C'Mon Flugo

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from beantowngm15. Show beantowngm15's posts

    C'Mon Flugo

    Fluto really needs to get off Wideman's nuts.  Saying that the Bruins will sorely miss him on offense is a gutsy thing to say.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from WalkTheLine. Show WalkTheLine's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]Fluto really needs to get off Wideman's nuts.  Saying that the Bruins will sorely miss him on offense is a gutsy thing to say.
    Posted by beantowngm15[/QUOTE]

    I agree with Fluto and unless somebody steps up they will miss Wides ability to move the puck out of their own end. Maybe Hunwick will step up or Seids will be that kind of player here and they won't miss Wideman at all. let's hope that's the case!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]Fluto really needs to get off Wideman's nuts.  Saying that the Bruins will sorely miss him on offense is a gutsy thing to say.
    Posted by beantowngm15[/QUOTE]


    I agree.  "Puck moving" defensemen are over rated IMO.

    Yes, Wideman could connect nicely on passes coming out of the zone, but ...

    Watch good hockey and carefully note the passing.  Generally the passes are short.  The 'long bomb' passes stand a good chance of being intercepted or turned over.  I play myself and I notice the 'long bombs' (which I *love* to throw myself) have to disappear when I play with better players.  The 'long bombs' are impressive and can lead to an offensive break.  Now - for the typical 'puck carrying' defenseman inthe league, those 'long bomb" LOOK IMPRESSIVE, but if you really think about it, about 50% of the time they only accomplish what could just as easily have been accomplished with 2 or 3 shorter passes with the same result.  25% of the time they are really helpful.  And 25% of the time they really hurt.  Of course I'm just making these stats up (thanks Ismoralda), but I bet the numbers fall into upholding my argument.  The 25% of the time things go bad, they can go really bad and the whole team has to bail you out, or they end up in a goal against or a shot on goal.  When I play, even when you are dead tired, somehow you get energy when the puck is on your stick, but when you are dead tired and your job is to chase a puck carrier or hustle defensively, that seems so much harder.

    This is why I consider most 'puck moving' defensemen over rated, unless of course they are very very good at it.  And of course if they are really good at it, they are of a huge benefit to the team.

    And there is this HUGE difference, if you watch Wideman on TV, he will generally look awful.  If you watch Wideman live at the rink, he looks much better, the 'wow' effect of the puck out of the zone pass seems so much more significant than it really is.

    To conclude this theory I have postulated in more simplistic terms, I could just say Wideman sukked.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from bruinsfan084evr. Show bruinsfan084evr's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    a missing link before the playoffs ,something PC will look at come trade deadline   
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to Re: C'Mon Flugo:[QUOTE] a missing link before the playoffs ,something PC will look at come trade deadline Posted by bruinsfan084evr[/QUOTE]

    Spot on as much as I disliked WIDE MAN not playing up to his talent the Bruins will need to explore a puck moving Dman at the deadline. Seidenberg thrives in Juliens system with his calm no panic demeanor and shot blocking but is no puck mover. Me thinks Seidenberg's offensive numbers are going to go up but not by much.

    Pre-spleen injury Hunwick looked poised to take Wideman's role so we'll see.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from shaunk. Show shaunk's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Isn't it easier for the Bruins to win a game 2-1 without Wideman instead of losing it 2-4 with Wideman and his 'Opposite day' assists?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from shaunk. Show shaunk's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    And by the way, someone name me a SPECIFIC player that is considered a 'puck-moving' defenseman and does not have significant defensive deficiencies.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to Re: C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]And by the way, someone name me a SPECIFIC player that is considered a 'puck-moving' defenseman and does not have significant defensive deficiencies.
    Posted by shaunk[/QUOTE]

    I'll name 2, Bobby Orr and Paul Coffey.  You might argue about Coffey.  Someone who the Bruins can sign?  Nobody.

    Anybody up for giving a list of the significant puck moving defensemen in the league today?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    As in anything else, there are trends and "fashions" in sports, and hockey is no different. Two of the big trends right now are puck-moving defensemen and bargain-basement goalies. In a couple of years, the trend will shift to something else. 

    Of course the Bruins will miss a self-confident, strong-skating Wideman. The unfortunate thing is, they didn't have that guy last year. I do hope, for his sake (Wideman always seemed to be a decent guy), that he recovers himself in Florida.   

