Bruins Round 2 Thread- New York Islanders

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
I'd prefer DeBrusk to Wagner, but whatever. Not going to get worked up over that.

Lauzon needs to be benched for the remainder of the playoffs.
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,502
Park Slope, Brooklyn
He's been useless and a non factor since early in the Cap's series. Not even leveraging his speed and the Isles D has manhandled him.
Amen to this. DeBrusk is completely bipolar when it comes to compete-level. He’s been utterly feckless to my eyes. I know he potted a couple early-on against the Caps, but he’s been playing heartless hockey (again) of late.
 

tonyandpals

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 18, 2004
6,901
Burlington
I know a lot in being hung on Lauzon for the ill advised cross ice pass. I could see him sitting. But, he's also the reason they were still playing, saving a sure goal earlier in the OT that Tuukka seemed very late to react on the pass across.

41609

Lauzon taketh away, Lauzon giveth...
 

locknload

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,135
Haverhill MA
Has DeBrusk done anything of note outside of the first games of the Caps series? All I recall from the last game is him sending about 8 weak backhand passes to the slot that were easily intercepted.
He had like 20 pucks bounce off his stick, that was my biggest note.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
28,548
306, row 14
DeBrusk has the highest xGF% between him, Ritchie and Coyle. The Krejci line didn't really skip a beat in game 2 with DeBrusk in Smith's place. They had the highest xGF of all Bruins line and their xGF% was 2nd only to the Lazar line. The Lazar line was basically fueled by superior defense, only allowing 0.02 xGA in very limited minutes. DeBrusk just hasn't been a problem. Coyle and Ritchie have been worse than DeBrusk, for instance.

Anyways, looks like a false alarm.

View: https://twitter.com/conroyherald/status/1400131310065233926?s=20
 

durandal1707

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2007
3,474
Looking at Krejci's line a bit closer over the two games:

Game 1:
w/ Smith: 9:48 TOI, 16-4 attempts, 7-3 shots, 8-2 chances, 3-0 HDC, 0.77 to 0.13 xGF
w/ DeBrusk: 3:31 TOI, 1-3 attempts, 1-2 shots, 1-1 chances, no HDC, 0.06 to 0.07 xGF

Game 2:
w/ DeBrusk: 17:07 TOI, 22-13 attempts, 12-9 shots, 12-5 chances, 3-1 HDC, 0.97 to 0.43 xGF

I'm not seeing anything that would suggest DeBrusk has been awful or even bad here in comparison to Smith. He was mediocre filling in for Smith in Game 1 but settled in for game 2 just fine. I'd be interested in keeping him together with Hall for a bit because both of them skate really well, and that gives Krejci another target for a homerun pass.
 

Maximus

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,540
I know a lot in being hung on Lauzon for the ill advised cross ice pass. I could see him sitting. But, he's also the reason they were still playing, saving a sure goal earlier in the OT that Tuukka seemed very late to react on the pass across.

View attachment 41609

Lauzon taketh away, Lauzon giveth...
I'm good with Lauzon playing instead of Zboril or Tinordi and it looks like Butch feels the same way. Lauzon makes mistakes but also is a big D with upside.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
He was on the ice for three goals against and was an absolute pylon. He's useless.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
9,603
Looking at Krejci's line a bit closer over the two games:

Game 1:
w/ Smith: 9:48 TOI, 16-4 attempts, 7-3 shots, 8-2 chances, 3-0 HDC, 0.77 to 0.13 xGF
w/ DeBrusk: 3:31 TOI, 1-3 attempts, 1-2 shots, 1-1 chances, no HDC, 0.06 to 0.07 xGF

Game 2:
w/ DeBrusk: 17:07 TOI, 22-13 attempts, 12-9 shots, 12-5 chances, 3-1 HDC, 0.97 to 0.43 xGF

