Don't want no mediocre, won't hit no mediocre
- Thread starter FL4WL3SS
- Start date
FelixMantilla said:
Maybe I was angry, irrationally so, but when Buffalo went up 3-2, I was firmly in the camp of "BLOW IT THE FUCK UP" mode.
Given that came from an irrational place, I have settled on "they need to make a major move up front" and am not in that mode. They won't get out of the first round with the way they are playing, and that 1st line RW has become a vacuum of suck. However, with Eriksson looking like his old self (illusion? reality?), I could be convinced adding someone like Stewart and not touching the current roster might make some sense.
Then I kick that self in the teeth, and say trade Lucic + for Hall.
Then I kick that self in the teeth and cry a little as I wonder how I could have betrayed my homie, my man, my true hockey love, Milan.
Then I kick that self in the teeth and wonder why the hell we can't just call up Pastrnak when he's done with World Juniors and let him ride on the RW with Lucic and Krejci.
Then I.... need Xanax.
Honestly I think Pastrnak is the only realistic option for this year that doesn't include blowing it up. He can fit under the cap, can make an impact on the first line, and I am drooling at the thought of him with Krejci. On the flip side, I don't think he'll be able to hold up through the rest of the regular season and a full playoff run playing top line minutes at age 18 having never played so much hockey in a season.
But that just pushes the can down the road and then they're back in the same spot next year of having overpriced players underperforming. I am moving more and more toward the idea that the team just isn't going to make a run this year and just bite the bullet and make moves for the future.
Then I remember that the freaking Rangers made the Cup finals last year and all it takes is making the playoffs and getting hot. I don't see this team as being demonstrably worse than the Rangers were last year.
But that just pushes the can down the road and then they're back in the same spot next year of having overpriced players underperforming. I am moving more and more toward the idea that the team just isn't going to make a run this year and just bite the bullet and make moves for the future.
Then I remember that the freaking Rangers made the Cup finals last year and all it takes is making the playoffs and getting hot. I don't see this team as being demonstrably worse than the Rangers were last year.
Yeah, seeding doesn't matter. You just need a ticket to the dance. LA won the Cup as the 8th and 6th seeds. The Rangers and a Devils are low seeds that have advanced to the Finals in recent years out of the East. So really, you just need to get in. Home ice is a bonus.
I understand what they're doing with Pastrnak. They're trying to avoid using the ELC year as well as not placing unfair expectations and pressures on him to come in as an 18 year old and solve the RW problem. It's a tough call for the team because on the one hand he could be an internal option that solves everything, but on the other there is a lot that could go wrong and hurt the future of both Pastrnak and the team.
I understand what they're doing with Pastrnak. They're trying to avoid using the ELC year as well as not placing unfair expectations and pressures on him to come in as an 18 year old and solve the RW problem. It's a tough call for the team because on the one hand he could be an internal option that solves everything, but on the other there is a lot that could go wrong and hurt the future of both Pastrnak and the team.
Any moves that are made should not be made with this season in mind. The Bruins aren't going anywhere this year. They're not getting past Montreal, if they make the playoffs at all.
The Bruins need to fix the team with an eye towards the next 2-4 years. AKA - no Chris Stewart. They need to bring in a long term solution that can put the puck in the net consistently. They need to move some contracts to provide flexibility down the road to re-sign Dougie, plus whatever scoring talent they acquire.
The sooner there's acceptance that they're not winning the Cup this year, the better.
The Bruins need to fix the team with an eye towards the next 2-4 years. AKA - no Chris Stewart. They need to bring in a long term solution that can put the puck in the net consistently. They need to move some contracts to provide flexibility down the road to re-sign Dougie, plus whatever scoring talent they acquire.
The sooner there's acceptance that they're not winning the Cup this year, the better.
And I believe his career high in games is under 40. No way they throw him into the fire right now.cshea said:
I think they're willing to burn his ELC year, but will try to baby him until March and then see if he's still an option. He can play 4 more NHL games before a final decision (I think...<10, right?) needs to be made.
I think TFP's post combined with this post is the way to go with Pastrnak. Hold him until Feb/March and then let him loose on that top line (given they don't have a replacement by then).Dummy Hoy said:
The problem for Chia is going to be the fact that this team has talent and can make the playoffs, so the direction is going to be hard to decide.
Well... Um, yeah.
