|
Post by bostonfan191646 on Aug 17, 2015 16:36:24 GMT
I'm really optimistic too, but I think. You should have just cut out your projections and written the bottom two paragraphs. The goals don't mean that much to me, for example, Krug over hamilton, and belesky over lucic. Cmon, Lucic and hamilton are the two better players there. Conversely I'll take talbot over Paille any day of the week. Dallas scored a half goal more per game, and they were horrible. I think the specific mention of goal output from last year's roster and this year's roster is very relevant, since Stevie was being condescending and saying that the new roster has less ability to score goals. Note that I wasn't listing my projections for the coming season, but the actual output from last year. I think Lucic is better than Beleskey, but it's an undeniable fact that Lucic only scored 18 goals last year. I think Hamilton has a higher ceiling going forward than Krug, but I'd argue that Krug was better last year. In the very least he was better in the role that was given him, since Hamilton was asked to play a much more challenging role on the team in the top pairing. I think Lucic is going to tear it up this year and put up around 60 points while hitting everything in sight. I think Hamilton is going to take another step forward in '15-16, score more, and probably work out a lot his defensive lapses. But that's not the point here. The question is "are the Bruins better this year than last", NOT "would the Bruins this year be better with Hamilton and Lucic in the lineup?" The answers to those questions could be very different. For the team to be improved, Beleskey doesn't need to be better than Milan Lucic, he just needs to play better than Lucic did last year. Since Milan had one of his worst seasons ever, I think he can do that. Smith could have a great rebound year too and put up 65 points. But last year he only had 13 goals, so even if Hayes scores 15 this year and throws the body, Boston is a better team for it year on year and it doesn't matter what Reilly does in Florida. All very good points. I agree
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 17, 2015 16:38:56 GMT
I think it's madness to think that you need superstars to win in the league. That wasn't what I was implying, or meant to imply if I did. I'm saying a team like the Panthers & the Sabers could potentially have closed the gap if the B's aren't a team that doesn't have a great work ethic. You watched this team last season book. A lot of games they looked lethargic & had no energy. They need their best players to be their best players in the offensive part of the ice. If they aren't a team like the Panthers could end up being the team that gets in the play-offs ahead the Bruins instead of the Sens. Hey, nite - I missed this one when you replied. Yeah, it wasn't really that you implied that you have to have a superstar to win; the presence of a superstar was one of the things you mentioned, and then we were off to the races on the definition of superstar.
On the lethargy/energy thing. Maybe this isn't as obvious to a goalie, but every sport I've played, and even now playing pick up...when guys aren't on the same page, it seems like everyone's a lazy s.o.b.. Case in point, there's a couple of guys I play ball hockey with - long-standing pick up game where the quality of play evolves every year as old farts get challenged by young guys who can actually adapt to playing in sneakers and not skates (you have to run to get back to the defensive zone - there's no coasting on tarmac!). One of said guys plays defense most of the time, and his favorite move is to lob it from one end of the court to the other. We don't play "icing" - it's freaking ball hockey - so one of two things happens. Forwards run their bags off trying to chase down the lob. Once they get it, they then have to do something with it, so it's a really easy play for Tony - the D - and a really demanding one for the forwards. If they don't get there first and try to win it back, and fail, then they have to haul ass back to the defensive zone. 90% of the time, though, there's a better play there for Tony. The centre comes back for an easy pass. The D to D is there to change the angles etc. Same thing with the guys who Costanza in any sport - the chuckers. Guys who are going to shoot no matter where they are, no matter how useful shooting is at that moment: never a bad idea to shoot. Unless you're the other guys on the team working to get open for a pass, create a lane, take a high percentage shot ratherthan a 0% one.
I think this happened a lot with the Bruins last year. Lucic was the poster boy. He'd fly in as the first man, lay the body, force a weak rim around, but whoever he was playing with wouldn't get there in time to force the D's hand or create another hit, and they'd break out with Lucic still coming off the back boards after the hit on the forecheck. Eventually, that wears on a guy. I think being out of synch wore Smith down; I think not being able to generate a cycle wore Lucic down; I think Soderberg's giveaways (horrible when you're charging 110% to the net hell bent for leather and the guy blindly throws it three yard behind you to the other team's forward) wore down Eriksson. I think Bergeron had a low +/- last year due to a lot of plays where he'd done everything right, but someone who needed to make a simple play to advance the puck couldn't do it, and Bergie was hung out to dry on the wrong side of the play. Ditto Marchand. I think they needed to hit reset and get back to that 18 skaters, one hive mind. That more than anything will make the difference in whether they seem to have energy or not.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 17, 2015 16:41:52 GMT
The Hockey News has said all kinds of things on all kinds of subjects. I have never once read them and thought "case closed" about anything. I'd look a little harder than turning unquestioningly to The Hockey News for gospel on hockey issues.
It's a debate. Some see him as a superstar, and some don't. I can see both sides of it. However, the superstar argument was more convincing before the 2014-15 season. It's called "the Bible of Hockey." The gospel is part of the Bible. What's your problem, Fletch?
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 17, 2015 16:43:41 GMT
So.... The original question was simple. "ARE THE BRUINS REALLY BETTER" Despite 5 pages of response, it's pretty obvious the group is more comfortable taking the discussion in another direction. Any direction. Those that did, pretty much all posted like they were auditioning for the Bruin PR Director position. The strongest language...either way, could be broken down to "optimistic", or 'tough to be optimistic". Kind of sissified if you ask me. And since I'm including my own earlier contribution as being too vague, I'll go again. No. That's where I'm at now. I'm fine with moving players, but if one is looking to improve, one usually likes to consider an upgrade over what went out. I see an upgrade in physicality, but the #1 need imo, was scoring more/winning more. When I see Lucic, Yeti, Smith, Hamilton, Paille, Campbell, Backup, and about 2.8 in capspace out...vs Belesky, Hayes, and Rinaldo in...I see an alarming decline in talent. Yes, the Bruins have acquired a good number of 1st round picks and prospects, which are worth a lot...but as far as the next 82 games...they're not worth much except trade bait. One or more could step up, make the team and contribute greatly...but highly unlikely. Team, trumps talent, in certain applications, but usually the preference is to replace players with better players. At least in your own mind. There is a bit of cap space left, and that's good, but the team still has to sign 2 or 3 more players just to have a reasonable roster size. That won't leave enough to bring in a player of considerable notoriety without more going out. That leaves all of these valuable 1st rounders. They can certainly be turned into huge immediate assets, if the Bruins see fit, but the downside is, there has to be cap space available, to accommodate the stud coming back. Without more subtraction that's a toughie. Although the deals the Bruins have made, unquestionably netted value, that value imo is not in the now, but in the future. IMO, the now hasn't been fully addressed yet. If what we currently have(minus 3 entry level markers) is what we go to the deadline with, it's going to be tough to top 96 points I couldn't remember how I'd responded, but I was pretty sure I'd have fallen into your "sissified" category. Sissy answer or not? I still don't have a *ucking clue. I'd be guessing. If guessing means "nutting up" then I could guess, but seriously, I think it's a coin flip in a lot of ways.
"Team, trumps talent, in certain applications, but usually the preference is to replace players with better players." I agree in principle, but I don't think GMs worry quite as much about replacing the player through that same trade as they needed to in the past. Chiarelli was very good at finding players through unconventional means, and I think the decline in his success in finding replacements on the cheap has a lot to do with other GMs learning from his bag of tricks. What I'm getting at is that the full suite of "replacements" has to include Spooner, Connolly, Irwin, CMiller and even Pastrnak to some degree. It's a bit tricky because of the fluxus from last year. Yeah, Connolly and Spooner and Pastrnak played on the team that spit the bit down the stretch but that wasn't a fully functional team with Krejci battling injury, Chara battling injury, and Hamilton out. You almost have to state your lineup up front as the representative Bruins 2014-15 and then compare to the available options this year. Putting guys in different roles means you have to account for how they may or may not do.
I can easily see a scenario where they are awful. I can easily see a scenario where they're brilliant. This much change in a single season makes it really difficult to say if they're better or not. But if it means I'm not a sissy...then no, they're not better this year. They may get better results, though, even if they're not a better team.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Aug 17, 2015 18:01:49 GMT
The goals don't mean that much to me, for example, Krug over hamilton, and belesky over lucic. Cmon, Lucic and hamilton are the two better players there. I think Hamilton has a higher ceiling going forward than Krug, but I'd argue that Krug was better last year. In the very least he was better in the role that was given him, since Hamilton was asked to play a much more challenging role on the team in the top pairing. You weren't talking about career projection, you were addressing your opinion on the upcoming season. Pretty clear.
|
|
|
Post by walktheline on Aug 17, 2015 19:08:02 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below.
My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round.
|
|
|
Post by 50belowzero on Aug 17, 2015 19:24:35 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. Good plan! When this happens again, take a deep breath and slowly back away from the keyboard, don't make any sudden moves and stay calm at all times. When you feel the urge to type has totally dissipated, feel free to return to the keyboard.
|
|
|
Post by walktheline on Aug 17, 2015 19:48:29 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. Good plan! When this happens again, take a deep breath and slowly back away from the keyboard, don't make any sudden moves and stay calm at all times. When you feel the urge to type has totally dissipated, feel free to return to the keyboard. Ya know, that's pretty much what I did. lol
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 17, 2015 19:57:58 GMT
Good plan! When this happens again, take a deep breath and slowly back away from the keyboard, don't make any sudden moves and stay calm at all times. When you feel the urge to type has totally dissipated, feel free to return to the keyboard. Ya know, that's pretty much what I did. lol Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and my balls don't need washing, so good call!
|
|
|
Post by walktheline on Aug 17, 2015 20:08:02 GMT
Ya know, that's pretty much what I did. lol Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and my balls don't need washing, so good call! I'm pretty long-winded at times but I keep it in check pretty well in here. Been like that for some time, plus I'm older than you so perhaps you are the one imitating me, eh?
Your wife just called...she's calling you out on the whole ball washing statement.
|
|
|
Post by The OC on Aug 17, 2015 20:09:18 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. I think you summed up your thoughts pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 17, 2015 20:21:04 GMT
And of by the way, "this part I'm missing", who exactly did Connolly "push out". Seems to me he didn't even play til about the last week of the schedule, or am I just being a reverse homer in coming to that conclusion.
Oh, specifically to Brett Connolly, here's a link to the box score of the last game of the season: bruins.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/boxscore?id=2014021225Brett played 17 minutes, that's top-6 ice time. And overall he averaged 14:21 TOI with Boston. They've brought him in to move into a top-9 role. Generally speaking that's why you give up two 2nds for a former top-10 pick who's playing at a 20-goal pace. The box score to the very last game of the year!!!! in a losing effort!!!! and this is "specific" to him "pushing out" other players?
Wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 17, 2015 20:26:42 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round.
This is why I just have no F'ing idea whether they'll be better or not. I mean, as good as Hamilton will some day be, and was in flashes - and as good as Lucic was offensively (he did lead the team in scoring the year they won the Cup) - I think their three more offensively gifted players return - Krejci, Bergeron and Marchand. In terms of offensive skills, Eriksson and Lucic is probably a wash. So 4 of the top 5. On D, 2 of 3 with Chara and Krug returning and Hamilton departing. If those six guys return to form, Beleskey, Hayes, Connolly, Spooner and Pastrnak will have room to roam as supporting offensive players. And it seems more likely that some straight-line players can be a real complement and score more simple goals than the more talented guys they gave up - just because they're better suited to scoring ugly than pretty.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 17, 2015 20:32:49 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. I also think they'll be harder to play against. That doesn't necessarily mean more wins though. I can remember some "real" hard to play against Bruin teams in the past....but they weren't near the top of the league. I'll say this. If they do, Don Sweeney(and Cam) will have done a masterful job retooling. Generally.., stocking up on a whole lot of extras 1st rounders, is about at least some element of subtraction. To improve on a 96 point season, plus bank all those top flight prospects should be considered A+.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Aug 17, 2015 21:05:16 GMT
"If those six guys return to form, Beleskey, Hayes, Connolly, Spooner and Pastrnak will have room to roam as supporting offensive players."
I think these players have to be more than just supporting in order for the Bruins to push forward during the season. These players, that were mentioned above, need to move away from being labeled "supporting".
That is what I believe, or took, Oates was getting at with his projections. There is a certain expectation that I have for those players and it isn't "supporting".
They are as being given an opportunity to produce as playmakers. They have to grab it. More icetime with players like Marchand, LouI, Krejci and Bergeron is what they need to seize on.
|
|
|
Post by walktheline on Aug 17, 2015 21:14:52 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. I also think they'll be harder to play against. That doesn't necessarily mean more wins though. I can remember some "real" hard to play against Bruin teams in the past....but they weren't near the top of the league. I'll say this. If they do, Don Sweeney(and Cam) will have done a masterful job retooling. Generally.., stocking up on a whole lot of extras 1st rounders, is about at least some element of subtraction. To improve on a 96 point season, plus bank all those top flight prospects should be considered A+. Here's what I think and hope will happen. What I mean about being tougher to play against is this. Do you remember how often they gave up a lead, often in the 3rd period or late in the game last season? Not that. Do you remember them playing in game 7 against the scabs a little over a year ago like it was a meaningless game in February at the end of a long road trip? Not that.
Minimize or eliminate those games where focus and intensity take a nap or are missing altogether and they're a better team.
|
|
|
Post by caperbruins on Aug 17, 2015 22:38:03 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. So many question marks going into this season ,for me ,the biggest one is what kind of a year are we going to get out of David Krejci . We almost need him to be better than he ever has ,at least in the regular season .
|
|
|
Post by #4 Bobby Orr! GOAT! on Aug 17, 2015 23:13:16 GMT
Hard to play against used to be what better teams said about weaker teams as an escape in case they lost when they didn't expect to. The B's have been in the top tier the last few years and should return to form as such.
Beaten to death Why Solid Core We have a vezina winner in his prime. Z is the best shut down guy in the league. Z is 38--who cares-- he is the fittest guy in the league. He will be recuperated from injury. Lids won vezina at 38 and at 41(shouldn't have though) and was still effective at 42(retired), Chelios had his 2 best +/- years at 38 and 40 and was effective til 44-45. Z will have more than 20 points. Berg is still in prime. DK will be healthy. March and Loui are solid players. Seid is a solid #3. Krug is one of top scoring D 28th even strength, 30th pp points, 30th +/- while being 77th in TOI. He is going to step up, he has said so.
Solid supporting cast McQ can play, will be healthy, and makes the dzone very unhealthy for players. K.Millar will be healthy, Cj uses him more on PK than anyone not named Z. His plus minus has remained constant last 2 years @ +20 each year. Beleskey Conn and Hayes will be solid with 20 or more goals each. Pasta and Spoon will continue their exciting play with growth. 4th line with Talb and Kelly will be solid
Unknowns Irwin had a decent season on score sheet last year, how will he fit in with CJ. How will CJ fit in our d utes Trotman, Morrow, C.Miller 4th line Zac will he play or suspend play, who will fill in for him when he is out Backup- can someone win some games 7-6-1 last year-has to be better.
