|
Post by kelvana33 on Jan 10, 2024 18:17:46 GMT
First Carlo, now Poitras and Ullmark, don’t like how either came off the ice. When you see the player hasn't flown back to Boston, in the middle, of a road trip. Great news. Fluto said this morning Carlo remained with the team. Good, he's having a terrific year, the Ullmark injury scares me. Good thing we have Swayman.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jan 10, 2024 22:23:29 GMT
Carlo could be on life support and still be more effective than Gryz
|
|
|
Post by davinator on Jan 11, 2024 3:48:44 GMT
Carlo could be on life support and still be more effective than Gryz Ouch!
|
|
|
Post by The OC on Jan 11, 2024 4:00:39 GMT
Carlo could be on life support and still be more effective than Gryz Ouch! Carlo was more effective against ARZ, that's for sure!
|
|
|
Post by davinator on Jan 11, 2024 4:26:09 GMT
Carlo was more effective against ARZ, that's for sure! Double Ouch !
|
|
|
Post by nitelite on Jan 11, 2024 14:16:53 GMT
So- It looks like the adult B's will get the opportunity to see what they have in Bussi? I know he's had some tough nites this season, but I think the B's should use this opportunity to see where he's at. Don't overplay Swayman here. Give him at least every 3rd game off. Unless Bussi is another Subban. Tough nights cause Providence D is freakin bloody awful. Agree it will be nice to see what Bussi can do. The backup job next season is, I believe, his to lose. I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats!
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jan 11, 2024 14:49:58 GMT
Tough nights cause Providence D is freakin bloody awful. Agree it will be nice to see what Bussi can do. The backup job next season is, I believe, his to lose. I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats! They indicated they would be willing to alternate in the next playoffs...so maybe that will take care of the issues. But traditionally you are up 3-1, you go with what works...and that also meant no way Bergeron returns to lineup in game 5...no need.
|
|
|
Post by chappy28 on Jan 11, 2024 15:04:32 GMT
Tough nights cause Providence D is freakin bloody awful. Agree it will be nice to see what Bussi can do. The backup job next season is, I believe, his to lose. I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats! While I understand that they are close, hard to believe they both decide to forgo millions of dollars and share the net. It's worked out the past few years because Ullmark was in his prime and Swayman has been the up-and-comer. I think that made it easier to give the net to Ullmark come playoff time, and probably easier for Swayman to swallow that because "my time is coming" could still be his mentality. But with Sway entering the prime of his career, and Ullmark looking at his last major payday that's a lot of sacrifice to ask of both of them. Plus, pretty sure the team has other holes to fill that will make more of an impact come playoff time. While the thought of a playoff goalie tandem is nice in theory, I don't think it happens nor do I think it's a good idea. The team that wins the cup almost always is riding a hot goalie. Rarely are two goalies equally hot at the same time. I'd rather the B's build their roster around what works in the playoffs rather than sacrifice in the name of injury insurance. I was trying to think of parallels for Sway and Ullmark and the only B's analogy I could come up with is Bergy and DK. Both were franchise pillars but ultimately they spent their careers competing for the #1C spot, and the wingers that came along with it. DK started out ahead, but ultimately Bergy teaming up with Marchand rose that pair to the top line and DK was forced to play with a rotating cast of wingers for the second half of his career after being a clear 1C for a few great years. I have to think that situation was part of DK walking away from the B's to go to Europe, and him having no problem retiring after this last season. You have to wonder if DK would have had a better overall career going somewhere else to be a #1, or at least not sticking around to play with Karson Kuhlman on his wing. Bergy is royalty in Boston and can do no wrong, but there was always plenty of DK critics out there in his latter years as a 2C. With goalie, take that dynamic and multiply by 10. If you are an elite goalie, you want to win a cup, you want a Vezina, you want the net when it matters most. I don't care how good of friends you are with your backup, no athlete rises to that level of their sport without a bit of ego to drive them to perfect their craft. I think Sweeney, as usual is demonstrating one of his weaknesses as a GM --- asset management. We sit on guys forever and we lose them to free agency rather moving on a little bit earlier and recouping assets. It applies to prospects, but it also applies to your proven NHL players. One could argue that the reason Chicago one three cups in their Toews-Kane window and the B's only won one cup