*Crickets*

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

    I find that alot of CJ's critics really just don't like his coaching style and thats the problem, results be damned. 



    I have a major problem with his personnel decisions and the timing thereof.  We'll see if he changes it in the playoffs.  Young awesome players should be out there 20+ minutes and goons have no place on the ice with 1:20 left in the third, down by a goal.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportsnutty. Show Sportsnutty's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

     

    I find that alot of CJ's critics really just don't like his coaching style and thats the problem, results be damned. 

     



    I have a major problem with his personnel decisions and the timing thereof.  We'll see if he changes it in the playoffs.  Young awesome players should be out there 20+ minutes and goons have no place on the ice with 1:20 left in the third, down by a goal.

     




    So it isnt so much "a win's, a win's, a win"? Just trying to clarify NAS. (smirk)

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

     

    I find that alot of CJ's critics really just don't like his coaching style and thats the problem, results be damned. 

     



    I have a major problem with his personnel decisions and the timing thereof. p We'll see if he changes it in the playoffs.  Young awesome players should be out there 20+ minutes and goons have no lace on the ice with 1:20 left in the third, down by a goal.

     



    I hope it does, i have said before that if there is one thing i don't like about CJ is his undying loyalty to some players. I noticed in last years playoffs against the Caps CJ shortened his bench in the 3rd period of some games.As they were all 1 goals games i could see why.I wish he would do it more often and the down by a goal scenario i don't think there is anyone on this forum that agree's with the 4th line being on the ice.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportsnutty. Show Sportsnutty's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    I like his line management now better than 4 or 5 years ago. Julien can be adamant about his approach, thats for sure, but he at least now is willing to juggle lines. Its especially difficult with this current version of the team. Trying to fit in Jagr and now Soderberg cohesively, not to mention deal with certain unnamed inconsistent performers. The guy has his work cut out for him.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to Sportsnutty's comment:

    I like his line management now better than 4 or 5 years ago. Julien can be adamant about his approach, thats for sure, but he at least now is willing to juggle lines. Its especially difficult with this current version of the team. Trying to fit in Jagr and now Soderberg cohesively, not to mention deal with certain unnamed inconsistent performers. The guy has his work cut out for him.



    Thats how i see it as well, other than the Bergeron line all others seem to be in flux and getting cohesiveness before the playoffs is important.Like you said CJ has his work cut out for him and its a week before the playoffs.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    Waiting for the playoffs, the B's are in the mix, the talent is maybe not on par with the Pens but the team is built for the playoffs, defense.  With regard to CJ, he has more than proved his worth in victories and playoff berths the past few years.  

    I have held that the power play is a major weakness of the team despite my support for the coach and organizational decision making.  I hold onto the believe that a "Savard" type who was signed as a free agent as an offensive player and defensively weak, as the solution to the power play.  I think PC tried to address the weakness, yet the 48 game schedule did not allow the team to actively work on the need.  Jagr was an excellent addition but he is not the answer to the power play issue.  I tend to link the inability to move the puck out of the defensive zone as the problem.  It certainly raises questions on 5 on 5 against certain teams like Montreal.  

    As for the Lucic phenomena, I will hold judgement.  He is a unique type of player, probably not worth the 6 million next year, but if he regains form he is a prototypical Bruin player.  Contrarily speaking, CJ could have problems if the Lucic phenomena does spread throughout the team to other players.  The apathy type of play among several players will undoubtedly lead a dismissal.  Try two more years first though.  

    Paranthetically speaking, one of those teams who played apathetically this year could be the one team to redeem itself with a series victory over the Pens.  The Rangers team is built with defense in mind.  As for the Islanders and Maple Leafs, I am of the mind to think like the Bs several years ago.  Competitive but the  players are just not experienced enough in playoff hockey.  Like I said two years ago, bring on any team (Montreal), only one way to win the Cup is to fear no one team.  Cheers, too nice to be inside.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to islamorada's comment:

    Waiting for the playoffs, the B's are in the mix, the talent is maybe not on par with the Pens but the team is built for the playoffs, defense.  With regard to CJ, he has more than proved his worth in victories and playoff berths the past few years.  

    I have held that the power play is a major weakness of the team despite my support for the coach and organizational decision making.  I hold onto the believe that a "Savard" type who was signed as a free agent as an offensive player and defensively weak, as the solution to the power play.  I think PC tried to address the weakness, yet the 48 game schedule did not allow the team to actively work on the need.  Jagr was an excellent addition but he is not the answer to the power play issue.  I tend to link the inability to move the puck out of the defensive zone as the problem.  It certainly raises questions on 5 on 5 against certain teams like Montreal.  

    As for the Lucic phenomena, I will hold judgement.  He is a unique type of player, probably not worth the 6 million next year, but if he regains form he is a prototypical Bruin player.  Contrarily speaking, CJ could have problems if the Lucic phenomena does spread throughout the team to other players.  The apathy type of play among several players will undoubtedly lead a dismissal.  Try two more years first though.  

    Paranthetically speaking, one of those teams who played apathetically this year could be the one team to redeem itself with a series victory over the Pens.  The Rangers team is built with defense in mind.  As for the Islanders and Maple Leafs, I am of the mind to think like the Bs several years ago.  Competitive but the  players are just not experienced enough in playoff hockey.  Like I said two years ago, bring on any team (Montreal), only one way to win the Cup is to fear no one team.  Cheers, too nice to be inside.  



    Great Post Is! 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to islamorada's comment:

    Waiting for the playoffs, the B's are in the mix, the talent is maybe not on par with the Pens but the team is built for the playoffs, defense.  With regard to CJ, he has more than proved his worth in victories and playoff berths the past few years.  

    I have held that the power play is a major weakness of the team despite my support for the coach and organizational decision making.  I hold onto the believe that a "Savard" type who was signed as a free agent as an offensive player and defensively weak, as the solution to the power play.  I think PC tried to address the weakness, yet the 48 game schedule did not allow the team to actively work on the need.  Jagr was an excellent addition but he is not the answer to the power play issue.  I tend to link the inability to move the puck out of the defensive zone as the problem.  It certainly raises questions on 5 on 5 against certain teams like Montreal.  

    As for the Lucic phenomena, I will hold judgement.  He is a unique type of player, probably not worth the 6 million next year, but if he regains form he is a prototypical Bruin player.  Contrarily speaking, CJ could have problems if the Lucic phenomena does spread throughout the team to other players.  The apathy type of play among several players will undoubtedly lead a dismissal.  Try two more years first though.  

    Paranthetically speaking, one of those teams who played apathetically this year could be the one team to redeem itself with a series victory over the Pens.  The Rangers team is built with defense in mind.  As for the Islanders and Maple Leafs, I am of the mind to think like the Bs several years ago.  Competitive but the  players are just not experienced enough in playoff hockey.  Like I said two years ago, bring on any team (Montreal), only one way to win the Cup is to fear no one team.  Cheers, too nice to be inside.  



    Exellent post!Bring on the playoffs!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

     


    I have a major problem with his personnel decisions and the timing thereof.  We'll see if he changes it in the playoffs.  Young awesome players should be out there 20+ minutes and goons have no place on the ice with 1:20 left in the third, down by a goal.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do as well NAS, but in all reality who's out there that you think could actually step in & change things? This team I think next to the Pens have the best mixture of youth & vets in it's top to bottom line-up. Having said that, do you not think it would be hard for a new coach to come in & tell the vets/leaders on this team that there will be a "new Philosphy" on how things will be done? As a vet would you not kind of have a "who's this guy; what's he ever won." attitude? I get the the B's have had numerous coaches over the yrs & vets had to accomadate accordingly, but how many of those coaches won a cup as a B's coach? Do you think Guy Bouche is someone that could get more out of this team? Lindy Ruff? I guess what I'm asking is if not CJ...Then Who? 

    And not to argue, but your win is a win philosophy stinks. That may work in minor hockey, but in pro sports it's how you win that matters as well. I still didn't like some of the B's play yesterday. Although I will say this I'm certainly on board with bringing in a Shawn Mattiias! On a NHL caliber team this guy could score 40 goals! 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to Sportsnutty's comment:



    So it isnt so much "a win's, a win's, a win"? Just trying to clarify NAS. (smirk)



    I still fully support a win is a win.

