Game 6 - It was not Death, for I stood up

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,671
And let’s be honest. They got a bit lucky with the first round draw being Toronto. I think they lose to most other playoff teams.
 

IdiotKicker

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
11,185
Somerville, MA
I love Good Jake, but he’s so streaky and just positively disappears for weeks and weeks and weeks (even excepting his broken wrist time). Someone is going to give him a crazy contract and I really hope it isn’t Boston.
Agreed. I’m fine getting him for 3x5 but someone is giving him 5x7 and I don’t want it to be us.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,671
I will say he was pretty damn good in the playoffs. He missed a couple of absolutely golden opportunities that would have changed games, but overall he was probably their best player through both rounds.
 

Honker

New Member
Jan 9, 2023
16
Denver
I just cannot understand how anybody can think Sweeney is a problem. He a very good GM.

Cassidy went out in the first round with a loaded team.
Sure but he won a cup last year. Dallas may win one this year.

I agree with Sweeney’s decision to go all in last year despite the result. I can’t get past moves like Rinaldo. He also seems to love spending assets on guys like Forbort and Peeke.

it’s a crime that the Bergeron era only produced one cup.
 

locknload

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,829
Haverhill MA
I just cannot understand how anybody can think Sweeney is a problem. He a very good GM.

Cassidy went out in the first round with a loaded team.
7. He set an all time record for too many men on the ice in only 13 games. There is arguments about his slowness to adjust but those 14 minutes of being short handed for bench minors is inexcusable.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,167
Agreed. I’m fine getting him for 3x5 but someone is giving him 5x7 and I don’t want it to be us.
Please god do not give a 40 point player $5 million this is not the way to rebuild into a real contender while we are missing a 1C.

This was a moderately fun run but let’s not spoil it by pretending it was something it wasn’t. There are serious issues with the roster and they need to be smart, not sentimental.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,262
Tuukka's refugee camp
Why do all of you guys strawman this one so badly? It’s fucking weird. There have been repeated, specific criticisms of Montgomery, and there’s pretty much never a defense of what he does in connection with them. It’s always this weird “Look how reasonable I am!” misrepresentation the posts that you guys disagree with, or some non-responsive, “But they don’t have the talent [and pay no attention to what happened last season when they did and he helped sabotage them with inexplicable shitting bricks personnel moves].”

I don’t know that I’ve ever see one of you talk about all of the things that Montgomery is really awesome at that a potential replacement wouldn’t be. And I’m more than willing to be educated in that regard. Was Montgomery on a lot of your wishlists to replace Cassidy, or was he just another guy?
Okay. Who replaces Monty? Why are they a better fit? What should the Bruins do to better activate Morgan Geekie as a top 6 guy?

I hear the “fire everyone” argument but I have yet to hear a good rationale outside of “because they lost”. Monty was really fucking good at making the team win in the regular season. I personally did not think they were going to make the playoffs. I was wrong (can’t wait until you selectively bring that up). He has done a much better job than Claude or Cassidy in shepherding young guys and integrating them into the team. He also did a great job building the confidence of fragile players miner DeBrusk. He did a bad job last playoffs. I think this is an above average outcome this playoffs. The Bruins weren’t talented and their three best players (non goalie) were hurt or mediocre to shit for most of the playoffs. Sure they could fire him but I’d rather bank on the guy who’s had success at some level of the NHL vs hiring another retread or unknown. Fully admit that reasonably minds could disagree. Again, it’s hockey. It’s only game. I no longer haff to be mad.

But yes we’re unreasonable compared to the crowd that has had Monty (and Claude and Bruce) fired after every loss. We know you’re smarter at building an argument than everyone herre. You can tear what I said apart if you want to. But fuck off for telling us that we’re unreasonable because we disagree with the mighty fucking Myt1. We’re all arguing from a place of good faith and you treat it like it’s fucking war. You have actively made it less fun for me to contribute to this place this last month to a place I’ve been contributing to for 15+ years that has been progressively dying and isn’t being helped by you creating schisms and labels like “Vanguard of the Reasonable”. But hey, you may have won an argument. Congrat u fucking lations. It’s goddamn exhausting.
 
Last edited:

fenwaypaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,714
Boxborough MA
When you have a dearth of scoring talent, you just can’t make the deluge of mental mistakes that this team makes. Shorthanded for 3/4 of a period this playoffs due to bench minors. Brain dead play after brain dead play by the defense in their own zone. Absolutely shit adjustments on the powerplay, and no style flexibility to generate more shots when you don’t have the skill to get the perfect shots. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

The positives from the season are Swayman’s play under pressure in the playoffs and Lohrei’s emergence—and I wanted him moved at the deadline for the right deal. But Pasta didn’t have the impact a player of his stature should—again—and the commitments to McAvoy and Lindholm going forward really worry me. Maybe we can extend Forbort.
This post sums up my feelings about this team more perfectly than anything I could come up with on my own. I might add that it seems undeniable that Marchand’s best days are behind him.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,167
The Dallas goal disallowed for occupying space in the general vicinity of the goalie sure was a nice heaping pile of salt in the wound.
 

Boston Brawler

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 17, 2011
9,872
I don’t know where I stand on Monty yet. He seems to be liked by the players and gets the most out of them in the regular season. He sucks at adjusting quick enough during a playoff series, though.

They need to secure Swayman, trade Ullmark, and find a real 1C. Someone that can work well with Pasta consistently. The free agent pool didn’t look full of 1C material, so I don’t think it will be easy.

I think they’ll still be playoff worthy next year, assuming no regression from Swayman.
 
Last edited:

Norm Siebern

Member
SoSH Member
May 12, 2003
7,163
Western MD
I didn't watch another play after the goal got upheld in game 4. I fucking hate this league, and I don't know how any coach gets past the Bruins rules and the Marchand tax. Someone upthread talked about "only 1 cup" under the current ownership, but the Bruins were absolutely fucked out of a cup in the STL series.
I could have written this post myself, sums up everything I am thinking. Absolutely agree, from the "didn't watch another play..." down to "...absolutely fucked in the STL series." Spot on.

And now I can't sleep. But hey, at least iv'e got a summer of Red Sox baseball to look forward too. How they doing so far? Oh....
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
42,468
South Boston
Okay. Who replaces Monty? Why are they a better fit?
I don’t know, but I love this response every time it gets made. Did you have Montgomery as your top replacement for Cassidy when he got fired? Cassidy for Clode? If not, it sure seems like serviceable coaches are probably out there.

What should the Bruins do to better activate Morgan Geekie as a top 6 guy?
Do you not read these things before you write them, or are you trying to prove my point?

I hear the “fire everyone” argument but I have yet to hear a good rationale outside of “because they lost”. Monty was really fucking good at making the team win in the regular season. I personally did not think they were going to make the playoffs. I was wrong (can’t wait until you selectively bring that up).
Speaking of selectivity, why does he get the credit for making the team win in the regular season, but their talent level is the reason they lost in the playoffs? Aren’t you basically doing “because they won” here? Shouldn’t their talent level reach itself more effectively over the longer regular season?

He has done a much better job than Claude or Cassidy in shepherding young guys and integrating them into the team. He also did a great job building the confidence of fragile players miner DeBrusk.
Hey, look! Two actual arguments about things that Montgomery does well.

He did a bad job last playoffs. I think this is an above average outcome this playoffs. The Bruins weren’t talented and their three best players (non goalie) were hurt or mediocre to shit for most of the playoffs. Sure they could fire him but I’d rather bank on the guy who’s had success at some level of the NHL vs hiring another retread or unknown.
This is an argument, too. Cool. Yes, the known quantity and less variance could be good. Consistency from year to year could be as well. Change for the sake of change leading to the third head coach in four years seems suboptimal. Maybe you give him another year with a revamped roster to really see what you’ve got—three years seems like a decent runway

Fully admit that reasonably minds could disagree. Again, it’s hockey. It’s only game. I no longer haff to be mad.

But yes we’re unreasonable compared to the crowd that has had Monty (and Claude and Bruce) fired after every loss. We know you’re smarter at building an argument than everyone herre. You can tear what I said apart if you want to. But fuck off for telling us that we’re unreasonable because we disagree with the mighty fucking Myt1. We’re all arguing from a place of good faith and you treat it like it’s fucking war.
You’re not unreasonable because you disagree with me. The post I was responding to was explicitly and objectively a bad faith strawman (not an enormous deal in the aftermath of a playoff loss, but that’s just what it was). You, in particular, like to misrepresent what people write and give a contrarian takes because you think they’re bad fans (or idiots on other subjects). You’ve admitted that it’s your thing to try to go against the masses. Going into every discussion with a default position that what other people are saying is wrong because what they’re saying is common—instead of taking each situation in its own merits—isn’t good faith.

You have actively made it less fun for me to contribute to this place this last month to a place I’ve been contributing to for 15+ years that has been progressively dying and isn’t being helped by you creating schisms and labels like “Vanguard of the Reasonable”. But hey, you may have won an argument. Congrat u fucking lations. It’s goddamn exhausting.
I’m sorry that you enjoy your schtick so much that me pointing out that it’s actually a schtick is reducing your enjoyment of said schtick.

But, I mean, you pretty quickly grabbed a post that didn’t mention you by name and was responding to a strawman post claiming that people who wanted Monty fired really felt like the team was a head coach away from a cup (again, not good faith, your protestation to the contrary notwithstanding) and treated it like a personal insult. Maybe you guys could just be a little less full of shit toward the people who disagree with you and climbing up on your crosses when your tendency to do so is pointed out? Seems like a pretty light lift.
 
Last edited:

jbupstate

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2022
629
New York, USA
So Monty stinks in the playoffs? Next head coach should?

- Yell at officials during games and loss it during press conferences
- Have Pasta bury more… especially those moves where he’s goes between Bob’s legs and the puck still goes wide
- Make adjustments so Marchand’s head doesn’t receive punch leading to missed games
- For sure, have Florida’s more talented team not play well
- Only win Cups because it’s comes down to just having a head coach that makes adjustments
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
42,468
South Boston
So Monty stinks in the playoffs? Next head coach should?

- Yell at officials during games and loss it during press conferences
- Have Pasta bury more… especially those moves where he’s goes between Bob’s legs and the puck still goes wide
- Make adjustments so Marchand’s head doesn’t receive punch leading to missed games
- For sure, have Florida’s more talented team not play well
- Only win Cups because it’s comes down to just having a head coach that makes adjustments
Exhibit A
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,671
We should definitely just keep smashing our head into the wall. Keep making the same stupid ineffective moves. Never adapt.

surely that will work!

Repeating the same mistakes: it’s called Bruins.
 

Reardon's Beard

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2005
3,878
McAvoy is likely seriously injured in his wrist, I suspect we'll learn that tomorrow.

Swayman showed he's a true number 1 and I expect Ullmark will be moved this summer.

The braindead play is on coaching but I doubt they make a change there.
Agree with most. Would just add braindead play is not just on the coach. It's the players who execute and play the game. Monty ain't guilt free but putting all of this on him is a stretch.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
15,083
Gallows Hill
We should definitely just keep smashing our head into the wall. Keep making the same stupid ineffective moves. Never adapt.

surely that will work!

Repeating the same mistakes: it’s called Bruins.

My biggest concern is where they are as an organization.

They have an elite goal scorer, a pretty solid defensive group, great goaltending, and a ton of cap space to add what they need to move forward.

The problem is, what they really need is a couple of 25-29 year old top line centers, and those guys usually don’t hit free agency.

Usually you need to draft top 5 for multiple years to add that kind of talent, and they are too good, and have too good of a program/culture to do that.