in their Bergy-DK window is that unlike the Bruins, the Chicago GM was willing to move valuable pieces to keep contending. Sweeney has made moves to content for sure, but his moves are one-way --- bringing guys in to make us better. He never really traded away any valuable pieces in a real hockey trade or just to recoup assets for a guy he knew he couldn't afford in his next contract. Krug for example could be one of those guys. If we weren't going to sign him, we could have moved him before he was a FA and gotten a haul. Chara could have fetched a pick or two in his latter years where he was no longer a top pairing force. We kept DK and traded Seguin which made us older and more expensive at the time (DK is the better player though). I don't know if there is a perfect example, but I think it is clear that Sweeney has trouble pulling the trigger on real trades that involve real players. I guess he traded Lucic and Boychuck, but I honestly wish he would do that kind of thing a bit more often rather than sit on guys until they walk for free.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Markwart on Jan 11, 2024 15:49:31 GMT
Loui Ericsson. The guy was the #1 trade target in the entire NHL at the deadline and Sweeney somehow kept him for a Bruins playoff run that never materialized. It's one of the biggest "What if" and "WTF" moments for me since the Bruins could have added the "push" to get at least one more Cup. That piece could have been the guy that helped make the sure the STL debacle did not occur.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Jan 11, 2024 16:32:47 GMT
I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats! They indicated they would be willing to alternate in the next playoffs...so maybe that will take care of the issues. But traditionally you are up 3-1, you go with what works...and that also meant no way Bergeron returns to lineup in game 5...no need. No you don't simply go with what works. And you pay no attention whatsoever, to what either is "willing" to do moving foward. You "think", and you disect "why" you are up 4 games to one, what lies ahead, and you consider the makeup of your team and important players. Then you move forward to game 5. Several here have poked gaping holes in your logic. Yet you still attempt to insert it, at every opportunity, as some kind of general wisdom. It isn't. It's a dumb downed version of shit headedness. Increased clarity is the result of hindsight. In real time, it was clear Sway was the slightly better option for game 5. After the game was played..it became obvious. Game 6 was a no brainer. Every coach in league history, is going to play their #1 center, in a deciding game, in the playoffs, if the players says he good to go, and gets medical clearance.
|
|
|
Post by nitelite on Jan 11, 2024 16:50:54 GMT
I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats! While I understand that they are close, hard to believe they both decide to forgo millions of dollars and share the net. It's worked out the past few years because Ullmark was in his prime and Swayman has been the up-and-comer. I think that made it easier to give the net to Ullmark come playoff time, and probably easier for Swayman to swallow that because "my time is coming" could still be his mentality. But with Sway entering the prime of his career, and Ullmark looking at his last major payday that's a lot of sacrifice to ask of both of them. Plus, pretty sure the team has other holes to fill that will make more of an impact come playoff time. While the thought of a playoff goalie tandem is nice in theory, I don't think it happens nor do I think it's a good idea. The team that wins the cup almost always is riding a hot goalie. Rarely are two goalies equally hot at the same time. I'd rather the B's build their roster around what works in the playoffs rather than sacrifice in the name of injury insurance. I was trying to think of parallels for Sway and Ullmark and the only B's analogy I could come up with is Bergy and DK. Both were franchise pillars but ultimately they spent their careers competing for the #1C spot, and the wingers that came along with it. DK started out ahead, but ultimately Bergy teaming up with Marchand rose that pair to the top line and DK was forced to play with a rotating cast of wingers for the second half of his career after being a clear 1C for a few great years. I have to think that situation was part of DK walking away from the B's to go to Europe, and him having no problem retiring after this last season. You have to wonder if DK would have had a better overall career going somewhere else to be a #1, or at least not sticking around to play with Karson Kuhlman on his wing. Bergy is royalty in Boston and can do no wrong, but there was always plenty of DK critics out there in his latter years as a 2C. With goalie, take that dynamic and multiply by 10. If you are an elite goalie, you want to win a cup, you want a Vezina, you want the net when it matters most. I don't care how good of friends you are with your backup, no athlete rises to that level of their sport without a bit of ego to drive them to perfect their craft. I think Sweeney, as usual is demonstrating one of his weaknesses as a GM --- asset management. We sit on guys forever and we lose them to free agency rather moving on a little bit earlier and recouping assets. It applies to prospects, but it also applies to your proven NHL players. One could argue that the reason Chicago one three cups in their Toews-Kane window and the B's only won one cup in their Bergy-DK window is that unlike the Bruins, the Chicago GM was willing to move valuable pieces to keep contending. Sweeney has made moves to content for sure, but his moves are one-way --- bringing guys in to make us better. He never really traded away any valuable pieces in a real hockey trade or just to recoup assets for a guy he knew he couldn't afford in his next contract. Krug for example could be one of those guys. If we weren't going to sign him, we could have moved him before he was a FA and gotten a haul. Chara could have fetched a pick or two in his latter years where he was no longer a top pairing force. We kept DK and traded Seguin which made us older and more expensive at the time (DK is the better player though). I don't know if there is a perfect example, but I think it is clear that Sweeney has trouble pulling the trigger on real trades that involve real players. I guess he traded Lucic and Boychuck, but I honestly wish he would do that kind of thing a bit more often rather than sit on guys until they walk for free. I disagree completely about the goaltending ONLY because what the Bruins have is rare with their 2 All-Stars & the bond they have. It's something that I think a lot of teams only DREAM to have such a situation. Sure most goalie tandems get along, but this is extremely rare! I truly believe that there's a huge possibility that both goalies decide to stick around for another 2 or 3 seasons together! There is a huge possibility that both goalies will only be at their best when they're pushing one another! Marty Biron said a few weeks ago. "You always want your goalie partner to do well for the better of the team, but at the same time YOU WANT THAT NET FOR YOURSELF! You still have a thought in your mind that you "NEED" the other guy to falter so you can get your next chance. With regards to Swayman & Ullmark you have a real genuine bond where they care so much for one another that they REALLY want the other guy to be their best every single night they play! I've never heard or seen this kind of situation that is so honorable & true ANYWHERE else!" So, your reasoning maybe right 99% of the time, but I think if both goalies decide they love the situation they're in. I can see both of them telling their agents to make it so they can stay where they're at. Providing THEY BOTH continue their strong play & take it into the post season!
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jan 11, 2024 16:54:02 GMT
They indicated they would be willing to alternate in the next playoffs...so maybe that will take care of the issues. But traditionally you are up 3-1, you go with what works...and that also meant no way Bergeron returns to lineup in game 5...no need. No you don't simply go with what works. And you pay no attention whatsoever, to what either is "willing" to do moving foward. You "think", and you disect "why" you are up 4 games to one, what lies ahead, and you consider the makeup of your team and important players. Then you move forward to game 5. Several here have poked gaping holes in your logic. Yet you still attempt to insert it, at every opportunity, as some kind of general wisdom. It isn't. It's a dumb downed version of shit headedness. Increased clarity is the result of hindsight. In real time, it was clear Sway was the slightly better option for game 5. After the game was played..it became obvious. Game 6 was a no brainer. Every coach in league history, is going to play their #1 center, in a deciding game, in the playoffs, if the players says he good to go, and gets medical clearance. up 3-1, it's not a deciding game...it's a luxury
|
|
|
Post by MrHulot on Jan 11, 2024 17:09:25 GMT
Loui Ericsson. The guy was the #1 trade target in the entire NHL at the deadline and Sweeney somehow kept him for a Bruins playoff run that never materialized. It's one of the biggest "What if" and "WTF" moments for me since the Bruins could have added the "push" to get at least one more Cup. That piece could have been the guy that helped make the sure the STL debacle did not occur. You're wrong, my Lord. Nobody wanted Loui Shoulderpads, the teams that showed some interest deemed the price for him too high, and they were right. They were much smarter than Chiarelli, who gave up Seguin for the vanilla winger. Eriksson signed a long-time retirement contract with the Canucks and was ineffective as f.... Fans in Vancouver hated the mercenary (and they were right too).
