swagger/confidence/talent

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

    swagger/confidence/talent

    I'm of the opinion this latest edition of our Bruins was a good one.  Since I don't know squat about any trade/acquisition potential leading up to the deadline, I'm not going to skewer management.  I do know, had the B's brought in Gaborik, Bruinland would have been pissed at PC's judgement.


    This is incredibly subjective territory, but I believe the Bruins have been plenty "good enough' since about 2010.


    Despite the ridiculous DK excuse, the B's gave up in 10, and got outplayed by Montreal in 11.  They looked disinterested to me against Washington in 12, and I didn't feel they played "inspired" against either Toronto or  Chicago last year.  I wasn't impressed against Detroit this year, and despite going 7 games against Montreal, thought they only played 2 decent games in that series.


    Is that a fair assessment?  More importantly, is this kind of ebb and flow the norm for the NHL's best teams?


    Lots of talk about how LA comes to play every night.  The work ethic and such.  Obviously, that's a bit overstated, as it looks like they might have taken a nite or 2 off as recently as San Jose.


    Do we hold the Bruins to an impossible standard, or are they the model of playoff inconsistentcy?

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    Good post and i agree with your Bruins assessment.  And i think its a combination of the two.  Since winning the cup the bruins have been a pretty dominant regular season team.   So heading into the playoffs we anticipate a carry over into the playoffs.  I find with the league today any team can get on a hot streak and make some noise.  Just look at what the Rangers did.   And next year they may not even make the playoffs.  I think for teams to make deep runs the stars need to line up perfectly.  This year we didnt have the following stars:

    - lucky bounces.  You saw what happened with the rangers vs LA.  They easily could have been up a few games.  For us a few lucky bounces and we knock off the Habs

    - great goaltending. We didnt get it.  He wasnt brutal, he wasnt great. He was ok.  Need a goalie to steal game.  

    - health. We didnt have it entering the playoffs...kelly seidz and mcQ would have helped.  Chara and others werent completely healthy. 

    - timely scoring.  Nope.  Didnt happen.  

    - dominant special teams.  Didnt happen. 

    - get a few calls by refs.  Definitely didnt happen.  

    I think the Bruins have a good chance again next year.   They need a roster upgrade and help for Z.  Our window is closing fast.  

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    Personally I would have loved it if PC got Gaborik. The Kings nabbed him for peanuts so the B's would not have given up anything significant either.

    Can't have too much firepower...especially since, as it turned out, many of the B's were firing blanks in the post-season anyway.

    I do think the B's have been serious contenders since 2009 and perhaps the 2010 team was the weakest of the 2009-present era. The 2013-14 Bruins were a damn good team and, if healthy, probably one of the best in a generation. But, "if ifs and buts were candy and nuts...."

     

     

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    "The Kings nabbed him for peanuts so the B's would not have given up anything significant either."

    We already had Sweethends.

     

    "Do we hold the Bruins to an impossible standard, or are they the model of playoff inconsistentcy?"

    The Bruins have a ton of talent so I think they should succeed, that creates a positive possibility in my mind. Boston should have gotten past the Canes in 2009, Philadelphia in 2010 and Montreal this year because of their talent. 

    It did not seem to me that PC learned from the 2012 or 2013 trade deadlines. Adding the right depth is how Bowman and Lombardi have beaten Chiarelli to the punch. PCs counterparts have added playoff depth and kept adding prospects at the same time. There is your consistency.

    Players on the ice have to take some blame and management have to as well. Direct correlation in the 2011 trade deadline. Do Bowman and Lombardi get lucky since 2010 ?

     

    Playoffs: Reilly Smith > Tyler Seguin

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     Adding the right depth is how Bowman and Lombardi have beaten Chiarelli to the punch. PCs counterparts have added playoff depth and kept adding prospects at the same time. There is your consistency.

    Players on the ice have to take some blame and management have to as well. Direct correlation in the 2011 trade deadline. Do Bowman and Lombardi get lucky since 2010 ?

     [/QUOTE]

    I think Bowman and Lombardi are much more aggressive and willing to take risks than PC with regard to picking up the right people at the deadline or even before. For example, Gaborik was risky in the sense that he is both expensive and has little playoff chops. I highly doubt PC ever really considered picking him up. That is why he came relatively cheap Yet Lombardi took the risk and the guy did better than ok. PC usually seems to be beaten to the punch or is very tepid in this regard. I mean how many times have we heard from him "well, we were in the running but it just didn't happen" or "the price was too steep."

    In short, Bowman and Lombardi usually seem to get their man because they are willing to take risks.

     

     

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to jmwalters' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    PC usually seems to be beaten to the punch or is very tepid in this regard. I mean how many times have we heard from him "well, we were in the running but it just didn't happen" or "the price was too steep."

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Interesting you should put it this way. In the Boston sports scene (for anyone not from around here or a fan of the other area teams) there is a widespread opinion that ALL of our local teams over-value their players/prospects (especially). I've always thought that PC was shrewd but perhaps he too falls into that category as well. I mean -here we go again- at the trade deadline PC has the rep for continuously saying "the price was too steep". We can only judge by what player X actually went for, not what was asked from the Bruins that was deemed "too steep". Interesting comment though.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Good post and i agree with your Bruins assessment.  And i think its a combination of the two.  Since winning the cup the bruins have been a pretty dominant regular season team.   So heading into the playoffs we anticipate a carry over into the playoffs.  I find with the league today any team can get on a hot streak and make some noise.  Just look at what the Rangers did.   And next year they may not even make the playoffs.  I think for teams to make deep runs the stars need to line up perfectly.  This year we didnt have the following stars:

    - lucky bounces.  You saw what happened with the rangers vs LA.  They easily could have been up a few games.  For us a few lucky bounces and we knock off the Habs

    - great goaltending. We didnt get it.  He wasnt brutal, he wasnt great. He was ok.  Need a goalie to steal game.  

    - health. We didnt have it entering the playoffs...kelly seidz and mcQ would have helped.  Chara and others werent completely healthy. 

    - timely scoring.  Nope.  Didnt happen.  

    - dominant special teams.  Didnt happen. 

    - get a few calls by refs.  Definitely didnt happen.  

    I think the Bruins have a good chance again next year.   They need a roster upgrade and help for Z.  Our window is closing fast.  

    [/QUOTE]
    I believe that is the only reason we weren't playing the Kings in the Final (though, rooting against the Rangers given the circumstances would have been awfully tough to do).  Would have been fun to watch - both teams are built very similar.  Bruins may not have won, but contrary to what teeth-Felger thinks, LA would have known they were playing a series.

    To Stevegm's point about ebb and flow, I think there is some validity to that.  Some years GM's have the pieces and cap space to make moves and other years they don't.  But what I think is even more important is the commitment to player development.  Like any good company the prototypes aren't sold until the next ones are in development.  And Chiarelli does this in a way that should make most Bruins fans comfortable.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    I would add playing with emotion to the mix.  Habs had a ton of it with their "no respect" theme.  Even if I think it is trumped up, they bought into it and used it to their advantage.  Thought the B's struggled with the emotional aspect of that series, trying to balance being disciplined and still playing their game.

    On PC, and many other teams (all sports) that win championships.  One you achieve the pinnacle, the risk is that you stop "go for it at all costs".  You have one.  Maybe this year's failure might shape how he does business moving forward, considering the window.  Still, in his defense, it's easy to say that he should have gone out and got Gaborik, but the Habs got Vanek and that had mixed results for them.  I was more frustrated that Andy MacDonald went for such a low price and he seemed like a much better fit than Mezaros.  Defense was the glaring deadline need, not necessarily scoring.

     

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    I love when people say players look disinterested or don't care.  It's the Stanley Cup playoffs.  It's their entire life's work.  You don't get to the NHL and stay there by not being interested in the playoffs.  We're not talking about loafers like Yakupov.  

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to jmwalters' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Personally I would have loved it if PC got Gaborik. The Kings nabbed him for peanuts so the B's would not have given up anything significant either.

    Can't have too much firepower...especially since, as it turned out, many of the B's were firing blanks in the post-season anyway.

    I do think the B's have been serious contenders since 2009 and perhaps the 2010 team was the weakest of the 2009-present era. The 2013-14 Bruins were a damn good team and, if healthy, probably one of the best in a generation. But, "if ifs and buts were candy and nuts...."

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

       The way I understood the situation, was that the Bruins were so tight against the cap, bringing in a player with a salary over 2M, would have forced them to trade a roster player.

    Even pro-rated, bringing in Gaborik, who was a 7.5M cap hit (that's nuts), would have forced Chiarelli to move a 5.5M contract, so Lucic or Bergeron would have had to be traded for draft picks.

    That was never going to happen.

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to BigBadnBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]


       The way I understood the situation, was that the Bruins were so tight against the cap, bringing in a player with a salary over 2M, would have forced them to trade a roster player.

    Even pro-rated, bringing in Gaborik, who was a 7.5M cap hit (that's nuts), would have forced Chiarelli to move a 5.5M contract, so Lucic or Bergeron would have had to be traded for draft picks.

    That was never going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's just not how it works.

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    Don't think the Bruins have ever used Savards money.  Not sure though.   It appears so far, even though that money is available to be spent,.....it hasn't been.  I don't think that's PC, or Cams call.

    PC's mentioned the "expensive" thing more than a few times, and I don't understand it.

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

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

    I love when people say players look disinterested or don't care.  It's the Stanley Cup playoffs.  It's their entire life's work.  You don't get to the NHL and stay there by not being interested in the playoffs.  We're not talking about loafers like Yakupov.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Id agree on al north american players.  Lots of euro care more about world tourny. No pay cheques in the playoffs.  

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    I love when people say players look disinterested or don't care.  It's the Stanley Cup playoffs.  It's their entire life's work.  You don't get to the NHL and stay there by not being interested in the playoffs.  We're not talking about loafers like Yakupov.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Id agree on al north american players.  Lots of euro care more about world tourny. No pay cheques in the playoffs.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Krejci, Chara, Rask?

    I'd say they were pretty interested in winning!

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "The Kings nabbed him for peanuts so the B's would not have given up anything significant either."

    We already had Sweethends.

     

    "Do we hold the Bruins to an impossible standard, or are they the model of playoff inconsistentcy?"

    The Bruins have a ton of talent so I think they should succeed, that creates a positive possibility in my mind. Boston should have gotten past the Canes in 2009, Philadelphia in 2010 and Montreal this year because of their talent. 

    It did not seem to me that PC learned from the 2012 or 2013 trade deadlines. Adding the right depth is how Bowman and Lombardi have beaten Chiarelli to the punch. PCs counterparts have added playoff depth and kept adding prospects at the same time. There is your consistency.

    Players on the ice have to take some blame and management have to as well. Direct correlation in the 2011 trade deadline. Do Bowman and Lombardi get lucky since 2010 ?

     

    Playoffs: Reilly Smith > Tyler Seguin

    [/QUOTE]

    Well said.  I will add that in 2011 the irony was that the "big" pick-up, Kaberle, really contributed nothing.  I will give PC credit for Kelly and Peverley that year - whether he foresaw the impact they'd have in that run, we'll have no idea.

    Something happens in the locker room during payoff time that transcends talent.  The Bs had the talent, but not that "immeasurable" - call it focus, ice veins, whatever….LA has had it.  

    The Bs DID have it in 2011 and, yes, 2013, but sadly they were running on fumes and triage last year (although forcing a Game 7 would have been really something).

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

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

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    I love when people say players look disinterested or don't care.  It's the Stanley Cup playoffs.  It's their entire life's work.  You don't get to the NHL and stay there by not being interested in the playoffs.  We're not talking about loafers like Yakupov.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Id agree on al north american players.  Lots of euro care more about world tourny. No pay cheques in the playoffs.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Krejci, Chara, Rask?

    I'd say they were pretty interested in winning!

    [/QUOTE]

    Well i can fire names but i think you get my pt. euros dont(generalizing) play street hockey wanting the stanley cup.  They are more interesting in rep their home country.  

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    Is there any question that there's ebb and flow?  Of course there is - we talk about it all the time.  I tend to be of the opinion that you have to have it, cultivate it, and try to maximize the flow when the games matter most.  That's been the difference year to year for the Bruins; they haven't always been successful at playing their best when the games matter most.  People forget that in 2010, they were awful on offense - abysmal.  Then for 9 games, they broke out of their year-long funk and played their best offensive stretch of hockey all year - by far.  They just couldn't sustain it.  I don't agree that Montreal out-played them in 2011.  At the start of the series, yes, but the big ebb and flow game (3 or 4?) where it looked like Montreal had them and they roared back to win and eventually tie the series was like a wake-up call.  2012, low ebb offensively going into the playoffs and months of "Cup hangover" talk.  2013, an amazing run of defense and goaltending once they woke up against the Loafs.  The "flow" ended with a couple of bad bounces that burned the mojo v. Chicago - suddenly they could see themselves failing again.  Oduya doesn't hit Ference's skate, LA and the Bruin are playing tennis with the Cup.

    In terms of guys like Gaborik, I don't think it's easy for players to come in at the end of the year and play the way the Bruins ask their players to play.  It's demanding and it's about attention to detail.  We saw it with Jagr who never fit the system and really wasn't the impact player we had hoped we'd see.  I tend to think that bringing in "firepower" is always going to be no better than a 50/50 proposition as long as Julien is the coach.  More importantly, though, I agree with Burke - if you're counting on a deadline acquisition to make you a champion, you probably didn't build your team very well in the first place.  Every once in a while, a Gaborik comes along who makes an impact on a Cup winner - the Goring effect - and everyone loses their minds about deadline deals.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

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

    Re: swagger/confidence/talent

    In response to Sobchack's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well said.  I will add that in 2011 the irony was that the "big" pick-up, Kaberle, really contributed nothing.

    [/QUOTE]


    He led the B's D in layoff points, played 20ish mins a game and had a positive +/-. I'd say he contributed something....

     

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share