The negatives

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

    The negatives

    Tonight was a watershed moment, and people sense that.



    Chara is done in terms of his former presence. Instead of dominating, he rode shotgun on a 50/50 goal in Game 6 and scored one on his own keeper tonight, after several terrible plays in his own end. He's injured? Welcome to hockey. At his age, an injury is a semi-permanent demotion.


    Rask is no Tim Thomas. Or Lundquist. Or Price. Or ...
    Tuuka Rask is an above-average goaltender. Putting a lot of faith in regular-season stats means that you think Sydney Crosby is a winner. Rask has given up too many goals when he needed to step up.



    David Krejci! I remember when you played for the Bruins! Oh ... you still do?!? Oh. Um, sorry. Excuse me.



    Brad. Brad, remember when you were the "Little Ball of Hate" and no one knew when you stepped on the ice if you'd cheap shot someone, score, or take a penalty? Yeah, man! I remember that, too! Unfortunately, it's all a memory. Cuz you don't score any more, and no one puts up with your crap any more. You look like you might do well in Ottawa, though. Good luck to you.



    Mr. Bartkowski! Way to step up when those ahead of you go down. Well done. Except for the part where you don't move your feet, when the opponent's feet are indeed moving. Moving toward the puck. And taking it from you. Matt, thank you for your contributions.


    Patrice Bergeron, winner of ... the Casper the Ghost award for least significant contribution from an ostensible star. Patrice, where were you? I saw a few small plays done right, a lot of bad shots, and overall just a sense that you are not the player you once were. Hope I'm wrong.


    Milan, baby. You the heart of the Broonz! You never back down, and the skillz, oh my! You showed that Subban with the muscle flex, baby! Except the part where, from that point forward, you had no real impact and he kept moving the game forward, on the stat sheet or off. You, Milan, kept grinding (or making it look that way), missed some open nets, and essentially got completely out-thought by a bunch of sissies.



    Should I keep going?


    This team had the physical capabilities to win a Cup.  But psychologically, they were very lacking.  You can blame the coach (and he has a lot to answer for), but ultimately the players were the ones tonight who pulled up before finishing hits; who were indecisive when leadership was needed; who let the opposition bring it right to them.


    This was not a tough loss in the sense that we didn't get the bounces.  The Bruins were psychologically weaker than their opponent, and that's pretty ugly considering what sissies the opponents were/are.

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

    Re: The negatives

    Where from here?  Too many key players out at the end.  Kelly, Seidenberg .... it's not acceptable.  When your playoff hopes rise and fall on Carl Soderberg, you're in trouble. 

    Rask has done his very best to show that he is not a championship goalkeeper.  With all the money soaked into his contract, it will be very, very hard to move him.  So, the Bruins will have to hope that he "finds himself."  I predict 2 more years, then a less-than-savory departure.

    Be honest - if you had one game on which all was riding,and someone said you could have any NHL goaltender play for you, Tuuka Rask would not even be in the top 6 for consideration.  He's a stat padder, the Sydney Crosby of netminders.  I'd love to see him leave, not because I don't like him, but because his results are completely unacceptable.

    Anyone feeling nasty about the above needs to think first about one thing: what kind of championship team gets LESS than the average performance from their star in a key position?  None is the right answer.  Rask is not a champion.  And won't ever be.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from LordByron77. Show LordByron77's posts

    Re: The negatives

    You ever think Montreal actually OUTPLAYED the Bruins?

    That's the way I saw it.

    IMO

    Sure some bad bounces and missed nets, that's hockey. I'm no Habs fan, but they hustled and took Boston game from them

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pauly1. Show pauly1's posts

    Re: The negatives

    Spineless effort....heart transplant needed. They played like there entitled to win.

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

    Re: The negatives

    I agree that they outplayed the B's in Games 6 and 7; my question is not only "why?" but "what can be done about it?"  I love the Bruins; I have since Gilles Gilbert ruined my adolescence (that's a joke).

    Saying Chara's done gives me no pleasure; who doesn't love the man?  Well to hell with those who don't.  I do.  But Cups aren't won with love, they are won with skill and motivation.  The Bruins were clearly less motivated in the last two games than they needed to be.  My guess (and I readily admit it's a guess) is that they had more than enough skill. 

    Should we take a spin nailing up Claude Julien?  Sure.  A coach's job is to prepare their players for the game at hand, and they were surely ill prepared.  But whether he is now "old hat" to them, or not, replacing him is going to be a tough task.  So, I look at the roster. 

    Picking on Shawn Thornton ... huh.  Didn't know he was the key to our team.  Please.

    No, it was the big name players who not only didn't dent the score sheet, but to my eyes they were sloppy and lazy the last two games.  Sloppy with the puck; not finishing hits; there were a lot of plays that looked like Wednesday night games in January, not May playoffs.  Shame on them all, for such a shoddy effort.

    I want to call them out.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from LordByron77. Show LordByron77's posts

    Re: The negatives

    I agree, Call Them Out

    As Professionals, the players should be ashamed. However, they played another team. This time of year, a better team.

    The B's dominated Game 5. DOMINATED

    Game 6, SO FLAT

    Sure the Miller/Rask Blunder happened but was so early in game, the B's had time to respond. Not good enough, seemed they continued play like "we'll get them next game" from then on

    WRONG! Montreal came into Game 7 and played their second best game of the year, when it mattered most

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pauly1. Show pauly1's posts

    Re: The negatives

    Trade lucic, his total lack off class right down to the hand shake is terrible. Thornton can go to, another classless piece of work and the latter is really hard for me to say because until this year i always liked him

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

    Re: The negatives

    In response to ABQDan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Tonight was a watershed moment, and people sense that.

     


    Chara is done in terms of his former presence. Instead of dominating, he rode shotgun on a 50/50 goal in Game 6 and scored one on his own keeper tonight, after several terrible plays in his own end. He's injured? Welcome to hockey. At his age, an injury is a semi-permanent demotion.

     

    Rask is no Tim Thomas. Or Lundquist. Or Price. Or ...
    Tuuka Rask is an above-average goaltender. Putting a lot of faith in regular-season stats means that you think Sydney Crosby is a winner. Rask has given up too many goals when he needed to step up.

     


    David Krejci! I remember when you played for the Bruins! Oh ... you still do?!? Oh. Um, sorry. Excuse me.

     


    Brad. Brad, remember when you were the "Little Ball of Hate" and no one knew when you stepped on the ice if you'd cheap shot someone, score, or take a penalty? Yeah, man! I remember that, too! Unfortunately, it's all a memory. Cuz you don't score any more, and no one puts up with your crap any more. You look like you might do well in Ottawa, though. Good luck to you.

     


    Mr. Bartkowski! Way to step up when those ahead of you go down. Well done. Except for the part where you don't move your feet, when the opponent's feet are indeed moving. Moving toward the puck. And taking it from you. Matt, thank you for your contributions.

     

    Patrice Bergeron, winner of ... the Casper the Ghost award for least significant contribution from an ostensible star. Patrice, where were you? I saw a few small plays done right, a lot of bad shots, and overall just a sense that you are not the player you once were. Hope I'm wrong.

     

    Milan, baby. You the heart of the Broonz! You never back down, and the skillz, oh my! You showed that Subban with the muscle flex, baby! Except the part where, from that point forward, you had no real impact and he kept moving the game forward, on the stat sheet or off. You, Milan, kept grinding (or making it look that way), missed some open nets, and essentially got completely out-thought by a bunch of sissies.

     


    Should I keep going?

     

    This team had the physical capabilities to win a Cup.  But psychologically, they were very lacking.  You can blame the coach (and he has a lot to answer for), but ultimately the players were the ones tonight who pulled up before finishing hits; who were indecisive when leadership was needed; who let the opposition bring it right to them.

     

    This was not a tough loss in the sense that we didn't get the bounces.  The Bruins were psychologically weaker than their opponent, and that's pretty ugly considering what sissies the opponents were/are.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The negatives

    u could not be more right.  everything u said!

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

    Re: The negatives

    In response to marco0863's comment:


    In response to pauly1's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Spineless effort....heart transplant needed. They played like there entitled to win.




    I truly DO NOT AGREE. DO NOT I REPEAT TAMPER WITH THE NUCLEUS... WE WILL NOT GET EQUAL VALUE.. WE NEED A GOODDRAFT PERIOD


    [/QUOTE]

    The nucleus of this team is overrated. It is not good enough to go to, or win a cup without a goaltender putting up historic numbers. Boston fans way overrate the talent level of Marchand and Lucic, and Chiarelli overpays them as well. To me, Daniel Paille may actually be the Bruins best left wing in terms of what you get for your money and consistency.


    The real nucleus of this team is Chara (who is aging and whose best days may be behind him), Bergeron (who had a good, but not great series), and Rask (who did not even have a good series - puck luck not withstanding a save percentage below .900 in 5 of the 7 games is simply bad).

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

    Re: The negatives

    They went a notch down from CHI and LA.   They fell back into the parity of the East.  They won't be any better or worse than the usual suspects, but that may be a good thing.   No pressure to win a Cup might just put them there.

    But, I keep thinking about how good those Blackhawks are....top to bottom.  Be amazing if they win a 3rd Cup in 5 years and back to back.

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

    Re: The negatives

    I for one have heard CJ uttering the phrase "We weren't ready to play" way too often.
    Six years ago, when the Habs bumped the Bruins in game 7 too, we were okay with the team's performance, but this year an underdog eliminated the President's trophy winners in game 7 in the Stanley Cup favorites' building. This is unacceptable.
    And please, Monsieur Julien, spare us the cr*ap about your young d being too nervous. This team has more than enough veterans who should have been leading the way - which they didn't.
    This team is good enough to win, but only if they show up for the entire game. Unfortunately, the President's trophy and all those comeback wins have given them a sense of entitlement, like "we'll get them anyway next game" - only thing is there will be no next game this season.
    If playing the Habs in a game 7 on home ice isn't a good enough reason to be extremely motivated, then I don't know what is. Is it the coach's fault? Maybe, but if you fire CJ, who would you hire - Trotz, Oates, Tortorella?
    ABQDan's analysis is spot on.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I have an impersonal trainer. We meet at the gym, we don't talk, he works out alone and I go home. (George Carlin)


    It's "Stehno", not "Z-Dayno"!

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

    Re: The negatives

    And one more thing (and I'm not a Seguin supporter, I'm merely stating a fact): the Dallas Stars, the Bruins' trade partners in the LouiE plus x for Seguin and Peverley deal, ended their season with their heads held high after being eliminated by the top team in the West, while the B's were favorites to win the cup and ended up being ousted by a supposedly inferior team. So did PC really improve the team? He said he wanted to add some grit and character - I didn't see a lot of grit or character after game 5 of this series.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I have an impersonal trainer. We meet at the gym, we don't talk, he works out alone and I go home. (George Carlin)


    It's "Stehno", not "Z-Dayno"!

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

    Re: The negatives

    I agree with Hulot - unacceptable.

    I will make the damning comment that I was uncomfortably reminded of the 2011 "Chicken and Beer" Sox by this team, and the way their non-hockey-specific BS seemed to cast a shadow on to the ice.

    1. Me-first approach?  Check (or if you prefer, failure to finish checks).  Krejci is the poster child.  "Put me down for a goal" .... really?

    2. Coach who seems uncomfortable and unable to control his players?  Check.  (NOTE: I am a huge Tito and CL fan, and just observing the reality, not blaming them per se).

    3. Self-generated distractions?  Check!  Water bottles.  Handshake lines.  Trending tweets.  Even a few (bigoted, idiotic) fans got in on this one.

    4. Choking.  No two ways around this one: Rask, Chara, Iginla, Krejci, Marchand, Bartkowski .... it's a long list!  When you show one level of play over a season or many seasons, then play worse than that across an entire series, you are choking.  Those missed empty nets in the Red Wings series don't seem so inconsequential in hindsight.  How much did a bad team environment play into this? 

    Ben Cherington cleaned house, and then we had Larry Lucchino's Last Gasp (e.g., the Bobby Valentine Mistake), and lo: a championship.

    Does Magic Johnson own a hockey team?

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

    Re: The negatives

    Adding a couple of telling quotes:

    "It's not that it's anybody's fault, we just didn't do enough to move on as a team." - Rask

    "I don’t think that we can say that we were probably playing our best hockey in this series," Chara said. "I know that the effort and the willingness wasn’t there, but we were just for whatever reason not playing probably our best hockey like we were in the season or even against Detroit."

    Way, way too comfortable.  Rask really needs to go.  Vezina finalists are .... where, again, this morning? 

    Too many accolades were handed to this team, and it gave them poor character.  That's on Neely and Chiarelli, and if they are winners they will do like Cherington and start immediately planning larger changes.  Like with the Sox, you can't dump guys at their low-value point, but I would not at all be surprised to see a 'blockbuster' trade a quarter into next season. 

    Or maybe we can put Adrian "God's will" Gonzalez in net.

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

    Re: The negatives

    Small egotistical bump here -- but no one wants to discuss the psychology of this team?


    Entitlement mentality worse than Harvard students. 

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

    Re: The negatives

    In response to ABQDan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Small egotistical bump here -- but no one wants to discuss the psychology of this team?


    Entitlement mentality worse than Harvard students. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Im not a doctor 

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

    Re: The negatives

    Go Rangers




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

    Re: The negatives

    Tonight seeing the Ducks / Kings handshake, I couldn't help but wonder if Lucic understands that his issues ... have an impact on the outcome.

    This was a watershed because the Bruins' current roster make up (physical to the point of belligerance vs. skill and speed) was revealed as insufficient.  It's fun as hell to root for when they win, but it's not winning hockey.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowboys9. Show cowboys9's posts

    Re: The negatives

    You can always go support another team...

     

Share