I'm ready to throw in the towel on this year's team. They look like shit in every game they play. I'd explore some targeted trades of guys like Lucic, Seidenberg and the like.
Chara is about to be very over paid. I'd like to keep him in a reduced role, but with a contact like his you'd like to get rid of him a year early than a year late. Tough call on this roster.
I'm ready to throw in the towel on this year's team. They look like shit in every game they play. I'd explore some targeted trades of guys like Lucic, Seidenberg and the like.
Chara is about to be very over paid. I'd like to keep him in a reduced role, but with a contact like his you'd like to get rid of him a year early than a year late. Tough call on this roster.
I think they should explore trades for everyone on the roster except for Krejci, Bergeron and Hamilton. See what they can get for anyone else.FL4WL3SS said:
I'm with BSF here.
TSC said in the game thread that we can reasonably expect a 1st, a prospect, and a vet in a package for Chara, and I say if somebody offers that the B's need to jump on it.
This might also qualify as crazy talk, but I think they should look into moving Tuukka as well. He would have to waive his NMC, obviously, but he is a totally different goalie behind this year's young defense than he was behind the veterans they had the two years previous, to my eye. A .02 drop of his Save% over his career norm this season is scary, especially when you had to expect a young defense to let up more shots than previous teams. I get that Svedberg isn't ready, and may never be ready, to take over. I am also unsure of how close Subban is to being ready (his GAA and Save% in the AHL leaves something to be desired, I suppose).
Serious question.... how much insider knowledge do the GM's have right now about what the cap will be next year? If Chiarelli thinks the cap will be roughly the same next year then I think they absolutely have to make some cap shedding moves, and soon. I don't think the team is too far away from competing, but they have no way of adding a scorer with the cap crunch they are in right now. If he expects (or knows?) that the cap will increase by a bit, then maybe a major move becomes less necessary.
TSC said in the game thread that we can reasonably expect a 1st, a prospect, and a vet in a package for Chara, and I say if somebody offers that the B's need to jump on it.
This might also qualify as crazy talk, but I think they should look into moving Tuukka as well. He would have to waive his NMC, obviously, but he is a totally different goalie behind this year's young defense than he was behind the veterans they had the two years previous, to my eye. A .02 drop of his Save% over his career norm this season is scary, especially when you had to expect a young defense to let up more shots than previous teams. I get that Svedberg isn't ready, and may never be ready, to take over. I am also unsure of how close Subban is to being ready (his GAA and Save% in the AHL leaves something to be desired, I suppose).
Serious question.... how much insider knowledge do the GM's have right now about what the cap will be next year? If Chiarelli thinks the cap will be roughly the same next year then I think they absolutely have to make some cap shedding moves, and soon. I don't think the team is too far away from competing, but they have no way of adding a scorer with the cap crunch they are in right now. If he expects (or knows?) that the cap will increase by a bit, then maybe a major move becomes less necessary.
Chara has a full no move clause and a 6.9 million cap hit for 2 more years. Plus a 3rd year at 4 million when he'll be 41. Nobody is trading for him. The Bruins would have a better shot moving Seidenberg and Lucic.
Chara has a NMC and I highly doubt the organization would trade him.
But his contract is well below market value. He would get a hell of a lot more than 3/18 on the open market right now. Iginla just got 3/16. Chara is still an elite, top 5 defenseman. He would be looking at at least 3/24 IMO.
A team trying to win this year would improve their cup odds significantly by adding Chara. I don't doubt they could get quite a haul for him, especially if they took back an expiring contract to make the money work. Again, I don't see it happening because of his NMC and the front office, but if I was the GM and had a chance to get significant picks and high end prospects back for him, I'd probably do it right now.
But his contract is well below market value. He would get a hell of a lot more than 3/18 on the open market right now. Iginla just got 3/16. Chara is still an elite, top 5 defenseman. He would be looking at at least 3/24 IMO.
A team trying to win this year would improve their cup odds significantly by adding Chara. I don't doubt they could get quite a haul for him, especially if they took back an expiring contract to make the money work. Again, I don't see it happening because of his NMC and the front office, but if I was the GM and had a chance to get significant picks and high end prospects back for him, I'd probably do it right now.
