Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

What's wrong with the Bruins?


  • Please log in to reply
441 replies to this topic

#101 lexrageorge

  • 2,336 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 09:22 AM

...
4. Firing Geoff Ward is shuffling deck chairs, IMO. If there's a coaching problem, it starts higher up than Geoff Ward. Anyone calling for Ward's job should be looking higher than that, IMO. Part of that is personnel - Kelly, Paille & Campbell are great PK players and add little to nothing else. There's no need for all three but because they play they way CJ prefers, they get ice time and Caron goes back to Providence. I know Kelly, Paille & Campbell aren't going to score very often - they aren't skilled in that way. Yet the problem is scoring...so how do they help?

...



It's always fashionable to kick the "plumbers" when the chips are down. But these guys are hardly where to look for blame in the current slump. Every team has a 4th line, and every team needs penalty killers. While Kelly isn't exactly a top 6 scoring forward, it's wrong to say he adds little else than penalty killing. Kelly has looked a lot better than Caron did in his limited time.

Horton, Krejci, et al need to score. And the defense has to play better. One or the other would help right now. But neither is the fault of the Kelly/Campbell/Paille.

#102 Manzivino

  • 1,440 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 09:34 AM

5. If the Bruins continue to play the way they have, making a move in January will not help them make the playoffs. Perhaps I'm completely wrong and they are about to flip a switch and get right back into the mix. But from what I've seen, it's a team that does not have a goalie turning in one of the greatest seasons in history and a bunch of square pegs in round holes, with the resulting gaps leading to uneven performances and a dearth of scoring. YMMV.


The guys who are underperforming this season were on the roster last year. The players that are struggling to score this season performed at a goal per game better pace last season while playing the same exact system, that's why the calls for Julien's job are shortsighted. In his 4 years as coach they haven't finished with fewer than 91 points, and a playoff berth and they won a Cup. His system produces wins in the regular season, it has produced wins in the playoffs, and it has done both with essentially the roster they have. The players have played poorly over a 10 game stretch, but even with the system you hate they are generating enough offensive chances to win games and failing to execute them. That's on the talent not performing; the system doesn't have anything to do with firing pucks into goalies' chests and missing open nets

4. Firing Geoff Ward is shuffling deck chairs, IMO. If there's a coaching problem, it starts higher up than Geoff Ward. Anyone calling for Ward's job should be looking higher than that, IMO. Part of that is personnel - Kelly, Paille & Campbell are great PK players and add little to nothing else. There's no need for all three but because they play they way CJ prefers, they get ice time and Caron goes back to Providence. I know Kelly, Paille & Campbell aren't going to score very often - they aren't skilled in that way. Yet the problem is scoring...so how do they help?


I will grant you that Julien has to take some blame for the PP ineptitude, he's the head coach, everything is his responsibility. But again, when you have an assistant coach in charge of a unit and that unit consistently underperforms, it's perfectly reasonable to replace that assistant coach without canning the whole coaching staff. Nobody was calling for Francona's head in '04-05 just because Dale Sveum didn't know when to hold a runner at third.

Edited by Manzivino, 31 October 2011 - 09:35 AM.


#103 soxfan121


  • leader of tebow zealotry


  • 8,869 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 09:41 AM

You're entitled to your opinion, but not many coaches can put "Stanley Cup winning coach" next to their name.


Since 1976:
Scotty Bowman x8
Al Arbour x4
Glen Sather x4
Jean Perron
Terry Crisp
John Muckler
Bob Johnson
Jacques Demers
Jacques Lemaire
Mike Keenan
Marc Crawford
Ken Hitchcock
Larry Robinson
Bob Hartley
Pat Burns
John Tortorella
Peter Laviollette
Randy Carlyle
Mike Babcock
Dan Bylsma
Joel Queenville
Claude Julien

I don't think this list really supports your argument. Lots of JAC's (just-another-coach), few HOF guys (excepting the top of the list). Lots of guys who were subsequently fired and who haven't replicated their success in other places. IOW, winning a cup is much more about the players and less about the coach.

As for your other point, sure, Thomas and the other players absolutely deserve a decisive majority of the credit. I'd put it at 90% or above. And hence, I don't agree that "Stanley Cup Winning Coach" is worth much at all. It's the players. And since the players are talented and have proven they can win, the best way to change things for a hockey team is to fire the coach.

#104 Haunted


  • The Man in the Box


  • 1,878 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 09:47 AM

IOW, winning a cup is much more about the players and less about the coach.


I am no fan of Handsome Ralph, but doesn't this sentence go against your whole argument?