    Instead of leaning on that one guy to move the puck up the ice (and I always wonder - how does a team move the puck when that guy isn't out there?), the Bruins will do what they usually do: Use the entire team to play defense, and to transition the puck.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Agreed duinne, the defense by team is the only solution.  Ray Bourque could make the long pass stick to stick heh?  In Bs history we have been blessed with a long line of HOF defensemen.  Somehow Bs fans always look for the next one, including me. Personally, Zach Bogosian is one of the puck moving defensemen on the rise.  He is young though and on a poor team.  He has the right coach now!  
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    A few weeks ago I suggested that Puck Moving Defenseman means the guy has defensive deficiencies by definition.  Otherwise, he'd be a defenseman.  Full stop.  Ray Bourque was a defenseman.  Bobby Orr was a defenseman.  Put as many superlatives in front as you want; don't put a qualifier.

    If you follow that logic, it's hard to see why anyone would need a PMD (which sounds like an STD for a reason).  What teams need is for their defenseman to do what BadHab's suggesting - retrieve the puck quickly and make accurate passes to forwards moving quickly to the attack.  Long bombs a la DW are a small part of that.  Now, if you haven't totally blocked the series v. Philly, you'll remember that Pronger consistently turned the flow of the game with hard, accurate, two line passes.  So it's still part of the game and if you can do it, it can be huge. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsNationNorth. Show BruinsNationNorth's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Hello everyone, first timer here but I've been reading this board for quite some time. It's nice to see some common sense creeping in a bit so I decided to get in the game. I agree, the B's need some movement from the back end, hopefully Hunwick can find his confidence again, when he was on his game he looked great. I was at a game in Toronto 2 seasons ago and he was simply fantastic; smart pinches, great breakouts, quick smart decisions with the puck and joining the rush. It would be nice to see THAT Matt Hunwick again this season. As Bookboy said you don't need to long-bomb all game to be effective, just make hard accurate and timely passes out of the zone. Hope to have some great discussions with all of you and hope we are on the verge of a Championship!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to Re: C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]And by the way, someone name me a SPECIFIC player that is considered a 'puck-moving' defenseman and does not have significant defensive deficiencies.
    Posted by shaunk[/QUOTE]
    Seidenberg
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from KrayzieJoe. Show KrayzieJoe's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Ray Bourque was great moving the puck and excellent defensively.  Wideman is average at moving the puck and well below average defensively.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo



    OK, I might get my head around the Bruins missing a PMD.
    But that guy wasn't Dennis Wideman.  He and Komiserak have to be the 2 guys in the league that can singlehandedly grab defeat from the jaws of victory.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stuke50. Show Stuke50's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Doesn't anybody think that Wideman's off sesaon shoulder surgery had anything to do with his fall from grace with the Bruin faithful ? I mean, when the guy got here in the trade, he was great to watch coming out of his end. Then last year, he didn't. Why ? I too hope he pulls it together in Florida. I do think our present D men will rise to the challange. Go B's Go

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsCountry. Show BruinsCountry's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to Re: C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]As in anything else, there are trends and "fashions" in sports, and hockey is no different. Two of the big trends right now are puck-moving defensemen and bargain-basement goalies. In a couple of years, the trend will shift to something else.  Of course the Bruins will miss a self-confident, strong-skating Wideman. The unfortunate thing is, they didn't have that guy last year. I do hope, for his sake (Wideman always seemed to be a decent guy), that he recovers himself in Florida.    Instead of leaning on that one guy to move the puck up the ice (and I always wonder - how does a team move the puck when that guy isn't out there?), the Bruins will do what they usually do: Use the entire team to play defense, and to transition the puck.
    Posted by duinne[/QUOTE]


    I respectfully disagree Duinne.  If puckmoving D are a "trend", they've been trending for about 40 years.  Orr, Dallas Smith, Don Awrey, Joe Watson, Brad Park, (hell, even Mike O'Connell wasnt' bad offensively, but then he became just offensive, shhh...), Larry Robinson, Serge Savard, Guy Lapointe, Denis Potvin, Coffey, Larry Murphy, Al Iafrate, Lidstrom, Rafalski, the Tampa Bay D now with Sharks (having a senior moment), Pronger, Niedermayer, Campbell and his even better PP partner across the point for the 2010 Blackhawks, etc. 