I'm not seeing anything that would suggest DeBrusk has been awful or even bad here in comparison to Smith. He was mediocre filling in for Smith in Game 1 but settled in for game 2 just fine. I'd be interested in keeping him together with Hall for a bit because both of them skate really well, and that gives Krejci another target for a homerun pass.
I think DeBrusk plays below the level advanced stats give him credit for because the has the physical tools but not the mental tools to be a top 6 W. He seems to generally be in the right place but almost never makes the right play with the puck. Shoots when he has guys open, passes when the shot was the better option. He might look good statistically because he can possess the puck and has the speed to get it but his outcomes seem to be suboptimal time and again. Krejci and Bergeron think the game 2X faster than they play where as DeBrusk plays 2X faster than he can think.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
28,548
306, row 14
He was on the ice for three goals against and was an absolute pylon. He's useless.
I don't think anyone will argue that he didn't make a bad play in OT that resulted in the GWG. I was guilty of railing on him in the immediate aftermath of the OT goal. However, upon further review, I think the idea that he has been bad or useless is wrong.

The caveat here is that he missed time so the sample size is small but, defensively speaking, Lauzon has been one of their better D in the playoffs. Among the 8 D they have used in the playoffs, Lauzon ranks:

4th in shots against per 60
4th in scoring chances against per 60
3rd in high danger chances against per 60
2nd in expected goals against per 60

So when he's on the ice, he's doing a good job limiting chances against, and I'd probably argue has been one of their better defenseman in that area. He's been on the ice for 5 goals against at even strength. That's due to Rask having a .792 save percentage when Lauzon is on the ice. That's by far the lowest among the 8 D the Bruins have used in the playoffs. Lauzon's high danger rates indicate he hasn't been a pylon, either. He's not giving up breakaway after breakaway either, nor is it constant d zone meltdown.. Pucks have just found a way into the net. The breakdown on the OT goal was really due to his limitations offensively than anything he's done defensively.

Other than the breakaway goal, he's basically been the victim of point shots that have found away through or been tipped/deflected on the way in. His 5 goals against are the Dillon and Dowd goals in game 1 against Washington, the Pelech bomb in game 1 on Saturday, the Palmieri scramble goal on Monday and the OT winner. It's hard to really change much there. You always want to do a better job of moving traffic out of the goalies line of sight, but if teams are shooting from long range when you're out there you're doing well.

Sitting him for Tinordi would be a significant downgrade. I could buy an argument for a healthy Miller, but to be honest, Lauzon's been better than Miller too.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
6,826
South of North
I think people are being a bit too harsh on JDB, but that's likely relative to your expectations for him. He hasn't stood out as a major positive in this NYI series yet but he also brought some physicality in game 2. If he's playing on the Krejci-Hall line, then his job is to maximize the talent of the other 2--same goes for Smith. If JDB plays with the Coyle we got in G2, I think there might be a way to make that 3rd line more positive. The other option which seems unlikely would be to try Coyle on Krejci's RW while Smith is out. We definitely need more production outside of the top 5 forwards to win this series. Ritchie picking up some of Smith's slack would be a welcome sight.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
7,137
Falmouth
He was on the ice for three goals against and was an absolute pylon. He's useless.
I don't think anyone will argue that he didn't make a bad play in OT that resulted in the GWG. I was guilty of railing on him in the immediate aftermath of the OT goal. However, upon further review, I think the idea that he has been bad or useless is wrong.

The caveat here is that he missed time so the sample size is small but, defensively speaking, Lauzon has been one of their better D in the playoffs. Among the 8 D they have used in the playoffs, Lauzon ranks:

4th in shots against per 60
4th in scoring chances against per 60
3rd in high danger chances against per 60
2nd in expected goals against per 60

So when he's on the ice, he's doing a good job limiting chances against, and I'd probably argue has been one of their better defenseman in that area. He's been on the ice for 5 goals against at even strength. That's due to Rask having a .792 save percentage when Lauzon is on the ice. That's by far the lowest among the 8 D the Bruins have used in the playoffs. Lauzon's high danger rates indicate he hasn't been a pylon, either. He's not giving up breakaway after breakaway either, nor is it constant d zone meltdown.. Pucks have just found a way into the net. The breakdown on the OT goal was really due to his limitations offensively than anything he's done defensively.

Other than the breakaway goal, he's basically been the victim of point shots that have found away through or been tipped/deflected on the way in. His 5 goals against are the Dillon and Dowd goals in game 1 against Washington, the Pelech bomb in game 1 on Saturday, the Palmieri scramble goal on Monday and the OT winner. It's hard to really change much there. You always want to do a better job of moving traffic out of the goalies line of sight, but if teams are shooting from long range when you're out there you're doing well.

Sitting him for Tinordi would be a significant downgrade. I could buy an argument for a healthy Miller, but to be honest, Lauzon's been better than Miller too.
you both make compelling arguments
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
I don't think anyone will argue that he didn't make a bad play in OT that resulted in the GWG. I was guilty of railing on him in the immediate aftermath of the OT goal. However, upon further review, I think the idea that he has been bad or useless is wrong.

The caveat here is that he missed time so the sample size is small but, defensively speaking, Lauzon has been one of their better D in the playoffs. Among the 8 D they have used in the playoffs, Lauzon ranks:

4th in shots against per 60
4th in scoring chances against per 60
3rd in high danger chances against per 60
2nd in expected goals against per 60

So when he's on the ice, he's doing a good job limiting chances against, and I'd probably argue has been one of their better defenseman in that area. He's been on the ice for 5 goals against at even strength. That's due to Rask having a .792 save percentage when Lauzon is on the ice. That's by far the lowest among the 8 D the Bruins have used in the playoffs. Lauzon's high danger rates indicate he hasn't been a pylon, either. He's not giving up breakaway after breakaway either, nor is it constant d zone meltdown.. Pucks have just found a way into the net. The breakdown on the OT goal was really due to his limitations offensively than anything he's done defensively.

Other than the breakaway goal, he's basically been the victim of point shots that have found away through or been tipped/deflected on the way in. His 5 goals against are the Dillon and Dowd goals in game 1 against Washington, the Pelech bomb in game 1 on Saturday, the Palmieri scramble goal on Monday and the OT winner. It's hard to really change much there. You always want to do a better job of moving traffic out of the goalies line of sight, but if teams are shooting from long range when you're out there you're doing well.

Sitting him for Tinordi would be a significant downgrade. I could buy an argument for a healthy Miller, but to be honest, Lauzon's been better than Miller too.
This is a great, thoughtful response.

I just... I don't know. He sucks, according to the eyeball test. Facts and observation (under stress and alcohol) don't often match up correctly so I'm open to being emotional and wrong, but my eyes tell me he's been awful. Not clearing out the crease, allowing forwards to get position for screens and tips. Not winning puck battles. Gaining defensive position but just allowing forwards to skate by him. Screening Tuukka but not blocking the shot. The boneheaded play leading to the breakaway goal was egregious but my complaints go far beyond that one.

I'm overall pretty high on his career trajectory, but he needs to be benched right now.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
24,677
right here
I'm still clinging to the belief that the idea of the OT play wasn't bad in and of itself it was just a bad pass. If it's a nice soft one Coyle is wide open coming down the slot has basically a mini 2 on 1 with the other d-man (I think it was McAvoy?)

41624

41625
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
13,966
Tuukka's refugee camp
I feel like he and Carlo were getting continually pinned down low too. May not have led to too many shots but did lead to extended zone time that drains all 5 guys on the ice. Carlo, for example, seems to continually missing easy-ish breakout passes leading to turnovers at the top of the zone. It's been noticeable since the turnover (off Krejci's skate?) that led to the goal against Washington.
 

Lupe Whalewatch

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
2,971
Worlds End
I'm still clinging to the belief that the idea of the OT play wasn't bad in and of itself it was just a bad pass. If it's a nice soft one Coyle is wide open coming down the slot has basically a mini 2 on 1 with the other d-man (I think it was McAvoy?)
I haven't watched the play since seeing it live, but Im pretty sure Coyle was not the intended target there-he was trying to go d to d to McAvoy, who was down a bit lower/not on the blue line?
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
24,677
right here
I haven't watched the play since seeing it live, but Im pretty sure Coyle was not the intended target there-he was trying to go d to d to McAvoy, who was down a bit lower/not on the blue line?
could well be that he was going to McAvoy which would explain the speed. Which still, he'd have had a big open lane to the net with some traffic in front (first pic shows someone just to the left of the net heading to the front)
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,554
Rhode Island
This is a great, thoughtful response.