These are the reasons they will be better than last year, they are not a better team from this point of time compared to last years lineup, but they will be better. Noone foresaw Z being injured entire last half, DK injured from game 11 on. Miller out, Dougie out, no top line.
|
|
|
Post by #4 Bobby Orr! GOAT! on Aug 17, 2015 23:21:23 GMT
Ya know, that's pretty much what I did. lol Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and my balls don't need washing, so good call! Something like this Johnny Carson " so what does your wife do for you for luck before you play" Arnold Palmer " she kisses my balls" JC "I guess that makes your putter stand up"
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 18, 2015 2:01:22 GMT
I'm really optimistic too, but I think. You should have just cut out your projections and written the bottom two paragraphs. The goals don't mean that much to me, for example, Krug over hamilton, and belesky over lucic. Cmon, Lucic and hamilton are the two better players there. Conversely I'll take talbot over Paille any day of the week. Dallas scored a half goal more per game, and they were horrible. I think the specific mention of goal output from last year's roster and this year's roster is very relevant, since Stevie was being condescending and saying that the new roster has less ability to score goals. Note that I wasn't listing my projections for the coming season, but the actual output from last year. I think Lucic is better than Beleskey, but it's an undeniable fact that Lucic only scored 18 goals last year. I think Hamilton has a higher ceiling going forward than Krug, but I'd argue that Krug was better last year. In the very least he was better in the role that was given him, since Hamilton was asked to play a much more challenging role on the team in the top pairing. I think Lucic is going to tear it up this year and put up around 60 points while hitting everything in sight. I think Hamilton is going to take another step forward in '15-16, score more, and probably work out a lot his defensive lapses. But that's not the point here. The question is "are the Bruins better this year than last", NOT "would the Bruins this year be better with Hamilton and Lucic in the lineup?" The answers to those questions could be very different. For the team to be improved, Beleskey doesn't need to be better than Milan Lucic, he just needs to play better than Lucic did last year. Since Milan had one of his worst seasons ever, I think he can do that. Smith could have a great rebound year too and put up 65 points. But last year he only had 13 goals, so even if Hayes scores 15 this year and throws the body, Boston is a better team for it year on year and it doesn't matter what Reilly does in Florida. So anyone who floats something outside your comfort zone is condescending? Clever. Absolutely, I think Lucic, Smith and Hamilton provide more offensive punch than Belesky, Hayes, Rinaldo and Irwin. And I think there's lots of other condescending people who might not see that logic quite as flawed as you do. If you want to scream how some others take things so literally, you should realize, a "part" of the question is in fact "would the Bruins be better with Lucic and Hamilton". A ton of Bruins had bad years last year. You and I agreed on that, and we both agreed most of them would come out of it. If I buy your logic that Lucic will "tear it up'(and I do), why would I assign an 18 goal baseline as good value for Belesky? If Hamilton does what you've harped about for the last year(which is nothing like your saying now), what does Krug have to do with that. He was/is going to be here anyway. Wouldn't Irwin be a more reasonable comparable? Same with Smith. With all these guys, you're taking "the dumper" as baseline for our ex Bruins, and assume the new guys will keep doing what a very limited sample size suggests. Certainly possible, but it's still going to be tough. In order for this team to be a Cup threat(which is what I thought they were as little as 6 months ago), Lucic had to play the way we knew he could play. Same with Smith, Hamilton and same with everybody else. Experts agree, parity is everywhere. The margins are razor thin. Like you, I'm counting on a hugely better year for Chara, Seids and Krejki. I'm counting on more from Bergeron and Kelly, and Louis and Marchand. I'm hopeful Spooner and Pasta weren't just a flash in the pan, and will contribute, but I realize counting on too many things isn't the best plan. I was also counting on a good season by Lucic standards because of the contract year, and I was counting on Hamilton to contribute hugely on offense, and continue to get better defensively. With all that....maybe they were a contender. Therefore, it doesn't seem reasonable the passmark for the new guys, is replicating what the old guys did, when we all considered that to be abject failure.
I hope you're right. They may do better, I hope they do better, but if I had to bet, I'd bet under 96.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 18, 2015 2:10:55 GMT
I also think they'll be harder to play against. That doesn't necessarily mean more wins though. I can remember some "real" hard to play against Bruin teams in the past....but they weren't near the top of the league. I'll say this. If they do, Don Sweeney(and Cam) will have done a masterful job retooling. Generally.., stocking up on a whole lot of extras 1st rounders, is about at least some element of subtraction. To improve on a 96 point season, plus bank all those top flight prospects should be considered A+. Here's what I think and hope will happen. What I mean about being tougher to play against is this. Do you remember how often they gave up a lead, often in the 3rd period or late in the game last season? Not that. Do you remember them playing in game 7 against the scabs a little over a year ago like it was a meaningless game in February at the end of a long road trip? Not that.
Minimize or eliminate those games where focus and intensity take a nap or are missing altogether and they're a better team.
I remember all of those agonizing things. But I also remember pretty much the same group having their way with any team in the league for long stretches. I remember a team that was advertised as extremely tight too. Anyway..I'm with you, I hope.........
|
|
|
Post by caperbruins on Aug 18, 2015 2:59:22 GMT
I am still having a hard time getting over the Montreal series .
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Aug 18, 2015 3:50:01 GMT
"In order for this team to be a Cup threat(which is what I thought they were as little as 6 months ago)"
I don't know many, if any, Bruins fans that thought Boston were a cup threat 6 months ago.
"With all that....maybe they were a contender. Therefore, it doesn't seem reasonable the passmark for the new guys, is replicating what the old guys did, when we all considered that to be abject failure."
What did the old guys do last year that made Boston a contender ?
The Bruins missed the playoffs with Lucic and Hamilton. It might take this season for Hamilton to figure out his defensive game - another year.
|
|
|
Post by caperbruins on Aug 18, 2015 4:58:46 GMT
That doesn't necessarily mean that Lucic and Hamilton were the problem . Neither had particularly good years but I thought Lucic was thrown to the wolves for a large portion of the year .No Iginla and No Krejci for a lengthy stretch and Krejci was obviously not 100 percent when he did play . Considering the circumstances and the return we got for Lucic it was probably time to move on but I am still fully convinced Lucic could have rebounded this year if complimented well,I am sad to see him go.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 18, 2015 7:31:12 GMT
"If those six guys return to form, Beleskey, Hayes, Connolly, Spooner and Pastrnak will have room to roam as supporting offensive players." I think these players have to be more than just supporting in order for the Bruins to push forward during the season. These players, that were mentioned above, need to move away from being labeled "supporting". That is what I believe, or took, Oates was getting at with his projections. There is a certain expectation that I have for those players and it isn't "supporting". They are as being given an opportunity to produce as playmakers. They have to grab it. More icetime with players like Marchand, LouI, Krejci and Bergeron is what they need to seize on. I think we're basically saying the same thing in terms of what we expect from those players - given ice time with the Bruins' top offensive players, the new guys need to show they are at least as productive as they were in their previous situations, and, in Connolly's case, that he's ready to play like a top ten pick. And Spooner and Pastrnak need to give the team solid production from that third line spot given that Bergeron and Krejci will take the lion's share of the heat.
What I meant by "supporting" was "not core" really. If I thought that the Bruins were depending on the five I named to drive the offense, I would be much less enthused. With the exception of some very brief flashes from Pastrnak and Spooner, none of them has been the offensive go-to guy in the NHL, so it would be a leap of faith to put them in a lead offensive position and expect the offense to improve. But if the lead is still PB, DK, BM, LE up front and Krug and Chara on the back end, then I think your last sentence is bang on: the Bruins need these guys to seize the opportunity they're being given to close the gap on the lead players. All of them were sort of at the top of a tier or a stage of development last year, and they need to solidify themselves in that next echelon for the Bruins to have a fully functional offense.
|
|