    When a potential win becomes a loss due to poor bench management is the issue.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:


    I do as well NAS, but in all reality who's out there that you think could actually step in & change things? This team I think next to the Pens have the best mixture of youth & vets in it's top to bottom line-up. Having said that, do you not think it would be hard for a new coach to come in & tell the vets/leaders on this team that there will be a "new Philosphy" on how things will be done? As a vet would you not kind of have a "who's this guy; what's he ever won." attitude? I get the the B's have had numerous coaches over the yrs & vets had to accomadate accordingly, but how many of those coaches won a cup as a B's coach? Do you think Guy Bouche is someone that could get more out of this team? Lindy Ruff? I guess what I'm asking is if not CJ...Then Who? 

    And not to argue, but your win is a win philosophy stinks. That may work in minor hockey, but in pro sports it's how you win that matters as well. I still didn't like some of the B's play yesterday. Although I will say this I'm certainly on board with bringing in a Shawn Mattiias! On a NHL caliber team this guy could score 40 goals! 



    I haven't looked into "who else", so I can't comment on that.

    I do think it took too long to drop the hammer on some under performers.

    I don't think the vets would push back under the "what's he ever won" ideal.  I think some slackers would play their best for fear of sitting with Aaron Johnson if they didn't.

    And I think Seguin, Bergeron and Marchand should share less ice time with Merlot.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    Some 70 posts later, I guess it turns out there IS, in fact, something to cry about? Something to post?

     

    I think those crickets we're hearing might be those filling the uncomfortable silence around the fact that the guy who started this thread - mocking those who complain only after losses - is also the owner of 'Fire all coaches!' ?

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportsnutty. Show Sportsnutty's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to Sportsnutty's comment:


    I still fully support a win is a win.

     

    When a potential win becomes a loss due to poor bench management is the issue.



    I simply don't get it. When the Bruins struggle to score, play only 20 minutes a game, cant score on the PP, cant get the puck out of their zone, have player x,y,z play like they have nothing invested... you harp on "It's the coaches fault...the 4th line plays too much. "

     

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

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to shuperman's comment:

    Book,

    I know its one example but this team is gonna win if RWTK is coaching bc it as a lot of talent.     

    Nope.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    versus the Panthers I saw the Bruins play basically the same they did against the Sabres and Penguins with a different result. Particularly the Sabres game.

    W do have a few that seem to love to be miserbale when they lose. Oh well, some people can just never be satisfied.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    In response to gord11's comment:

    Some 70 posts later, I guess it turns out there IS, in fact, something to cry about? Something to post?

     

    I think those crickets we're hearing might be those filling the uncomfortable silence around the fact that the guy who started this thread - mocking those who complain only after losses - is also the owner of 'Fire all coaches!' ?

     

     



    Correct, Gord.  Thank you for bringing this up.  There is a big difference between a specific period or play or game and a base level philosophical disconnect that spans a season or two.

    I apprecaite you recognizing that my thoughts aren't crybaby reactionist, but much more global.

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

    Re: *Crickets*

    Today on Satellite radio, I asked Espo if he thought that Neely maybe had a talk with Lucic and his game. He said probably had more than one. Then he said maybe Lucic is fighting a nagging injury (that's possible) but if an injury is the excuse and he's trying to play thru it. Why scratch him at all? Also, why not make him sit and let it heal a bit especially now that they made the post season. Would it not be better to have him as close to 100% as possible come the 2nd season? 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: *Crickets*

    The B's have some bad luck in some of their losses, and some of the late goals that were scored on them. You could make a case that they would have 10 more points just by holding on in the final minute of some 5 games. They have played winning hockey almost all season. Hard to believe they could keep that kind of consistency after the lockout. I'm proud of this team, and proud of Julien and Chiarelli for trying to keep the team on course.

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

    Re: *Crickets*

    to be accurate not 10 points, but more like maybe 6 to 7, some of the chokes turned into OT losses.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share