I just... I don't know. He sucks, according to the eyeball test. Facts and observation (under stress and alcohol) don't often match up correctly so I'm open to being emotional and wrong, but my eyes tell me he's been awful. Not clearing out the crease, allowing forwards to get position for screens and tips. Not winning puck battles. Gaining defensive position but just allowing forwards to skate by him. Screening Tuukka but not blocking the shot. The boneheaded play leading to the breakaway goal was egregious but my complaints go far beyond that one.

I'm overall pretty high on his career trajectory, but he needs to be benched right now.
Sometimes you see what you want to see. I generally see a young player who does a good to sometimes great job of steering plays wide. He is nicely aggressive at moving below the goal line to disrupt cycle behind the net and in the corners. (Seriously, watch for this. Young D-men can often get caught in between holding position and chasing the puck. He looks to have good instincts here and some good tight space quickness to go with some size. ) He is completely willing to step into lanes and block shots. He might be a little on the anxious side to move pucks quickly, but the opposite of that is that he holds the puck too long and misses on potential outlet passes. The OT pass was clearly a mistake, but it wasn't completely indefensible. He made up his mind before the puck got to him that he was going to swing it D to D which is the problem. There was a ton of open ice when the puck was coming up the boards and if Coyle doesn't turn low McAvoy has a one-timer from 25 feet with a forward probably in position for a tip. He couldn't feather a short pass to Coyle because Cizikas would have been in position to disrupt so he had to fire it cross ice to McAvoy. He should have picked up on Coyle moving into the passing lane and safely dumped it back down to the corner. Terrible outcome, but if I'm Cassidy I see a guy willing to make an aggressive play and not the routine safe one. It's a coachable play and Cassidy knows at this point if Lauzon is a guy that will take the coaching or needs to sit and think about it. He apparently thinks he'll learn from it and he's the best option for tonight.
41626

He's clearly better than any other options they have at the moment.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
19,671
Alamogordo
Yeah, I thought the idea of the play (cross ice pass to a wide open McAvoy) he was trying to make was a good one, it just ended up being executed... well... yeah.

It's not like he passed it tape to tape to the Islanders, it was a fluke.

He also made an outstanding defensive play to keep the game from ending earlier in OT that is mostly getting ignored because of the way it ended. I'm willing to give him the benefit of learning from this mistake and getting better going forward.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
28,548
306, row 14
Zboril got hurt in the final game of the regular season. No idea what the injury was/is but he just returned to practice on Tuesday. I'm not sure if the team will have a full practice today but if they do that would give us some indication of his availability.

In terms of his play, he was OK. Fell out of the lineup at the deadline when they started getting healthy and added Reilly. Zboril's shot share is north of 50% but he's under 50% by scoring chances and high danger chances. That adds up to a 2.06 xGA per 60 which was 10th among the 13 D the Bruins used during the regular season, ahead of Kampfer,. Ahcan and Moore.

I suspect that if Carlo is out, they'll go to Tinordi, though I prefer Zboril and have said my piece on Tinordi. Zboril has only played twice since April 20th and they typically don't like dropping an idle player into the middle of the playoffs if they can avoid it. Tinordi was forced into game 5 against Washington last week when Lauzon and Miller were out and Zboril still unavailable.
 

BostonFanInCanesLand

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 16, 2011
701
Reilly was a beast in the O-zone last night. It’s good to know that he clicks with McAvoy, gives Cassidy a good option for an in-game boost.

Charlie McAvoy and Mike Reilly have been on the ice for 15 minutes together at 5-on-5 this postseason. In those 15 minutes, the Bruins have outshot their opponents 20-7 and outscored them 4-0.
Someone in the game thread mentioned T. Hall as must-see-tv. I agree. And he’s kicked his 200 foot game into high gear since joining the Bruins.
During Taylor Hall's 16:37 of 5-on-5 ice time tonight, the Bruins outshot the Islanders 15-0.
https://mobile.twitter.com/smclaughlin9
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
20,280
I mean, this news is about a million times better than I expected today. The fact that his season isn't immediately over is huge news.
So true. Hitting the glass (which gives) is better than hitting the boards (which don't), but he was clearly hit hard enough to be unsteady on his feet as he was helped off the ice.
 

