Defensemen

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

    Defensemen

    Bartkowski was atrocious tonight and almost cost them the game with terrible play in his own zone. Yet, Hamilton was calm, cool and looked good. I really feel the B's after Chara, Boychuk, McQuaid, Hamilton, Krug (questionable in his own right on D), are badly in need of a veteran 6th dman to replace the loss of Seidenberg. Miller, Bartkowski and with the youth of Hamilton, Krug as far as from the defensive end, just puts more need on a defensive d-man. It has to be Chiarelli's No. 1 priority this point going. I disagree with some of the game thread analysis on Svedberg, who I felt kept the B's from losing with many great stops. For a goalie playing his first NHL game, he played great, and much better than what I've seen from Chad Johnson. The B's forwards, including Spooner, showed those spots of just not playing hockey tonight, letting the other team take control. But that's normal at this point of the year to see ups and downs from the forwards, who clearly played great over the last 15 minutes and OT.  In the B's zone in particular, you can see the younger d-men not being able to push players from the net or get beat constantly on moves right around them. Too many young, small guys forcing Boychuk, Chara and McQuaid to play the bulk of the game as the ones to rely on checking, clearing out. Too much pressure on 3 guys. Have to get a d-man.

    PS--When Marchand got drilled by Weber and he responded without stupidity, then makes a nifty play around Fisher to score the OT goal, that's maturity, and I was thinking how fitting he got the game-winner after getting destroyed on that board check.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    And I've noticed Bartkowski's lousy play now for a few games. It's starting to get too noticeable.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    If Chiarelli's #1 issue is a #6 defenseman, well, get the Duckboats ready.

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

    Re: Defensemen


    Krug's been making some really bad decisions lately as well. I think CJ sits him for a game or two and puts Miller in. Glad to have Hamilton back.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    I have noticed Krug's mistakes more then I have noticed Bartkowski's although I have missed a couple of games recently.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to mxt's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Krug's been making some really bad decisions lately as well. I think CJ sits him for a game or two and puts Miller in. Glad to have Hamilton back.

    [/QUOTE]


    Agree. I think Miller has been solid with his limited time.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to RickyHussle's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I have noticed Krug's mistakes more then I have noticed Bartkowski's although I have missed a couple of games recently.

    [/QUOTE]


    Agreed

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

    Re: Defensemen

    It will be nice to have Hamilton back i think he has taken a big step forward this year and does a great job moving the puck out of there end.

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

    Re: Defensemen


    Krug has nade his mistakes seems a bit slower and more offensive minded than defensive and Bartowski sending the puck around the boards a couple of times without looking bad decisions also and I think these 2 do need to sit a game or 2 seperately so they can get there focus back and thats being  more cautious defensively. I do beleive the Bs will seek another defensive defenseman in due time, no one is calling there season an end yet to start cleaning house.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    His (Hamilton's) little move in his own corner led directly to the game winner last night.  That's the kind of composure and execution you want to see as the norm from him.  He's more than capable of it.

    Remember when Bartkowski was the #7 D and everyone was worried he wouldn't play enough?

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

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If Chiarelli's #1 issue is a #6 defenseman, well, get the Duckboats ready.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah I'm pretty sure he'll be looking for a #3,#4 defenceman

     

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

    Re: Defensemen

    I'm OK with Bartowski's play.  Krug looks like he's lacking a bit of confidence right now, but I still think he's an outstanding #5D/powerplay specialist.  Hamilton looked very nice, he's taken a big jump this year.  I think they need to play out the next month and get a feel for just how much Hamilton's game has matured.  If he's truly ready to be on the top pair, then I'd be find with Bart/Boychuck on the second string.  Boston could then maybe pick up a Wade Redden type for depth.  If Hamilton is not ready for a lead role, then the Bruins need something a little more and should go for it... this team is too good to lose contention due to Seidenberg's injury.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    A positional veteran d-man, no flash, 6-1, 210-plus, 16-18 min a game...Applications welcome

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    While I have also noticed the recent struggles of Krug and Bartkowski, I don't really think it is too much of a concern, at this point.  

    First off, who didn't see this coming?  Two quasi-rookies thrown into the fire were surely bound to have troubles and slumps.  I think you get by on adrenaline and instincts for a little while but at some point the inexperience and adjustment is going to be an issue.  Secondly, they're still going to be in a role of 5-6 d-men.  Show me a team that doesn't have some concern over their 5-6 d-men.  Losing Seidenberg is a big blow, but Chara, Boychuk, McQuaid, and Hamilton as a top-4, with Rask in net, is still a pretty high-end defense.

    I'm not saying that bringing in another piece on the blueline isn't a good idea.  But there are about 25 teams with the exact same concern about their defensive depth going into the spring.  Chiarelli is better than most at assembling depth and/or bringing in a useful piece if needed.

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

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to OatesCam's comment:[QUOTE] I'm OK with Bartowski's play.  Krug looks like he's lacking a bit of confidence right now, but I still think he's an outstanding #5D/powerplay specialist.  Hamilton looked very nice, he's taken a big jump this year.  I think they need to play out the next month and get a feel for just how much Hamilton's game has matured.  If he's truly ready to be on the top pair, then I'd be find with Bart/Boychuck on the second string.  

    ^Agree with all of this!

    Boston could then maybe pick up a Wade Redden type for depth.  If Hamilton is not ready for a lead role, then the Bruins need something a little more and should go for it... this team is too good to lose contention due to Seidenberg's injury. [/QUOTE]


    It's the big minutes Seidenberg logged that concern me. Games 3, 5 and 7 (intense swing games) of a tight playoff series that Boston needs Dennis. A "Wade Redden type" isn't going to do it for me. Has to be someone that can take the pounding and push back.

    PS. College Defenseman rule!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from perrysound. Show perrysound's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    They are the team with the BEST goals against in the league, so I am not sure exactly what the problem is with the Defense. 

    Yes, losing Seindenberg is a huge blow, but can you really see them giving up a high draft pick or a few high-end prospects when they aren't bleeding that badly to begin with? 

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

    Re: Defensemen

    Ice time from the last game

    Chara 24:16

    Bartowski 23:51

    Boychuk 23:14

    Hamilton 17:56

    McQuaid 15:59

    Krug 14:02

    I think that pretty much sums up where the D stand. Hamilton's numbers probably going to creep up to that 20 min mark.

    So last night Bartowski's the no 2 D I see that evening out with Hamilton's

    Agreed with Fletcher: Krug,Bartowski, Hamilton are all young defenceman growing pains are to be expected

    Agreed with SanDog: A Wade Redden type is not what the Bruins should be looking for. A player like that doesnt replace any of the current players. A 20 min + currently playing LD is what should be on the table

    Agreed with perrysound: I can't see Chiarelli subtracting any significant players from the current roster unless something crazy is on the table eg...Yandle,Weber

     

     

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

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    While I have also noticed the recent struggles of Krug and Bartkowski, I don't really think it is too much of a concern, at this point.  

    First off, who didn't see this coming?  Two quasi-rookies thrown into the fire were surely bound to have troubles and slumps.  I think you get by on adrenaline and instincts for a little while but at some point the inexperience and adjustment is going to be an issue.  Secondly, they're still going to be in a role of 5-6 d-men.  Show me a team that doesn't have some concern over their 5-6 d-men.  Losing Seidenberg is a big blow, but Chara, Boychuk, McQuaid, and Hamilton as a top-4, with Rask in net, is still a pretty high-end defense.

    I'm not saying that bringing in another piece on the blueline isn't a good idea.  But there are about 25 teams with the exact same concern about their defensive depth going into the spring.  Chiarelli is better than most at assembling depth and/or bringing in a useful piece if needed.

    [/QUOTE]

    Too be honest Fletch. I think the main reason Krug's play recently has only been noticed, because he's stopped producing points. This was Krug's biggest reason he went undrafted. The guy is 5 9" 180 lbs playing defense in the NHL! What do people expect? IF he doesn't gain any time to skate a bit when he grabs the puck in his zone;98 % of the time he's going to be out muscled. His defence hasn't gone awywhere at all. He's been this way since day one. The reason everyone looked the other way was because he was making great plays, skating with the puck, scoring, or creating chances, but most of all..Scoring. Him taming down on that aspect has to be expected by knowledgable hockey people. So, if people think that he's going to improve defensively at his size? He'll be a bust to those people. They're going to have to take the negative's that go along with being this small playing d in the NHL. You look at any of the small d-men in the league. They're not usually defensively sound & they're not in the league for that reason. They're there to help carry the load offensively from the back end! 

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

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to perrysound's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    They are the team with the BEST goals against in the league, so I am not sure exactly what the problem is with the Defense. 

    Yes, losing Seindenberg is a huge blow, but can you really see them giving up a high draft pick or a few high-end prospects when they aren't bleeding that badly to begin with? 

    [/QUOTE]

    IMO. They need to bulk up in on the backend to replace Seidenberg for a deep play-off run. If they don't; they "could" be in a heap of trouble. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    People fail to realize that defense is the hardest position in the NHL to play.  Takes a long time for them to remain consistant bc teams watch video and learn the weak spots.  When young guys burst onto the scene i always am a bit weary bc it takes time to learn the trade.  

    I never like taking dmen in drafts for this reason.  I think adding a dman likely happens as the season progresses.  For now im not worried.  

    I think adding a solid fwd is more important as we approach the playoffs.   

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from suffolkowner. Show suffolkowner's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    People fail to realize that defense is the hardest position in the NHL to play.  Takes a long time for them to remain consistant bc teams watch video and learn the weak spots.  When young guys burst onto the scene i always am a bit weary bc it takes time to learn the trade.  

    I never like taking dmen in drafts for this reason.  I think adding a dman likely happens as the season progresses.  For now im not worried.  

    I think adding a solid fwd is more important as we approach the playoffs.   

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Shupe

    I too would like to see them run with the D corp they have. How else are they to gain experience? Maybe add Chris Phillips to round out the 2nd pairing come playoff time

    Do you really think a fwd is necessary? I am assuming Eriksson comes back good. Spooner stays and Thornton and Caron as spares. Maybe I answered my own question :)

    It does seem that is a quantum leap over what we went into the playoffs with last year

     

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

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to suffolkowner's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    People fail to realize that defense is the hardest position in the NHL to play.  Takes a long time for them to remain consistant bc teams watch video and learn the weak spots.  When young guys burst onto the scene i always am a bit weary bc it takes time to learn the trade.  

    I never like taking dmen in drafts for this reason.  I think adding a dman likely happens as the season progresses.  For now im not worried.  

    I think adding a solid fwd is more important as we approach the playoffs.   

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Shupe

    I too would like to see them run with the D corp they have. How else are they to gain experience? Maybe add Chris Phillips to round out the 2nd pairing come playoff time

    Do you really think a fwd is necessary? I am assuming Eriksson comes back good. Spooner stays and Thornton and Caron as spares. Maybe I answered my own question :)

    It does seem that is a quantum leap over what we went into the playoffs with last year

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Ottawa isnt gonna deal him unless they fall out hard.  And i agree that you gotta play to gain the experience.  And last years playoff run was huge for those guys.  I still think adding depth at def is huge.  Look at what redden did.  He bridged the gap.  Adding a vet dman like a Tallinder would be great.  He has worked great with Myers before he went to Jersey.  

    As for a fwd yes.  Our fwds were exposed against the deep hawks.  I think it was the reason we lost.   Loui/Kelly RW.  Then campy paille anyone not named Thornton.  

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

    Re: Defensemen

    They are the team with the BEST goals against in the league, so I am not sure exactly what the problem is with the Defense. 

    Yes, losing Seindenberg is a huge blow, but can you really see them giving up a high draft pick or a few high-end prospects when they aren't bleeding that badly to begin with? 

    [/QUOTE]

    IMO. They need to bulk up in on the backend to replace Seidenberg for a deep play-off run. If they don't; they "could" be in a heap of trouble. 

    [/QUOTE]

    True enough, as most teams try to bring in an extra D before the playoffs anyway. But that is usually a depth guy, not a top 4 type guy.

    Again, unless it is a deal that you'd make anyway, I can't see the B's giving up too much for 'depth'. Lets hope for a big surprise. 

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A positional veteran d-man, no flash, 6-1, 210-plus, 16-18 min a game...Applications welcome

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree with this. I think Miller has fit the bill nicely so far, but not sure they are ready to hitch that wagon to big minutes in the playoffs. I like Krug and Bartkowski but they really seem to need another "stay at home" defenseman IMO. Sounds weird but with Seids out it would be great to have AF back (not that he is a prototypical stay at home defender).

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from suffolkowner. Show suffolkowner's posts

    Re: Defensemen

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to suffolkowner's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    People fail to realize that defense is the hardest position in the NHL to play.  Takes a long time for them to remain consistant bc teams watch video and learn the weak spots.  When young guys burst onto the scene i always am a bit weary bc it takes time to learn the trade.  

    I never like taking dmen in drafts for this reason.  I think adding a dman likely happens as the season progresses.  For now im not worried.  

    I think adding a solid fwd is more important as we approach the playoffs.   

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Shupe

    I too would like to see them run with the D corp they have. How else are they to gain experience? Maybe add Chris Phillips to round out the 2nd pairing come playoff time

    Do you really think a fwd is necessary? I am assuming Eriksson comes back good. Spooner stays and Thornton and Caron as spares. Maybe I answered my own question :)

    It does seem that is a quantum leap over what we went into the playoffs with last year

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Ottawa isnt gonna deal him unless they fall out hard.  And i agree that you gotta play to gain the experience.  And last years playoff run was huge for those guys.  I still think adding depth at def is huge.  Look at what redden did.  He bridged the gap.  Adding a vet dman like a Tallinder would be great.  He has worked great with Myers before he went to Jersey.  

    As for a fwd yes.  Our fwds were exposed against the deep hawks.  I think it was the reason we lost.   Loui/Kelly RW.  Then campy paille anyone not named Thornton.  

    [/QUOTE]


    I tend to agree, unless this western road swing is a disaster. You don't think Soderberg and Spooner can round out the bottom 6. Caron and Thornton has to be better than what we had last year.

    Who were the spare FWD's last ?

    Caron,Daugavins,Soderberg?

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share