Chiarelli's last stand?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    Sometimes GMs and Coaches get fired because they've gone as far as they can go, not because they've done something wrong or even because of year end results.  For example, they could play lights out against a first round opponent and lose to an unconscious goaltender.  I'd be less inclined to can CJ under those circumstances than if they go late into the third round playing wobbly hockey backed by great goaltending.

    Changes of leadership happen for two reasons: lack of results and plateaus.  CJ and PC have gotten good results for this team - not a Cup and yes, we all want a Cup, but instability in the coaches office/front office is an odd way to turn a contender into a winner.  Far more likely for the team to make a change if they decide that PC and CJ don't know how to get them over that next horizon - third round, finals, winner.  I could see this being CJs last stand given that it does seem he's made changes on direct orders from the FO: shorten the bench, use ice time to punish/reward etc.  That suggests they've already started to question his clear belief that you decide what will work best based on your personnel, and then you ride it consistently rather than react to every circumstance adn end up with no clear identity.

    I doubt they ditch PC.  He's been too successful at bringing in cash and improving the brand, mostly by improving the on-ice results.
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    Good points.  I say the same thing I said last week: We can only judge Chiarelli after making trades to make the team better and seeing the results. Credit goes to him for MAKING the moves, but unless they pay off, the organization is back to square one next Fall. But, at some point even the biggest homer Bruins fan needs to be honest because you either believe them when they say they want to win a Cup, or you don't. This, at least shows they are willing to try to make those moves necessary. Yes. Agreed. No debate there. As Craig Janney said, The Bruins are notorious for not really showing that in the past. But, for the most part Chia's prints are all over this team.  He is responsible for drafting Kessel and the subsequent Seguin and 2011 Tor. pick moves as well. In other words, those have to pay off.
    Posted by BBReigns


    And at some point even the greatest Jacobs, Chia, and Julien hater needs to not throw a wet blanket on every move and remove the hater glasses for one second. 

    What's the plan if the Bruins win the cup? To claim that they did it in spite of Jacobs, Chia and CJ? All the world see a management, front office and coaching staff that is commited to putting a winner on the ice, somehow you continue to think they're all horrible. 

    I don't get your views just like I don't get your avatar.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    There is nothing to back up that the Bruins rack up goals against weak opponents.  They have had success against strong teams.  As far as if PC or CJ should be fired if the team doesn't have success, well, that depends.  The GM doesn't play the games, they just use their best judgment to build a team they think can win.  Almost everyone on here and elsewhere agree that PC has built a very good team and has made good moves at the deadline.  So based on what we know, he has used good judgment so he shouldn't be fired regardless of the outcome of the season and playoffs.  CJ should be fired not if the team fails, but if the team fails because of his coaching.  Against Carolina two years ago the team was too passive and matched Stall too agressively.  They changed-up and engaged the D offensively mid-series but it was too late.  If something like that happens again, I would say he has to go.  But for the most part I find CJ is an excellent coach and is a strength, not a weakness.  If the Bruins, for example, meet the Flyers in the second round and lose because they are just not talented enough, it would be foolish to blame the coach.  You learn from the loss and hope that as the young players mature their time will come.
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from screw-cindy-and-ovie. Show screw-cindy-and-ovie's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand? : how many nhl coaches have never been fired? how did firing julien work out for nj that year?
    Posted by goodnewsbears

    What New Jersey went on to do in the playoffs doesnt have anything to do with it.

    The team was in first place with a week left in the regular season and fired the coach for lack of preparation, not making adjustments, and emphasizing too much defense.

    How is it possible to emphasize too much defense on a team like NJD?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand? : The avatar is of all-world QB of the Ny Yets.  He's the bestest!  Didn't you hear? As for my views, the Bruins have not won a SC since 1972 and Jacobs is so non-committed, he got caught with his pants down out of the Lock Out 6 years ago. I agree they've righted the ship, but fans here want a Cup not a "winner" that ends up doing the 1st or 2nd rd exits.
    Posted by BBReigns

    But most fans realize that it takes time. Since the lockout the B's have made great strides towards the Stanley Cup. Sorry you can't see that. I want to see the Stanley Cup back in Boston as much as anyone but I'm not going to sit here and do nothing but bash them because they haven't won it. 
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from nrguy. Show nrguy's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand? : I've already said this 100 times: Chia and Julien. Both were not considered top notch options at the time.
    Posted by BBReigns


    Agree, they weren't the best picks for management but I think they've worked out pretty well. CJ won coach of the year and is highly respected. Chia fleeced Calgary and then Toronto (although I think he got fleeced in the Kaberle trade, the move was done to get the Bs into contention).

    I respectfully disagree with your views on the management and think you are demanding a lot from a growing team. It took the Red Sox how long to rebuild from scratch, the Patriots? I think you are right to say if they aren't in contention for the cup over the next 2 years, then you have to look at the management.

    I just think it's too early to demand a cup this year. I also think this team is set up to be in contention for the next 5-7 years. I'm not worried if they don't get there this year because I think it's a growing team with lots of chances to succeed (unlike Chicago).

