2022-23 Bruins Season

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,261
Off the beaten track
Curious, what's XPG? Is that shorthand for expected goals, or something else?
Expected goals. Sorry, I should have been more clear.

Carlo has the largest delta between simple Corsi and expected goals, in large part because the team has landed close to 65% of the inner slot shots on net while he is on the ice.
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
41,582
South Boston
I was going to ask why the Carlo hate this morning, and am glad to see some posts on this. I fully admit I have not followed the Bruins fervently this year as I'm spending time traveling the west coast of Mexico playing in the waves, but I do still have access to advanced data and it says that Brandon Carlo is first in the NHL in XPG% among defensemen with over 300 5 on 5 minutes (194 players), and he is 3rd in actual 5 on 5 goal on ice percentage, as well. He has done this with the 7th lowest OZ start % among those 194 defensemen, which makes it pretty remarkable.

The team has been exceptional with him on the ice this year.
Do we have any ability to tease out where he is relative to his team peers while playing with similar forwards? The Bruins are kicking everyone’s ass in actual and expected goal differential, I think, so I’m not sure how much this tells us. Are all the Bruins’ defenders right around awesome this year?

For me, the Carlo complaints this year (he’s playing the puck more confidently against the boards than the past couple years, IMHO) are often the offensive line corollary. When goals get scored while he’s on the ice, it feels like it’s due to an immediate error he made on the specific play (giveaway, failure to cover the goal scorer while puck watching, etc.) disproportionately often. That’s observational and hardly scientific, of course.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Ranking the B's blue liners by CF% (courtesy hockey-reference.com), I get:

Lindholm: 55.5%
McAvoy: 53.8%
Carlo: 52.0%
Grzelcyk: 52.0%
Clifton: 49.6%
Forbort: 47.0%

They rank in the same order if I use CF relative %. Using expected +/- (not sure how meaningful that stat is), Carlo would rank 2nd behind Lindholm. Interestingly, he leads the team's defensemen in takeaways with 17 and is lowest with giveaways with 9. No idea how many of those giveaways led to scores ;) .

I did not consider Zboril, Reilly or Stralman in this analysis as they all have played far fewer minutes than the top 6.

I highly doubt he will be traded this season, nor would I want Sweeney to do so. There is too much risk of repeating the Boychuck situation in the locker room, IMO.
 

durandal1707

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2007
6,131
Per MoneyPuck:

60234

There's one name that constantly bubbles up to the top (Lindholm) and one that constantly sinks to the bottom (Forbort). Montgomery has also found regular pairings in Lindholm-Carlo, Grzelcyk-McAvoy, and Forbort-Clifton.

I do think that much of Carlo's analytical success we're seeing is due to being regularly paired with Hampus Lindholm, who by all accounts is a team-transforming addition to the roster. But he has also played quite well with Grz, so some credit is due to Carlo. I do wonder if Carlo's steady "stay-at-home" nature enables Lindholm to be more dynamic offensively.

The only defenseman that seems lacking is Forbort. I'm not sold that his return "fixed" the penalty kill—I think that was just a huge coincidence. Unless there is some downstream effect by him eating high-intensity PK minutes on the deployment of the other defensemen.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I do think that much of Carlo's analytical success we're seeing is due to being regularly paired with Hampus Lindholm, who by all accounts is a team-transforming addition to the roster. But he has also played quite well with Grz, so some credit is due to Carlo. I do wonder if Carlo's steady "stay-at-home" nature enables Lindholm to be more dynamic offensively.
I don't think this is accurate, at least in terms of the defensive side of the game. Carlo's defense is basically the same with and without Lindholm. Lindholm provides the juice offensively. Their expected goals as a pair is 57%. Carlo without Lindholm drops to 52% but that's basically on the back of his xGA/60 cratering from 2.94 to 2.41. More than a 0.5 goal per 60 drop. His defense basically stays the same. 2.16 xGA/60 with Lindholm, 2.25 xGA/60 without.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,164
Cambridge, MA
Eye test is particularly harsh on Carlo, which is mostly where I'm coming from (cue ERR's very applicable "if you're gonna be using numbers and stuff I'm gonna look real dumb" all-timer).

I'm not saying Carlo isn't a useful player - he absolutely is - but I am surprised to see the numbers so favorable for him given he sticks out on a number of occasions in most games, be it with puckhandling gaffes, icings, and generally other small plays that you don't expect to see out of a true shutdown defenseman.

I hope I'm wrong and he's finding his game again after a rough year last year (getting brained by the Washington Caps annually will do that to a guy) but I still don't think it was the right move to lock him down on a six year deal when his upside is so limited. Given his tenure, I agree w cshea that it's a leadership non-starter to move him mid-year, but he's the first name I look to move in the offseason after a strong year to drive up his value and get out from what could be an injury timebomb.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
He's not that expensive tho *shrug*

Edit: to PSK
$4.1M is indeed reasonable. Biggest risk is the length as it runs through 2027, and there are some other players that the Bruins will need to squeeze into that cap* into the coming years.

Definitely a tomorrow problem. It's certainly a trade-able contract in the offseason; although obligatory note that Carlo does have a 10 team no-trade through 2024, which goes down to 8 and 3 in 2025/26.

*: I'll defer my usual rant on the NHL's cap "increase" and why it seems to always be much lower than that of NFL/NBA despite a spanking new and shiny TV contract.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,913
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
$4.1M is indeed reasonable. Biggest risk is the length as it runs through 2027, and there are some other players that the Bruins will need to squeeze into that cap* into the coming years.

Definitely a tomorrow problem. It's certainly a trade-able contract in the offseason; although obligatory note that Carlo does have a 10 team no-trade through 2024, which goes down to 8 and 3 in 2025/26.

*: I'll defer my usual rant on the NHL's cap "increase" and why it seems to always be much lower than that of NFL/NBA despite a spanking new and shiny TV contract.
I'm on the side of keeping him for another 2-3 seasons and then dealing with it. If nothing else, he becomes a really good bottom pairing D at the back end of the contract.
 

Chainsaw318

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2006
1,902
Burned . . . Blacklisted
Way to go, you all. Now no one gets to have any Brandon Carlo.

Not a great look to have him helped off the bench and around behind the boards. Hopefully not too bad, but this likely means we see Zboril for a few games, rather than Strahlman, right?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
They didn't have any update on Carlo postgame. We'll probably find out more tomorrow or Sunday, they'll probably have the day off today.

We'll see how they sort out the replacement. Zboril has been with the team all season but has only played 1 game (and only 6:47 TOI at that) since 11/23. They have the cap space to call up Reilly and he's been playing games down in Providence so he's probably in better game shape than Zboril. He's not a bad player, probably better than Zboril, he's in the AHL more due to the salary cap than anything performance related. It might not be a bad idea to get him NHL games in advance of the deadline either.

I'm not sure what's going on with Stralman. He's hanging around so he's in their plans to some degree, but I don't think he's game ready. He was working out at Warrior for a while and then popped up at a Providence practice last week but it seems like that was a cameo and he hasn't been back as far as I know, nor has he played games.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,535
right here
yeah, no practice today. would imagine he'll come in for treatment and imaging and maybe an update this afternoon but probably tomorrow when they practice.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Friedman on his 32 Thoughts podcast today re: Horvat
  • Talks have intensified recently
  • As of Thursday night the Canucks had not given Horvat's camp permission to talk to other teams
  • Seattle, Minnesota ("as a rental"), Boston ("may be tough") are "around it" then he wonders about New Jersey ("they're on something, not sure if it's this"), Carolina ("they don't do rentals") plus some idle speculation about Colorado and Tampa ("haven't heard anything, but I wonder"). Also says he is probably missing teams.
  • Not sure of timeline, but reiterates that things have intensified. Rutherford has a history of acting early. Mentioned Seattle specifically saying they would probably want him earlier so they have more runway on extension talks.
View: https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/1616461026177830918?s=20&t=8h1l4Polrbq6aihH66DilA
 

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,261
Off the beaten track
Do we have any ability to tease out where he is relative to his team peers while playing with similar forwards? The Bruins are kicking everyone’s ass in actual and expected goal differential, I think, so I’m not sure how much this tells us. Are all the Bruins’ defenders right around awesome this year?