If I'm Chiarelli, I stay the course for the next few weeks. They're only 2 points out of a playoff spot with 43 games left. They don't need climb Everest to get in and once you get in anything can happen. LA won Cups as the 8 and 6 seed. NJ and NYR made the Finals from the East as low seeds. Punting on the season now seems crazy to me. Get in, see what happens. Some of the advanced metrics are favorable for the Bruins. Despite the record, they're still a top 10 possession team by Corsi and Fenwick. That doesn't guarantee success (see New Jersey last year) but it's a pretty good indicator that things should turn around at some point.To me the biggest thing the Bruins need to turn it around is Rask to go back to the Rask we saw for the previous two seasons. The drop from a .930 save percentage to a .909 save percentage is killing them.
As for trades, I'd probably stay in a holding pattern for the next few weeks and then see where we're at closer to the deadline. I don't think they should sell but at the same time it may not make sense to waste assets in what could be a futile attempt to compete this year. Give it another few weeks to see if this thing gets turned around. See if Pastrnak's arrival helps and also make a final decision on him for this year.
As for trades, I'd probably stay in a holding pattern for the next few weeks and then see where we're at closer to the deadline. I don't think they should sell but at the same time it may not make sense to waste assets in what could be a futile attempt to compete this year. Give it another few weeks to see if this thing gets turned around. See if Pastrnak's arrival helps and also make a final decision on him for this year.
Good post.
I was admittedly being very reactionary, but this team is infuriating to watch. It's not even enjoyable knowing the wheels will fall off at some point.
I was admittedly being very reactionary, but this team is infuriating to watch. It's not even enjoyable knowing the wheels will fall off at some point.
I'm with cshea on this one. Too much talent, money, and time invested in this roster to mail it in now. If they were sitting in dead last or near last in the conference it's a different story. If you get into February and you're actually starting to drop out of competition for making the playoffs at all, that's probably when you think about moving some of the veterans you could get some return on - but even then I'm not so sure.
Yeah, watching them is very frustrating. They had no business losing yesterday, but alas here we are. They're better than this. It seems like it's one step forward (beating Detroit), then 2 steps back (dropping points to Toronto and Ottawa). I will say that I thought the overall play over the last 3 games has been much better than early in the year, so maybe that's the silver lining in those two losses.FL4WL3SS said:
cshea said:
Maybe their season is like the game play - starts slow and is rough in the first, balances out in the second and they play best in the third.
What's the forum's take on Jagr? I recall he wasn't a great fit for the system the first time around and all, but this team needs to score goals, and if he can net a hat trick at this age, he might be positive addition to the team whether he sees ice time with Krejci or the Swedes, or hell, even Krejci and Pastrnak for an all Czech line.
http://youtu.be/hd_70hxvkXs
3.5M cap hit but if you could jettison Campbell, McQuaid, and Gagne's salary plus an asset for NJ would you do it? This may be a nonstarter but I think we can all agree this team needs to score more goals and has to be creative with few dance partners in the NHL.
Cshea is right, obviously, but its really difficult to not feel like Fl4W watching this team. The problem is the only way to "fix" the scoring issues is to blow up a good portion of the core and its hard for me to believe that the type of pieces they need are really out there right now. They have a number of needs but no cap space and few assets to acquire the types of players we all want without creating another hole. I think the recent losses to Toronto and Ottawa are frustrating, but if they weren't a part of a larger frustration, we wouldn't be stressing it the way we are as a fanbase. Hopefully Krejci being back continues to keep them playing at a higher level and they are able to string together a run of good play that will eek them into the playoffs. I'm struggling to see much of a chance for them to outlast Pittsburgh, Tampa or Montreal in the playoffs though.
There really is a lot of dead weight on the roster right now. Campbell and Paille are offering very little at this point and cost $3mm. Kelly has been playing serviceable but his cap number is prohibitively high. Bartkowski is making $1.3 mil to sit in the press box. They have the depth to replace guys like this in Providence for peanuts and use that money to upgrade the top 9/top 4, which would have a much more measurable impact on the team's performance. The key is where do you put all of that stuff? I honestly think we have to wait until next year.
There really is a lot of dead weight on the roster right now. Campbell and Paille are offering very little at this point and cost $3mm. Kelly has been playing serviceable but his cap number is prohibitively high. Bartkowski is making $1.3 mil to sit in the press box. They have the depth to replace guys like this in Providence for peanuts and use that money to upgrade the top 9/top 4, which would have a much more measurable impact on the team's performance. The key is where do you put all of that stuff? I honestly think we have to wait until next year.
For me it really depends on what the road forward is. I would rather blow it up now then spend the rest of the Bergeron era on a slow descent into mediocrity (or worse).
