News Article: “Why Did Bruins Fans Dislike Danton Heinen So Much?”

[sarge88]

Easiest way for you to begin to appreciate draft position, how many other players taken his round would get you Nick Ritchie today?

If you draft a quarter and it becomes a dollar ... I don't understand how you can't care about that?

Edit: And that's knowing most quarters drafted become worthless.

I don't care where a guy was drafted because it has no bearing on his on ice play. If the coaches put a guy on line 2, I expect him to produce like a 2nd liner -- regardless of where he was drafted. I don't expect a 2nd liner drafted in round 1 to score 30 and a 2nd liner drafted in round 8 to score 20.

 

[sarge88]

what about the same crowd being down on a first rounder who hasn`t yet or didn`t become what we think they should have?

When Heinen was picked years ago, nobody here outside of "maybe" a few had even heard of the kid and I`ll wager was on nobodies radar to really pay much attention to and why? Because he`s a 4th rounder. Scouts don`t solely earn their money on what they identify as a good 1st round pick, it`s when they are in the thick of mid level to later rounds, Bjork/Heinen kind of picks.

Ritchie was a top 10 pick by the Ducks, wonder if Duck fans are super pumped at how he developed prior to being traded? An argument can be made that this being his 6th year in the league, one could understand a fans frustration knowing their 10th pick in the first round hasn`t exceeded 14 goals

Do I lose sleep over which picks did or didn`t make it? Nope, I`m part of the pro Heinen crowd but also believe I was one of those who recognized without argument that he needed to contribute more offensively which he simply stopped doing over the last season and a half. Now he`s getting loads of ice time in Anaheim and appears like he`s doing well, same as Ritchie here, good trade for both teams, a former 1st rounder being moved for a 4th rounder

I guess my attitude derives mostly from not watching hockey, aside from the NHL. I don't fall in love with prospects and tend to take a wait and see attitude about players until I've seen them play 100 or so games.

 

[Number8]

There are people that feel that he didn't live up to his 4th round (116th overall) pick.
Look at all these stars

View attachment 329853

Anybody who doesn't think Heinen was/is very good value for a 4th round pick is a fool. I didn't see anyone taking that approach but I don't spend any time on Twitter which someone else (Sarge?) rightfully defined as a trash pile.

I think what you see (at least here) is that a lot of Heinen "detractors" were pushing back against the sense that others were equating him to a 1st round pick talent and a steal of the century. As I said in an earlier post, after an excellent first half of his rookie season, that seemed to be at least a possibility.

In the end, I think he's an excellent 4th round pick who has offensive upside and a great feel for the defensive side of the game. So he's not Wayne Gretzky. No shame in that.

 

[Number8]

Easiest way for you to begin to appreciate draft position, how many other players taken his round would get you Nick Ritchie today?

If you draft a quarter and it becomes a dollar ... I don't understand how you can't care about that?

Edit: And that's knowing most quarters drafted become worthless.

I get what you are saying, but it's really the totality of the effort that matters.

I have a friend who loves to tell me when he wins $100 on a bet. Inevitably I ask him how he did on the rest of his bets and how is he doing overall. His answer is always "I'm probably breaking even". Now that is probably in the right ballpark as he's a pretty buttoned down guy and isn't a risk junkie.

However, if you are generally break even +/- -- then the drafting a quarter that becomes a dollar is really insignificant in the big view. Just a nice thing to be able to tell your buddy.

In my view, as a fan, where a player is drafted is irrelevant -- outside of being able to brag about Bergeron on the Main Boards!

For a GM or a scouting team it's critical for a bunch of reasons: repeating past success, avoiding sins of the past, not getting fired, etc, etc.

 

[sarge88]

Bruins are weird. No PK for Smith and then Heinen....No center for Backes and Seguin... No Jagr on Krecji's line...No MoJo on line 2 after he looked great there before his concussion...some odd things.

No pp for Bjork, but they occasionally use him on the PK...and more curiously, I don't remember him being used in OT -- 3 on 3.

 

[Smitty93]

I wonder if Heinen would be better on a team that doesn't naturally play a defensive style. Defense is his greatest strength, but I'm not sure it matters as much for the Bruins, who are strong in that area. The one problem is that his offensive style might not mesh with that run and gun style. I'd bet a team like the Leafs could really use someone like him.