#105 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 10:10 AM

When the Bruins are at their best, they are the best 5-on-5 team in the league. I could care less if they suck on the PP if they are dominating 5-on-5 play. PP% is flashy and some teams get by with a great PP, but the Bruins have chosen to get by with great 5-on-5 play. Here is the PP% and 5-on-5 ratio for the last 3 years. I've added some teams that succeed with the opposite approach for comparison.

2010-2011:
Boston
5/5 - 1.40 (1st)
PP% - 16.2 (20th)

Tampa
5/5 - 0.99 (18th)
PP% - 20.5 (6th)

2009-2010:

Boston
5/5 - 0.95 (19th)
PP% - 16.6 (23rd)

Philly
5/5 - 0.97 (17th)
PP% - 21.4 (3rd)

2008-2009:

Boston
5/5 - 1.42 (1st)
PP% - 23.6 (4th)

Philly
5/5 - 1.01 (15th)
PP% - 22.5 (6th)

This season:

Boston
5/5 - 0.88 (21st)
PP% - 12.8 (25th)

Pittsburgh
5/5 - 0.91 (19th)
PP% - 21.8 (9th)

I think a lot of people are either overvaluing the PP or undervaluing 5-on-5 play, I can't decide which. It seems pretty reasonable that in order to be successful, you need to be good at either one and only average at the other and it really doesn't matter which. Obviously the dominant regular season teams of the past 3 seasons have been really fucking good at both, but success doesn't depend on being great at both. With the PP being a pretty finicky beast, I would almost rather be a dominant 5-on-5 team and hope the PP works out than putting all my eggs in the PP basket and hoping we don't run into a great PK team.

#106 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 10:27 AM

Since 1976:
Scotty Bowman x8
Al Arbour x4
Glen Sather x4
Jean Perron
Terry Crisp
John Muckler
Bob Johnson
Jacques Demers
Jacques Lemaire
Mike Keenan
Marc Crawford
Ken Hitchcock
Larry Robinson
Bob Hartley
Pat Burns
John Tortorella
Peter Laviollette
Randy Carlyle
Mike Babcock
Dan Bylsma
Joel Queenville
Claude Julien

I don't think this list really supports your argument. Lots of JAC's (just-another-coach), few HOF guys (excepting the top of the list). Lots of guys who were subsequently fired and who haven't replicated their success in other places. IOW, winning a cup is much more about the players and less about the coach.

As for your other point, sure, Thomas and the other players absolutely deserve a decisive majority of the credit. I'd put it at 90% or above. And hence, I don't agree that "Stanley Cup Winning Coach" is worth much at all. It's the players. And since the players are talented and have proven they can win, the best way to change things for a hockey team is to fire the coach.

Well if that's the case then why fire the coach? Winning is all about the players.

Let me rank the coaches in your list above by winning percentage:
Scotty Bowman 0.657
Dan Bylsma 0.656
Mike Babcock 0.640
Joel Queenville 0.604
Glen Sather x4 0.602
Randy Carlyle 0.596
Claude Julien 0.591
Ken Hitchcock 0.588
Bob Hartley 0.579
Pat Burns 0.573
Peter Laviollette 0.571
Al Arbour 0.564
Jacques Lemaire 0.563
Jean Perron 0.556
Marc Crawford 0.556
Mike Keenan 0.551
Bob Johnson 0.548
John Tortorella 0.524
Terry Crisp 0.515
John Muckler 0.493
Larry Robinson 0.492
Jacques Demers 0.471

Sure looks like a lot of coaches that knew how to win. Not too many flukes on that list eh? All but 3 had winning records in the league and the rest are pretty damned close, you think that's just a coincidence? Pretty funny where Julien falls on that list too, huh? Right near the top. Facts are stubborn things, regardless of your vendetta against Julien.

Edited by FL4WL3SS, 31 October 2011 - 10:28 AM.


#107 TheStoryofYourRedRightAnkle

  • 3,227 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:24 AM

People overvalue the PP because it's frustrating when you have more players on the ice than the other team and you look worse than when you have the same number of players or fewer.

Teams played a total of 14,225 minutes on the PP last season. That's about 9% of the total minutes played. I can't find any stats that show overall minutes played including overtime so I just used games x minutes. About 5% of time is spent on the PK, the rest is ES. 70% (4729/6721) of goals last season were scored at even strength. 23% were scored on the PP. So PPs are more important than the amount of time spent on them (the marginal time per goal is lower), but nowhere near as important as ES play since teams play some 80%+ of the time at ES. I do recognize that I should break this into 5 v 5, 4 v 4 and 3 v 3 as well, but I don't have time and I think we can agree that the vast majority of ES time is spent at 5 v 5.

I recognize there are some soft characteristics like momentum that success or failure on the PP affect (or seem to affect) that can't be measured. But I think it's clear here that ES play is way more important over the course of a whole season and that Claude and Chia have the right strategy to focus on dominating in ES situations.