The problem I see is that the team is:
1. Lacking in talent (see 1st line RW).
2. Unable to retain the all of the talent it does have (UFA Soderberg, RFAs Hamilton, Krug, Smith).
3. Beyond Pastrnak and perhaps Morrow, short on young guys capable of providing low cost value.
I'm not optimistic. How does next year's team look if they are forced to roll with an even thinner and less talented roster than the current one?
Of course, the returns to blowing it up are also unclear.
In hindsight, I think Chiarelli wrecked the organization with the Seguin deal. Even if Chiarelli was correct that Seguin's greatest value to the Bruins was as a trade chip, that doesn't excuse his bungling of the deal.
The problem I see is that the team is:
1. Lacking in talent (see 1st line RW).
2. Unable to retain the all of the talent it does have (UFA Soderberg, RFAs Hamilton, Krug, Smith).
3. Beyond Pastrnak and perhaps Morrow, short on young guys capable of providing low cost value.
I'm not optimistic. How does next year's team look if they are forced to roll with an even thinner and less talented roster than the current one?
Of course, the returns to blowing it up are also unclear.
In hindsight, I think Chiarelli wrecked the organization with the Seguin deal. Even if Chiarelli was correct that Seguin's greatest value to the Bruins was as a trade chip, that doesn't excuse his bungling of the deal.
One quick note on the goal scoring- They've averaged 3.12 goals per game in the 8 games since Krejci's returned. That essentially gave them a full compliment of forwards, and they're producing. It's a small sample size of course, but the offense seems to have stabilized.
cshea said:
Yeah that's a great number actually, especially if you consider they haven't hit their stride with him yet. Forgive my caffeine induced Jagr lovefest above - one can't help but imagine what could have been.
I don't think Jagr is necessarily a bad idea. He fits what they're looking for with likely a manageable cap number and acquisition cost. He didn't seem like that great of a fit during 2013 though.
Again, what do you do? Everyone who you'd like to move has a NMC. Sure if someone wants Seidenberg or Kelly and he's willing to go you move him, but what are the chances of that? If there is some chemistry issue then maybe shake something up if you can, but I'm not sure why that would be the case given it's nearly all the same players as before (otherwise why the hell is Campbell here?).
A good point about Claude - the obvious place to improve the team is the 4th line and it seems like as long as Claude is around Campbell's place is assured. Can you like, get him to see how useless he is and how there are maybe young players who could help more? I don't know.
Anyway, just stay the course and if you miss the playoffs, appreciate the higher draft pick than you're accustomed to, and try to make some changes in the offseason. The core of Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, Chara, Hamilton is a start to a championship team at least in the next year or two (and I don't think Chia/Claude are the best people to oversee a total rebuild, so I really hope that doesn't happen with them still around).
A good point about Claude - the obvious place to improve the team is the 4th line and it seems like as long as Claude is around Campbell's place is assured. Can you like, get him to see how useless he is and how there are maybe young players who could help more? I don't know.
Anyway, just stay the course and if you miss the playoffs, appreciate the higher draft pick than you're accustomed to, and try to make some changes in the offseason. The core of Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, Chara, Hamilton is a start to a championship team at least in the next year or two (and I don't think Chia/Claude are the best people to oversee a total rebuild, so I really hope that doesn't happen with them still around).
burstnbloom said:
I don't know how Claude still gets this reputation hung on him. Since he's been here, there have been plenty of players who have earned their place as regulars before they turned 23 years old. Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Kessel, Rask, Wheeler, Marchand, Seguin, Krug, Hamilton, Reilly Smith. So far this year Griffith is getting the opportunity to be a regular, and Morrow and Pastrnak have had(maybe will again) limited opportunity.
I don't think Claude is afraid to play young players. He just expects them to earn the opportunity. Doesn't seem unfair to me.
You give Claude a 21 year old who's ready to play a big role on this team, I don't think he'll have any issue playing that guy.
mcpickl said:
I agree he has broken in young players in the past but I was referring to those specific players, all of which have been scratched this season and held accountable for their mistakes in a way that he hasn't done with players like Campbell, Paille and Lucic. The former is hands down the worst player on the team according to corsi (and he's my current whipping boy). You can say he doesn't deserve the reputation, but he is certainly slow to allow those players a little rope. That has been fine over the past 5 years because the veterans on the team were better players and able to keep the team playing at a high level. When they are playing as horrible as they are right now, It's likely better for the team long term to have the mistakes be made my young players rather than UFA to be players who are playing awful. I'll believe he has that flexibility when I see it, because he's never been that guy.