locknload

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,135
Haverhill MA
Ive slept on it. I'm still pissed this morning, I want Ritchie fired into the sun. He brings nothing besides bad penalties. The third line was inexcusably bad so I would full shake it up. They can't worse.
 

durandal1707

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2007
3,474
Line-by-line 5v5:

Line Attempts Shots Chances High-Danger Chances Expected Goals
Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak 11-11 2-8 6-8 2-3 0.44 to 0.42 (51%)
Hall-Krejci-Smith 9-12 6-3 2-7 0-2 0.12 to 0.32 (27%)
DeBrusk-Coyle-Ritchie 12-9 5-3 4-8 1-2 0.27 to 0.47 (37%)
Kuraly-Lazar-Wagner 8-10 4-5 4-6 4-1 0.48 to 0.23 (67%)


Not going to win too many games when the 4th line is your best line. The 3rd line's been bad the whole series, the difference tonight is that the top 2 lines played well below their standards.
I'm standing by this line here. What was different last night is that the Bergeron line was mediocre and the Krejci line was bad. The focus should be on getting them going again.

The "third" line had the least 5v5 TOI of the four last night, so Cassidy does recognize the problem. They need to start playing more like a fourth line unit: tighter checking, more effort in puck battles, simple plays instead of low percentage passes and stick-handles around defenders. If plugging in Kuhlman or Frederic does that, I'm all for it.

But it's all pretty moot if the top two lines fail to show up.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
7,137
Falmouth
I'm standing by this line here. What was different last night is that the Bergeron line was mediocre and the Krejci line was bad. The focus should be on getting them going again.

The "third" line had the least 5v5 TOI of the four last night, so Cassidy does recognize the problem. They need to start playing more like a fourth line unit: tighter checking, more effort in puck battles, simple plays instead of low percentage passes and stick-handles around defenders. If plugging in Kuhlman or Frederic does that, I'm all for it.

But it's all pretty moot if the top two lines fail to show up.
I think Bergy and Marchy played their normally excellent game...Pasta being off really does affect them overall though.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
41,679
What’s really a shame is that we are basically a year too early on Studnicka and/or Vaak being credible options along with some of the other guys who need more seasoning.

Not to mention a guy like Senyshyn not even being worth a look.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
20,280
I think Bergy and Marchy played their normally excellent game...Pasta being off really does affect them overall though.
I think - but have no way to prove, that losing Carlo made (either by choice or necessity) the forwards start deeper, or simply get stuck deeper on D. I know they were only down Carlo from the previous game, but the Dmen really looked inept in starting the play.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
7,137
Falmouth
I think - but have no way to prove, that losing Carlo made (either by choice or necessity) the forwards start deeper, or simply get stuck deeper on D. I know they were only down Carlo from the previous game, but the Dmen really looked inept in starting the play.
Some of that was due to the NYI forecheck. I actually think most, but who knows, I was watching live while drinking.

Carlo isn't really the guy that gets things started, though perhaps his absence, which definitely led to the introduction of a player worse at getitng the puck out, also led to issues with mixing and matching and communication between the D.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
7,137
Falmouth
What are the opinions of the experts here on how best to shake up the 3rd line? And if you were coach, would the shakeup include any other changes, presumably to the 4th line?
Not an expert but I'd sack Ritchie for Frederic. 4th line played pretty well the other night, no need to mess with them.
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
3,232
In the simulacrum
I also don't think the 4th line is the problem except insofar as the Islanders 4th is a little better.

The problems are, to my mind:

Pasta is cooked by the end of the periods/games. They are just wearing him down with the hitting.
The second line is trapped in a close but no cigar rut. If the Bruins were playing the Pens I think Hall would have about 8 goals so far, but this is not the Pens.
The third line has lost its way. Ideally we'd see Coyle and DeBrusk absolutely taking it to the Islanders defenders a few times a game trying to push power moves 1v1 to the goal, maybe potting one every once in a while. I'd like to see them much harder on the boards and loose pucks too. Ain't happening. They are floating. Ritchie is not fast enough for playoff hockey.