That said, our PP sucks and has sucked for a while. If that's Ward's only contribution (and I doubt it is), then he should be taken out and shot and Claude should get a black mark on his permanent record for allowing Ward's poor performance. But firing Claude would be a vast overreaction.

Edited by TheStoryofYourRedRightAnkle, 31 October 2011 - 11:25 AM.


#108 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 3,472 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:33 AM

Here I'll add some substance - It's 10 games into the season and Julien should be fired after having won the Cup last season? Should Belichick have been fired in 2002 because he went 9-7 and missed the playoffs? How about in 2005 when the same story happened? I know I'm a tool, but I also know a stupid idea when I see one.


You live in a fantasy world - the team can't be made up of all-stars, we need some 3rd and 4th line players. Sorry there pinky, but the 4th line players aren't the problem. There is more than one way to skin a cat and the Bruins decided that strong defense and strong 2-way players is the way to go. They rely on their defense and their strong goaltending and awesome 5-on-5 play. We've been hearing the same whiny bullshit for 3 years now. Let me fill you in, here is the Bruins G/G the last 3 years and where they ranked relative to the rest of the league:

2.98 - 5th (Holy shit ahead of Anaheim who had mr. 50 goal scorer)
2.39 - Dead last (hmm, which season sticks out as an aberration?)
3.29 - 2nd (Ahead of Pittsburgh, who had both Malkin and Crosby scoring out of their ass)

They don't need a stud goal scorer, they've proven it works without one. They'd rather win with depth and overall talent than relying on one guy to score all the goals. Ask Calgary how that's turned out.

Their style may not be what you want, but it's how they've chosen to construct the team. They won the Cup last year, so you may not like it, but it fucking works. You could always go be a Vancouver fan, you'd fit right in.

At no point did I say they need to rely on one guy to score all their goals and also at no point did I say get rid of everyone of their 4th line players. However I think it would be very productive for this team to replace one of them with someone who can put the fucking puck in the net on a regular basis. So you would go so far as to tell me that you would not like to replace one of Paille, Kelly or Campbell with a Shane Doan for example? It doesn't have to be Doan, but you get my point.

Also you use the last 3 years as an example. I will give you last year, they did produce without that true proven goalscorer. But I would not give you 3 years ago. Did you forget they still had Phil Kessel on that team? He is a proven true goal scorer in this league. So that team did have someone who could put the puck in the net. Also that team had a true point per game player in Marc Savard, who was healthy. So excluding 3 years ago and thus far including this season through 10 games, then last year looks like the anomaly. Granted they still have the chance to change that this season, but in my opinion I think last year was a year where everything fell into place for the Bruins and went perfectly all the way throught the playoffs.

We are obviously never going to agree on this, but when you look at most of the past winners in the last 10 years or so in the NHL, I would venture to say that each team had far more offensive talent upfront than this Bruins team does and even the Bruins team of last year. Once again, I hope I am wrong but I believe last year was the anomaly.

Edited by BoSoxFink, 31 October 2011 - 11:37 AM.


#109 cshea


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,746 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:58 AM

They have two 30 goal scorers on the wing in Nathan Horton and Milan Lucic. They have 2 60+ point centers. They have a kid in Tyler Seguin who was drafted as a potential franchise center who is coming into his own, and given a larger role, has been a PPG player so far (admittedly, SSS applies). To round out the forward group, they have Peverley who has scored 20 a season and Brad Marchand who scored 20 a year ago as a rookie, and was fantastic in the post season. Talent is not the problem. It is execution. Horton and Krejci have gotten off to tough starts, and that has hurt them. I think it is reasonable to suggest that they will be a lot better as the year goes on.

I actually think the offensive problems stem from the blue line more than the forwards. 1 goal in 10 games amongst the defenseman. They aren't getting pucks through and on net, which means no tips/rebounds. They run their in-zone offense through the point men, and the need to be better.

#110 TheStoryofYourRedRightAnkle

  • 3,227 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 12:19 PM

That's a good point, cshea. They haven't seemed to be getting a lot of 2nd and 3rd chances as well even when those shots get through which speaks to their quality as well as the positional awareness of the forwards and the shit luck they've been having.

The defense goes through stretches where they don't make decisions with the puck fast enough and the breakout, the offense and the PP suffer for it as it allows teams to step up pressure and close off options quickly. Some of this is probably on the forwards as well as they are not finding seams and presenting them with good options, but it does seem like a general trait of our defensive personnel.

#111 erfus

  • 1,519 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 12:23 PM

I actually think the offensive problems stem from the blue line more than the forwards. 1 goal in 10 games amongst the defenseman. They aren't getting pucks through and on net, which means no tips/rebounds. They run their in-zone offense through the point men, and the need to be better.