|
|
|
Post by nitelite on Jan 11, 2024 17:43:45 GMT
They indicated they would be willing to alternate in the next playoffs...so maybe that will take care of the issues. But traditionally you are up 3-1, you go with what works...and that also meant no way Bergeron returns to lineup in game 5...no need. No you don't simply go with what works. And you pay no attention whatsoever, to what either is "willing" to do moving foward. You "think", and you disect "why" you are up 4 games to one, what lies ahead, and you consider the makeup of your team and important players. Then you move forward to game 5. Several here have poked gaping holes in your logic. Yet you still attempt to insert it, at every opportunity, as some kind of general wisdom. It isn't. It's a dumb downed version of shit headedness. Increased clarity is the result of hindsight. In real time, it was clear Sway was the slightly better option for game 5. After the game was played..it became obvious. Game 6 was a no brainer. Every coach in league history, is going to play their #1 center, in a deciding game, in the playoffs, if the players says he good to go, and gets medical clearance. Yea, I haven't even tried making sense to WTF Danny is even going on about with regards to Bergy! When someone talks this foolish I tend to try & stay away from it. You probably should too Steve. I haven't said anything because it's an absolute brain dead discussion!! Sitting Bergy after he said he wanted to play would be like the Pens sitting Crosby, or the Oilers sitting McJesus FFS! Not saying Bergy is as good, but by the fuck he certainly was just as IMPORTANT!!
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Jan 11, 2024 21:22:50 GMT
No you don't simply go with what works. And you pay no attention whatsoever, to what either is "willing" to do moving foward. You "think", and you disect "why" you are up 3 games to one, what lies ahead, and you consider the makeup of your team and important players. Then you move forward to game 5. Several here have poked gaping holes in your logic. Yet you still attempt to insert it, at every opportunity, as some kind of general wisdom. It isn't. It's a dumb downed version of shit headedness. Increased clarity is the result of hindsight. In real time, it was clear Sway was the slightly better option for game 5. After the game was played..it became obvious. Game 6 was a no brainer. Every coach in league history, is going to play their #1 center, in a deciding game, in the playoffs, if the players says he good to go, and gets medical clearance. up 3-1, it's not a deciding game...it's a luxury Any game in which you can put your opponent should be considered a "deciding" game in your favour. Don't you agree there's a huge difference between being up 3-1 vs tied 2-2? Don't you agree it's reasonable to describe the differences that can constitute a game 5 situation? A fekin "luxury" ? Really?
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Jan 11, 2024 21:35:30 GMT
up 3-1, it's not a deciding game...it's a luxury Any game in which you can put your opponent should be considered a "deciding" game in your favour. Don't you agree there's a huge difference between being up 3-1 vs tied 2-2? Don't you agree it's reasonable to describe the differences that can constitute a game 5 situation? A fekin "luxury" ? Really? I looked at a far different way and maybe luxury wasn't the right word...The team's chemistry was such that PB proved to be a distraction in some ways..The B's played well enough to take a 3-1 games lead, and yes, Ullmark being hurt-certainly should have led to Sway coming in maybe...but on PB himself, I'd much rather seen the B's finish off the Panthers in 5 games without him and DK. There was a shift in how players were responding when first PB entered the lineup in game 5, and then DK in game 6. This has nothing to do with deserving, nothing to do with talent, and has everything to do with chemistry and timing. By game 7, the B's ended up having to rely on DK to make some big plays to get the team back from a 2-0 deficit. But 2 guys (or 3 or 4) were affected by the re-entrance of PB/DK into the lineup..starting with the line changes, and the healthy scratch of a player for game 5 first. Then by game 6, it was 2 healthy scratches after 4 games of mostly success. The lines shifted, players shifted and it affected play for several B's. Ultimately it's a team game, the B's are to blame, the coaches are to blame, and the team essentially choked twice, once by blowing a 3-1 games lead, and the other by blowing a 7th game lead in the final minute. So yes, I didn't see a need or sense of urgency to bring PB back, but when the team lost game 5, there was certainly a desperate need by the coaches it seems to bring back DK after PB. If I can turn back the clock, I would have waited on PB to play in the next series. Finish of the Panthers, start fresh, put the lines back where they were in regular season. Anyway, that's my take. Just because it's differing from others, doesn't mean I'm wrong. I definitely would have only played PB had they lost game 5 without him, you still had a 3-2 games lead at that point. Going back to the Montreal injury game, it was awkward, he wanted to play in front of his family/dad (ill) and he got hurt in essentially a meaningless game that 99 out of 100 times a player like him would have sat.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Jan 11, 2024 23:00:34 GMT
Any game in which you can put your opponent should be considered a "deciding" game in your favour. Don't you agree there's a huge difference between being up 3-1 vs tied 2-2? Don't you agree it's reasonable to describe the differences that can constitute a game 5 situation? A fekin "luxury" ? Really? I looked at a far different way and maybe luxury wasn't the right word...The team's chemistry was such that PB proved to be a distraction in some ways..The B's played well enough to take a 3-1 games lead, and yes, Ullmark being hurt-certainly should have led to Sway coming in maybe...but on PB himself, I'd much rather seen the B's finish off the Panthers in 5 games without him and DK. There was a shift in how players were responding when first PB entered the lineup in game 5, and then DK in game 6. This has nothing to do with deserving, nothing to do with talent, and has everything to do with chemistry and timing. By game 7, the B's ended up having to rely on DK to make some big plays to get the team back from a 2-0 deficit. But 2 guys (or 3 or 4) were affected by the re-entrance of PB/DK into the lineup..starting with the line changes, and the healthy scratch of a player for game 5 first. Then by game 6, it was 2 healthy scratches after 4 games of mostly success. The lines shifted, players shifted and it affected play for several B's. Ultimately it's a team game, the B's are to blame, the coaches are to blame, and the team essentially choked twice, once by blowing a 3-1 games lead, and the other by blowing a 7th game lead in the final minute. So yes, I didn't see a need or sense of urgency to bring PB back, but when the team lost game 5, there was certainly a desperate need by the coaches it seems to bring back DK after PB. If I can turn back the clock, I would have waited on PB to play in the next series. Finish of the Panthers, start fresh, put the lines back where they were in regular season. Anyway, that's my take. Just because it's differing from others, doesn't mean I'm wrong. I definitely would have only played PB had they lost game 5 without him, you still had a 3-2 games lead at that point. Going back to the Montreal injury game, it was awkward, he wanted to play in front of his family/dad (ill) and he got hurt in essentially a meaningless game that 99 out of 100 times a player like him would have sat. It does mean you're wrong. Because you're connecting meaningless, immaterial, inconsequential dots, coupled with an incorrect assumption regarding "99 times out of 100". An assumption about "chemistry" that has zero basis for any kind of opinion. Pretty reasonable to say the whole world would have preferred "the B's finish the Cats in 5"...fresh and rested and healthy for the next series. But you're assuming it "woulda" happened, and theres jack to suggest that. But it's beyond fekin simple for that to be "the plan", or anything to be remotely considered as a hockey professional. It's fekin nuts! 100% count on their best players, and 0% assume it's a reasonable notion to save them for next series. Teams routinely win games with top players not in the lineup. It doesn't mean chemistry got fucked if they lose a couple when they get back. That's as dumb as figuring the only reason we won in 11, was cuz Horton got hurt. Same with your Montreal logic. 37 got lots of rest down the stretch. He needed some games to stay in sync. It's 101 he'd play against an easy team(for the last time in his life) near home. 100 times out of 100 this will happen. The player never sits. I'd like to see the worlds brightest, most experienced hockey minds list 10 reasons why the Bruins lost. I can guarantee, none would have your scenario on their list. You really need to re-think this Dan. Nite...you're right.
|
|
|
Post by davinator on Jan 12, 2024 2:00:01 GMT
I shot a rabbit once...
|
|
|
Post by sandogbrewin on Jan 12, 2024 6:19:43 GMT
Tough nights cause Providence D is freakin bloody awful. Agree it will be nice to see what Bussi can do. The backup job next season is, I believe, his to lose. I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats! Swayman is not taking a pay cut. He knows what he can get. Heard there might be long term AAV offer on the table already for Swayze. Why would he take a pay cut ? Plus offers for Ullmark will pretty juicy before the draft. Betting that Sweeney wouldn't mind to get some higher picks in his cache.
|
|
|
Post by davinator on Jan 12, 2024 17:01:58 GMT
I don't know San? Sway & Ully are pretty tight. If BOTH guys are willing to take a cut on their next contracts maybe the B's stick with the best tandem in the league? Especially if they can bring a great playoff together! I honestly think that we'll see both goalies getting their share this year. JM NEVER should've waited so long to put Sway in there! Especially after Ully got injured in game 3. Neither goalie Sat for that long all season. Kind of hard to expect them to be on their game being put in a game 7 situation when you're used to playing at least every other game. I would've without hesitation put Sway in after the B's were up 3-1 against the Cats! Swayman is not taking a pay cut. He knows what he can get. Heard there might be long term AAV offer on the table already for Swayze. Why would he take a pay cut ? Plus offers for Ullmark will pretty juicy before the draft. Betting that Sweeney wouldn't mind to get some higher picks in his cache. Kinda hard following this thread, but (re: bold).. If you're referring to a "home team discount", it doesn't necessarily mean a pay cut - but rather a little less $$ than outside offers to stay in the current, familiar environment.
|
|
|
Post by chappy28 on Jan 12, 2024 21:36:21 GMT
While I understand that they are close, hard to believe they both decide to forgo millions of dollars and share the net. It's worked out the past few years because Ullmark was in his prime and Swayman has been the up-and-comer. I think that made it easier to give the net to Ullmark come playoff time, and probably easier for Swayman to swallow that because "my time is coming" could still be his mentality. But with Sway entering the prime of his career, and Ullmark looking at his last major payday that's a lot of sacrifice to ask of both of them. Plus, pretty sure the team has other holes to fill that will make more of an impact come playoff time. While the thought of a playoff goalie tandem is nice in theory, I don't think it happens nor do I think it's a good idea. The team that wins the cup almost always is riding a hot goalie. Rarely are two goalies equally hot at the same time. I'd rather the B's build their roster around what works in the playoffs rather than sacrifice in the name of injury insurance. I was trying to think of parallels for Sway and Ullmark and the only B's analogy I could come up with is Bergy and DK. Both were franchise pillars but ultimately they spent their careers competing for the #1C spot, and the wingers that came along with it. DK started out ahead, but ultimately Bergy teaming up with Marchand rose that pair to the top line and DK was forced to play with a rotating cast of wingers for the second half of his career after being a clear 1C for a few great years. I have to think that situation was part of DK walking away from the B's to go to Europe, and him having no problem retiring after this last season. You have to wonder if DK would have had a better overall career going somewhere else to be a #1, or at least not sticking around to play with Karson Kuhlman on his wing. Bergy is royalty in Boston and can do no wrong, but there was always plenty of DK critics out there in his latter years as a 2C. With goalie, take that dynamic and multiply by 10. If you are an elite goalie, you want to win a cup, you want a Vezina, you want the net when it matters most. I don't care how good of friends you are with your backup, no athlete rises to that level of their sport without a bit of ego to drive them to perfect their craft. I think Sweeney, as usual is demonstrating one of his weaknesses as a GM --- asset management. We sit on guys forever and we lose them to free agency rather moving on a little bit earlier and recouping