 

[LouJersey]

No pp for Bjork, but they occasionally use him on the PK...and more curiously, I don't remember him being used in OT -- 3 on 3.

he will be dealt for Josh Anderson in the summer. Injury risk for injury risk.

 

[Number8]

well said friend, ironically we could say much of the same about Jake, the biggest difference between the two is that we all know Jake, at some point, goes on heaters and puts up silly numbers but my biggest issue with Jake is when his offensive game isn`t clicking, it drastically affects his attention to details in the other 2 zones on the ice yet the kid gets waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many free passes here from the Debrusk fanboy/fangirls IMO

PS as one of those Heinen fan boys I can say without hesitation, he wasn`t close to being one of our best players in the playoffs

I think this is very fair. I also think that the issue of players getting passes is a bit of human nature.

Danton is a quiet and reserved person on the ice and in interviews. No idea what he's like in person.

Debrusk on the other hand shows enthusiasm, is personable, and sometimes in interviews comes across as that friendly puppy who's ears you just can't help but scratch. I'm a father of two amazing kids in their early 20's. When I saw Debrusk give that interview with his Dad where they were joking with each other and then Jake ends it with a tap on his Dad's chest saying "love you Dad" - that guy gets a huge, massive, long lasting soft spot in my heart. Of course it resonated. Big time.

That of course has nothing to do with hockey or whether a player should get more/less ice time and opportunities. Just offering up a thought on why in some cases people react the way they do.

 

[sarge88]

he will be dealt for Josh Anderson in the summer. Injury risk for injury risk.

I'd welcome that x 1000.

 

[Number8]

I wonder if Heinen would be better on a team that doesn't naturally play a defensive style. Defense is his greatest strength, but I'm not sure it matters as much for the Bruins, who are strong in that area. The one problem is that his offensive style might not mesh with that run and gun style. I'd bet a team like the Leafs could really use someone like him.

That's a really interesting point. I think you are also right in that he'd help the Leafs immeasurably. The big problem with that though is that Dubas' head would spin into orbit.

"That new guy.... 43..... the blonde haired kid. What is he doing out there?"

"Er..... he's playing defense, sir."

"What?"

"He's backchecking sir. You know? Coming back to help out the D."

"What?"

"For the record I told him that would be a bad idea around here."

 

[Fenian24]

Another great point in there is the JDB comparison. Heinen was "soft" but DeBrusk is not perceived that way. Except in reality, Jake is pretty soft. He hardly throws hits, get pushed off pucks etc. I guess because he takes some spectacular spills out there he is rugged? Heinen went to the net front and took his lumps as often as, and probably more than, Jake does.

Part of this is the name, if you remember Louie you probably give Jake a bit of a break. Part of it is style, JDB when on his game is fast, drives the net and scores goals, in the playoffs he scores big goals. Heinen on his game was quiet and shutting guys down, was not fast, was not physically engaged where DeBrusk is in the playoffs.

JDB is a guy I want on the Bruins in May, Danton still showed the same level of emotion in mid January as he did in the Cup finals and that does effective perception. There was a reason St. Danton was more appreciated by fans of analytics. While there numbers may be similar in goals on ice etc JDB will double Heinen's goal production and more than double it in the payoffs.

And whether or not the cult likes it JDB shows emotion on the ice Heinen does not. It may not effect their advanced numbers but it effects how you look at them if you are not a fan of analytics

 

[Smitty93]

I did like Danton Heinen. A lot.

He disappointed me. Never took the step forward that he needed to to become a top six player. So I resigned to him being a third line talent.

In the end, I think it was a fit/pacing issue. Always said he looked fantastic when he was making quick, confident decisions with the puck... but we so rarely got to see that side of him. And I predicted he would succeed in the right system where his more deliberate pace would mix right with his teammates.

I think he’ll be good for the Ducks, but it was the right trade for the Bruins.

I've been thinking about the bolded and how I agree with it, but it's incredible that could happen at all. This is a player who wasn't drafted in his normal age year. You don't expect much from 4th round picks, let alone ones drafted in their Draft+1 season. Then, he had two fantastic seasons at Denver, and the projections and expectations skyrocketed. He follows that up with a great rookie season in Providence, and was almost point per game in the playoffs.

