Former Bruins EX Bruins Discussion Thread Part II All Talk Here..

[Mr. Make-Believe]

They will move on to whining that Sweeney traded for Jimmy Hayes and didn't draft Konecny

It's a shame Carlo wasn't one of the three picks they acquired so we could close this as a Sweeney win anc open up a 48 hour sticky thread where those who thought Sweeney got schooled could post apologies and admit they were wrrrrrong.

It was picks, dude. It's always been picks. Who they selected with the picks is irrelevant.

The Bruins didn't trade Jamie Benn for Adam McQuaid.

 

[Mpasta]

I'd still have hope if I were them,I think people pull plugs on things too quickly,except here in the case of Hayes.

I think everybody agrees that we've seen the best of Lucic. I just think he's going to fall fast but I'll give it more time to see if I'm right.

They will move on to whining that Sweeney traded for Jimmy Hayes and didn't draft Konecny

It's a shame Carlo wasn't one of the three picks they acquired so we could close this as a Sweeney win anc open up a 48 hour sticky thread where those who thought Sweeney got schooled could post apologies and admit they were wrrrrrong.

The problem with the Lucic trade is you have to take Jones and convert to a prospect & a first and when your brain cells are swollen from screaming Rinaldo!!! It's a bit to much

I give them a mulligan - it's advanced GMing

I know this isn't directed at me but I was glad we got rid of Smith but I wasn't happy we got Hayes. I was happy we got Rinaldo but I wasn't happy we gave up a 3rd. I complain a lot about moves or lack thereof but those 2 trades were so insignificant at the time that I can't complain about it now.

 

[toasterjam]

I will say..so far this season, as much as I liked Loui, I haven't thought once while watching a game "man I really wish Loui was still a bruin" or "wow this team is really missing Loui!"

I really thought I'd miss him more.

Now as for Lucic...I still have moments while watching a game where I wish we still had Lucic (in his prime of course, not present day Lucic). Like when a game gets chippy or other team is running our guys or bruins need an energizing big hit.

I have liked Backes so far...sure points totals n stuff don't 'wow' you but I think as they get going, lines start to gel more, they will come. Also love the physical game he brings too and still seems like the compete level is there.

Overall happy we moved on from Loui and don't miss him as much as I thought I would.

and still miss vintage Lucic


Don't miss Dougie at all...barley handling 15-17 minutes a night.

AND KempWatch update

Joonas is taking the KHL by storm, in 31 games he has 8 goals 5 assists, 13 points. -2

People are all sitting around complaining about moves Don got wrong...nobody is talking about his biggest blunder...losing Kemppainen to free agency where he is now slowly (very slowly) taking over hockey in Russia!!


#KempWatchNeverDies

 

[DKH]

It was picks, dude. It's always been picks. Who they selected with the picks is irrelevant.

The Bruins didn't trade Jamie Benn for Adam McQuaid.

I know that dude. I'm not the one whining

 

[Gee Wally]

The problem with the Lucic trade is you have to take Jones and convert to a prospect & a first and when your brain cells are swollen from screaming Rinaldo!!! It's a bit to much

I give them a mulligan - it's advanced GMing

Well right now some of the Oiler fan base are turning on him. As we saw here from time to time hes disappeared.

 

[Era of Sanity]

Well right now some of the Oiler fan base are turning on him. As we saw here from time to time hes disappeared.

Yup, I live in Edmonton and they have been underwhelmed with Looch. Their expectations of Lucic were a few years out of date, they had it in their head that they were getting the Lucic that played hard and was physically imposing every night, the guy that was every Bruins fans favorite when he came into the league. He hasn't been very physically engaged, turning pucks over with bad passes as usual, lots of soft plays, not producing a lot. Patrick Maroon is probably outplaying him and for a quarter of the price, could be a long 7 year deal.

 

[Pia8988]

Lucic is already off McDavid's wing last time I watched being replaced by Maroon. Lucic has been on his wing for 138:01/281:32 5 on 5 and Maroon is up to 109:48/281:32

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I simply believe that Eriksson is the better player,and I think statistically year by year he has mostly produced more. I'm not backing down just because statistically,he's off to a bad start in what might be a bad situation. If Backes gets 31 goals then he's the better fit with the Bruins,but right now he's Krejci's winger and an occasional center,5th in faceoffs taken. He's a better fit because of leadership? Style? Faceoffs? Just produce,and right now he's on pace for 49 points,exactly where I think he'll be and what I thought he'd do. I also think that Loui would have equalled or surpassed his 60 points of last year with another year of a 70 game healthy Krejci versus 50 of last year. I did think Loui would be a 70 point player again with the Sedins but their fans are saying those 2 ain't what they used to be and now they are looking for fits.

The bias is indeed strong.

Loui has been tried with the Sedins and without. Eriksson being horrible this year isn't about anyone other than him having a horrible year. The fact that this is what you have taken out of the Canucks thread is

 

[DKH]

Lucic is already off McDavid's wing last time I watched being replaced by Maroon. Lucic has been on his wing for 138:01/281:32 5 on 5 and Maroon is up to 109:48/281:32

I'm putting up my Christmas candles in a week and will name two after Loui & Dougie in hopes better things in 2017. Maybe the hockey Angel will help guide Dougie to be better positioned and Loui next time shoots on own net will hit the post and stay out

 

[BNHL]

The bias is indeed strong.

Loui has been tried with the Sedins and without. Eriksson being horrible this year isn't about anyone other than him having a horrible year. The fact that this is what you have taken out of the Canucks thread is

Yes,I know there is not one true Canucks fan saying that the Sedins are not what they were in that thread. Hopefully,you've noticed by now that Loui's best years were with Primetime Richards,Ribeiro and then a mostly healthy Krejci and when the other centers were inferior,his production suffered. So putting him with Granlund and Sutter,you will predetermine the production. Right now Henrik and Daniel are on pace for 54 and 55 points,much lower than their career averages of near 70 and in line with a normal age 32-36 decline.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Yes,I know there is not one true Canucks fan saying that the Sedins are not what they were in that thread. Hopefully,you've noticed by now that Loui's best years were with Primetime Richards,Ribeiro and then a mostly healthy Krejci and when the other centers were inferior,his production suffered. So putting him with Granlund and Sutter,you will predetermine the production. Right now Henrik and Daniel are on pace for 54 and 55 points,much lower than their career averages of near 70 and in line with a normal age 32-36 decline.

What is your thing with Loui? The fact is HE is getting older as well, and he's looked like dog **** in all but two or three games this year. I have watched about half of Nucks games. Doesn't matter what situation he's in. He has sucked. Period. The fact that you cannot help but redirect his failing to others around him is ridiculous. The guy just earned a contract that pays him 6 million over the next 6 years. He is expected to provide at least a little offense for himself. From what I can see, the guy looks out of shape and I'm not sure he's giving his all.

He's been tried on multiple lines in Vancouver. Nothing is working for him. Is Vancouver's offense overall underwhelming? Absolutely. Is anyone more of a disappointment than Eriksson? Nope. And that's the way it is. As I have stated (and as seems to be playing out), the guy has been hovering on the threshold for acceptable skating speed in today's NHL the last couple years. He couldn't fall much further and it really looks like he's starting to slip below that level.

Is Vancouver an ideal situation for him? Definitely not. He COULD be performing better on a team with more talent. But, guess what? I watch the games. His individual contributions are WAY below where they need to be for a player in the NHL, much less a player of his caliber. If your mission is to deflect blame and defend Loui until the bitter end, go ahead. But, I am calling it like I see it. The guy is not working out AT ALL in Vancouver, and I continue to be happy that we didn't resign him. If you're looking to go to that next level (like the Bruins), you want players who can ELEVATE their games when things are on the line. I've never seen that from Loui. David Backes? Seen it multiple times with St. Louis.

Backes over Loui (at this point in their career's) any day for me.

 

[BNHL]

What is your thing with Loui? The fact is HE is getting older as well, and he's looked like dog **** in all but two or three games this year. I have watched about half of Nucks games. Doesn't matter what situation he's in. He has sucked. Period. The fact that you cannot help but redirect his failing to others around him is ridiculous. The guy just earned a contract that pays him 6 million over the next 6 years. He is expected to provide at least a little offense for himself. From what I can see, the guy looks out of shape and I'm not sure he's giving his all.

He's been tried on multiple lines in Vancouver. Nothing is working for him. Is Vancouver's offense overall underwhelming? Absolutely. Is anyone more of a disappointment than Eriksson? Nope. And that's the way it is. As I have stated (and as seems to be playing out), the guy has been hovering on the threshold for acceptable skating speed in today's NHL the last couple years. He couldn't fall much further and it really looks like he's starting to slip below that level.