It's not a myth. It took a long, long time for most of the guys you mentioned to get established and "earn" their playing time while veterans who they could outperform got minutes especially if they have a reputation as being "skillful" instead of physical.
I mean:
-Kessel was benched in the playoffs as was Seguin. Both were TRADED and I have to think Claude had a bit to do with those decisions.
-Krug played in the playoffs after everyone else was injured and he played so well that there was no choice but to keep him in
-Bergeron was established before Claude got here
-Marchand toiled on the 4th line for a long time his first year and still doesn't get as much PP time as he arguably should
-Spooner got nothing last year and was sent down. Koko came up this year and played something like 7 minutes in two games. This year Campbell and Paille (and Gagne until his Dad died) have received steady playing time while providing little.
Griffith seems to be the only young player who has really stuck this year for whatever reason.
I'm fine with sticking to the system when you're not struggling to find offense and put together a winning streak, but what is the 4th line providing that cements their place on the team?
I mean:
-Kessel was benched in the playoffs as was Seguin. Both were TRADED and I have to think Claude had a bit to do with those decisions.
-Krug played in the playoffs after everyone else was injured and he played so well that there was no choice but to keep him in
-Bergeron was established before Claude got here
-Marchand toiled on the 4th line for a long time his first year and still doesn't get as much PP time as he arguably should
-Spooner got nothing last year and was sent down. Koko came up this year and played something like 7 minutes in two games. This year Campbell and Paille (and Gagne until his Dad died) have received steady playing time while providing little.
Griffith seems to be the only young player who has really stuck this year for whatever reason.
I'm fine with sticking to the system when you're not struggling to find offense and put together a winning streak, but what is the 4th line providing that cements their place on the team?
You're projecting your unhappiness with the Seguin and Kessel trades onto Julien. Julien has shown a willingness to play younger players, and play them in places where they can succeed.
I mean:
- Kessel- Played in the top 6 for his two seasons under Julien.
- Seguin- Played the majority of his 3 seasons in the top 9, the latter two years in the top 6. Led the team in scoring one year to boot!
- Marchand- Started on the 4th line then gradually played his way up to the top 6.
- Lucic- Began as a 19 year old on the 4th line. By the end of the his rookie season Lucic was on the first line with Savard.
- Krejci- Dropped into the top 6 when he came up, centering Sturm and Kessel.
- Krug was like 9th on the depth chart and was forced into the lineup due to injuries. Julien then stuck with Krug deep in the playoffs when the veterans started to get healthy.
- Hamilton/Boychuk/McQuaid/Miller are all NHL defensemen that Julien developed.
Criticize the player evaluations all you want, but Julien is perfectly capable of playing younger players and putting them in a position to succeed.
I mean:
- Kessel- Played in the top 6 for his two seasons under Julien.
- Seguin- Played the majority of his 3 seasons in the top 9, the latter two years in the top 6. Led the team in scoring one year to boot!
- Marchand- Started on the 4th line then gradually played his way up to the top 6.
- Lucic- Began as a 19 year old on the 4th line. By the end of the his rookie season Lucic was on the first line with Savard.
- Krejci- Dropped into the top 6 when he came up, centering Sturm and Kessel.
- Krug was like 9th on the depth chart and was forced into the lineup due to injuries. Julien then stuck with Krug deep in the playoffs when the veterans started to get healthy.
- Hamilton/Boychuk/McQuaid/Miller are all NHL defensemen that Julien developed.
Criticize the player evaluations all you want, but Julien is perfectly capable of playing younger players and putting them in a position to succeed.
Right, so you can put different spins on each situation depending on what point you're trying to make. We don't know everything that went into the evaluation from our view, but things like benching Kessel in the playoffs were pretty ridiculous and plenty of people said so at the time. Maybe guys get worked in sooner under a different coach, perhaps?
Are we confident that he will give fair shots to any prospects during a probably lost season, or is he going to keep putting Campbell out there? His past treatment of guys who we KNEW had talent doesn't lead me to believe he will, especially if they are players whose game is more offensive than defensive.
He doesn't seem to have an issue playing guys who focus on defense (like Miller) right away, certainly.