Amen to that. The problematic breakout is also a direct result of the immobility and general lack of passing vision and ability of the blueline. Even the guys they have that should be decent at doing this are slumping offensively (Seidenberg, Chara).

As for Julien, he should have a statue in front of the building for what he did with this roster last season. They are a good team that acheived greatness last season and I don't think he's holding them back in any way this season. He's clearly trying to push buttons, which was a long standing complaint of his style in previous years.

#112 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 12:31 PM

At no point did I say they need to rely on one guy to score all their goals and also at no point did I say get rid of everyone of their 4th line players. However I think it would be very productive for this team to replace one of them with someone who can put the fucking puck in the net on a regular basis. So you would go so far as to tell me that you would not like to replace one of Paille, Kelly or Campbell with a Shane Doan for example? It doesn't have to be Doan, but you get my point.

Also you use the last 3 years as an example. I will give you last year, they did produce without that true proven goalscorer. But I would not give you 3 years ago. Did you forget they still had Phil Kessel on that team? He is a proven true goal scorer in this league. So that team did have someone who could put the puck in the net. Also that team had a true point per game player in Marc Savard, who was healthy. So excluding 3 years ago and thus far including this season through 10 games, then last year looks like the anomaly. Granted they still have the chance to change that this season, but in my opinion I think last year was a year where everything fell into place for the Bruins and went perfectly all the way throught the playoffs.

We are obviously never going to agree on this, but when you look at most of the past winners in the last 10 years or so in the NHL, I would venture to say that each team had far more offensive talent upfront than this Bruins team does and even the Bruins team of last year. Once again, I hope I am wrong but I believe last year was the anomaly.

So Lucic and Horton weren't guys that could put the puck in the net last year? You arbitrarily exclude 3 years ago to strengthen your argument and you want me to take your post seriously? I don't even know where to begin, this is just asinine.

Last year is an anomaly because everything fell into place, that explains it.

#113 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 3,472 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 01:07 PM

So Lucic and Horton weren't guys that could put the puck in the net last year? You arbitrarily exclude 3 years ago to strengthen your argument and you want me to take your post seriously? I don't even know where to begin, this is just asinine.

Last year is an anomaly because everything fell into place, that explains it.

Lucic and Horton can put the puck in the net but I wouldn't label them as true offensive studs. Horton has the talent to be, but has not quite put it together through a couple of regular seasons in a row. Lucic is not even close to what I would call an offensive stud, yes he did score 30, but I believe that 7 of those were empty net goals and he is more of a grinder that needs to put home the dirty goals on the doorstep off of rebounds.

How am I arbitrarily excluding 3 years ago? The point of the argument is stating that the Bruins need more offensive talent upfront isn't it? I never said they needed it 3 years ago, they had it in Savard and Kessel. Therefore that team is excluded as they already had what this team doesn't. You're trying to make it sound arbitrary as it doesn't work with your argument. This current team may have one soon with Seguin, but we can't be sure yet that they do.


Also cshea you bring up a good point about the defense. That very well be the problem right now as they are getting no production whatsoever from the back end, save for one good game by Chara against Toronto.

#114 cshea


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,746 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 01:25 PM

I really can't disagree with you more about Milan Lucic. He is absolutely not a grinder. He led the team in scoring last year, and I'd argue that outside of Seguin, he's got the best shot on the team. There isn't a guy on the team I'd want to have the puck on his stick in the slot more than him. Go back and watch his goals from last year, the dude is much, much more than a grinder. Yes, he can bang bodies around and clean up the garbage in front, but there is a lot more to his game than that. I mean, did you see the snipe job on Price on Saturday? That's as good a shot as you'll find. The guy has a legit, well rounded offensive game.

Edit: This is going nowhere, but your argument seems to be that the B's were some sort of exception to the rule in that they won the Cup without a stud forward up front. I disagree with that, but I'll counter that by saying that none of the recent Cup winners have had a Zdeno Chara and Tim Thomas. They're the guys you're looking for. The cornerstone they built everything around. Pittsburgh had Crosby/Malkin, Chicago had Toews and Kane, Detroit had Datsyuk and Lidstrom. The B's have Chara and Thomas.

Edited by cshea, 31 October 2011 - 01:44 PM.


#115 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 01:40 PM

Lucic and Horton can put the puck in the net but I wouldn't label them as true offensive studs. Horton has the talent to be, but has not quite put it together through a couple of regular seasons in a row. Lucic is not even close to what I would call an offensive stud, yes he did score 30, but I believe that 7 of those were empty net goals and he is more of a grinder that needs to put home the dirty goals on the doorstep off of rebounds.