    That's where I think you disagree with a lot of people. You think the team needs to win now while others have a bit more patience and like in the core of this team. (correct me if I'm wrong).  
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    If Boston does not win a Cup this year or even next, when do you start to tighten the leash/bring in a new regime?
    Posted by BBReigns


    Julien, I think, would be on thin ice next year already.  As Bookboy pointed out, NHL coaches not named Ruff tend to have a short shelf-life.  Next year would be year 5 for him, that's already reaching the point where he is likely getting stale.  If the team looks like it is just going to be the same again, I'd agree that it would be time to move on to try to move forward.

    Chiarelli is not so simple to analyze.  The point I think pbergeron was trying to make, and I agree with, is that far too many of the factors that go into deciding the championship team are outside of a GM's immediate control to go with the 'win or go home' mentality.  Instead, I think you have to look at his decisions, and decide both if they looked like the right call at the time, and whether they turned out to be the right call after the fact.

    His current contract apparently runs for the next three seasons.  If the Bruins don't win this year or next, I think the year after will be his deciding year (assuming there is no lockout).  Either he makes moves that give the Bruins a great chance to win, or a serious look needs to be given at the organization, top-to-bottom, to see if it is set-up for a championship.  That means the Bruins need to have a make-up that is highly competitive, and the prospect pipeline is filled with the kinds of prospects that rebuilding teams will take for rentals - not necessarily great prospects, but low-risk ones.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand? : Fair argument, but the players are signed by Chiarelli. Chiarelli himself admitted a depth problem at certain positions recently, and his allocation of salaries are absolutely questionable. Ference and Ryder's contracts are high. No idea what Horton is making.

    Ken Holland and Joel Quenneville could be available tomorrow and Jacobs would still think he has the best people in the business here. lol
    Posted by BBReigns


    Chiarelli admitted a depth problem then addressed it with Kaberle, Kelly and Peverly what more did you want mortgage the farm for Richards ? Ference and Horton do not have high contracts. Andrew's plus- 23 is an easily moveable contract but why move it ? Ference has been solid all year as he is not expected to produce points at 2.25Mil.

    Nathan's contract is unproven in Boston right now because ultimately he cannot be judged until his playoff performance(s). Right now he is on pace for 53 points so I'd say his contract is reasonable.

    Why in the heck would Detroit let go of Holland or Chicago let go of Quenneville ? How many years and teams did it take for Quenneville to finally win ? allot so I don't understand your attempt at a point there.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from wolfwood. Show wolfwood's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    PC is safe if anything Julien will be shown the door if we dont make it past the 1st or 2nd round
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from LoyalBlackNGold. Show LoyalBlackNGold's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand? : too much patience? this isn't the NBA, you can't go from last to first in one season. You can't simply move a draft pick and a young player, sign a free agent and then all of a sudden be championship calibur. At this point, we aren't talking about 40 years we are talking about the current managements reign, and in the time they've had, they have done a fantastic job. They acquired elite draft picks, gathered prospects, and have a stanley cup contending team. If you think Chicago wouldn't want to be in Boston's shoes right now, you are crazy
    Posted by pbergeron37

    pbergeron37 is right on point. u are throwing this management and coaching staff in with the sins of a past regimes. what does the late 70s 80s 90s and early 2000s have to do with this teams future playoff run. nothing. u just have to grade chiarelli on his job julian on his job. tim thomas did fall in his lap but it was chiarelli that resigned him. now i hated the contract at the time too but i was wrong is there anyone on the team that has earned his money more than tim thomas.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand? : Chiarelli admitted a depth problem then addressed it with Kaberle, Kelly and Peverly what more did you want mortgage the farm for Richards ? Ference and Horton do not have high contracts. Andrew's plus- 23 is an easily moveable contract but why move it ? Ference has been solid all year as he is not expected to produce points at 2.25Mil. Nathan's contract is unproven in Boston right now because ultimately he cannot be judged until his playoff performance(s). Right now he is on pace for 53 points so I'd say his contract is reasonable. Why in the heck would Detroit let go of Holland or Chicago let go of Quenneville ? How many years and teams did it take for Quenneville to finally win ? allot so I don't understand your attempt at a point there.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin


    I agree. Horton is on pace for 53 points (for 4mill)and people want to crucify him. Ryder gets 53 points (for 4 mill) on a very overachieving 2008-2009 Bruins team and he was, at that point, hailed as a successful pickup by PC.

    No consistency in approach....
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    In Response to Re: Chiarelli's last stand?:
    pc is far from a second tier gm. he has done an excellent job. however, i agree with you that he should have known that krejci and sturm were going to get injured in the playoffs. i guess that's what separates holland and quenneville from the rest of the gm's. they must have better crystal balls.
    Posted by goodnewsbears


    I do not think a GM can prognosticate injuries. No one really "could have known."
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Chiarelli's last stand?

    Go Yets! Go Yets! Typical Sox fan wonders over for a few months to bring up O'Connell, Sinden and last years loss due to injuries.

    PS. The Bruins were not "one and done" last year or the year before.
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts