|
Post by islamorada on Jun 1, 2023 19:29:53 GMT
Anointing NHL star status to players still in the system or to be drafted is not a sure sign of success. Carolina has done so the past several seasons. This year Carolina had been touted as the next SC champion. They still have holes in their lineup as they begin to deal with Cap issues in the coming years. Their window is closing somewhat like the Strangers some dozen years ago. The Bs meanwhile will build upon their current assets. Looking backward is like driving your car with your rear view mirror.
|
|
|
Post by 50belowzero on Jun 1, 2023 19:36:15 GMT
In their Cup winning window i also think the Hawks benefitted from some sketchy contract shenanigans to keep the team together. Contract limits and yearly cap hits (AAV) were inplemented after the Hawks assembled their teams. They still managed it within the NHL rules at the time so fair is fair i guess. It's a plucky flucky cap foolery. Sweeney did use the "Tampa clause" a bit this season. Well sheet I would. I think the only player who didn't come back until the playoffs was Folingo, not quite Kucherov level, haha, unless i'm missing someone.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 1, 2023 20:00:39 GMT
You don't seem to understand the Bergeron situation. It wasn't selfish. They rested him the last couple weeks of the season to avoid him tweaking his groin which has been a traditional problem for the last few years. At the point they decided to shut him down to prevent injury, they agreed he would play the last game of the season as a tune up so he wasn't cold going into the playoffs. Get back in the rhythm. This makes total sense and the plan from everyone in the organization. It just so happens that in that game he did something to his back and herniated a disc. Heck, that might have happened because he wasn't in game form from sitting out. Regardless, it wasn't selfish and wasn't stupid. It was crap luck. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Bergeron had no business playing in game 5, none..no need. That's on the Monty too. If I'm injured and not playing at my best, I owe it to my team to let them know that maybe it's better to play the depth until I am in a state of I can help the team...27,37,35 Oh, c'mon. Yeah, I can see the "it ain't broke" side of the equation, but Bergeron came back and scored a goal, led the team in shots, and won almost 70% at the dot. He was -1 for the game because he was on for the first goal against. Remember that goal? A perfect backhand feed under zero pressure from everyone's darling Tyler Bertuzzi right into the slot to a Panther. Ullmark makes the save, and Bergeron is caught because he didn't expect Bertuzzi to make an insanely stupid play. Duclair gets the rebound before Bergeron can get back on him. What about Bergeron's performance in that game do you think the options for his replacement would improve? Is there a player who didn't play who would have covered Bertuzzi's ooopsie? No. Buried one of the six shots? Not likely. Won more FOs? Unlikely. Bergeron was Bergeron in game 5. The Bruins didn't lose game 5 because of him and they didn't lose game 5 because the chemistry of games 3 and 4 was disrupted by the return of the Captain. They lost because they made too many bonehead plays like the Bertuzzi gaffe on the first goal, the stupid penalty by Lauko seconds after Bergeron tied it at 2, leading to the go ahead goal for Florida, and then after they get the tying goal from Hall, the shithead play by both Ullmark and Grz (because why is he going back so slowly? What the fu** is he thinking there?).
|
|
|
Post by mdsizzle on Jun 1, 2023 21:54:48 GMT
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Bergeron had no business playing in game 5, none..no need. That's on the Monty too. If I'm injured and not playing at my best, I owe it to my team to let them know that maybe it's better to play the depth until I am in a state of I can help the team...27,37,35 Oh, c'mon. Yeah, I can see the "it ain't broke" side of the equation, but Bergeron came back and scored a goal, led the team in shots, and won almost 70% at the dot. He was -1 for the game because he was on for the first goal against. Remember that goal? A perfect backhand feed under zero pressure from everyone's darling Tyler Bertuzzi right into the slot to a Panther. Ullmark makes the save, and Bergeron is caught because he didn't expect Bertuzzi to make an insanely stupid play. Duclair gets the rebound before Bergeron can get back on him. What about Bergeron's performance in that game do you think the options for his replacement would improve? Is there a player who didn't play who would have covered Bertuzzi's ooopsie? No. Buried one of the six shots? Not likely. Won more FOs? Unlikely. Bergeron was Bergeron in game 5. The Bruins didn't lose game 5 because of him and they didn't lose game 5 because the chemistry of games 3 and 4 was disrupted by the return of the Captain. They lost because they made too many bonehead plays like the Bertuzzi gaffe on the first goal, the stupid penalty by Lauko seconds after Bergeron tied it at 2, leading to the go ahead goal for Florida, and then after they get the tying goal from Hall, the shithead play by both Ullmark and Grz (because why is he going back so slowly? What the fu** is he thinking there?). I don't think many will argue what bergy does on ice, but to me, it seemed to be the teams mentality with him in the line up. Seems like everyone just relaxed and played like shit thinking he would carry the team... But that's a tough ask for an oft injured guy in the wrong end of 30... And we saw what happened.
|
|
|
Post by The OC on Jun 1, 2023 22:43:10 GMT
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Bergeron had no business playing in game 5, none..no need. That's on the Monty too. If I'm injured and not playing at my best, I owe it to my team to let them know that maybe it's better to play the depth until I am in a state of I can help the team...27,37,35 Oh, c'mon. Yeah, I can see the "it ain't broke" side of the equation, but Bergeron came back and scored a goal, led the team in shots, and won almost 70% at the dot. He was -1 for the game because he was on for the first goal against. Remember that goal? A perfect backhand feed under zero pressure from everyone's darling Tyler Bertuzzi right into the slot to a Panther. Ullmark makes the save, and Bergeron is caught because he didn't expect Bertuzzi to make an insanely stupid play. Duclair gets the rebound before Bergeron can get back on him. What about Bergeron's performance in that game do you think the options for his replacement would improve? Is there a player who didn't play who would have covered Bertuzzi's ooopsie? No. Buried one of the six shots? Not likely. Won more FOs? Unlikely. Bergeron was Bergeron in game 5. The Bruins didn't lose game 5 because of him and they didn't lose game 5 because the chemistry of games 3 and 4 was disrupted by the return of the Captain. They lost because they made too many bonehead plays like the Bertuzzi gaffe on the first goal, the stupid penalty by Lauko seconds after Bergeron tied it at 2, leading to the go ahead goal for Florida, and then after they get the tying goal from Hall, the shithead play by both Ullmark and Grz (because why is he going back so slowly? What the fu** is he thinking there?). Yeah, Bergeron also won the big faceoff in the dying seconds that sent Brad on a breakaway and could have ended the series in dramatic fashion. That would have been 1GP, 1G+1A 0+/-, epic faceoff win. The stuff of legend. That's the way I am with this year's result. It's human nature to second guess everything, but mostly I just see a great team the lost to a really, really good team in large part due to really, really tough puck luck. It happens in hockey. Sucks.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jun 2, 2023 3:52:02 GMT
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Bergeron had no business playing in game 5, none..no need. That's on the Monty too. If I'm injured and not playing at my best, I owe it to my team to let them know that maybe it's better to play the depth until I am in a state of I can help the team...27,37,35 Oh, c'mon. Yeah, I can see the "it ain't broke" side of the equation, but Bergeron came back and scored a goal, led the team in shots, and won almost 70% at the dot. He was -1 for the game because he was on for the first goal against. Remember that goal? A perfect backhand feed under zero pressure from everyone's darling Tyler Bertuzzi right into the slot to a Panther. Ullmark makes the save, and Bergeron is caught because he didn't expect Bertuzzi to make an insanely stupid play. Duclair gets the rebound before Bergeron can get back on him. What about Bergeron's performance in that game do you think the options for his replacement would improve? Is there a player who didn't play who would have covered Bertuzzi's ooopsie? No. Buried one of the six shots? Not likely. Won more FOs? Unlikely. Bergeron was Bergeron in game 5. The Bruins didn't lose game 5 because of him and they didn't lose game 5 because the chemistry of games 3 and 4 was disrupted by the return of the Captain. They lost because they made too many bonehead plays like the Bertuzzi gaffe on the first goal, the stupid penalty by Lauko seconds after Bergeron tied it at 2, leading to the go ahead goal for Florida, and then after they get the tying goal from Hall, the shithead play by both Ullmark and Grz (because why is he going back so slowly? What the fu** is he thinking there?). Gryz's playoff history is that of a guy who isn't that good...Clifton was basically benched, and I think despite maybe some rough play, he was a better option. Lauko once he had the first bad penalty, that was on Monty to keep sending him out (Cassidy would have sat him on the bench rest of game). I really thought AJ Greer was playing as well as anyone the last 5 games of the season, engaged, doing a lot of really good things to be that enforcer type and yet still make some big plays on his line. To not even try him and to go with Lauko over Greer was head-scratching. My point on Bergy was what sizz said, there was definitely some weird mojo that left the B's by just coming back into lineup, and yes there were a number of poor plays throughout the series by many players.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 15:04:43 GMT
Anointing NHL star status to players still in the system or to be drafted is not a sure sign of success. Carolina has done so the past several seasons. This year Carolina had been touted as the next SC champion. They still have holes in their lineup as they begin to deal with Cap issues in the coming years. Their window is closing somewhat like the Strangers some dozen years ago. The Bs meanwhile will build upon their current assets. Looking backward is like driving your car with your rear view mirror. A lot of fun until you run over a nun?
|
|
|
Post by sandogbrewin on Jun 2, 2023 15:07:47 GMT
Anointing NHL star status to players still in the system or to be drafted is not a sure sign of success. Carolina has done so the past several seasons. This year Carolina had been touted as the next SC champion. They still have holes in their lineup as they begin to deal with Cap issues in the coming years. Their window is closing somewhat like the Strangers some dozen years ago. The Bs meanwhile will build upon their current assets. Looking backward is like driving your car with your rear view mirror. There going to end up being the new TO. Just can't get there goaltending fixed. Score a bunch of goals but have major holes in their backend.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 15:16:12 GMT
Oh, c'mon. Yeah, I can see the "it ain't broke" side of the equation, but Bergeron came back and scored a goal, led the team in shots, and won almost 70% at the dot. He was -1 for the game because he was on for the first goal against. Remember that goal? A perfect backhand feed under zero pressure from everyone's darling Tyler Bertuzzi right into the slot to a Panther. Ullmark makes the save, and Bergeron is caught because he didn't expect Bertuzzi to make an insanely stupid play. Duclair gets the rebound before Bergeron can get back on him. What about Bergeron's performance in that game do you think the options for his replacement would improve? Is there a player who didn't play who would have covered Bertuzzi's ooopsie? No. Buried one of the six shots? Not likely. Won more FOs? Unlikely. Bergeron was Bergeron in game 5. The Bruins didn't lose game 5 because of him and they didn't lose game 5 because the chemistry of games 3 and 4 was disrupted by the return of the Captain. They lost because they made too many bonehead plays like the Bertuzzi gaffe on the first goal, the stupid penalty by Lauko seconds after Bergeron tied it at 2, leading to the go ahead goal for Florida, and then after they get the tying goal from Hall, the shithead play by both Ullmark and Grz (because why is he going back so slowly? What the fu** is he thinking there?). Gryz's playoff history is that of a guy who isn't that good...Clifton was basically benched, and I think despite maybe some rough play, he was a better option. Lauko once he had the first bad penalty, that was on Monty to keep sending him out (Cassidy would have sat him on the bench rest of game). I really thought AJ Greer was playing as well as anyone the last 5 games of the season, engaged, doing a lot of really good things to be that enforcer type and yet still make some big plays on his line. To not even try him and to go with Lauko over Greer was head-scratching. My point on Bergy was what sizz said, there was definitely some weird mojo that left the B's by just coming back into lineup, and yes there were a number of poor plays throughout the series by many players. OK, say there was some weird mojo. Whose fault is that? Do you not play your best players if they're healthy enough to play because you're afraid of "mojo"? Can you imagine that press conference? "Monty, tough loss tonight. Do you think Bergeron would have helped? Maybe if you're Captain's out there, he bails out that gaffe by Bertuzzi?" "Yeah, Kevin, you know Bergie's always a positive, and you'd never really say he couldn't have made a defensive play - even one like that - because his anticipation and awareness are so good." "And did you choose not to dress him because the back just wasn't ready?" "No, I just didn't want to mess with our mojo." If what you and sizz are saying is true then yes, blow it the fuck up because the legendary "culture" of this era of the Bruins is dead. You are basically saying that the players who were doing well in Bergeron's absence decided, deliberately or not, that they didn't have to work as hard or play with the same intensity and commitment because Bergeron will take care of it. If you really believe that, put a for sale sign on every player you think is guilty of that thinking. It's also a sign that the legendary "leadership in the room" took a hit somewhere, and that I would believe because I think they brought in way too many players at the deadline and promoted them ahead of guys who were fully bought into the way of bear. But it's a locker room leadership failure if what you're saying is true. Bergeron or Marchand or McAvoy of Foligno should have stepped up at the first period intermission and said you are accountable for your own play. Do you jobs whether Bergeron is on the bench or not. Point fingers if necessary. None of this is a problem with putting one of your best players back in, especially when he pretty much did his job and proved he was a better option than anyone else you had.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 15:22:11 GMT
Anointing NHL star status to players still in the system or to be drafted is not a sure sign of success. Carolina has done so the past several seasons. This year Carolina had been touted as the next SC champion. They still have holes in their lineup as they begin to deal with Cap issues in the coming years. Their window is closing somewhat like the Strangers some dozen years ago. The Bs meanwhile will build upon their current assets. Looking backward is like driving your car with your rear view mirror. There going to end up being the new TO. Just can't get there goaltending fixed. Score a bunch of goals but have major holes in their backend. They get to claim injuries more than some. Losing both MovieMax and Svechnikov is tough. But they are victims of their own arrogance, having decided that they didn't need to acquire more at the deadline than Jessu Pu. Ooops. I like the Toronto comparison. They are also guilty of thinking they'll just plug holes with aging vets. In their case, they made the decisions on Burns and MovieMax because neither guy cost them much and they had Cap room to spare, so this was like a UFA by proxy for them. But it's the "we'll just figure it out" approach where they have an inflexible faith in one part of their build and then that "figure it out" approach to the rest that reminds me of the Shanaplan.
|
|
|
Post by mdsizzle on Jun 2, 2023 15:22:41 GMT
Gryz's playoff history is that of a guy who isn't that good...Clifton was basically benched, and I think despite maybe some rough play, he was a better option. Lauko once he had the first bad penalty, that was on Monty to keep sending him out (Cassidy would have sat him on the bench rest of game). I really thought AJ Greer was playing as well as anyone the last 5 games of the season, engaged, doing a lot of really good things to be that enforcer type and yet still make some big plays on his line. To not even try him and to go with Lauko over Greer was head-scratching. My point on Bergy was what sizz said, there was definitely some weird mojo that left the B's by just coming back into lineup, and yes there were a number of poor plays throughout the series by many players. OK, say there was some weird mojo. Whose fault is that? Do you not play your best players if they're healthy enough to play because you're afraid of "mojo"? Can you imagine that press conference? "Monty, tough loss tonight. Do you think Bergeron would have helped? Maybe if you're Captain's out there, he bails out that gaffe by Bertuzzi?" "Yeah, Kevin, you know Bergie's always a positive, and you'd never really say he couldn't have made a defensive play - even one like that - because his anticipation and awareness are so good." "And did you choose not to dress him because the back just wasn't ready?" "No, I just didn't want to mess with our mojo." If what you and sizz are saying is true then yes, blow it the fuck up because the legendary "culture" of this era of the Bruins is dead. You are basically saying that the players who were doing well in Bergeron's absence decided, deliberately or not, that they didn't have to work as hard or play with the same intensity and commitment because Bergeron will take care of it. If you really believe that, put a for sale sign on every player you think is guilty of that thinking. It's also a sign that the legendary "leadership in the room" took a hit somewhere, and that I would believe because I think they brought in way too many players at the deadline and promoted them ahead of guys who were fully bought into the way of bear. But it's a locker room leadership failure if what you're saying is true. Bergeron or Marchand or McAvoy of Foligno should have stepped up at the first period intermission and said you are accountable for your own play. Do you jobs whether Bergeron is on the bench or not. Point fingers if necessary. None of this is a problem with putting one of your best players back in, especially when he pretty much did his job and proved he was a better option than anyone else you had. I think it's alot like the back up goalie vs the starter situation... You've got your number 1 in and you tend to take a little comfort knowing he's there to do his thing, so you relax a bit.. If your back up is in, you put a better effort out there knowing that he's not the number 1 guy.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 15:34:37 GMT
OK, say there was some weird mojo. Whose fault is that? Do you not play your best players if they're healthy enough to play because you're afraid of "mojo"? Can you imagine that press conference? "Monty, tough loss tonight. Do you think Bergeron would have helped? Maybe if you're Captain's out there, he bails out that gaffe by Bertuzzi?" "Yeah, Kevin, you know Bergie's always a positive, and you'd never really say he couldn't have made a defensive play - even one like that - because his anticipation and awareness are so good." "And did you choose not to dress him because the back just wasn't ready?" "No, I just didn't want to mess with our mojo." If what you and sizz are saying is true then yes, blow it the fuck up because the legendary "culture" of this era of the Bruins is dead. You are basically saying that the players who were doing well in Bergeron's absence decided, deliberately or not, that they didn't have to work as hard or play with the same intensity and commitment because Bergeron will take care of it. If you really believe that, put a for sale sign on every player you think is guilty of that thinking. It's also a sign that the legendary "leadership in the room" took a hit somewhere, and that I would believe because I think they brought in way too many players at the deadline and promoted them ahead of guys who were fully bought into the way of bear. But it's a locker room leadership failure if what you're saying is true. Bergeron or Marchand or McAvoy of Foligno should have stepped up at the first period intermission and said you are accountable for your own play. Do you jobs whether Bergeron is on the bench or not. Point fingers if necessary. None of this is a problem with putting one of your best players back in, especially when he pretty much did his job and proved he was a better option than anyone else you had. I think it's alot like the back up goalie vs the starter situation... You've got your number 1 in and you tend to take a little comfort knowing he's there to do his thing, so you relax a bit.. If your back up is in, you put a better effort out there knowing that he's not the number 1 guy. Maybe...but this conversation is taking that to the absurd level of saying you should then never play your number one guy because you get a better effort from 18 other guys. This started with the statement that it was selfish of Bergeron to push to play in Game 5, and that somehow the fault for this lack of effort thing falls on him and on Monty for the decision to play a member of the 5 crown club who is about to win his sixth Selke trophy. That's just absurd, even if what you described is accurate. If Bergeron had had a shitty game, then maybe. But again, a goal, led the team in shots on goal, 70% at the dot, and the only goal against where he took a minus was the kind of play that gets you benched in peewee by Bertuzzi. I've been saying since the series ended that I am more disappointed in Bergeron's inability to contribute offensively, and I think that's a sign that his age and starting to impose limits on his effectiveness. He got dominated by Staal last year, and his line couldn't hold off Bennett's this year. But to not even dress him would have been insanity.
|
|
|
Post by mdsizzle on Jun 2, 2023 16:01:32 GMT
I think it's alot like the back up goalie vs the starter situation... You've got your number 1 in and you tend to take a little comfort knowing he's there to do his thing, so you relax a bit.. If your back up is in, you put a better effort out there knowing that he's not the number 1 guy. Maybe...but this conversation is taking that to the absurd level of saying you should then never play your number one guy because you get a better effort from 18 other guys. This started with the statement that it was selfish of Bergeron to push to play in Game 5, and that somehow the fault for this lack of effort thing falls on him and on Monty for the decision to play a member of the 5 crown club who is about to win his sixth Selke trophy. That's just absurd, even if what you described is accurate. If Bergeron had had a shitty game, then maybe. But again, a goal, led the team in shots on goal, 70% at the dot, and the only goal against where he took a minus was the kind of play that gets you benched in peewee by Bertuzzi. I've been saying since the series ended that I am more disappointed in Bergeron's inability to contribute offensively, and I think that's a sign that his age and starting to impose limits on his effectiveness. He got dominated by Staal last year, and his line couldn't hold off Bennett's this year. But to not even dress him would have been insanity. For sure, and I get what you are saying, but Bergy, much like every year, wasn't healthy and seemed to be rushed back. And again, there were LOTS of contributing factor to this epic collapse... But anaylizing this one, without anaylizing it too much, because I really have no clue exactly where to point the finger, the team was playing well and winning without him... Ain't broken, don't fix it. Did the team play different with bergy in? A resounding yes. Why? Idk.. Should bergy have said more in the locker room to keep their heads on straight? Should Monty have? Probably, right? Fact of the matter is they didn't win a single game with him in the line up... There are usually patterns and reasons for statistics... And none in this case are good. Hindsight being 20/20...Monty should have said screw the regular season records and rest the crap out of our guys not at 100%...to hell with regular season records. And I support bergy retiring simply because he is just NEVER healthy enough in the playoffs to secure a win anymore. The tradition for a season end over the last decade has been lose the last game.. In grande fashion these days and then get the lengthy list of bergies injuries. He's not getting younger, he's not getting healthier, he's apparently not getting any more effective as a captain and apparently the coaching staff can't manage his health to the point where he will be winning his last game. He's a living legend, we love him to death, but facts are facts, and numbers don't lie. Short story long... Not that you have ever done that.. 😉 I agree.. Obviously you don't sit a healthy star for almost any reason, but in this case, you do sit a banged up star because A. He needs to heal.. and B. The team is/was on a roll. Trust in what has been successful. Ain't broken, don't fix it. But, ya, this is a small part contributing to a colossal collapse.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jun 2, 2023 16:34:01 GMT
Maybe...but this conversation is taking that to the absurd level of saying you should then never play your number one guy because you get a better effort from 18 other guys. This started with the statement that it was selfish of Bergeron to push to play in Game 5, and that somehow the fault for this lack of effort thing falls on him and on Monty for the decision to play a member of the 5 crown club who is about to win his sixth Selke trophy. That's just absurd, even if what you described is accurate. If Bergeron had had a shitty game, then maybe. But again, a goal, led the team in shots on goal, 70% at the dot, and the only goal against where he took a minus was the kind of play that gets you benched in peewee by Bertuzzi. I've been saying since the series ended that I am more disappointed in Bergeron's inability to contribute offensively, and I think that's a sign that his age and starting to impose limits on his effectiveness. He got dominated by Staal last year, and his line couldn't hold off Bennett's this year. But to not even dress him would have been insanity. For sure, and I get what you are saying, but Bergy, much like every year, wasn't healthy and seemed to be rushed back. And again, there were LOTS of contributing factor to this epic collapse... But anaylizing this one, without anaylizing it too much, because I really have no clue exactly where to point the finger, the team was playing well and winning without him... Ain't broken, don't fix it. Did the team play different with bergy in? A resounding yes. Why? Idk.. Should bergy have said more in the locker room to keep their heads on straight? Should Monty have? Probably, right? Fact of the matter is they didn't win a single game with him in the line up... There are usually patterns and reasons for statistics... And none in this case are good. Hindsight being 20/20...Monty should have said screw the regular season records and rest the crap out of our guys not at 100%...to hell with regular season records. And I support bergy retiring simply because he is just NEVER healthy enough in the playoffs to secure a win anymore. The tradition for a season end over the last decade has been lose the last game.. In grande fashion these days and then get the lengthy list of bergies injuries. He's not getting younger, he's not getting healthier, he's apparently not getting any more effective as a captain and apparently the coaching staff can't manage his health to the point where he will be winning his last game. He's a living legend, we love him to death, but facts are facts, and numbers don't lie. Short story long... Not that you have ever done that.. 😉 I agree.. Obviously you don't sit a healthy star for almost any reason, but in this case, you do sit a banged up star because A. He needs to heal.. and B. The team is/was on a roll. Trust in what has been successful. Ain't broken, don't fix it. But, ya, this is a small part contributing to a colossal collapse. Really, sizz is saying what I've been saying, and I'm sorry I understand completely all the points you were saying on Bergeron, book, but roles changed a bit when 37 came into the lineup--now is that 37's fault? No. It's Monty's fault. Then he made a weird move right away with not putting 37 with 63, who has been his little brother since 2011. But roles did change and it did affect how some guys performed AFTER 37 came back into the lineup. A player was healthy scratched for him, lines were shuffled a bit, the PP was affected. It's not as simple as saying PLAY 37 AT ALL COSTS...and again, you are up 3 games to 1...what exactly is the rush, necessity of having him back and why would even 37 rush to get back, knowing team is on a role, and wouldn't be bad idea to stay rested for next series, game 1. I just thing it was not the best call by all parties. And I'm sorry 37 was selfish to ask back in and the quote I heard was Monty was not so sure and 37 said "I'm playing." Well, that was Montreal as well, as far I can tell. That's putting myself in front of my team. Sorry, that's selfish....I'm not even posting any of this had the series been 2-2, down 3-1...it was up 3-1. Big difference, not a rush, not a necessity, not a NEED FOR 37. Not at that point. Finally, I really do think B's players did feel a sense of relief or lost that sense of urgency that I think was there with 37 out, 46 injured-not himself for sure. But the team responded like a champion, won 3 games, on a roll, and when I'm on a roll, sorry I'm going with what works, what was working, and not changing a fucking thing. If Mookie Betts was out and the Sox were up 3-1 in a series and kicking ass, I'm not rushing him back into the lineup either--to give a different hypothetical example.
|
|
|
Post by thanx4memORRies on Jun 2, 2023 17:45:09 GMT
I think it's alot like the back up goalie vs the starter situation... You've got your number 1 in and you tend to take a little comfort knowing he's there to do his thing, so you relax a bit.. If your back up is in, you put a better effort out there knowing that he's not the number 1 guy. Maybe...but this conversation is taking that to the absurd level of saying you should then never play your number one guy because you get a better effort from 18 other guys. This started with the statement that it was selfish of Bergeron to push to play in Game 5, and that somehow the fault for this lack of effort thing falls on him and on Monty for the decision to play a member of the 5 crown club who is about to win his sixth Selke trophy. That's just absurd, even if what you described is accurate. If Bergeron had had a shitty game, then maybe. But again, a goal, led the team in shots on goal, 70% at the dot, and the only goal against where he took a minus was the kind of play that gets you benched in peewee by Bertuzzi. I've been saying since the series ended that I am more disappointed in Bergeron's inability to contribute offensively, and I think that's a sign that his age and starting to impose limits on his effectiveness. He got dominated by Staal last year, and his line couldn't hold off Bennett's this year. But to not even dress him would have been insanity. Bingo with that last paragraph….
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 18:33:21 GMT
For sure, and I get what you are saying, but Bergy, much like every year, wasn't healthy and seemed to be rushed back. And again, there were LOTS of contributing factor to this epic collapse... But anaylizing this one, without anaylizing it too much, because I really have no clue exactly where to point the finger, the team was playing well and winning without him... Ain't broken, don't fix it. Did the team play different with bergy in? A resounding yes. Why? Idk.. Should bergy have said more in the locker room to keep their heads on straight? Should Monty have? Probably, right? Fact of the matter is they didn't win a single game with him in the line up... There are usually patterns and reasons for statistics... And none in this case are good. Hindsight being 20/20...Monty should have said screw the regular season records and rest the crap out of our guys not at 100%...to hell with regular season records. And I support bergy retiring simply because he is just NEVER healthy enough in the playoffs to secure a win anymore. The tradition for a season end over the last decade has been lose the last game.. In grande fashion these days and then get the lengthy list of bergies injuries. He's not getting younger, he's not getting healthier, he's apparently not getting any more effective as a captain and apparently the coaching staff can't manage his health to the point where he will be winning his last game. He's a living legend, we love him to death, but facts are facts, and numbers don't lie. Short story long... Not that you have ever done that.. 😉 I agree.. Obviously you don't sit a healthy star for almost any reason, but in this case, you do sit a banged up star because A. He needs to heal.. and B. The team is/was on a roll. Trust in what has been successful. Ain't broken, don't fix it. But, ya, this is a small part contributing to a colossal collapse. Really, sizz is saying what I've been saying, and I'm sorry I understand completely all the points you were saying on Bergeron, book, but roles changed a bit when 37 came into the lineup--now is that 37's fault? No. It's Monty's fault. Then he made a weird move right away with not putting 37 with 63, who has been his little brother since 2011. But roles did change and it did affect how some guys performed AFTER 37 came back into the lineup. A player was healthy scratched for him, lines were shuffled a bit, the PP was affected. It's not as simple as saying PLAY 37 AT ALL COSTS...and again, you are up 3 games to 1...what exactly is the rush, necessity of having him back and why would even 37 rush to get back, knowing team is on a role, and wouldn't be bad idea to stay rested for next series, game 1. I just thing it was not the best call by all parties. And I'm sorry 37 was selfish to ask back in and the quote I heard was Monty was not so sure and 37 said "I'm playing." Well, that was Montreal as well, as far I can tell. That's putting myself in front of my team. Sorry, that's selfish....I'm not even posting any of this had the series been 2-2, down 3-1...it was up 3-1. Big difference, not a rush, not a necessity, not a NEED FOR 37. Not at that point. Finally, I really do think B's players did feel a sense of relief or lost that sense of urgency that I think was there with 37 out, 46 injured-not himself for sure. But the team responded like a champion, won 3 games, on a roll, and when I'm on a roll, sorry I'm going with what works, what was working, and not changing a fucking thing. If Mookie Betts was out and the Sox were up 3-1 in a series and kicking ass, I'm not rushing him back into the lineup either--to give a different hypothetical example. Look, I've made the case against JT Superstar for years against all of the "but he had a boo boo!" people who defended him for his JT 0-0-0 playoff performances. But there's no evidence that Bergeron was in any way diminished in game 5. He was good to go, he's a better player than almost any other forward on this team, and he played better than all of them in game 5. That's not a player being arrogant or selfish. That's the best option for the team to win coming back from injury and doing his thing. Everyone whose role changed as a result slotted down. They faced weaker matchups, not stronger. They got less TOI, so no excuse for being tired or making less-sharp plays due to fatigue. Why are you making excuses for them and blaming it on Bergeron being selfish? Fuck, if everyone's boy toy Bertuzzi doesn't do one of his patented dumbass super-selfish fancy passes right into the slot a la Giggles Miller, you could say that series is over and this isn't a discussion, but people are bending over backwards to find a way to keep "Bert". Fuck Bert. Bert, Orlov, Hathaway - those are the players who pushed good Bruins out of the lineup or into subordinate roles, and they all played like raccoon feces in the final 4 games. Explain why you're angry at Bergeron and not those bozos.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jun 2, 2023 18:47:36 GMT
Really, sizz is saying what I've been saying, and I'm sorry I understand completely all the points you were saying on Bergeron, book, but roles changed a bit when 37 came into the lineup--now is that 37's fault? No. It's Monty's fault. Then he made a weird move right away with not putting 37 with 63, who has been his little brother since 2011. But roles did change and it did affect how some guys performed AFTER 37 came back into the lineup. A player was healthy scratched for him, lines were shuffled a bit, the PP was affected. It's not as simple as saying PLAY 37 AT ALL COSTS...and again, you are up 3 games to 1...what exactly is the rush, necessity of having him back and why would even 37 rush to get back, knowing team is on a role, and wouldn't be bad idea to stay rested for next series, game 1. I just thing it was not the best call by all parties. And I'm sorry 37 was selfish to ask back in and the quote I heard was Monty was not so sure and 37 said "I'm playing." Well, that was Montreal as well, as far I can tell. That's putting myself in front of my team. Sorry, that's selfish....I'm not even posting any of this had the series been 2-2, down 3-1...it was up 3-1. Big difference, not a rush, not a necessity, not a NEED FOR 37. Not at that point. Finally, I really do think B's players did feel a sense of relief or lost that sense of urgency that I think was there with 37 out, 46 injured-not himself for sure. But the team responded like a champion, won 3 games, on a roll, and when I'm on a roll, sorry I'm going with what works, what was working, and not changing a fucking thing. If Mookie Betts was out and the Sox were up 3-1 in a series and kicking ass, I'm not rushing him back into the lineup either--to give a different hypothetical example. Look, I've made the case against JT Superstar for years against all of the "but he had a boo boo!" people who defended him for his JT 0-0-0 playoff performances. But there's no evidence that Bergeron was in any way diminished in game 5. He was good to go, he's a better player than almost any other forward on this team, and he played better than all of them in game 5. That's not a player being arrogant or selfish. That's the best option for the team to win coming back from injury and doing his thing. Everyone whose role changed as a result slotted down. They faced weaker matchups, not stronger. They got less TOI, so no excuse for being tired or making less-sharp plays due to fatigue. Why are you making excuses for them and blaming it on Bergeron being selfish? Fuck, if everyone's boy toy Bertuzzi doesn't do one of his patented dumbass super-selfish fancy passes right into the slot a la Giggles Miller, you could say that series is over and this isn't a discussion, but people are bending over backwards to find a way to keep "Bert". Fuck Bert. Bert, Orlov, Hathaway - those are the players who pushed good Bruins out of the lineup or into subordinate roles, and they all played like raccoon feces in the final 4 games. Explain why you're angry at Bergeron and not those bozos. Lot of hate for Bert, who I thought played fantastic in the series (albeit he made some bonehead plays)--he picked up the offensive slack without DK/Bergy in lineup. Now, I have ripped Orlov, but not Hathaway, who was getting such low minutes that I'm still not sure exactly what was going on there--he did nothing in the series--agreed. Orlov I ripped because he seemed to slide into this mode of offensive d-man playing like a forward, which works great if you can connect on a goal, and looks horrible if you are out of position counter attack that leads to an opponent goal. He was also strangely not physical in the series as were the entire team--thus my want for Greer of all people. So no, I don't pin anything on Bergy, but I stand by what I said that he was selfish. Like it or not, the team was on all cylinders PRIOR to his arrival v. Florida...I think Orlov and Hathaway didn't answer their call as to why they were acquired in first place--but I think Bert did answer the call, and you can say Fuck Bert, but you were the one saying Fuck Marchand in 19 if I recall...no you don't discard talents like both. As for Bert's bad passes, Pasta was guilty of same many times last few years, sometimes same type of lazy plays or dumb decisions...you don't say Fuck 60 goal guy either, right? I think you are way too hard on Bert.
|
|
|
Post by mdsizzle on Jun 2, 2023 19:32:11 GMT
Really, sizz is saying what I've been saying, and I'm sorry I understand completely all the points you were saying on Bergeron, book, but roles changed a bit when 37 came into the lineup--now is that 37's fault? No. It's Monty's fault. Then he made a weird move right away with not putting 37 with 63, who has been his little brother since 2011. But roles did change and it did affect how some guys performed AFTER 37 came back into the lineup. A player was healthy scratched for him, lines were shuffled a bit, the PP was affected. It's not as simple as saying PLAY 37 AT ALL COSTS...and again, you are up 3 games to 1...what exactly is the rush, necessity of having him back and why would even 37 rush to get back, knowing team is on a role, and wouldn't be bad idea to stay rested for next series, game 1. I just thing it was not the best call by all parties. And I'm sorry 37 was selfish to ask back in and the quote I heard was Monty was not so sure and 37 said "I'm playing." Well, that was Montreal as well, as far I can tell. That's putting myself in front of my team. Sorry, that's selfish....I'm not even posting any of this had the series been 2-2, down 3-1...it was up 3-1. Big difference, not a rush, not a necessity, not a NEED FOR 37. Not at that point. Finally, I really do think B's players did feel a sense of relief or lost that sense of urgency that I think was there with 37 out, 46 injured-not himself for sure. But the team responded like a champion, won 3 games, on a roll, and when I'm on a roll, sorry I'm going with what works, what was working, and not changing a fucking thing. If Mookie Betts was out and the Sox were up 3-1 in a series and kicking ass, I'm not rushing him back into the lineup either--to give a different hypothetical example. Look, I've made the case against JT Superstar for years against all of the "but he had a boo boo!" people who defended him for his JT 0-0-0 playoff performances. But there's no evidence that Bergeron was in any way diminished in game 5. He was good to go, he's a better player than almost any other forward on this team, and he played better than all of them in game 5. That's not a player being arrogant or selfish. That's the best option for the team to win coming back from injury and doing his thing. Everyone whose role changed as a result slotted down. They faced weaker matchups, not stronger. They got less TOI, so no excuse for being tired or making less-sharp plays due to fatigue. Why are you making excuses for them and blaming it on Bergeron being selfish? Fuck, if everyone's boy toy Bertuzzi doesn't do one of his patented dumbass super-selfish fancy passes right into the slot a la Giggles Miller, you could say that series is over and this isn't a discussion, but people are bending over backwards to find a way to keep "Bert". Fuck Bert. Bert, Orlov, Hathaway - those are the players who pushed good Bruins out of the lineup or into subordinate roles, and they all played like raccoon feces in the final 4 games. Explain why you're angry at Bergeron and not those bozos. If you are hating on Bert for one dumb play you must absolutely hate EVERY Dman and want to string Linus up by his balls!
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jun 2, 2023 20:10:54 GMT
Look, I've made the case against JT Superstar for years against all of the "but he had a boo boo!" people who defended him for his JT 0-0-0 playoff performances. But there's no evidence that Bergeron was in any way diminished in game 5. He was good to go, he's a better player than almost any other forward on this team, and he played better than all of them in game 5. That's not a player being arrogant or selfish. That's the best option for the team to win coming back from injury and doing his thing. Everyone whose role changed as a result slotted down. They faced weaker matchups, not stronger. They got less TOI, so no excuse for being tired or making less-sharp plays due to fatigue. Why are you making excuses for them and blaming it on Bergeron being selfish? Fuck, if everyone's boy toy Bertuzzi doesn't do one of his patented dumbass super-selfish fancy passes right into the slot a la Giggles Miller, you could say that series is over and this isn't a discussion, but people are bending over backwards to find a way to keep "Bert". Fuck Bert. Bert, Orlov, Hathaway - those are the players who pushed good Bruins out of the lineup or into subordinate roles, and they all played like raccoon feces in the final 4 games. Explain why you're angry at Bergeron and not those bozos. If you are hating on Bert for one dumb play you must absolutely hate EVERY Dman and want to string Linus up by his balls! Bert is the future, or should be..superstar in the making just like Pasta is
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 22:02:34 GMT
Look, I've made the case against JT Superstar for years against all of the "but he had a boo boo!" people who defended him for his JT 0-0-0 playoff performances. But there's no evidence that Bergeron was in any way diminished in game 5. He was good to go, he's a better player than almost any other forward on this team, and he played better than all of them in game 5. That's not a player being arrogant or selfish. That's the best option for the team to win coming back from injury and doing his thing. Everyone whose role changed as a result slotted down. They faced weaker matchups, not stronger. They got less TOI, so no excuse for being tired or making less-sharp plays due to fatigue. Why are you making excuses for them and blaming it on Bergeron being selfish? Fuck, if everyone's boy toy Bertuzzi doesn't do one of his patented dumbass super-selfish fancy passes right into the slot a la Giggles Miller, you could say that series is over and this isn't a discussion, but people are bending over backwards to find a way to keep "Bert". Fuck Bert. Bert, Orlov, Hathaway - those are the players who pushed good Bruins out of the lineup or into subordinate roles, and they all played like raccoon feces in the final 4 games. Explain why you're angry at Bergeron and not those bozos. If you are hating on Bert for one dumb play you must absolutely hate EVERY Dman and want to string Linus up by his balls! It wasn't one bad play. He freelanced in ways that exposed teammates all the time. He made Giggles like the pass to the slot in Game 5 all series, just not always as such golden gifts. He was one of the most guilty for trying to pass through the teeth of the D, and for every penalty he drew by trying to go to the net, he turned it over and killed three possessions. On a team where the offense comes from structure and support and was unpredictable and unreliable. The fact he got goals and points doesn't matter nearly as much as what his overall impact was on the whole, and I think it was pretty close to a wash. This is very similar to the argument I've had on this board since 2010 about the go-go Oilers first overall picks like Hall and Eberle and RNH. Why does it seem like literally every goalie and every D man who goes there is an ECHL backup? Because the forwards are all about their cookies and don't play a structure that doesn't expose the D in ways that give them too few good options. Larsson looks like Rod Langway in Seattle. Justin Schultz left Edmonton, won two rings in Pittsburgh and just had a great playoff for Seattle (10 points and +5 in 14 games). What's the difference? Team structure over personal stats. I'm bashing him for that pass because it was high risk and low reward. Pastrnak, Marchand...I am not a fan when they start flinging stupid blind passes all over the ice, but both of them play the team structure. Both are bought in. And both make those stupid passes blueline in for the most part and not below the dots in their own zone.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 22:03:44 GMT
If you are hating on Bert for one dumb play you must absolutely hate EVERY Dman and want to string Linus up by his balls! Bert is the future, or should be..superstar in the making just like Pasta is Sorry, you mean the guy who got injured on his first shift and continued to play every game despite being largely ineffective except on the PP? I guess he's not selfish because he's a superstar.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Jun 2, 2023 22:16:22 GMT
If you are hating on Bert for one dumb play you must absolutely hate EVERY Dman and want to string Linus up by his balls! Bert is the future, or should be..superstar in the making just like Pasta is I said it above in response to the idea that Bergeron is at fault for all the guys who took the rest of the series off after he came back, and so he was selfish. I'll say it again here. If you're right, blow it up because this era of the Bruins is over. The days of recognizing that structure, commitment to a 200' game and collective success over individual highlight reel appearances are over. I don't think they can win with Bertuzzi, and you're right, I'm not sure they can win with this version of Marchand. I am honestly not even sure about Pastrnak when he goes all butterskates, but yeah, I will take the 60 goals because I think he does generally play the team game. I don't like how reliant they are on drawing penalties (diving) and scoring on the PP. I don't like how bigger teams with defensemen with a longer reach have shut them both down because they can't beat them one on one, and they don't have the size and strength to get through them otherwise. If I have a concern about this team it's that I am not sure they can beat other championship level clubs because our stars are easier to shut down than theirs. I like Zacha. I would like Coyle if he played the heavy game he flashes from time to time and shot the puck consistently, but he doesn't. I like Frederic's game when he's not trying to be an enforcer. Shupe says he's a fraud. I agree. He's a fraud as a tough guy. He's a punk who should be a 40 point player who drives you mad when you play against him because of his strength and willingness to grind. I am on record as not trusting Hall. I think DeBrusk took huge strides as a two way player last year, but I don't trust his ability to weather adversity. And to be frank, I think the only reason there's so much love for Bertuzzi is that he seems like a prick and Bruins fans subconsciously realize that this team is mentally and physically soft. Dominated on the road in the playoffs last year. Bounced after a 3-1 lead this year. Pushed around and out of the playoffs by heavier, less talented teams every year since they last missed the playoffs. Don't deal well with adversity. Bergeron should retire before more people paste him with guilt by association.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jun 2, 2023 22:19:59 GMT
Bert is the future, or should be..superstar in the making just like Pasta is Sorry, you mean the guy who got injured on his first shift and continued to play every game despite being largely ineffective except on the PP? I guess he's not selfish because he's a superstar. Well, considering he is young, considering he was a 60-goal scorer, yes he was an all-time warrior AND OH BY THE WAY, HE WILLED HIMSELF TO SCORE THE GO-AHEAD GOAL IN 3RD PERIOD, GAME 7..not selfish....let me add, the team was up 3-1 with him in the lineup too..different scenario, I even said if the series was 2-2 or 3-1 the other way, I wouldn't have said a word on El Capitan.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jun 2, 2023 22:24:07 GMT
Bert is the future, or should be..superstar in the making just like Pasta is I said it above in response to the idea that Bergeron is at fault for all the guys who took the rest of the series off after he came back, and so he was selfish. I'll say it again here. If you're right, blow it up because this era of the Bruins is over. The days of recognizing that structure, commitment to a 200' game and collective success over individual highlight reel appearances are over. I don't think they can win with Bertuzzi, and you're right, I'm not sure they can win with this version of Marchand. I am honestly not even sure about Pastrnak when he goes all butterskates, but yeah, I will take the 60 goals because I think he does generally play the team game. I don't like how reliant they are on drawing penalties (diving) and scoring on the PP. I don't like how bigger teams with defensemen with a longer reach have shut them both down because they can't beat them one on one, and they don't have the size and strength to get through them otherwise. If I have a concern about this team it's that I am not sure they can beat other championship level clubs because our stars are easier to shut down than theirs. I like Zacha. I would like Coyle if he played the heavy game he flashes from time to time and shot the puck consistently, but he doesn't. I like Frederic's game when he's not trying to be an enforcer. Shupe says he's a fraud. I agree. He's a fraud as a tough guy. He's a punk who should be a 40 point player who drives you mad when you play against him because of his strength and willingness to grind. I am on record as not trusting Hall. I think DeBrusk took huge strides as a two way player last year, but I don't trust his ability to weather adversity.
And to be frank, I think the only reason there's so much love for Bertuzzi is that he seems like a prick and Bruins fans subconsciously realize that this team is mentally and physically soft. Dominated on the road in the playoffs last year. Bounced after a 3-1 lead this year. Pushed around and out of the playoffs by heavier, less talented teams every year since they last missed the playoffs. Don't deal well with adversity. Bergeron should retire before more people paste him with guilt by association. Agreed on bold.
|
|
|
Post by islamorada on Jun 3, 2023 15:30:26 GMT
Anointing NHL star status to players still in the system or to be drafted is not a sure sign of success. Carolina has done so the past several seasons. This year Carolina had been touted as the next SC champion. They still have holes in their lineup as they begin to deal with Cap issues in the coming years. Their window is closing somewhat like the Strangers some dozen years ago. The Bs meanwhile will build upon their current assets. Looking backward is like driving your car with your rear view mirror. There going to end up being the new TO. Just can't get there goaltending fixed. Score a bunch of goals but have major holes in their backend. Yeah, going into the series vs. Florida I thought the Hurricane defense was solid. If anything Florida's defense was questionable after the first pairings. Nope, I was wrong. Carolina must complete a "needs assessment" transition.
|
|