For me, the Carlo complaints this year (he’s playing the puck more confidently against the boards than the past couple years, IMHO) are often the offensive line corollary. When goals get scored while he’s on the ice, it feels like it’s due to an immediate error he made on the specific play (giveaway, failure to cover the goal scorer while puck watching, etc.) disproportionately often. That’s observational and hardly scientific, of course.
It's true that all Bruins defensemen have strong expected goal numbers, with their top 6 players' on ice XPG percentages ranging between 55% and 62%. But Carlo's XPG% numbers are best both on the team and in the league when looking at defensemen with over 300 5 on 5 minutes (194 players). The fact that Carlo has done this with the lowest OZ start percentage among all Bruins defensemen by a considerable margin, and in fact the 7th lowest OZS% in the NHL among those 194 defensemen, is incredible. In the past I found a solid relationship between OZ starts and both expected goals and actual goals on ice (and individual expected goals and goals, as well), such that the lower a player's OZ starts, the lower their expected goal and goal percentage. I'd have to look back, which I'm not going to do while the waves are cranking at Quimixto, but I cannot remember any player either forward or defensemen who was top 10 in XPG% and bottom 10 in OZS%.

Carlo has played with Coyle, Pastrnak, Zacha, Hall, Marchand, and Foligno most of all team forwards (over 150 even strength minutes each), so he hasn't been getting mostly first or 2nd line pairings (it's actually been pretty even across the board). Interestingly, his expected goal percentage numbers on ice without these players, and really this is true of all team forwards he has played with, has been consistently very good, ranging from 56% to 66%.

The same is true looking at defensemen. Carlo has played most with Lindholm and Grzelcyk (both over 60% XPG%), but his without XPG% numbers for all Bruins defensemen range between 61% and 63%. No one is "carrying" Carlo this year that I can see statistically.

Finally, re: the bolded, great call. I can't share too much here, but he's been excellent on recovering opposition dump in's and getting them out of his own end.


Eye test is particularly harsh on Carlo, which is mostly where I'm coming from (cue ERR's very applicable "if you're gonna be using numbers and stuff I'm gonna look real dumb" all-timer).

I'm not saying Carlo isn't a useful player - he absolutely is - but I am surprised to see the numbers so favorable for him given he sticks out on a number of occasions in most games, be it with puckhandling gaffes, icings, and generally other small plays that you don't expect to see out of a true shutdown defenseman.

I hope I'm wrong and he's finding his game again after a rough year last year (getting brained by the Washington Caps annually will do that to a guy) but I still don't think it was the right move to lock him down on a six year deal when his upside is so limited. Given his tenure, I agree w cshea that it's a leadership non-starter to move him mid-year, but he's the first name I look to move in the offseason after a strong year to drive up his value and get out from what could be an injury timebomb.
I trust your eyes very much, which is why I looked at Carlo's data in the first place. But the data I'm seeing thus far this season does say Carlo is a far different player than the past few years, and is a solid asset to a very good team.

One last thought. The publicly available expected goal data is wonderful, and it's getting better all the time. But the expected goal data I have access to has an exponentially higher relationship to actual goals than anything out there that I have seen. They track far more actions than the public systems, and are far more sophisticated and (IMO) accurate. I bring this up because Carlo's Corsi, Fenwick, Natural Stat Trick, and Hockey Reference numbers are very different than what I have. They show a well above average player, but not someone at the top of the league. I think the data I have is more accurate, but half season sample size can be an issue. I guess what I'm saying is, don't discount the eye tests entirely.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Interesting stuff. I think having more visibility into the microstats (which I think is what you have that we don't :)) is the next step in public hockey analytics. You kind of need to use the microstats in conjunction with the on-ice stuff like corsi, fenwick, scoring chances, expected goals. The microstats kind of answer the "why?" when a player has good/bad analytics. What specifically does the player excel at or or struggle with? Deny entries, retrieve pucks, exit the zone, deny slot passes, etc.

The problem is that data isn't readily available publicly. There are a few people who track it and offer it through subscription services but you can't get it anywhere else. I'm sure their data pales in comparison to what teams have.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
The retrieval part is interesting. I believe Oates brought it up specifically about Carlo a couple years ago when he was interviewed on Chiclets so would make sense that is something he improved upon.
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
41,582
South Boston
It's true that all Bruins defensemen have strong expected goal numbers, with their top 6 players' on ice XPG percentages ranging between 55% and 62%. But Carlo's XPG% numbers are best both on the team and in the league when looking at defensemen with over 300 5 on 5 minutes (194 players). The fact that Carlo has done this with the lowest OZ start percentage among all Bruins defensemen by a considerable margin, and in fact the 7th lowest OZS% in the NHL among those 194 defensemen, is incredible. In the past I found a solid relationship between OZ starts and both expected goals and actual goals on ice (and individual expected goals and goals, as well), such that the lower a player's OZ starts, the lower their expected goal and goal percentage. I'd have to look back, which I'm not going to do while the waves are cranking at Quimixto, but I cannot remember any player either forward or defensemen who was top 10 in XPG% and bottom 10 in OZS%.

Carlo has played with Coyle, Pastrnak, Zacha, Hall, Marchand, and Foligno most of all team forwards (over 150 even strength minutes each), so he hasn't been getting mostly first or 2nd line pairings (it's actually been pretty even across the board). Interestingly, his expected goal percentage numbers on ice without these players, and really this is true of all team forwards he has played with, has been consistently very good, ranging from 56% to 66%.

The same is true looking at defensemen. Carlo has played most with Lindholm and Grzelcyk (both over 60% XPG%), but his without XPG% numbers for all Bruins defensemen range between 61% and 63%. No one is "carrying" Carlo this year that I can see statistically.

Finally, re: the bolded, great call. I can't share too much here, but he's been excellent on recovering opposition dump in's and getting them out of his own end.




I trust your eyes very much, which is why I looked at Carlo's data in the first place. But the data I'm seeing thus far this season does say Carlo is a far different player than the past few years, and is a solid asset to a very good team.

One last thought. The publicly available expected goal data is wonderful, and it's getting better all the time. But the expected goal data I have access to has an exponentially higher relationship to actual goals than anything out there that I have seen. They track far more actions than the public systems, and are far more sophisticated and (IMO) accurate. I bring this up because Carlo's Corsi, Fenwick, Natural Stat Trick, and Hockey Reference numbers are very different than what I have. They show a well above average player, but not someone at the top of the league. I think the data I have is more accurate, but half season sample size can be an issue. I guess what I'm saying is, don't discount the eye tests entirely.
Thanks, @Frisbetarian I can usually figure out the logic relationship I’m interested in, but I’m shit at finding/parsing the actual data. I’m super interested in causation issues on all of this. For example, we’re seeing analytics discussion of Coyle turning into a shutdown center, and that usage being intended by Montgomery, and the data you show makes me wonder about the degree to which he and Carlo might be influencing each other in that regard. Similarly, this layman looks at the goalie successes over the past three head coaches, with Thomas, Tuukka, Ullmark, Swayman, and even other backups, and and finds himself wondering the degree to which the team and defensive philosophy in front of those goalies has played an outsized role in “their” results. I almost feel like we can’t simply have been lucky/good merely from a goalie personnel standpoint over that period of time.

Glad also for the implication that my observation of Carlo’s board play might have something to it. Given the head injuries, I certainly don’t blame the guy for having occasionally played the puck like a grenade while facing the boards, but it definitely felt like he might have turned a corner on that this year. God knows he deserves it.
 