Are we confident that he will give fair shots to any prospects during a probably lost season, or is he going to keep putting Campbell out there? His past treatment of guys who we KNEW had talent doesn't lead me to believe he will, especially if they are players whose game is more offensive than defensive.
He doesn't seem to have an issue playing guys who focus on defense (like Miller) right away, certainly.
Sort of, except there's a salary cap so it's not just them being cheap; it helps them keep him (or keep someone else) in the future. Getting good performance from guys on ELCs is one key to a good team...RedOctober3829 said:
Plus Pastrnak comes up at this point and he'd basically be expected to save the season, which doesn't really seem fair. I'm fine with leaving him down.
I stand by the argument that Julien hasn't done a good job developing players. That's not the same as saying he "ruins young players" or that "no young players get to play under Julien".
But after the notable successes (Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Hamilton), the track record starts to not look very good.
Kessel is the #4 NHL goal scorer since he left; Seguin is at #2. They played (and each had some production) under Julien, but both are gone now. Some for Blake Wheeler. How many elite talents can be found wanting by a coach before it reflects poorly on the coach? Part of his job, after all, was to develop those players.
Krug is another success story of sorts, but one has to wonder about a coach and organization that had a player of his caliber and readiness 9th on the depth chart. Krug entered those playoffs so far down the depth chart that he was behind at least one corpse (aka Wade Redden) - yet he was obviosuly ready despite his lack of NHL experience.
As an organization, they have done better with defensemen than with forwards. They have done well with Boychuk (although he came up in another org and was 26 before he got a shot in Boston) and have gotten good hockey (at least at times) from guys like Miller, Boychuk, McQuaid, Bart, Warsofsky, Trotman, Morrow, even (going back) Lashoff. They have been able to withstand crippling runs of injuries to defensemen at various times, including the 2012-13 playoffs.
Up front the story is completely different. They had Krejci ready to plug in when Savard fractured a veterbrae during Julien's first year. But they have rarely been able to successfully tap their forward depth in times of need. Caron got off to a promising start in his rookie year, then kind of faded from sight. Julien basically had no use for Vlad Sobotka, probably the anti-Tyler Seguin, who went on to be a key third liner on some good St. Louis teams. Spooner and Khokhlachev don't even get a real look on a team with a disastrously bad 4th line. They might have lost a Stanley Cup because Kaspars Daugavins.
At some point, it's not just about who plays but about using the right players and finding out how to get the most out of them. The Bruins haven't done that very well during Julien's time here, at least not with forwards.
But after the notable successes (Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Hamilton), the track record starts to not look very good.
Kessel is the #4 NHL goal scorer since he left; Seguin is at #2. They played (and each had some production) under Julien, but both are gone now. Some for Blake Wheeler. How many elite talents can be found wanting by a coach before it reflects poorly on the coach? Part of his job, after all, was to develop those players.
Krug is another success story of sorts, but one has to wonder about a coach and organization that had a player of his caliber and readiness 9th on the depth chart. Krug entered those playoffs so far down the depth chart that he was behind at least one corpse (aka Wade Redden) - yet he was obviosuly ready despite his lack of NHL experience.
As an organization, they have done better with defensemen than with forwards. They have done well with Boychuk (although he came up in another org and was 26 before he got a shot in Boston) and have gotten good hockey (at least at times) from guys like Miller, Boychuk, McQuaid, Bart, Warsofsky, Trotman, Morrow, even (going back) Lashoff. They have been able to withstand crippling runs of injuries to defensemen at various times, including the 2012-13 playoffs.
Up front the story is completely different. They had Krejci ready to plug in when Savard fractured a veterbrae during Julien's first year. But they have rarely been able to successfully tap their forward depth in times of need. Caron got off to a promising start in his rookie year, then kind of faded from sight. Julien basically had no use for Vlad Sobotka, probably the anti-Tyler Seguin, who went on to be a key third liner on some good St. Louis teams. Spooner and Khokhlachev don't even get a real look on a team with a disastrously bad 4th line. They might have lost a Stanley Cup because Kaspars Daugavins.
At some point, it's not just about who plays but about using the right players and finding out how to get the most out of them. The Bruins haven't done that very well during Julien's time here, at least not with forwards.
And who would you have played that series instead of Daugivans?
I love the revisionist history about Seguin in the Cup run too. Great for two games and largely useless going forward.
I love the revisionist history about Seguin in the Cup run too. Great for two games and largely useless going forward.