How am I arbitrarily excluding 3 years ago? The point of the argument is stating that the Bruins need more offensive talent upfront isn't it? I never said they needed it 3 years ago, they had it in Savard and Kessel. Therefore that team is excluded as they already had what this team doesn't. You're trying to make it sound arbitrary as it doesn't work with your argument. This current team may have one soon with Seguin, but we can't be sure yet that they do.


Also cshea you bring up a good point about the defense. That very well be the problem right now as they are getting no production whatsoever from the back end, save for one good game by Chara against Toronto.

No, you were trying to discredit the idea that 09-10 was an aberration by completely throwing out a years worth of data because you don't think it counts. 2 of the last 3 years the Bruins have been in the top 5 in goal scoring which points the the fact that they don't need more talent up front. Saying "well, they had talent up front one year so we can't count that year and last year everything sort of fell right for them, so that doesn't count either" is being simple minded and not really contributing to the discussion. If you want to make the argument that the offense is notoriously inconsistent within a season, but also from season to season, that's one thing. The argument could be made that they needed more talent in 09-10 because they never replaced Kessel, Bergeron wasn't himself, they lost their best playmaker for most of the season and guys like Lucic and Krejci didn't round into form like we thought. This is a team that is returning 4 guys that scored over 50 points (2 over 60) and a defenseman who scored 44 points.

Sure every team could use a PPG player, but the Bruins don't need one.

#116 Myt1


  • thinks tim thomas is a dick-fil-a


  • 16,132 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 02:24 PM

Also you use the last 3 years as an example. I will give you last year, they did produce without that true proven goalscorer. But I would not give you 3 years ago. Did you forget they still had Phil Kessel on that team? He is a proven true goal scorer in this league. So that team did have someone who could put the puck in the net. Also that team had a true point per game player in Marc Savard, who was healthy. So excluding 3 years ago and thus far including this season through 10 games, then last year looks like the anomaly. Granted they still have the chance to change that this season, but in my opinion I think last year was a year where everything fell into place for the Bruins and went perfectly all the way throught the playoffs.


50% of your sample was the anomaly, why? Because you want it to be so?

And last season was such the year that everything fell into place that all the usual suspects were bitching about the same things during the rough spots that they're bitching about now. At this point, the arguments are a stopped clock.

The Bruins aren't winning right now because Horton and Krejci haven't played well. Just like they didn't play well for long stretches last season. Krejci's also still probably dinged up. Also, other players have been a bit snake-bitten.

#117 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 03:00 PM

The Bruins aren't winning right now because Horton and Krejci haven't played well. Just like they didn't play well for long stretches last season. Krejci's also still probably dinged up. Also, other players have been a bit snake-bitten.

Bingo.

The way this team is constructed depends on integral players in the cog to perform. They can't get by with one guy running the show and if guys get hurt and other guys don't step up, then they're not going to play up to their ability. An injury to a guy like Krejci is detrimental to the team, not because he's a huge part of the offense like Crosby or Malkin is, but because it effects the entire depth of the team, making guys play in spots they wouldn't normally be playing (Kelly on the first line, anyone). When you build a team that is meant to be strong top to bottom, then injuries will put a kink in that armor, especially if other guys don't step up. Which is exactly what is happening. Maybe that's a downfall to how the team is built, but you can't tell me that there isn't a downfall to building around a few big superstars and having one of them get hurt.

The roster construction and coaching is not the problem with this team right now. It's on the players and the players only.

#118 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:24 PM

It's pretty much insane to suggest that Claude should go. As in, "I'm not sure you've even watched hockey before" insane. His "system" is not to sit back and protect the lead and try to win 1-0. It's to get back and pressure the puck on the backcheck so that you can turn and go with speed across a consistent ice depth and attack a defense in transition. It's a relentless forecheck and cycling that outworks the opponent to the point where they get their scoring chances on shots from the points, rebounds, and net front passes out of the corner. This system can work. It can work with offensively gifted players (see 08-09) and it can work with a balanced yet talented team (last year). And when the offense isn't there, the defense should be able to tighten up and try to grind out those 2-1 wins. He coached his ass off in the playoffs last year, and he has not been shy in tinkering and making adjustments this year. I am a much bigger Claude supporter than most, and felt vindicated by it last year, but even his harshest critics (*cough* Haunted I love you *cough*) would probably agree with me that he is not the issue right now.

Now, in 8 out of the 10 games, this system hasn't really worked as designed. But it's not his system that's at fault. It's the players, because they aren't coming close to doing what they are supposed to be doing. They are getting caught 3 deep flatfooted in the offensive zone. They are not all coming back hard through the neutral zone and pressuring the pack. They can't execute short, simple passes in the defensive and neutral zone, let alone longer more risky ones. Seriously, in the last 4 periods against Montreal that I've seen, they mishandled more 20 ft and under passes than I've seen in a long time. They have the passer thinking one thing and the receiver thinking another. The puck is passed bouncing, or it is mishandled when being caught. It's pretty brutal, and it has nothing to do with coaching or a system. It's physical and mental execution, pure and simple.