The defense combines being excellent with being thin. Losing Carlo is like a playoff baseball team with only two serviceable starters having one of them get injured. The Bruins are trapped trying to piece those minutes together, but any minute without either Carlo or McAvoy is a minute I don't want to see. And I love me some Grzelcyk and Reilly, just not without my binkies at the ready back there.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
I really hope Ritchie sits for either Frederick or Kuhlman. I’d even entertain swapping DeBrusk for the other of the two aforementioned players. The line is a black hole and needs to be shaken up.

It might make sense to skip some Pasta shifts too here and there. Let Hall double up. Or whomever - rotate those shifts to keep Pasta a bit more fresh.
 

durandal1707

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2007
3,474
What are the opinions of the experts here on how best to shake up the 3rd line? And if you were coach, would the shakeup include any other changes, presumably to the 4th line?
I'm by no means an expert, just a clueless nerd who scrolls through NaturalStatTrick. Giving their Line tool a spin, here's each member of the dreaded 3rd line without the other two:

Jake DeBrusk (39:30 TOI) 39-44 attempts 19-23 shots 19-19 chances 3-3 HDC 1.51 to 1.33 expected goals 1-0 goals
Charlie Coyle (16:21 TOI) 12-23 attempts 7-13 shots 7-12 chances 3-3 HDC 0.55 to 0.93 expected goals 2-2 goals
Nick Ritchie (4:49 TOI) 4-7 attempts 1-4 shots 1-2 chances 0-1 HDC 0.13 to 0.2 expected goals 1-0 goals


Here's how two of them do without the third:

DeBrusk+Ritchie (3:57 TOI) 2-2 attempts 0-2 shots 1-0 chances no HDC 0.07 to 0.02 expected goals no goals
DeBrusk+Coyle (7:10 TOI) 5-8 attempts 1-4 shots 2-5 chances 2-2 HDC 0.31 to 0.43 expected goals 0-2 goals
Coyle+Ritchie (25:28 TOI) 24-29 attempts 10-16 shots 8-14 chances 1-5 HDC 0.55 to 1.17 expected goals 1-2 goals


There are some obvious caveats to note, mainly that DeBrusk got a "promotion" while Smith was out and I'm sure playing with Hall and Krejci will help anyone. And that we haven't seen Ritchie away from the other two for any significant amount of time, so SSS warning. But looking at these numbers, I'm starting to warm to cshea's assertion that Coyle may be the problem, especially on the defensive side of things. (See actual goals column.)

What would I do to shake up the 3rd line? I'm loath to break up the 4th line as constituted, as they've been playing very well against the Islanders, but I'd be curious to shuffle up the 3rd and 4th lines a bit by either bringing up Lazar or Kuraly to be 3rd line center and moving Coyle to the wing. Personally, I'd like to see what DeBrusk-Lazar-Coyle could do and then use Ritchie-Kuraly-Wagner very situationally. It solves the DeBrusk-on-his-offwing problem, relieves Coyle of his defensive responsibilities as a center, and I think Ritchie could benefit from simplifying his game as a 4th liner.

I think the simpler solution is to just continue giving Kuraly-Lazar-Wagner more ice time at Ritchie-Coyle-DeBrusk's expense, and sending the message that if you want more ice time you gotta earn it with hard work, tight checking, and high energy shifts. Again, the reason why this is now a big problem is that the top 2 lines had a poor Game 4.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,732
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Outshot NYI 43-19 but lose 5-4. 1-2 at home in this playoff series, continuing a long trend of playing poorly at home in the postseason. (EDIT: this may not actually be true, but after going 1-3 at home in the SC FInal against STL and 1-2 this year I'm running with it.)

Officiating was horribly biased against Boston as Trotz has played the Berube card and once again the league has fallen for it. I'm incredibly disappointed in everything. I'm glad Butch went off last night but it may be too late, he's got to start playing that card earlier because it burns us every single year.

They are better than NYI but are getting hosed on calls and are not converting their scoring chances. And their slot coverage last night was brutal. Rask appears injured as well.

I'm extremely frustrated.
 
Last edited: