Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

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

    Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    Big contract aside, this is how Rick Nash would stack up in Bruins history in terms of goal scoring...

    Only 31 times has a Bruins player scored 40+ in a season.  More than half of those times it was done 4 guys:  Espo (7), Nifty (5), Neely (4), and Hodge (3).   Nash has done this 2X with a lot less to work with than the aforementioned.

    Only 55X has a Bruins player scored 35+ in a season.  The 4 above did this 6 more times so 25/55.  Nash has done this 3X.

    Only 97X has a Bruins player scored 30+ in a season.  Nash has done this in 6/8 seasons...He had 27 in a down year and a lower total in his rookie year.

    I'd be curious to know how many times there has been a Stanley Cup winner in the past 30 years without a 30+ goal scorer during that season.  If there was not one, I'd be curious to know who their goalie was that season.  
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    The most recent team to do that was NJ in 2003 (Brodeur).  Before that, Detroit in 1998 (Osgood).  I didn't go back farther.

    The Bruins and Blackhawks these past two years each had one guy with exactly 30 goals as their top scorer.

    I'll go ahead and look at 35+ and 40+ for the past 13 cups:
    11/13 had at least one 30+ goal-scorer.  7/13 had more than one.
    8/13 had at least one 35+ scorer.  1/13 had more than one.
    4/13 had a 40+ guy.  1/13 had more than one.

    To look at it another way:
    4/13 had a 40+ guy as their top goal-scorer.
    From the remaining, 4/9 had a 35+ guy.
    From the remaining, 3/5 had a 30+ guy.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from gaaucoin. Show gaaucoin's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    Interesting...
    Next question is; Was the guy who was the regular season top scorer 30+, 35+ and 40+ also the top scorer in the playoffs?

    I think Lucic was 30 goals last season, but Horton was the man of the playoffs. Maybe I'm fulla baloney.

    Garfield
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    Actually Krejci was the man of the playoffs, followed by Bergeron and Marchand, then Horton, if memory serves correct?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history



    Nice statistical excercise, but it really doesn't equate to anything meaningful whatsoever.  Team dynamic equals overall success.  The B's could easily have 3 times more 30 goal scorers this year vs last.  In the big picture, it means nothing.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    Yeah, for me the most interesting thing is that the two teams that won the cup without a 30 goal guy are the only multi-time champions from then until now. Let your brain stew on that for a while.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    If I had the secret formula for a Stanley Cup winner, with all due respect, I would not be posting on this forum. 

    I think it is safe to say that scoring depth from multiple lines is essential in a great playoff as is outstanding goaltending, a shut down d-man (or pairing), and getting some bounces.  The Bruins throughout the 80s and 90s had that 30+ scorer (Neely, Middleton, Pederson) but hardly any secondary scoring and it cost them as teams were able to key in and shut down one guy/line as we did to the Sedin Sisters last year.

    Statistically speaking, judging from past winners of the Cup, a 30+ goal scorer does seem essential as part of that balance.  Teams without 30+ goal scorers probably struggle to even make the playoffs. Why not shoot for having both a 30+ scorer and secondary scoring?..and create a dynasty.  Names that come to mind behind those dynasties include Gretzgy, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Bossy.   To expect us to squeak through 3 game 7s again with the same formula is highly improbable---that is not just statistical exercise.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    If, if, if, big if...Nash ever plays in Boston under Claude Julien, he can forget reaching 40 goals in any season ever again. He won't get the ice time to do it.

    Let's move on from Nash. He ain't coming here and I, personally, don't want him here.

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

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    The only thing essential to winning the Stanley Cup is scoring more than your opponent. I said this last year to those who said the Bruins HAD to have a better power play to win in the playoffs. No, you don't.  It doesn't matter how you do it, it's what you do.

    The Bruins, despite their recent struggles, are still the league's highest scoring team. Where they have failed is in defense, where their normally air-tight coverage has fallen apart. Get that back on track and the wins will come.

    For the record, I love 30 goal scorers, but I don't like expensive ones in a cap system.  We have several in Lucic, Horton, (proven) Seguin and Marchand (potentially and likely this year) none of whom take up more than 4 million in cap space.  We don't need to add a fifth who has twice that cap hit. The money could be much better spent, especially since it would require giving up a 30 goal (or similar talent) scorer to get the 30 goal scorer. You're not coming out ahead there.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    In Response to Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history:
    [QUOTE]If I had the secret formula for a Stanley Cup winner, with all due respect, I would not be posting on this forum.  I think it is safe to say that scoring depth from multiple lines is essential in a great playoff as is outstanding goaltending, a shut down d-man (or pairing), and getting some bounces.  The Bruins throughout the 80s and 90s had that 30+ scorer (Neely, Middleton, Pederson) but hardly any secondary scoring and it cost them as teams were able to key in and shut down one guy/line as we did to the Sedin Sisters last year. Statistically speaking, judging from past winners of the Cup, a 30+ goal scorer does seem essential as part of that balance.  Teams without 30+ goal scorers probably struggle to even make the playoffs. Why not shoot for having both a 30+ scorer and secondary scoring?..and create a dynastyNames that come to mind behind those dynasties include Gretzgy, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Bossy.   To expect us to squeak through 3 game 7s again with the same formula is highly improbable---that is not just statistical exercise.
    Posted by lucdufour[/QUOTE]


    That's exactly the current DNA of the Boston Bruins.  Everybody shoots for a Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman and company.  Problem is...only one of em comes along per generation, and you have to really suck, to get a crack at em.   Perrenial playoff teams don't get the #1 pick in the draft.

    Your right, winning 3 game 7's in a row, is a "lock"...not to happen.  But so is beating Philly 4 straight, and going 6-0 on a west coast road trip.  In fact repeating with any combination of players is pretty much pie-in-the-sky.

    If your point is how nice it would be to have another 30 goal guy, I'm with you, but it's hard to get that going into the playoffs without subtraction.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

      B's are tied with Detroit in scoring, behind Vancouver and Philly
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    "Problem is...only one of em comes along per generation, and you have to really suck, to get a crack at em.   Perrenial playoff teams don't get the #1 pick in the draft."

    Columbus is one of those suck teams you mention.  For the record, I'm pretty sure I don't want Nash either given his price tag.  Based off of Stanley Cup history,  I just hope that the B's do not become complacent in their strategy in that a bunch of 15 to 30 goal guys is good enough (even though it worked last year).  I think the B's have the best secondary (distribution) scoring team in the league (despite recent results) and that's why they are still up there in scoring.  It's just nice to have that ace in the hole as well a la Gaborik, Kovalchuk, Stamkos,etc...   
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    In Response to Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history:
    [QUOTE]Actually Krejci was the man of the playoffs, followed by Bergeron and Marchand, then Horton, if memory serves correct?
    Posted by lambda13[/QUOTE]
    DK may have had the most points but he was far from "the man" in the playoffs for Boston. Chara, Seidenberg, Bergeron and Marchand were all more important to Boston winning it all. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history


    In terms of salary only, you could get Suter and Ruutu for the same salary as Nash.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    I haven't had too much to say about the whole Nash thing, but I'll make this one comment:

    In my opinion, it's not just about goals, and how many Nash would bring to your team.  I think GMs worry a lot about the chemistry of their team, because I would think it's pretty tough for a team without a good feeling in the room to go deep into the playoffs.

    Clearly, the Bruins had good team chemistry last season.  Is it the same this year?  Recchi was probably a tremendous stabilizing force throughout the season and into the playoffs.  Is Thomas a destabilizing force this year?  Is there someone to 'right the ship'  when things start to go awry?  Will bringing in a big-ticket item like Nash help or hurt the situation?

    Nash has been on a losing team for so many years, how has that affected his outlook on the game?  What's 'the room' like in Columbus? Especially now that Nash has been put on the market?  Are his teammates saying "What do you care? You'll be shipped off to a Cup contender any day now".  Can Nash "flip the switch", and change his attitude when he's moved to a contender? (he did so in the Olympics, but perhaps that's a unique situation).

    The other thing with Nash is his cap hit.  At $7.8m, he would be, by a fair distance, the highest paid player on the Bs (assuming he's traded here).  How will that affect Chara and Thomas?  Will they hold out next season for new contracts to proper reflect their value to the team?  Clearly, you don't trade away the type of assets you'll need to move to get Nash, and use him as a rental only -- you'd be thinking of keeping him for the long-term (unless you win a Cup, and can then flip him for new assets).  Can you completely upset the existing salary structure of your team to get Nash?

    Because of these questions, I'm in the camp that thinks that Nash won't be moved by the deadline.  More likely that something will happen pre-draft.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    Bruins are tops in goals per game. In response to "Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history": [QUOTE]  B's are tied with Detroit in scoring, behind Vancouver and Philly Posted by stevegm[/QUOTE]
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    I'll give you that Dez, but he was still the leading scorer! It was the Philadelphia and Tamp series that did it for Krejci IIRC.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from orr4neely8. Show orr4neely8's posts

    Re: Interesting re: Nash--Bruins scoring history

    Why go after Nash when we have Lucic and Horton, all three players have similar hockey skills. We need a vet player that can score important goals and a consistent d man.
     

Share