So they’re basically stuck in the middle until they either bottom out or get as good at identifying elite talent that drops in the draft and develop them like Dallas is doing right now.
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
4,751
In the simulacrum
Maybe it is a moot point, but has any team in modern hockey gone to the conference finals with such constant shuffling of the nominal 'top' line?

I think the likelihood of the Bruins getting out of the first or second round loser rut in the next few years depends on the combination of Poitras' development ceiling and how well they can use their cap space.

They have a great goalie
They have six pretty set defenders including, in Lohrei, a guy who looks like he's about to start crushing it

They have a 'deep' line-up of forwards that is mostly troubled by not having an obvious 1C and/or a top group of 3 that hit on all cylinders with playoff panache.

I don't think it is hopeless at all actually, but not a guarantee either.
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
42,468
South Boston
We should definitely just keep smashing our head into the wall. Keep making the same stupid ineffective moves. Never adapt.

surely that will work!

Repeating the same mistakes: it’s called Bruins.
To be fair, some things really have seemed to change for the better under Montgomery, including the folding in of younger players (by necessity in some cases, and it’s not like younger players under previous regimes who were jettisoned have mostly turned out to be great elsewhere). I think he absolutely got a bit of a bounce out of the team last year by just not being Cassidy, too. Shizawa does have a tendency to beat a concept into the ground (he must have had twelve goalie rotation pieces in the run up to the playoffs, to the point where they seemed to be AI), so it’s a bit tough to tell how much of the articles about that concept was him just going back to the well vs. it being a really big deal in the minds of the players.

Like many things, it’s been a mixed bag, I think. But there are worrying outliers. I’ve never seen anything like the too many men on the ice penalties, like, in my <mumbles> years as a sports fan. I don’t know how to pull specific penalty types from stats, but, observationally, it seemed like the Bruins took an inordinate amount of stupid stick fouls this season, too. Some of that might be a proxy for lack of talent (hooking due to a lack of foot speed), but it feels like the number of high sticks was just nuts. Those things push me toward feeling like there could be an organizational lack of discipline. The obsession with an injured Forbort in the playoffs at the expense of playing the other options is another weird thing. The observational lack of an adjustment to a more shot heavy strategy in the playoffs against a hard, aggressive defending team and a bit of a rebound happy goalie, combined with things like Sweeney’s and Maroon’s answers—which make me believe that this was probably an affirmative strategy decision rather than a lack of player execution—worry me about flexibility.
 
Last edited:

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,671
Yeah I agree with all of that. Monty is not Dave Lewis. But his faults are serious and fixable, yet they don’t fix them.

I’ve been arguing for a complete management changeover, but I feel like I’m about as likely to be elected President as that is to happen.
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
42,468
South Boston
Yeah I agree with all of that. Monty is not Dave Lewis. But his faults are serious and fixable, yet they don’t fix them.

I’ve been arguing for a complete management changeover, but I feel like I’m about as likely to be elected President as that is to happen.
I’ve been trying to launch a political party based entirely upon the permissibility of stepping on the Achilles and heel of anyone walking down the sidewalk at 1/4 speed, looking at their phones, during rush hour or lunch time. So maybe we can do some coalition building.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
My biggest concern is where they are as an organization.

They have an elite goal scorer, a pretty solid defensive group, great goaltending, and a ton of cap space to add what they need to move forward.

The problem is, what they really need is a couple of 25-29 year old top line centers, and those guys usually don’t hit free agency.

Usually you need to draft top 5 for multiple years to add that kind of talent, and they are too good, and have too good of a program/culture to do that.

So they’re basically stuck in the middle until they either bottom out or get as good at identifying elite talent that drops in the draft and develop them like Dallas is doing right now.
Is it time to start an offseason thread?

And if so, can whoever starts it find that graphic that I have seen in years past (but don't recall its source) that shows the B's under-contract depth chart and cap space?
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
21,383
Why do all of you guys strawman this one so badly? It’s fucking weird. There have been repeated, specific criticisms of Montgomery, and there’s pretty much never a defense of what he does in connection with them. It’s always this weird “Look how reasonable I am!” misrepresentation the posts that you guys disagree with, or some non-responsive, “But they don’t have the talent [and pay no attention to what happened last season when they did and he helped sabotage them with inexplicable shitting bricks personnel moves].”

I don’t know that I’ve ever see one of you talk about all of the things that Montgomery is really awesome at that a potential replacement wouldn’t be. And I’m more than willing to be educated in that regard. Was Montgomery on a lot of your wishlists to replace Cassidy, or was he just another guy?
I think Montgomery has gotten a lot of mileage out of a team that's not overly talented, I'm generally against the "we didn't win it all, so the coach must go" philosophy, and I'm hard-pressed to identify anyone available who could do a better job (Toronto's considering Craig Berube!). I realize that they underperformed last year by bowing out in the first round, but I don't think that this year's team underachieved by losing to a superior FLA team in the second round. On top of all this, they've played extremely well in the regular season under Montgomery, so much so in 2023 that he won the Jack Adams award, the team won the President's trophy, and the team set the all-time points record.

That said, he does have some things to clean up. The team is terrible when it comes to clearing the puck, the too many men penalties were ridiculous, and I would like for him to be more outspoken about the officiating (although I recognize that he might simply be following organizational philosophy by using restraint).
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
42,468
South Boston
I think Montgomery has gotten a lot of mileage out of a team that's not overly talented, I'm generally against the "we didn't win it all, so the coach must go" philosophy, and I'm hard-pressed to identify anyone available who could do a better job (Toronto's considering Craig Berube!). I realize that they underperformed last year by bowing out in the first round, but I don't think that this year's team underachieved by losing to a superior FLA team in the second round. On top of all this, they've played extremely well in the regular season under Montgomery, so much so in 2023 that he won the Jack Adams award, the team won the President's trophy, and the team set the all-time points record.

That said, he does have some things to clean up. The team is terrible when it comes to clearing the puck, the too many men penalties were ridiculous, and I would like for him to be more outspoken about the officiating (although I recognize that he might simply be following organizational philosophy by using restraint).
Thanks for this. I don’t think we’re far off at all. I’m generally against that philosophy as well. I just don’t think that it’s a fair representation of most of the posts here that lead to these discussions. Most of them are one-liners, and can fairly be criticized or questioned for that. But I don’t think there’s a ton of people here thinking or posting that it should always be Cup or bust, especially this year (if there are specific posters where that’s their schtick, then, by all means, have at it). That’s all I’m trying to get at—the reactions to the one-liners feel like they dismiss the possibility of legitimate criticisms that might be underlying them, because surely the only reason to fire Montgomery is because they didn’t win the Cup.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
12,525
Between here and everywhere.
Thanks for this. I don’t think we’re far off at all. I’m generally against that philosophy as well. I just don’t think that it’s a fair representation of most of the posts here that lead to these discussions. Most of them are one-liners, and can fairly be criticized or questioned for that. But I don’t think there’s a ton of people here thinking or posting that it should always be Cup or bust, especially this year (if there are specific posters where that’s their schtick, then, by all means, have at it). That’s all I’m trying to get at—the reactions to the one-liners feel like they dismiss the possibility of legitimate criticisms that might be underlying them, because surely the only reason to fire Montgomery is because they didn’t win the Cup.
yea. For me - it’s not that Boston lost in the second round of the playoffs, it’s //how// they lost in the second round of the playoffs.

A failure to adjust to the exact same team and game plan that knocked them out last season, 7 too many men penalties in 13 games, continually putting Derek Forbort in the lineup. It seems like Monty is a one trick pony, and that one trick gets exposed in the playoffs.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
21,383
A failure to adjust to the exact same team and game plan that knocked them out last season
Adjust in what way, though? Goaltending aside, Florida's the more talented team and the Bs were without Marchand for much of the series.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,671
Breakouts, forecheck, shot selection to name three things Monty refused to adjust… for the second year in a row.

Toronto had them figured out as well, but it was Toronto so…
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
21,383
Thanks for this. I don’t think we’re far off at all. I’m generally against that philosophy as well. I just don’t think that it’s a fair representation of most of the posts here that lead to these discussions. Most of them are one-liners, and can fairly be criticized or questioned for that. But I don’t think there’s a ton of people here thinking or posting that it should always be Cup or bust, especially this year (if there are specific posters where that’s their schtick, then, by all means, have at it). That’s all I’m trying to get at—the reactions to the one-liners feel like they dismiss the possibility of legitimate criticisms that might be underlying them, because surely the only reason to fire Montgomery is because they didn’t win the Cup.
I was referring to the sentiment that followed Montgomery's first season -- people were calling for his head then, too. I think that a lot of us saw the 2022-2023 playoffs as "Cup or bust" after they set the points record in the regular season. One of the big arguments for moving on from Montgomery, it seems to me, is that a team that many saw as the Cup favorites (and rightly so) grossly underachieved in the 2023 playoffs. "We didn't win it all, so the coach must go" is a bit hyperbolic, sure, but people had high expectations for that team and they weren't met. They stuck with Ullmark too long in the series, and that was a big mistake and I assume Montgomery's decision, but other than that, I just think the problem was that they ran into a Florida that got hot at the right time (wrong for the Bruins).

To be fair, I don't think that anyone's saying that their failure to get past the second round this year is reason to fire Montgomery.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
12,525
Between here and everywhere.
I mean, if I could answer that question I should be the next coach ya?

But everyone could see the last 2 seasons that Floridas forecheck gave the Bruins fits. That Monty seemingly did nothing to try and mitigate or get around that forecheck doesn’t concern you?
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
21,383
I mean, if I could answer that question I should be the next coach ya?

But everyone could see the last 2 seasons that Floridas forecheck gave the Bruins fits. That Monty seemingly did nothing to try and mitigate or get around that forecheck doesn’t concern you?
I would definitely trust you as HC -- you have a good track record around here.

I think they stuck to what worked for them in the regular season and they just fell short of taking Florida to a game 7, and without having Marchand for much of the series. They lost because they played a better team.
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
42,468
South Boston
I was referring to the sentiment that followed Montgomery's first season -- people were calling for his head then, too. I think that a lot of us saw the 2022-2023 playoffs as "Cup or bust" after they set the points record in the regular season. One of the big arguments for moving on from Montgomery, it seems to me, is that a team that many saw as the Cup favorites (and rightly so) grossly underachieved in the 2023 playoffs. "We didn't win it all, so the coach must go" is a bit hyperbolic, sure, but people had high expectations for that team and they weren't met. They stuck with Ullmark too long in the series, and that was a big mistake and I assume Montgomery's decision, but other than that, I just think the problem was that they ran into a Florida that got hot at the right time (wrong for the Bruins).

To be fair, I don't think that anyone's saying that their failure to get past the second round this year is reason to fire Montgomery.
Ah, I gotcha now. I agree, I wouldn’t have fired Montgomery on the basis of last year alone.

FWIW, I think that new coaches are largely fungible (at least in that there’s probably a much larger universe of people who could do the job passably well than who get the chance to) in most sports that don’t require the level of control and planning that, say, football does. So I’m probably more willing to cycle through if I see things that really concern me. But those would all be of the systemic kind, rather than strictly result based.
 

CapeCodYaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2020
81
I would definitely trust you as HC -- you have a good track record around here.

I think they stuck to what worked for them in the regular season and they just fell short of taking Florida to a game 7, and without having Marchand for much of the series. They lost because they played a better team.
better teams lose all the time in the NHL playoffs but we don't have the speed to beat their forecheck --not sure how to beat them---immediately start going up ice and quicker passes---but many times Florida forced the puck deep --but the Bs' board springing didn't work and then the long clears for dump and chase didn't work either--harder checking on their forecheckers??