The offense is so freaking frustrating right now, but to me it's way different than the hapless stretch 2 years ago when they lost 10 straight (man that seems like forever ago). They couldn't get a quality scoring chance to save their lives back then, likely because guys like Miro Satan were getting 1st line minutes. This year, I feel like they've missed more point blank awesome chances than all of last year combined, and while it sucks to watch it's easy to forget that they are getting these chances in the first place. It's like January/February Horton (when we honestly thought he would never score again) has infected the whole team not named Seguin or Lucic* right now.

I think it will come. They have the talent, they have the system, and they seem to have the desire (I hope). There's no doubt in my mind that the goals will come, and the wins will come. But as New Jersey or Carolina fans can attest to, I hope the points in the standings come before it is too late.

*People who think Lucic is a grinder with limited scoring capability basically missed the last year+. He has a laser of a wrist shot and had a ton of goals last year (and some this year) that were just heavy shots right under the bar. Yes he had 5 empty netters, and no he can't create a ton of opportunities on his own like a Seguin, but when he gets the puck from the tops of the circles in, he has a deadly shot. He probably has the second best wrist shot on the team right now, and that's only because Seguin's is pretty much superhuman. Lucic's issue is not his hands or his shot, it's his feet as always. When they're moving, he pushes the D back, he creates space both on the rush and the forecheck, and he allows himself the chance to use his shot. Playing with Seguin for some reason gets his feet moving, and I'd love to see Claude go back to that.

#119 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:25 PM

Goddamn that was a lot of writing.

#120 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 23,325 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:10 AM

Up late again Bunky?

#121 Spaulding Smails


  • Worth a thousand words


  • 2,457 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:14 AM

*People who think Lucic is a grinder with limited scoring capability basically missed the last year+. He has a laser of a wrist shot and had a ton of goals last year (and some this year) that were just heavy shots right under the bar. Yes he had 5 empty netters, and no he can't create a ton of opportunities on his own like a Seguin, but when he gets the puck from the tops of the circles in, he has a deadly shot. He probably has the second best wrist shot on the team right now, and that's only because Seguin's is pretty much superhuman. Lucic's issue is not his hands or his shot, it's his feet as always. When they're moving, he pushes the D back, he creates space both on the rush and the forecheck, and he allows himself the chance to use his shot. Playing with Seguin for some reason gets his feet moving, and I'd love to see Claude go back to that.


Good post overall, the bolded part is so painfully obvious too I don't know why Claude broke them up. Besides that, I don't really have a problem with what Claude is doing this year, in fact I think he has shown a shorter leash (with playing time) than in years past its just on the players to fish their heads out of their asses.

#122 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:33 AM

Oh look, it's TFP the all knowing hockey mind, you're such a tool sometimes.

#123 Spaulding Smails


  • Worth a thousand words


  • 2,457 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:46 AM

Oh look, it's TFP the all knowing hockey mind, you're such a tool sometimes.


Are you like this in real life? I'm honestly curious.

#124 TheShynessClinic


  • SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer


  • 4,417 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 08:48 AM

He's even better.

#125 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 09:09 AM

Are you like this in real life? I'm honestly curious.

Haha, perfect.

#126 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 09:24 AM

Oh look, it's TFP the all knowing hockey mind, you're such a tool sometimes.

I'd be jealous if I were you too.

#127 Haunted


  • The Man in the Box


  • 1,878 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 11:06 AM

TFP is right, overall, that Clode is not the problem right now. I have no love for him (in fact, my dislike for him is far beyond reasonable discussion), but even I don't lay this start at his feet.

#128 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 3,472 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 05:47 PM

TFP is right, overall, that Clode is not the problem right now. I have no love for him (in fact, my dislike for him is far beyond reasonable discussion), but even I don't lay this start at his feet.

But be honest, it wouldn't hurt you to see him fired. :)

Claude is not the problem, I still think they lack the goal scorer, but we shall see bc I don't think they will get one anytime soon.

Edited by BoSoxFink, 01 November 2011 - 05:49 PM.


#129 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 05:52 PM

I still think they lack the goal scorer, but we shall see bc I don't think they will get one anytime soon.

I think a true bonafide goal scorer would certainly go a long way towards helping them avoid slumps like this, and I certainly wouldn't turn one down, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary, if that makes sense. Hell even a guy like Kessel is incredibly streaky, so it still might not even help (although I doubt it would hurt).

#130 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 07:51 AM

But be honest, it wouldn't hurt you to see him fired. :)

Claude is not the problem, I still think they lack the goal scorer, but we shall see bc I don't think they will get one anytime soon.

Why wouldn't they get one anytime soon? They have a bunch of assets to go out and get one and it's a distinct possibility. Hell, Parise and Doan are both FA after this season, they might be able to target one of those guys.


Personally, I'd hold onto all of my assets and make a run at Shea Weber. I think he'd be a bigger asset to this team than anyone on offense. Personally, I think the offensive makeup is fine, but they need a guy on the backend that can put the puck in the net and can spark the offense and PP. (Although it does look like Suter and Carle are FA, they might be good targets as well).

I think a true bonafide goal scorer would certainly go a long way towards helping them avoid slumps like this, and I certainly wouldn't turn one down, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary, if that makes sense. Hell even a guy like Kessel is incredibly streaky, so it still might not even help (although I doubt it would hurt).

This is where I'm at and have said similar. Nobody is going to say "damnit, we added Iginla, this sucks". It's a luxury for the Bruins at this point, but not a necessity.

#131 TheShynessClinic


  • SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer


  • 4,417 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:02 AM

Why wouldn't they get one anytime soon? They have a bunch of assets to go out and get one and it's a distinct possibility. Hell, Parise and Doan are both FA after this season, they might be able to target one of those guys.

Personally, I'd hold onto all of my assets and make a run at Shea Weber. I think he'd be a bigger asset to this team than anyone on offense. Personally, I think the offensive makeup is fine, but they need a guy on the backend that can put the puck in the net and can spark the offense and PP. (Although it does look like Suter and Carle are FA, they might be good targets as well).


I'm hoping that person ends up being Dougie Hamilton.

And Zach Parise will be 28 in the offseason, Shane Doan 36. If the Bruins are going to trade quality assets for a goal scorer, go after the guy whose best years are still ahead.

#132 lexrageorge

  • 2,336 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:07 AM

Why wouldn't they get one anytime soon? They have a bunch of assets to go out and get one and it's a distinct possibility. Hell, Parise and Doan are both FA after this season, they might be able to target one of those guys.

...


I think the issue is that it is very unlikely to see a trade for a premier goal scorer, or an offensive defenseman, happening at this point in the season. Every team is technically still in the playoff hunt, and many teams are bunched in that middle tier, and there haven't been any season ending injuries of note. So noone is selling goal scorers right now. Phoenix is in 9th place in the West, and, as much as I love Parise's game, New Jersey is hovering at 0.500 after having only played 9 games so far.

Even the Joe Thornton trade didn't happen until the last day of November. And that took a GM who was in all out panic mode and therefore willing to dump him for a bag of pucks to the first team that returned his phone calls.





#133 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:18 AM

I'm hoping that person ends up being Dougie Hamilton.

And Zach Parise will be 28 in the offseason, Shane Doan 36. If the Bruins are going to trade quality assets for a goal scorer, go after the guy whose best years are still ahead.

Which one will cost more though? That's a consideration.

#134 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:19 AM

I think the issue is that it is very unlikely to see a trade for a premier goal scorer, or an offensive defenseman, happening at this point in the season. Every team is technically still in the playoff hunt, and many teams are bunched in that middle tier, and there haven't been any season ending injuries of note. So noone is selling goal scorers right now. Phoenix is in 9th place in the West, and, as much as I love Parise's game, New Jersey is hovering at 0.500 after having only played 9 games so far.

Even the Joe Thornton trade didn't happen until the last day of November. And that took a GM who was in all out panic mode and therefore willing to dump him for a bag of pucks to the first team that returned his phone calls.

Fair point, but I didn't put a timeframe on it, I'm assuming they could do it at some point this season, not right now.

#135 FL4WL3SS


  • Mrs. Dennis Wideman


  • 5,250 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:20 AM

I'm hoping that person ends up being Dougie Hamilton.

I'd trade Dougie Hamilton in a heartbeat for Shea Weber. I'm hoping Hamilton can turn into Weber too, but you don't turn down the chance to get Weber with hopes and dreams.

#136 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 3,472 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 08:22 AM

I think the issue is that it is very unlikely to see a trade for a premier goal scorer, or an offensive defenseman, happening at this point in the season. Every team is technically still in the playoff hunt, and many teams are bunched in that middle tier, and there haven't been any season ending injuries of note. So noone is selling goal scorers right now. Phoenix is in 9th place in the West, and, as much as I love Parise's game, New Jersey is hovering at 0.500 after having only played 9 games so far.

Even the Joe Thornton trade didn't happen until the last day of November. And that took a GM who was in all out panic mode and therefore willing to dump him for a bag of pucks to the first team that returned his phone calls.

