While good teams get better..

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

    Re: While good teams get better..

    Don't care who started the thread.  The poster claimed that no reinforcements are made by Stanley Cup winners and mentions nothing about major moves.  I'm just reading what was written and if he meant major or significant moves which is different than a reinforcement IMO, that is what he should have written.

    I would consider what Carolina and Pitt did as being major moves.  Adding an entire layer (Weight and Recchi) and (Kunitz and Guerin) of offence to your forward lines is pretty major to me.

    I'll move on as clearly we can see teams do win the cup after making deadline or in season moves.  Major, minor, reinforcements.  Call it whatever you want.

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

    Re: While good teams get better..

    This isn't true.  He has made good deadline deals, bringing in Rechi and  a 2nd rounder for prospects that never panned out was a great deadline deal.  He didn't bite during the rediculous Kovalchuck situation last year.  Hopefully he brings in a couple decent players to protect against injury this year.  That's what most champs do.  I wouldn't be surprised if he brings in someone a little extra good since we have the cap space.

    In Response to Re: While good teams get better..:
    [QUOTE]THE BRUINS ALWAYS EVALUATE , UNTIL NO ONE IS LEFT TO PICK FROM, OOOPS MISSED OUT AGAIN!
    Posted by TheRealHomer[/QUOTE]
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: While good teams get better..

    If you rank them by impact players - the Carolina deals were for veteran depth and they ended up as mid-range impact.  Pitt's acquisitions weren't more than mid, and they were complimentary pieces.  Anaheim added guys who didn't play in the playoffs.  Stuart, acquired as depth, proved to be a guy in need of the right scene - if you hit that play, super, but it's not the same as looking to acquire an impact player.  All those Devils adds were close to the end - big names but not big impact.

    Blake, yes.  Francis, Jennings, Samuelsson - yes.  Those are top end guys who went to Cup winning teams at the deadline.  That's what people are clamouring for, and that's the likelihood of success - twice.  Probably ever if you go with the "Goring was a complimentary piece" argument.

    Is there a Rob Blake or maybe an Eddie Johnson (then the Whale GM who was absolutely fleeced) out there this year?  That is, an Olympic calibre D who puts up points and bangs bodies?  If Shea Weber's available, yes.  I don't think he will be.  And the rube GM who you can repeatedly fleece (Johnson also traded Scott Young to the Pens for Rob Brown!)?  Depends.  Is Burke taking Chiarelli's phone calls?  Nevermind - he doesn't have a Ron Francis to deal.

    bridge, I get the frustration - my main point is really be careful what you wish for because if you get it, the chances are much higher that you'll be waiting another 40 years than that you'll be hoisting celebratory pints any time soon.

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

    Re: While good teams get better..

    I would call the Weight/Rechi deals minor, Rechi was considered washed up at the time, so was Weight.  But they did work out really well.  The Kunitz move was more of a player for player hockey trade for both teams, not a typical deadline dump.  It was definately significant.  The Guerin deal was a typical deadline dump that did have a major impact, as it addressed a major need for the Pens.  If the Bruins can pull off a deal like that for an old-timer that can still contribute in an area the Bruins need without much cost, it could be a good move.  But none of these moves except Kunitz were big, costly trades.

    In Response to Re: While good teams get better..:
    [QUOTE]Don't care who started the thread.  The poster claimed that no reinforcements  are made by Stanley Cup winners and mentions nothing about major moves.  I'm just reading what was written and if he meant major or significant moves which is different than a reinforcement IMO, that is what he should have written. I would consider what Carolina and Pitt did as being major moves.  Adding an entire layer (Weight and Recchi) and (Kunitz and Guerin) of offence to your forward lines is pretty major to me. I'll move on as clearly we can see teams do win the cup after making deadline or in season moves.  Major, minor, reinforcements.  Call it whatever you want.
    Posted by misterpaulo[/QUOTE]
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobbyOrrAlumni. Show BobbyOrrAlumni's posts

    Re: While good teams get better..

    In Response to Re: While good teams get better..:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: While good teams get better.. : When was the last time that a team reinforced their roster, at the deadline, and went on to win the Stanley Cup? You have to go back to the New York Islanders when they acquired Butch Goring, and that was 30 years ago. Do you have any other examples? Think hard.
    Posted by Wheatskins[/QUOTE]

    Francis to Pittsburg.


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

    Re: While good teams get better..

    In Response to Re: While good teams get better..:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: While good teams get better.. : I appreciate you speaking your mind, but all were doing is speaking our and letting you know that you are wrong. If you want a major rental, you HAVE to over pay. Always, 100%. Furthermore major rentals don't work. So if you want the Bruins to make a major move, a bad decision, and set the bruins back for a long time, tell us all about it, but you are going to get corrected
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]

    Not this time ! You're soooo wrong. Ther's at least 3 teams that have publicky stated they are in rebuilding mode and everything is for sale. The price ?

    reasable draft picks/ prospects to match the talent of the asset wanted.

    BOSTON has an abundance of draft picks and prospects ! All have great promise but we  all know , some may never play in the NHL !  So why not trade some of our potential assets for real assets that can help us today? 

    Tell me Spezza between Lucic and Horton won't help our team ?

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

    Re: While good teams get better..

    05/06:
    Recchi - 28 g, 36 assists= 64 pts in 83 games // playoffs - 16pts in 25 games
    Weight - 15 g, 42 assists = 57 pts in 70 games // playoffs - 16 pts in 23 games

    hardly washed up.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: While good teams get better..

    Most of you just want the Bruins to win. Keep in mind that whoever Peter selects, Claude must do the implementation[ yikes]. Oates, how about Phillips, give them Boychuck; Maybe Weiss[ sounds good]; Bogosian will cost BIG, is he worth it if Rammer had trouble with him?? Yandle would also cost BIG, and WHY would Phoenix on a 7 game streak do anything differently?? PC is obviously working to do something out of the ordinary.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: While good teams get better..

    In Response to Re: While good teams get better..:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: While good teams get better.. : I don't think Carolina or Pitt win without these moves.  Just an opinion.
    Posted by misterpaulo[/QUOTE]

    I agree!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: While good teams get better..

    In Response to Re: While good teams get better..:
    [QUOTE]If you rank them by impact players - the Carolina deals were for veteran depth and they ended up as mid-range impact.  Pitt's acquisitions weren't more than mid, and they were complimentary pieces.  Anaheim added guys who didn't play in the playoffs.  Stuart, acquired as depth, proved to be a guy in need of the right scene - if you hit that play, super, but it's not the same as looking to acquire an impact player.  All those Devils adds were close to the end - big names but not big impact. Blake, yes.  Francis, Jennings, Samuelsson - yes.  Those are top end guys who went to Cup winning teams at the deadline.  That's what people are clamouring for, and that's the likelihood of success - twice.  Probably ever if you go with the "Goring was a complimentary piece" argument. Is there a Rob Blake or maybe an Eddie Johnson (then the Whale GM who was absolutely fleeced) out there this year?  That is, an Olympic calibre D who puts up points and bangs bodies?  If Shea Weber's available, yes.  I don't think he will be.  And the rube GM who you can repeatedly fleece (Johnson also traded Scott Young to the Pens for Rob Brown!)?  Depends.  Is Burke taking Chiarelli's phone calls?  Nevermind - he doesn't have a Ron Francis to deal. bridge, I get the frustration - my main point is really be careful what you wish for because if you get it, the chances are much higher that you'll be waiting another 40 years than that you'll be hoisting celebratory pints any time soon.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Is it wrong to want a Cup in my lifetime?   I mean, I could see if this team wasn't close, but clearly they are, and it's offense where they need a boost.

    I'd rather take the risk and add small amounts of impact and talent to upgrade than not and pretend Chia knows better.


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share