assets. It applies to prospects, but it also applies to your proven NHL players. One could argue that the reason Chicago one three cups in their Toews-Kane window and the B's only won one cup in their Bergy-DK window is that unlike the Bruins, the Chicago GM was willing to move valuable pieces to keep contending. Sweeney has made moves to content for sure, but his moves are one-way --- bringing guys in to make us better. He never really traded away any valuable pieces in a real hockey trade or just to recoup assets for a guy he knew he couldn't afford in his next contract. Krug for example could be one of those guys. If we weren't going to sign him, we could have moved him before he was a FA and gotten a haul. Chara could have fetched a pick or two in his latter years where he was no longer a top pairing force. We kept DK and traded Seguin which made us older and more expensive at the time (DK is the better player though). I don't know if there is a perfect example, but I think it is clear that Sweeney has trouble pulling the trigger on real trades that involve real players. I guess he traded Lucic and Boychuck, but I honestly wish he would do that kind of thing a bit more often rather than sit on guys until they walk for free. I disagree completely about the goaltending ONLY because what the Bruins have is rare with their 2 All-Stars & the bond they have. It's something that I think a lot of teams only DREAM to have such a situation. Sure most goalie tandems get along, but this is extremely rare! I truly believe that there's a huge possibility that both goalies decide to stick around for another 2 or 3 seasons together! There is a huge possibility that both goalies will only be at their best when they're pushing one another! Marty Biron said a few weeks ago. "You always want your goalie partner to do well for the better of the team, but at the same time YOU WANT THAT NET FOR YOURSELF! You still have a thought in your mind that you "NEED" the other guy to falter so you can get your next chance. With regards to Swayman & Ullmark you have a real genuine bond where they care so much for one another that they REALLY want the other guy to be their best every single night they play! I've never heard or seen this kind of situation that is so honorable & true ANYWHERE else!" So, your reasoning maybe right 99% of the time, but I think if both goalies decide they love the situation they're in. I can see both of them telling their agents to make it so they can stay where they're at. Providing THEY BOTH continue their strong play & take it into the post season! It's the prisoner's dilemma though. It's not like they co-negotiate their next contracts so that outcome takes a TON of trust, not to mention both of their agents would be telling them they are crazy. If Swayman takes a big discount, and Ullmark decides to test free agency, then Sway just shafted himself out of money for nothing. Same dynamic with Ullmark, or really whoever signs first. That's why in the end the athlete almost always takes the money. It's great to all hold hands and say we'll be together forever, but it happens so rarely that you just can't realistically count on it or get too caught up in the idea. I feel like the 2011 group was that kind of close....they were all young, they were all in their prime, they were one of THE teams to beat, but reality kicked in and Lucic and Boychuck get shipped out besides being key players and truly loved in the locker room. They both probably wanted to stay there. Their teammates probably all wanted them to come back. But business decisions were made. I just think it's too big a risk to trust Sweeney to maintain the tandem for either of them to accept significant discounts to stay together. And it would take a significant discount. Any way you cut it they are both top 10 goalies in the league and both will get PAID. I'm torn on whether to be mad if Ullmark plays out his contract before one of them gets trade. On one hand, it's probably our only chance to get back into the first round and take a crack at some home grown center talent. On the other hand, our goalie tandem is the best thing about the current team and who doesn't like a celebratory post-game hug? Luckily we have him for 24-25 so even if we ride our tandem this year, I think next year we say good bye to one of them and either bring back some real NHL talent or a top half first rounder.
|
|