win 1-0 than 4-3. " "They have fallen in love with their system, and think that they are smarter than everyone else."
Of course, the second quote they just regurgitate for each of the local sides. They may have even used it for the Revs.
12 games of 0 SH% is not especially predictive if the player is still getting shots. Someone can have a half-season or more of inflated numbers due to luck (Bozak or Steen this year) and it's not predictive.TheShynessClinic said:
For Marchand, a couple garbage goals go in, or if they're facing Budaj instead of Price, and things look different. And if you ignore his best playoffs, which was 25 games (with an 18% SH%), yeah his performance is low, Eric Van. I posted his complete points / game numbers above -- they're not far from his regular season numbers.
I'm basically repeating myself so here's a bit of new info, then I'm done. Certainly this isn't the be-all-end-all but I think it's a pretty useful tool to try to tease out how much of a player's numbers are due to both luck and his teammates either performing or not. It is the kind of thing that this board would eat up if it were baseball related so that's why I'm still posting it.
When Marchand is on the ice, 5-on-5, here are his and his teammates' shooting percentages, regular season and then playoffs:
11-12: 9.0% / 3.3%
12-13: 8.3% / 5.9%
13-14: 8.8% / 6.4%
So this is not just Marchand, but his teammates have played worse / had bad luck with him on the ice (which would give him fewer assists to go along with his reduced goals).
For comparison, here's David Krejci:
11-12: 9.5% / 6.1%
12-13: 8.8% / 11.8%
13-14: 9.6% / 1.1%
Which season did he lead the NHL in playoff scoring? Which season did he just have 4 points in 12 games?
I definitely think the Krejci line played relatively poorly this playoffs, and their possession numbers agree with that. But there was a lot of bad luck for them too.
Murphy just can't stop making shit up. How somebody still employs this asshole is mind boggling.
I also love the phrasing. "have had talks"
"hey, you want to send us Marchand for Marleau?"
(dial tone)
"hey, you want to send us Marchand for Marleau?"
(dial tone)
Or Chiarelli stays on the phone and says "hey you ever heard of this site called cap geek? If you look on it you can see that there's really no way we can actually add fucking salary." Wow Murphy just thinks we're all retards.The Napkin said:
If you throw Kelly in, it makes a lot more sense, but you'd still need to find a Marchand replacement. Even if it's unlikely to happen, can you imagine a team with Krejci, Bergeron, Marleau, and Sorderberg as its Centers? Another option is they trade Krejci for someone to replace Marchand and call up Spooner. I don't know, it doesn't seem completely crazy to me. I do think Marchand is gone one way or another.Salem's Lot said:
Marleau isn't a center. He's a left winger.
I like Patrick Marleau fine as a player. He's got wheels and is a more consistent goal scorer than Marchand, and he hasn't shown any signs of slowing down. My concern is the salary cap. The Bruins take on $2.1 million in salary im this move, and they don't really have the space for it. I'm all for shopping Marchand around, but I'd almost prefer to deal him off for futures and cap space, then try to find a cheap right wing compliment for the Bergeron line on the FA market.
I like Patrick Marleau fine as a player. He's got wheels and is a more consistent goal scorer than Marchand, and he hasn't shown any signs of slowing down. My concern is the salary cap. The Bruins take on $2.1 million in salary im this move, and they don't really have the space for it. I'm all for shopping Marchand around, but I'd almost prefer to deal him off for futures and cap space, then try to find a cheap right wing compliment for the Bergeron line on the FA market.
Marleau is going to be 35 going into the upcoming season. He'll be 37 when his current deal is over.
I guess it depends on how Chiarelli sees this team over the next 2-3 years. If he's going to try and push for one more Cup during the remaining Chara-elite years, then blow it up and try rebuilding in 2017 when the only players remaining on contract are Bergeron, Seidenberg, Chara and Rash - this deal makes sense.
If he's trying to build a year in-year out competitive team (ala the Red Wings), I'm not sure I love this.
I guess it depends on how Chiarelli sees this team over the next 2-3 years. If he's going to try and push for one more Cup during the remaining Chara-elite years, then blow it up and try rebuilding in 2017 when the only players remaining on contract are Bergeron, Seidenberg, Chara and Rash - this deal makes sense.
If he's trying to build a year in-year out competitive team (ala the Red Wings), I'm not sure I love this.
I feel dirty for even clicking that link. Murphy is the worst. The least he could have done is try to seem like he had a clue by directly addressing the addition $2.1 in cap money by stating additional moves would need to be done to make this work.
I am trying to think who has it better considering they are never correct: a meteorologist or James Murphy.
Murphy has made a good career out of this shit. No idea how he ended up with ESPN and NESN for a few years. He's always had zero credibility. It was fun times when he insisted the Bruins had traded Patrice Bergeron to Anaheim for Chris Pronger years ago.
As an aside, the local Bruins media has taken a nosedive. Shinzawa is really the only good writer these days, and he's not even on the Bruins beat anymore.
As an aside, the local Bruins media has taken a nosedive. Shinzawa is really the only good writer these days, and he's not even on the Bruins beat anymore.
TheShynessClinic said:
He's only wrong when he's working late and submitting stories about 14 yr old girls, but he's only wrong until he pins it on his editor.
cshea said:
That makes more sense. He's still listed as a C on H-Ref, but I should have checked another site.
Chia is usually a straight shooter about these kinds of things (he admitted to trade discussions regarding Seguin), so if he's saying there have been no trade talks I would trust that to be the case. I don't know as much about Murphy's reliability as many of you do, but one thing I will say is that he is a terrible, terrible writer. Every time I open one of his articles (for the videos, of course), I feel like I'm reading an 8th grader's book report. There are usually about the same number of grammatical and factual errors, as well.
Art Staple (Isles beat writer at Newsday) tweeted that he thinks the Isles are going to trade the 5th overall pick. Bruins are looking for cap relief. Isles need wingers with grit. What would be a fair deal for both teams? I haven't read any credible rumors, just throwing this out there to pick some brains.