    Note that all of the forementioned D played for most of the Cup winners over the past 4 decades.  Indeed, the "trend" is that teams who don't have one (if not two) good offensive defensemen don't win the Cup.  IMHO, the lack of same is the B's biggest weakness.  Until they get one, they'll have a considerable chink in their chances of winning the Cup.  
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsCountry. Show BruinsCountry's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Apologies for failing to mention Bourquey, also Rob Blake, as they were the twin towers of the 2001 Avalanche Cup club.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    BruinsCountry - your list isn't of PMDs but of Norris calibre defensemen (with a couple of exceptions).  With the possible exceptions of Coffey and Murphy, most of those guys would have been top four defensive defensemen on their teams.  But you may have a point to this degree - it's not so much a trend toward PMDs as PMD has become a buzz word.  It's all perception.  Removing the two-line pass and tighter obstruction calls post-lockout have put a premium on the stretch pass and so a premium on that guy who can race back, retrieve the puck, and get it up ice accurately. Tightening up on obstruction also means you need defensemen who can out-skate forwards to dump ins without the help of a forward holding the forechecker back, retrieve the puck quickly, and skate it out as necessary.  What's really changing here is the role of defensemen; you get a job now by either skating well enough to retrieve pucks and move them or you're savvy enough and rangy enough to be a plug in the lanes and in front of the net.  Some of the old prototypes who could hack and slash and hold and trip and generally neutralize others' skating, well, they're dodos now.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    Bookboy has it exactly right - it's not that PMD are a trend; we've always had so-called PMD. However, the expression "puck-moving defenseman," has indeed become a buzz word. Kind of silly, when you look a bit closer; who's not a puck-moving defenseman? What do they do? Stand there with the puck at their feet and wait for a forward to pick it up?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to Re: C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]Bookboy has it exactly right - it's not that PMD are a trend; we've always had so-called PMD. However, the expression "puck-moving defenseman," has indeed become a buzz word. Kind of silly, when you look a bit closer; who's not a puck-moving defenseman? What do they do? Stand there with the puck at their feet and wait for a forward to pick it up?
    Posted by duinne[/QUOTE]

    At times last year, Wides fit that description, Hunwick too. The skill to pass stick to stick and with speed is a PMD imo.  The Bs are going to have to play as a team as you say with that definition.  If the forwards score, the defense will have more room to maneuver.  If the forwards don't score, the defenseman will resemble pylons.  Certainly the two teams who folded the Bs the last two years pressured the defensemen and limited mobility.  Hopefully, scoring or a PMD will rise to the occasion.  

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsCountry. Show BruinsCountry's posts

    Re: C'Mon Flugo

    In Response to Re: C'Mon Flugo:
    [QUOTE]Bookboy has it exactly right - it's not that PMD are a trend; we've always had so-called PMD. However, the expression "puck-moving defenseman," has indeed become a buzz word. Kind of silly, when you look a bit closer; who's not a puck-moving defenseman? What do they do? Stand there with the puck at their feet and wait for a forward to pick it up?
    Posted by duinne[/QUOTE]

    I agree with you and Bookboy on your follow-up points, but my biggest concern remains the current Bruins club's lack of true offensive defensemen.  How do B's win the Cup without one? 

    If we were to compare the D of Cup-winners since the advent of the new NHL (05-06) to this year's B's, what do we see?  In the B's favor, we see a Norris d'man in Chara, though he doesn't fit the profile of offensive D mentioned earlier.  We also see such offensive defensemen as Corvo/Wesley (the weakest of the bunch) in '06,  Niedermayer/Pronger in '07, Lidstrom/Rafalski/Kronwall in '08, Gonchar in '09 and the 2010 Norris winner (whose name still escapes me) along with Campbell on the 2010 Blackhawks blue line.  Do the B's have anyone remotely close to the offensive skill levels of those guys?  No.  So realistically, how good are the B's chances of winning a Cup in 2011?  This is the issue that most concerns me about the current B's.  

    As we know, the B's strength among their prospects and best young players lies with their forwards.  If he wants to speed up B's evolution into a true Cup contender, PC's going to have convert some of that strength at forward to offensive/PMD, don't you think? 
     

Share