Is Vancouver an ideal situation for him? Definitely not. He COULD be performing better on a team with more talent. But, guess what? I watch the games. His individual contributions are WAY below where they need to be for a player in the NHL, much less a player of his caliber. If your mission is to deflect blame and defend Loui until the bitter end, go ahead. But, I am calling it like I see it. The guy is not working out AT ALL in Vancouver, and I continue to be happy that we didn't resign him. If you're looking to go to that next level (like the Bruins), you want players who can ELEVATE their games when things are on the line. I've never seen that from Loui. David Backes? Seen it multiple times with St. Louis.

Backes over Loui (at this point in their career's) any day for me.

So what have we learned about Loui's career? It seems nothing. When he has scored 70 points,his centers scored 63-91 points. When he scored 60,his centers scored 60+ points. What else did we learn? Oh yeah,he seemed to take a long time to adjust to a new team. So that's what we know. What else do we know about Vancouver? Let's see,they no longer have any center capable of 60-90 points. In fact,the best center is producing at about 50% of his peak. You are the one that was pushing Loui as a complementary player,so if the primary player is half of what he is,what would you get out of the complementary player? OK,put him with someone who is a also a 30-50 point player,even though Loui's production has always been best with 60-90 point players and what do you think the result will be? In Loui's career he has 31 GWG and 9 OT goals,Backes has 26 and 2. Loui certainly is not producing like I thought he would but his history might reveal why. Backes has been a good addition,but has not been a difference maker at all,and I think the Bruins would have been better off lining up Loui next to Krejci once again. You can hope that Loui sucks,and right now I can't argue,only look to why a 30 goal year down to a 13 goal pace in a few months,I think I know why based on his history. I also think that Backes gets 40-50 points,which does not make up the 60 lost,faceoffs and hitting all included.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

So what have we learned about Loui's career? It seems nothing. When he has scored 70 points,his centers scored 63-91 points. When he scored 60,his centers scored 60+ points. What else did we learn? Oh yeah,he seemed to take a long time to adjust to a new team. So that's what we know. What else do we know about Vancouver? Let's see,they no longer have any center capable of 60-90 points. In fact,the best center is producing at about 50% of his peak. You are the one that was pushing Loui as a complementary player,so if the primary player is half of what he is,what would you get out of the complementary player? OK,put him with someone who is a also a 30-50 point player,even though Loui's production has always been best with 60-90 point players and what do you think the result will be? In Loui's career he has 31 GWG and 9 OT goals,Backes has 26 and 2. Loui certainly is not producing like I thought he would but his history might reveal why. Backes has been a good addition,but has not been a difference maker at all,and I think the Bruins would have been better off lining up Loui next to Krejci once again. You can hope that Loui sucks,and right now I can't argue,only look to why a 30 goal year down to a 13 goal pace in a few months,I think I know why based on his history. I also think that Backes gets 40-50 points,which does not make up the 60 lost,faceoffs and hitting all included.

Again, your argument is 100% statistic based. I respect it. I respect you as a knowledgeable hockey fan. But the fact is, as both being experienced fans, we see the game differently. Hockey is a game in which you MUST establish an identity to be a successful team (IMO). The Bruins have said over and over again, not that they want to be a team who outskills or outguns the other team, but that they want to be a team that is "tough to play against". I.e. a team that plays a solid system in all three zones and physically pounds their opponent. If that is the identity they are going for, having a guy like Backes is a much better option to me than Hayes.

If a team is going for a more Montreal/Pittsburgh/Chicago feel, then yes, Eriksson might be your better option. But different players fit better with teams that play different systems and different styles. I think we've both acknowledged it in different ways. To me, Loui was always a little bit of a "low energy" player. He did his job and played his game, but he seemed to struggle to take it to the next level. He stuck out to me like a sore thumb in the Winter Classic game last season (in which almost the entire team sucked). You get a fairly consistent effort, but it's far from gamebreaker type stuff. Even though David Backes is going to get you less points, he has shown time and time again he has another gear and shows up on the scoreboard and physically at the most important times. Loui definitely wasn't going to provide the latter and has yet to prove to me at any point he has that playoff gear. You need players like that if you're going to win anything post-April.

Committing to Loui long term well into his 30's would have been the wrong move IMO and I am glad it didn't happen. I think we've exhausted the conversation at this point and we're not getting anywhere so much respect, agree to disagree.

edit: Just as an add-on...to further point out our differences in how we view the game: I was a vocal supporter (have been a vocal critic for much of this season) for Matt Beleskey. Why? I thought the guy worked his ass off and provided a lot of energy and assets that we're recognized statistically. Some people get hung up on points and the money he's making. To me, Beleskey was A-OK last year. Little bit of a different story this year, but I am guessing you would not have been nearly as big of a fan of his game last season based on how you view the game. Now...I draw a line. As did most other people, I was 99.9% sure the David Clarkson contract in Toronto would be an unmitigated disaster and it was. You can't pay a guy solely for "intangibles" and one good season. But, there are portions of this game outside goals and assits that are underappreciated in this game. Hockey is one of the few sports where you can win the ultimate prize without superstar players, and a big part of it is because of the contributions and cohesiveness of a team's players from the first to fourth line. The Bruins won in 2011 (in my view) because of players who TOOK IT TO ANOTHER GEAR and because of the identity of their team. Even if the players taking it to another gear are not first line players (like Backes), the difference they make come late in the season/playoffs cannot be undersold.

 

[BNHL]

Again, your argument is 100% statistic based. I respect it. I respect you as a knowledgeable hockey fan. But the fact is, as both being experienced fans, we see the game differently. Hockey is a game in which you MUST establish an identity to be a successful team (IMO). The Bruins have said over and over again, not that they want to be a team who outskills or outguns the other team, but that they want to be a team that is "tough to play against". I.e. a team that plays a solid system in all three zones and physically pounds their opponent. If that is the identity they are going for, having a guy like Backes is a much better option to me than Hayes.

If a team is going for a more Montreal/Pittsburgh/Chicago feel, then yes, Eriksson might be your better option. But different players fit better with teams that play different systems and different styles. I think we've both acknowledged it in different ways. To me, Loui was always a little bit of a "low energy" player. He did his job and played his game, but he seemed to struggle to take it to the next level. He stuck out to me like a sore thumb in the Winter Classic game last season (in which almost the entire team sucked). You get a fairly consistent effort, but it's far from gamebreaker type stuff. Even though David Backes is going to get you less points, he has shown time and time again he has another gear and shows up on the scoreboard and physically at the most important times. Loui definitely wasn't going to provide the latter and has yet to prove to me at any point he has that playoff gear. You need players like that if you're going to win anything post-April.

Committing to Loui long term well into his 30's would have been the wrong move IMO and I am glad it didn't happen. I think we've exhausted the conversation at this point and we're not getting anywhere so much respect, agree to disagree.

edit: Just as an add-on...to further point out our differences in how we view the game: I was a vocal supporter (have been a vocal critic for much of this season) for Matt Beleskey. Why? I thought the guy worked his ass off and provided a lot of energy and assets that we're recognized statistically. Some people get hung up on points and the money he's making. To me, Beleskey was A-OK last year. Little bit of a different story this year, but I am guessing you would not have been nearly as big of a fan of his game last season based on how you view the game. Now...I draw a line. As did most other people, I was 99.9% sure the David Clarkson contract in Toronto would be an unmitigated disaster and it was. You can't pay a guy solely for "intangibles" and one good season. But, there are portions of this game outside goals and assits that are underappreciated in this game. Hockey is one of the few sports where you can win the ultimate prize without superstar players, and a big part of it is because of the contributions and cohesiveness of a team's players from the first to fourth line. The Bruins won in 2011 (in my view) because of players who TOOK IT TO ANOTHER GEAR and because of the identity of their team. Even if the players taking it to another gear are not first line players (like Backes), the difference they make come late in the season/playoffs cannot be undersold.

I was a big fan of tough hockey and tough players. My favorite players were the O'Reillys,Clarks,Tocchets etc. Now,you got Jimmy Hayes taking penalties for a little shot to Parise's face after he did the same thing to Chara. The physical game is fun but I question its effectivity in wins in today's game, so all I care about is production. The more production,the less I care about the intangibles. I simply want to win,and I don't want to give up stats for intangibles, Beleskey reminds me of Trent McCreary,a whole lot of noise amounting to a whole lot of nothing. Loui to me was a player who rarely made a mistake,cerebral and effective in all 3 zones,and finally regained his production. Now the Bruins are lacking production,so we'll see. BTW.I've been a longtime fan of Backes,I just think he's a little less of a factor in wins than the guy he's straight up replacing at this time.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I was a big fan of tough hockey and tough players. My favorite players were the O'Reillys,Clarks,Tocchets etc. Now,you got Jimmy Hayes taking penalties for a little shot to Parise's face after he did the same thing to Chara. The physical game is fun but I question its effectivity in wins in today's game, so all I care about is production. The more production,the less I care about the intangibles. I simply want to win,and I don't want to give up stats for intangibles, Beleskey reminds me of Trent McCreary,a whole lot of noise amounting to a whole lot of nothing. Loui to me was a player who rarely made a mistake,cerebral and effective in all 3 zones,and finally regained his production. Now the Bruins are lacking production,so we'll see. BTW.I've been a longtime fan of Backes,I just think he's a little less of a factor in wins than the guy he's straight up replacing at this time.

Alright, I disagree.

I guess we'll ultimately see (though there's countless other factors at play as well) when they finish out the year.

 

[BNHL]

Alright, I disagree.

I guess we'll ultimately see (though there's countless other factors at play as well) when they finish out the year.

My prediction of Loui getting 35/35 in Vancouver was obviously wrong. What he would have done here we'll never know. Hopefully the Bruins can pick up the goal scoring,but they are a mediocre +2 and a mediocre + 10 last year so.....

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

My prediction of Loui getting 35/35 in Vancouver was obviously wrong. What he would have done here we'll never know. Hopefully the Bruins can pick up the goal scoring,but they are a mediocre +2 and a mediocre + 10 last year so.....

I think on the surface, the "swap" isn't going to make much of statistical difference. It's when and if they make the playoffs and what I see there that will be revealing one way or the other. Perhaps Backes doesn't have another great playoff run in him (I believe he does), but from Loui's one year in the playoffs with the Bruins, and his performances down the stretch (not saying he's the only one), I'm still waiting to see that even once from him. Vancouver for this season (and the foreseeable future) probably isn't the best opportunity to prove that "next gear", but he's had some chances before and has never shown it.

 

[Pia8988]

I think on the surface, the "swap" isn't going to make much of statistical difference. It's when and if they make the playoffs and what I see there that will be revealing one way or the other. Perhaps Backes doesn't have another great playoff run in him (I believe he does), but from Loui's one year in the playoffs with the Bruins, and his performances down the stretch (not saying he's the only one), I'm still waiting to see that even once from him. Vancouver for this season (and the foreseeable future) probably isn't the best opportunity to prove that "next gear", but he's had some chances before and has never shown it.

Loui went 7-8-15 in his final 19 games for the Bruins.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Loui went 7-8-15 in his final 19 games for the Bruins.

That's cool.

 

[Pia8988]

That's cool.

Thanks for admitting you were wrong on that statement

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Thanks for admitting you were wrong on that statement

No, Loui's slightly under PPG run was not memorable to me as we once crashed and burned last year. Admitted. Really don't see this as proving me wrong on much of anything, but thanks.

 

[Pia8988]

No, Loui's slightly under PPG run was not memorable to me as we once crashed and burned last year. Admitted. Really don't see this as proving me wrong on much of anything, but thanks.

I see, if only Loui would have scored more points like Brad, Patrice, Krejci, Spooner, Krug, Beleskey, or Hayes. Oh wait, he out produced all those players down the stretch. If only he was PPG though, then maybe that would have been a good performance.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I see, if only Loui would have scored more points like Brad, Patrice, Krejci, Spooner, Krug, Beleskey, or Hayes. Oh wait, he out produced all those players down the stretch. If only he was PPG though, then maybe that would have been a good performance.

Honestly...why did you slide Hayes' name into that point?

Good for Loui. He's still not my type of player. That's great he put up 15 points in the final 18 games. The Bruins were not playing anything near the type of hockey we all wanted to see the latter half of last season, especially the last month. I'm glad Loui was performing well statistically during that time, but it obviously wasn't enough and was not noticeable in the slightest.

My point is...your players and the way they play defines your team, how it plays, and how successful you are. Loui Eriksson, despite the fact that he can put up good stats (I've said it over and over again) is not my type of player. He'll pick up his points but he is not a Bergeron to me. He's not a Marchand. He's not a Krejci (at his best). Don't even think he's David Backes. I haven't noticed the second gear. I did not see him be a huge difference maker for the team. With all the intangibles, I trust that David Backes, with where this team currently stands, can be a better asset than Loui Eriksson. That's based on what I know about Backes as a player and what I've seen him do.

I truly do apologize that not everyone agrees with me on this and not everyone sees it the way I do, but it is how I feel on the topic. I am pretty much done discussing it.

 

[DKH]

Dougie Hamilton with 3 assists- maybe the trade rumors have flipped the switch

I still expect 15G/40A second pair at some point - to much skill to be given up on 100 games into by Flames. The defensive side is never going to be a strong suit but he should be adequate with that size reach and skating

 

[HiyaGeorgii]

Hamilton is a plus 5 the past two games as well. playing well.