Who is posting revisionist history about Seguin in the Cup run? I didn't even mention that.kenneycb said:
As for who to play instead of Daugavans, Soderberg was an option (who eventually got in and was clearly better). Their failure to develop forward talent left them without many options, though. But that is part of the point.
If Campbell is on the roster, yes he keeps getting put out there. I think he probably should be as well.Toe Nash said:
He and Paille already receive the least amount of even strength ice time, as they should, and are their regular penalty killers. Don't see how putting one of them on the 9th floor for whoever the scratched forward was(mostly Fraser, now Caron) helps this team much, if at all.
If your issue is Campbell, I think those complaints should be directed at management, not coaching. Don't see any reason to make him a healthy scratch. If he's at that point, the team should release him.
Blaming Julien for not playing a prospect(Spooner,Koko,Pastrnak) who isn't on the roster over Campbell seems crazy to me.
This is just false.Toe Nash said:
The guys Claude hates and ran out of town, Kessel and Seguin, received plenty of ice time from Claude.
Kessel was second among forwards in even strength ice time his last year here, and Seguin was 3rd and 4th his final two years, only getting appreciably less than Krejci.
Krug wasn't on the roster. Would've been really hard to play him.
Isn't Marchand handling exactly what you'd want from a coach? A young player starts off with lesser ice time, and earns more and receives it from the coach? Sounds optimal to me.
You say Spooner got no ice time last year, while Campbell/Paille get regular time. Spooner got 12 minutes of ice time between Even/PP last year. Campbell/Paille getting 10 Even/PP this year. So, hard to say Spooner didn't get a chance.
You say Claude won't play young talent. I think results show he will, if they deserve it.
If Spooner/Koko/whatever young player people are infatuated with came up and showed they could play like the other young players that have earned time, they'd be getting that time. No doubt in my mind.
To that point, outside of the well documented Seguin sand Kessel examples, who has Claude not played that has turned into something away from the Bruins? Sobotka and, um, Nate Thompson?
I don't find Claude's issues to be with devoping young talent once it's in the lineup - it's getting that talent into the lineup. It isn't a new phenomenon and stretches back to when Vlad Sobotka was battling Steve Bégin and Trent Whitfield for ice time.
I've said it elsewhere, but look at the Habs and what Marc Bergevin did when Therrien was giving Moen and Bourque too much ice time, leaving players like Sekač and Andrighetto (younger, cheaper, and with more upside - sound familiar?) in the press box.
Bergevin trades them in the first third of the season and forces Therrien to play the kids in the bottom six. On top of that, Bergevin managed to clear their salaries and add players in Allen and Gonchar in return who provided depth and had one less year of salary commitment each than the guys Montréal traded for them.
I don't really blame Claude on the whole for playing 'his guys' - we've seen that with every coach in every sport pretty much. I just wish Chiarelli had the stones to take that decision out of Claude's hands.
I've said it elsewhere, but look at the Habs and what Marc Bergevin did when Therrien was giving Moen and Bourque too much ice time, leaving players like Sekač and Andrighetto (younger, cheaper, and with more upside - sound familiar?) in the press box.
Bergevin trades them in the first third of the season and forces Therrien to play the kids in the bottom six. On top of that, Bergevin managed to clear their salaries and add players in Allen and Gonchar in return who provided depth and had one less year of salary commitment each than the guys Montréal traded for them.
I don't really blame Claude on the whole for playing 'his guys' - we've seen that with every coach in every sport pretty much. I just wish Chiarelli had the stones to take that decision out of Claude's hands.
Good. God. How do you list those 3 issues, and then manage to turn this into a Seguin problem? Adding Seguin gets you your 1st line RW, of course it also loses the team's current best two RWs. It also exacerbates problem #2, as you now have slightly less cap space to work with and another Top 6 hole to fill, and takes away one of the only guys listed in #3 to help provide cost controlled value. The Bruins with Seguin would be even more desperate to cut salary than the current version was entering the season, and would have more holes to fill at the same time. Chiarelli saw that problem coming, and tried to deal with it. Has the trade worked out as well as hoped? Obviously not, but how exactly could anyone have predicted the Eriksson concussions? Hell, if it had been flipped around and Seguin was the one who'd had his brains scrambled, would we be touting it as the greatest steal of the century, and not just bad luck for the Stars?Eddie Jurak said:
Between this and the Boychuk bitching, it's almost as if everyone has forgotten the NHL has a salary cap. Maintaining an elite team is an incredibly tricky task under a salary cap, and the Bruins have done it just about as well as anyone else in the NHL. Sometimes that means good players have to be traded, or else you're going to lose other good players for nothing because you have no ability to re-sign them. Sometimes those trades don't work out due to injury or bad luck. Sitting back and bitching about those moves when you can't offer a valid counter-strategy that would have kept the team under the cap and doesn't require extensive after the fact knowledge is just asinine.
Sometimes I really desperately wished Boston fans had to pay attention to just how incompetently many other franchises are run so they could see the lunacy of their complaints.
There is a remarkable amount of revisionist history going on in this thread and the gamethread (I'll move those posts over). I don't have time to identify every single one, but things like "Marchand toiled on the fourth line" or the sentiment that Krug being a UDFA rookie stepping into the playoffs for the first time and never losing his spot is somehow a mark AGAINST Claude playing young players, or that Reilly Smith is just an "ok prospect", or that Spooner hasn't been objectively horrendous in a fair amount of playing time in the NHL, or that Seguin wasn't complete garbage in the 2013 Cup run and having a "goal scorer" would have led them to the promised land (this one is implied). I'm left just absolutely baffled if people are watching the same team.
The real issues are these:
The only upside in replacement production has been Dougie and Soderberg outperforming their deals, and maybe Krug and Reilly Smith. Marchand and Kelly have been ok for what they're paid and I like Paille for what he is.
Keeping Seguin would have made this team MORE top heavy, or meaning that one of Tuukka, Bergeron, or Krejci would be gone and the rest of the roster would be even worse. Maybe that would have worked out great. But you're not going to see the Bruins paying 6-9M for a goal scorer, it's not how they're built, it's not their philosophy, and that's not going to change. The issues with the Bruins right now are not just related to trading Seguin. They're also related to a lot of things that happened after that.
The real issues are these:
- Bergeron, Tuukka, and Krejci all got paid, and their performance has not improved and in some cases has declined, yet the aggregate cap hit for them is much higher now.
- The Iginla cap carryover (a move I supported but it didn't work out)
- The knee injuries to Chara and Seidenberg sapping them of being a top pairing
- Lucic falling off a cliff (and being their 2nd highest paid forward)
- Miller/McQuaid/Campbell/Bartkowski eating up over 5M in cap money and providing absolutely nothing, probably a negative overall.
The only upside in replacement production has been Dougie and Soderberg outperforming their deals, and maybe Krug and Reilly Smith. Marchand and Kelly have been ok for what they're paid and I like Paille for what he is.
Keeping Seguin would have made this team MORE top heavy, or meaning that one of Tuukka, Bergeron, or Krejci would be gone and the rest of the roster would be even worse. Maybe that would have worked out great. But you're not going to see the Bruins paying 6-9M for a goal scorer, it's not how they're built, it's not their philosophy, and that's not going to change. The issues with the Bruins right now are not just related to trading Seguin. They're also related to a lot of things that happened after that.
I very much agree with all of this and PSKs point earlier. I feel a little guilty that my previous point devolved into this Seguin shitfest. There is no room on this team for a one player solution. There needs to be major improvement from their existing forward group and the dead weight needs to be shed so that the higher upside players are given a chance to accelerate the learning curve. If they continue to suck and add a guy like Stewart in exchange for assets, I might just scream. Get rid of the garbage, let the kids make mistakes so they are better later in the year/next year rather than having to go through it all again next year.The Four Peters said:
BigMike said:
Is this true? I don't seem to remember him struggling. As far as I recall - he played really well, and many here thought he should stay up on the big club.
He's only played a high of like 35 games in a year so the concerns about the rookie wall are quite real.TheShynessClinic said:
kenneycb said:
Right. But that's not what BigMike said. He said he struggled up on the big club. I don't recall that being the case.
The Lucic debacle is the real killer to me. With his cap hit, you can live with the offensive inconsistency natural to his skill set and linemate issues. But what's so gross is his lackadaisical work in clearing from the defensive zone. He catches a feed to the mid boards on his wing worse than your average Mite C. In fact, if you review Carolina's first goal yesterday, it's his inability to play a puck on that wing board with no one within 30 feet of him that keeps the puck back in the defensive zone and leads to the goal. He is also woeful at making any kind of pass off the wing that isn't at least deflected, if not outright swiped.