This is what I meant, majority of the time a player with the capabilities of Parise won't be moved unless the team is out of the playoff chase and it's near the trade deadline, i.e. Kovalchuk. When I said they won't get one soon, I meant within the next couple months. They are going to have to try to play out of this rut without a major trade I believe.

On that topic however Parise is exactly the guy I want. He would fit perfectly on this team and if you were to pair him with Seguin, that would be absolutely awesome. Although I do expect that in the end some way that Lamarillo will find a way to extend him. A guy can dream though right?

#137 Blacken


  • Paddy Tanniger the Caddy Manager


  • 5,671 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 09:28 AM

Although I do expect that in the end some way that Lamarillo will find a way to extend him.

35 year contract, janitorial duties for the last 20.

#138 Eddie Jurak


  • Go Leafs Go


  • 7,818 posts

Posted 06 November 2011 - 07:48 AM

Interesting stat from yesterday's game - during their respective hot and cold starts, Toronto has been beating up on weak teams while the Bruins have been failing to show up against weak teams. Going into last night's game, Toronto was about .500 against good teams and 7-1 against bad ones, while the Bruins have lost to every subpar team they have played. This is nothing new - just maybe a little more extrmeme than usual - for Julien's Bruin teams, so based on past history this bad start is a fluke and ought to turn around completely as the season goes on.

One thing I'm disappointed about is that after a full preseason of saying that Rask was going to play a lot, Julien has once again buried him.

#139 TheoShmeo


  • made johnny damon think long and hard


  • 7,034 posts

Posted 06 November 2011 - 09:41 AM

One thing I'm disappointed about is that after a full preseason of saying that Rask was going to play a lot, Julien has once again buried him.

Between trying to get back to at least .500 and all the days off between games, I have no problem with what Julien is doing. For whatever reason, the Bs seem to play better in front of Thomas, and it's a long season. He still has time to get Rask in there on a more regular basis.

#140 The Napkin


  • wise ass al kaprielian


  • 11,480 posts

Posted 06 November 2011 - 10:44 AM

Plus there have been a heck of a lot of off days. I imagine we'll be seeing a lot of Tuukka the next couple weeks.

#141 Eddie Jurak


  • Go Leafs Go


  • 7,818 posts

Posted 06 November 2011 - 08:10 PM

Despite the 5-7 record, the Bruins are still the Boston team mostly likely to be hoisting another banner next fall.

#142 The Napkin


  • wise ass al kaprielian


  • 11,480 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 11:33 AM

Plus there have been a heck of a lot of off days. I imagine we'll be seeing a lot of Tuukka the next couple weeks.

Tuukka tonight. Damn I'm smart.

#143 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 11:40 AM

Not to mention handsome.

I'm really hoping the Bruins can have another strong effort tonight. They've played 2 very good games and this is a great point to go a little run to get right back into the thick of things. A loss tonight isn't the end of the world, but it would certainly undo some of the progress they had made the last couple games. The Islanders are about middle of the pack defensively (ga/g) and at the bottom of the league offensively (g/g) so I fully expect the Bruins to come out on top tonight. Getting out of the Eastern Conference basement wouldn't be a bad thing either.

#144 Myt1


  • thinks tim thomas is a dick-fil-a


  • 16,132 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 12:38 PM

If Lucic can grind out a couple more goals like Saturday night, they should be fine.

#145 PedroSpecialK


  • Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL salary cap


  • 15,366 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 12:44 PM

If Lucic can grind out a couple more goals like Saturday night, they should be fine.

I forget who said it, I think it was cshea, but they were spot on regarding Lucic not being a beneficiary of ENGs - he is deadly from the slot and is pretty unstoppable with the puck when he gets his straight-line speed up.

I salivate at the thought of him + Seguin in a 4-on-4 situation.

#146 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 12:49 PM

I forget who said it, I think it was cshea, but they were spot on regarding Lucic not being a beneficiary of ENGs - he is deadly from the slot and is pretty unstoppable with the puck when he gets his straight-line speed up.

I salivate at the thought of him + Seguin in a 4-on-4 situation.

Yeah whoever said that must have been a pretty smart guy.

#147 PedroSpecialK


  • Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL salary cap


  • 15,366 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 12:52 PM

Shaddap.

#148 Myt1


  • thinks tim thomas is a dick-fil-a


  • 16,132 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 02:08 PM

Yeah whoever said that must have been a pretty smart guy.


Settle down, William Gibson.

#149 The Napkin


  • wise ass al kaprielian


  • 11,480 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 02:11 PM

Yeah whoever said that must have been a pretty smart guy.

And handsome. Don't forget handsome.

#150 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 10,069 posts

Posted 07 November 2011 - 02:31 PM

Settle down, William Gibson.

If people who know the answer to that question are considered smart, then you're dead wrong about the Pats defense.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users