Last edited:

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,535
right here
Similarly, this layman looks at the goalie successes over the past three head coaches, with Thomas, Tuukka, Ullmark, Swayman, and even other backups, and and finds himself wondering the degree to which the team and defensive philosophy in front of those goalies has played an outsized role in “their” results. I almost feel like we can’t simply have been lucky/good merely from a goalie personnel standpoint over that period of time.
20 years of Goalie Bob.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,164
Cambridge, MA
I trust your eyes very much, which is why I looked at Carlo's data in the first place. But the data I'm seeing thus far this season does say Carlo is a far different player than the past few years, and is a solid asset to a very good team.
I appreciate it Chuck, but to your point it appears empirically my eyes are lying based on the data presented ;-)

I'm letting my distaste for locking Carlo down at the time they chose to - and the unfortunate impact of his injury history on their cap situation - cloud my evaluation of him. There's also a degree of looking to find imperfections in what's proving to be a generationally strong group, at least in this franchise's history. Hope he is good to go on Sunday and, if not, that his absence is short-lived - definitely something to be said for Carlo and Forbort allowing Montgomery to roll out reliable go-tos defending late leads when Lindholm/McAvoy are spent.
 

Chainsaw318

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2006
1,902
Burned . . . Blacklisted
That sucks for Nosek, who generally has played well on the 4th line and been useful.

Hopefully his upper-body issue that has kept him from taking face-offs can also heal in that time.

Wagner back again? Or more of Koppanen, who had a rougish one in NY
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It is pretty remarkable for a coach to "survive" that many head-coach changes.
Goalie Bob is old school and unassuming, but he works harder than anyone in that front office except maybe Donnie. He is detail oriented and prepared to an extreme degree, and his video presentations are legendary. IMO he is extremely good at what he does.
Sounds like Dante Scarnecchia.
 

Murby

New Member
Mar 16, 2006
1,790
Boston Metro
I remember going to games when he was a goalie for my hometown minor league team, he was very good. So glad to see him have a very good career post-hockey playing.
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
41,582
South Boston
20 years of Goalie Bob.
It is pretty remarkable for a coach to "survive" that many head-coach changes.
Goalie Bob is old school and unassuming, but he works harder than anyone in that front office except maybe Donnie. He is detail oriented and prepared to an extreme degree, and his video presentations are legendary. IMO he is extremely good at what he does.
I’m not surprised at the response, especially given @joe dokes ’s point about his longevity across regimes. It does seem that certain parts of coaching staffs are more likely to survive a head coach change in hockey than in other sports, but it really is something with Goalie Bob. If there’s even a hint of truth to him having this level of impact, they ought to back up the Brinks truck for him.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Sounds like on schedule. They announced a 4 week injury and this is the begging of week 3 so that's about the time players would start getting back on the ice. Then sometime late this week/next week they'd start practicing with the team. In Jake's case, I don't think that'll happen because of the road trip. 5 games (all on the road) in 10 days followed by the 10 day ASB + bye. My guess is he'll be back the first game coming out of the break, 2/11.

View: https://twitter.com/WEEI/status/1617515651941412867?s=20&t=6Ag9B6zOjjnp9MPDI8nYQQ
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Sounds like on schedule. They announced a 4 week injury and this is the begging of week 3 so that's about the time players would start getting back on the ice. Then sometime late this week/next week they'd start practicing with the team. In Jake's case, I don't think that'll happen because of the road trip. 5 games (all on the road) in 10 days followed by the 10 day ASB + bye. My guess is he'll be back the first game coming out of the break, 2/11.

View: https://twitter.com/WEEI/status/1617515651941412867?s=20&t=6Ag9B6zOjjnp9MPDI8nYQQ
Makes sense. It's been 3 weeks. Non-weight bearing bone. Bones are usually 4-6 weeks to heal. (IANAD, but I have broken many bones!). Skating (without torquing) may even be less of a stressor than the impact of walking.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,386
I just keep staring at the standings in disbelief. 37-5-4. Thirty-seven wins, nine losses - only five in regulation.

That's just unfathomable. At some point this team has to cool off, right?
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,466
Gallows Hill
I just keep staring at the standings in disbelief. 37-5-4. Thirty-seven wins, nine losses - only five in regulation.

That's just unfathomable. At some point this team has to cool off, right?
They have a very tough road trip coming up, so if they don’t cool off now, they might stay on this pace. Next five are:

Montreal on Tuesday (bad team but adding international travel right before a trip to Florida)

Tampa on Thursday

Florida on Saturday

Carolina on Sunday (3rd game in 4 days with travel and a start time 23 hours after the start time on Saturday)

Toronto on Wednesday

So that’s 4 good teams on the road with 3 games in 72 hours in the middle. I would be happy with 5 out of 10 points on the trip.
 

IdiotKicker

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
10,785
Somerville, MA
Yeah against this kind of competition I think a normal expectation would be to beat MTL (though weird stuff always happens there), and then split the rest of the games. 4-1 would be a fantastic outcome, but I still think 3-2 on this trip would be a win, given the level of competition they're facing off against.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Yeah against this kind of competition I think a normal expectation would be to beat MTL (though weird stuff always happens there), and then split the rest of the games. 4-1 would be a fantastic outcome, but I still think 3-2 on this trip would be a win, given the level of competition they're facing off against.
The result of this stretch will likely tell us whether this is a record-breaking regular season or "merely" a great one.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
More Bruins chatter from Friedman on the 32 Thoughs pod today.

On the Horvat thing he says he thinks the intesifying talks of last week was Vancouver trying to cull the herd so to speak and figure out the teams that are truly in. First team he mentions is the Bruins. In the same breath he also says "the Bruins are also looking at LHD." It doesn't sound like the Canucks are going to give Horvat's camp permission to talk to teams before a trade, though. Finally, he's sticks with the football analogy with the Pastrnak extension. He thinks they getting close to the red zone and is under the impression that the Bruins and Pasta's camp are talking daily.

The LHD thing is kind of interesting. Lindholm/Grzelyck/Forbort/Zboril/Reilly is the current depth on that side. It doesn't strike me as necessarily a need, although I'm firmly in the "they could do a lot better than Forbort" camp.

Anywho, they are also McLaughlin on the road trip. Been hot of late down in Providence, 7 points in his last 5 games.

View: https://twitter.com/NHLBruins/status/1617556973389578243?s=20&t=6Ag9B6zOjjnp9MPDI8nYQQ
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Does McLaughlin replace Smith in the lineup (even if on a different line)? My eyes say Smith has been a relative non-factor.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
I worry that they are looking for a lhd with how much love forbort gets. They certainly seem to value him far more than they should but if they want a lhd doesn’t it make sense they are doing it to “upgrade” gryz? That would be a mistake.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,466
Gallows Hill
I worry that they are looking for a lhd with how much love forbort gets. They certainly seem to value him far more than they should but if they want a lhd doesn’t it make sense they are doing it to “upgrade” gryz? That would be a mistake.
I look at it more like replacing Zboril in the event of the inevitable defenseman injury in the playoffs.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Does McLaughlin replace Smith in the lineup (even if on a different line)? My eyes say Smith has been a relative non-factor.
McLaughlin isn't really replacing anyone in the lineup. Nosek's injury brought them down to 12 F on the roster and they're headed out on a 6-game road trip. They usually make sure they have an extra along in case someone gets hurt while they're on the road. Most recently they brought Wagner to California after DeBrusk's injury dropped them to 12 F.

McLaughlin may very well get into a game or two at some point on the trip, probably more for Greer or Koppanen than Smith. Smith's been fine recently playing on the big line.
 

GruberTaggedHim

New Member
Oct 5, 2021
102
Hopefully. They started 35-5, never looked back and breezed to a championship.
That was a frustrating year to be a young Blue Jays fan. The team was finally really good and they got off to a great start - and they got buried by the Tigers start and never had a hope of catching them.