He joins the Bruins and has a better season than any of us could have imagined, considering he spent most of the season with David Backes and Riley Nash.

As fans, we had built up these expectations that were probably unrealistic. You re-draft 2014 today, and he's easily a 1st round pick. Somehow we let ourselves get to the point where we were disappointed by a player who massively outperformed what anyone could have expected when he was drafted 6 years ago, and that's unfortunate.

 

[Sheppy]

he will be dealt for Josh Anderson in the summer. Injury risk for injury risk.

Don't hate that idea.

 

[Clode]

Aside from the lack of physicality and outward passion/intensity my dislike for him was intensified by a couple of things:

1. The analytic arguments --the way that people referred to so many stats that really mean nothing to me and do nothing but make me enjoy the game less as an argument in his favor made him even more unlikable for me.

2. Similar to the above, the attempts and contortions by many to convince people that he was actually "tough" despite all the evidence to the contrary was another frustrating aspect of his tenure here.

3. The fact that so many just couldn't get themselves to admit that he was simply a JAG was also frustrating. Now, I may be different that a lot of people as I probably consider a higher % of NHL'ers than most, to be replacable, but this guy was the definition of a JAG. Third liner - minimal to moderate offensive production, good defensively, not tough, no physical game.....I just described probably 3-5 guys on every team in the league. If you add in the other 1-2 guys per team that fit the description above with a little more toughness and now we're talking 4-7 guys per team. That's what a JAG is -- a guy who could go to another team and that team doesn't get better because of them and the team they left doesn't get worse because he left.

In the end, he just bored me to death and it's not because I don't "understand the game" or "appreciate the subtleties and nuances". If that were the case Dave Poulin, David Krejci and Dave Reid wouldn't be among my 3 favorite players of all time. Dave Poulin was a defensive forward that made it exciting. Krejci is as quiet and subtle as one can be on the ice. Reid was tremendously underrated, and not physical (for that time) as almost any regular, but I appreciated his overall game.

Lastly, for me, I have no problem saying that sometimes you just don't like a guy. Certainly the reasons above played a big part, but I can't say that I was ever a big fan of his, even when he was playing well in the first part of year 1. I didn't hate him, but I didn't watch him play and feel any kind of connection or get any particular enjoyment from watching him play.

Edit/add --- I will say that I don't think he was disliked as much as GD thinks. Admittedly, I stay far away from the cesspool that is Twitter -- but I think far more fans liked him or were at worst neutral to him than disliked him.

Hit the nail on the head.

 

[rocketdan9]

Ultimately Bruins not having enough "finishers" , caused too much spotlight on Heinen, who at best is a support player

IF Cassidy went with Heinen Coyle Pasta

I bet Heinen would of had a better season (confidence and statwise)

But again because the spotlight was on him to produce, he was probably thinking a little too much out on the ice.

Heinen and Krejci never worked. And there was some good moments when paired with Bergeron and Pasta or Marchand.

Looked good with Coyle last season but Mojo really helped complete that line

I hope Heinen finds his footing with the Ducks. Overall I think this was a good trade for both teams. Change of scenery could just what the doctor ordered.

 

[Smitty93]

Aside from the lack of physicality and outward passion/intensity my dislike for him was intensified by a couple of things:

1. The analytic arguments --the way that people referred to so many stats that really mean nothing to me and do nothing but make me enjoy the game less as an argument in his favor made him even more unlikable for me.

2. Similar to the above, the attempts and contortions by many to convince people that he was actually "tough" despite all the evidence to the contrary was another frustrating aspect of his tenure here.

3. The fact that so many just couldn't get themselves to admit that he was simply a JAG was also frustrating. Now, I may be different that a lot of people as I probably consider a higher % of NHL'ers than most, to be replacable, but this guy was the definition of a JAG. Third liner - minimal to moderate offensive production, good defensively, not tough, no physical game.....I just described probably 3-5 guys on every team in the league. If you add in the other 1-2 guys per team that fit the description above with a little more toughness and now we're talking 4-7 guys per team. That's what a JAG is -- a guy who could go to another team and that team doesn't get better because of them and the team they left doesn't get worse because he left.

In the end, he just bored me to death and it's not because I don't "understand the game" or "appreciate the subtleties and nuances". If that were the case Dave Poulin, David Krejci and Dave Reid wouldn't be among my 3 favorite players of all time. Dave Poulin was a defensive forward that made it exciting. Krejci is as quiet and subtle as one can be on the ice. Reid was tremendously underrated, and not physical (for that time) as almost any regular, but I appreciated his overall game.

Lastly, for me, I have no problem saying that sometimes you just don't like a guy. Certainly the reasons above played a big part, but I can't say that I was ever a big fan of his, even when he was playing well in the first part of year 1. I didn't hate him, but I didn't watch him play and feel any kind of connection or get any particular enjoyment from watching him play.

Edit/add --- I will say that I don't think he was disliked as much as GD thinks. Admittedly, I stay far away from the cesspool that is Twitter -- but I think far more fans liked him or were at worst neutral to him than disliked him.

@sarge88 You and I have had this conversation before, but one of the most interesting parts of Heinen discussion/debate is how it represents the two general "types" of hockey fans. I hate using the term new or old school because I think that puts a negative spin on it, but that's how many people seem to classify it. It's the eye test vs. analytics. It's toughness & physicality versus skill & speed. Truthfully, what it really does is pigeonhole fans into a certain viewpoint. There's this idea that you can't look at things both ways. I think analytics rounds out the evaluation of a player, but I understand there are plenty of people who don't, and I realize that it's an effort in futility to attempt to convince others to view things the same way I do.

Now, there are certain parts of your argument that I vehemently disagree with, but there's really no need to rehash them here. For Marvel fans, the Heinen debate feels like Dr. Strange and Dormammu stuck in an endless timeloop having the same conversation over and over again.

All I'll say is that I appreciate the courage of your convictions (and every other poster's) because without it, this place would be pretty boring. I'd also spend a lot more time doing my actual work, and who really wants to do that?

 

[Lobster57]

Danton Heinen, the gift that keeps on giving This should be the last hurrah for the Great Heinen Debates on the forum, though. We are just getting the last of it out of our systems before moving on to someone else

<gives Sean Kuraly the side-eye>

 

[PlayMakers]

I liked (and still like) Heinen a lot. I think most of the criticism he got here was unfair.

"Soft, doesn't win board battles..." I never agreed with those statements. In fact, I thought he was very good along the walls. He didn't push people over the way Lucic did, but he wins way more board battles than he loses using a quick stick and leverage. Soft players don't even engage in those scrums.

I think where Heinen has to take some responsibility is for leaving you wanting more in the playoffs. His two-way play was solid in the post-season but you could almost guarantee he'd miss on every meaningful shot attempt he took. He also failed to take that next step in his development, a step I fully expect him to take in Anaheim.

Maybe that last failing is on the coach. No matter how well Heinen played or how productive he was, the coach would publicly say he doesn't believe he can sustain it and would move him back down the lineup. How is anyone supposed to succeed with that kind of feedback. Now, maybe Butch didn't believe he should get top6 minutes because he didn't believe he'd score when it mattered most. I don't know, but if that was the case, then from the coach's perspective, he might as well develop lines with players he believes in.

The coach is also trying to build a style here with speedy wingers, and Heinen didn't really fit that mold, but they seem to have made an exception to that rule with Ritchie.

With regard to the trade, I think the Bruins made the deal because they didn't believe Heinen would help them in the playoffs. Even as a fan of the player, I had that feeling like he wouldn't finish his chances in the playoffs. So the Bruins viewed him as expendable. Adding Kase made him even more expendable because Kase brings similar two-way play and production, but plays with speed and on the right. The Bruins wanted to get more physical and Ritchie was the best player Heinen could return. If I were a betting man, I'd say Anaheim wins that deal.

Heinen is smart, creative and talented. If he plays with a good center and has a coach who believes in him he's going to take the next step. Ritchie? I think there are more question marks with him. Will he get to a point where his work ethic is consistent? Will the "edge" he plays with help us with strong physical play or hurt us with dumb spearing penalties? Will he find chemistry with one of our centers and produce at a 40 point pace or will that line see a boost in production when he's replaced with guys like Kuraly and Frederic? I don't know if Ritchie understands this but the leash is shorter than he thinks. There are going to be players knocking on his door down the stretch and certainly next fall. I think the chances of him getting beat out for a job next fall are as good as the chances that he takes the next step in his development.

 

[arider1990]

For me, my feelings about Heinen were more of a counterbalance to others who seemed to think his very hot beginning to his rookie season was the rule, not the exception.

I felt that in his rookie season he fell off a cliff about 50% of the way through. Not at all rare. And, because he had a strong enough start, his numbers looked very good for the full rookie season.

However, in season 2, he again played much more like the second half of year 1 -- a continuation of a fairly average 25-35 point pace. Same trend in year 3. All this despite getting time on 2nd line and powerplay. To me, the eye test did nothing but confirm this trend.

IMO his game was never anything to get overly excited about one way or the other (except during that really hot start as a rookie).

So, to the point, I never had an issue with Heinen -- but I didn't buy the argument that he was more than he is.

To me though, you can analytics the hell out of a player all you want. However, that doesn't change the fact that 30 point forwards that play defensively responsible game are a fantastic but not terribly rare commodity. If you have a team that has a need, and you have a surplus of a valuable asset (defensively responsible forwards), you make a move.

Regardless, he seems like a very nice kid, is a legit NHLér, and certainly plays a responsible 200 foot game. Really wish him the best -- there's absolutely no reason not to.

Looking at Heinen's stats he really fell off the cliff in March that season. He had 39 points in 57 games, then had 8 in his last 20. What we forget happened at that time is Bergeron getting injured followed by Riley Nash. In those first 57 games he had his most consistent line mates. Then last season he had to drag along the ghost of David Backes along with insert kid here. He didn't get a good line mate until he was moved up to play with Bergeron and Marchand. And that point has been hammered often. From February to the end of the season he had 21 points in 28 games. He has shown he can be a better player with more consistent line mates.

 

[Mainehockey33]

The question should be, why did Bruins fans waste so much time debating about Danton Heinen?

 

[Dr Hook]

The question should be, why did Bruins fans waste so much time debating about Danton Heinen?

You know, I thought about this not too long ago, and while I never dug back into the old Heinen threads to see if I remember it right, I think it all started with his lack of physicality and he being on the third line. There were a lot of other candidates for that role that certain people wanted who played a more physical game and so the Danton thrashing began, which in turn triggered the responses and it snowballed from there. I guess we should think this is a good thing, since the Bruins are good enough that a role player like Danton Heinen could generate that much controversy for want of much else to complain about. Much better than 50 pages of Rask debates, or Marchand arguments.

 

[CDJ]

Kids gonna be a useful player imo


The move was the right one to make given the present construction of the roster, doesn’t change my opinion that Heinen is a good player given time and a regeneration of his confidence. He’ll have that opportunity to blossom in a consistent role in Anaheim, I’m happy for him

 

[wintersej]

I liked him when I thought he was going to be a two way guy that used his smarts to put up 50-60 points in the top 6. I thought he was going to be Loui Eriksson in his last year in Boston. I was a keyboard warrior who defended Danton Heinen.

But, as it became clear he wasn't going to be that guy (at least now in Boston) and it became clear he was best at LW and Bjork joined the team... I just realized I didn't ENJOY watching him play as much as Bjork or the other longer term 3LW options like Frederic or Lauko.

The fact that he seemed to shoot LESS as he matured in the league and seemed to shrink when the going got tough didn't help.

 

[neelynugs]

he will be dealt for Josh Anderson in the summer. Injury risk for injury risk.

i feel like you're gonna see josh anderson for sam bennett. flames have almost no right shot forwards,
jackets are short centers. bennett has mostly played wing but calgary started using him in the middle
maybe 2 weeks ago (interesting timing). if anderson was healthy, that was my deadline guess. as for
bjork, bruins are better off keeping him. he should sign a very reasonable 2 year deal this summer
and hopefully can make some training gains without any injury issues.

and since this is a heinen thread, i always had time for him. really nice kid, worked hard, high IQ,
total longshot prospect and became a pretty good player. in the end, he didn't produce enough
the past 2 years, plays a bland game and doesn't really hit anyone, which is probably a big reason
why a lot of fans don't like him. like @wintersej , i thought he could be eriksson. maybe he still
can, but he's likely at best a really good 3rd liner.

 

[DKH]

Thinking of a Go Fund Me for Joe to get a Heinen road Ducks jersey