Boston Bruins All Bruins Trade/Free Agent Rumours/Suggestions 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.

SAVEBYTHOMAS

Registered User
Sep 28, 2006
967
139
boston
The past three years we have penciled in Pastnak, Carlo, McAvoy, DeBrusk and Heinen and that's worked out pretty well.

True

Guess I’m not used to the success with all our prospects lately. I tend to err on the side of caution.

Or too much pessimism.

First round playoff exit then a second round exit, definite progress.

Still concerned with our division going forward as the team currently stands...
 

Sheppy

Registered User
Nov 23, 2011
56,392
58,701
The Arctic
Tavares to Tor, looking like EK to TB.

At least the Bruins got Nordstrom
My biggest fear isn't really what Boston does, it's the fact that other teams, historically do significant moves to get significantly better. I don't think the Bruins did that.

I don't think the Bruins got worse, but yeah, definitely not better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gonzothe7thDman

BiggioRainesHOF

Registered User
May 19, 2017
522
163
I don’t know why you think those are two different things. A productive player is an impact player by definition. If you produce, you’re making an impact. Period.

Ryan Spooner was a productive player. So what you're saying is that he's an impact player by definition?
 

EverettMike

FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
Mar 7, 2009
44,468
31,483
Everett, MA
twitter.com
I didn’t know there was a minimum number of games needed to be played to be impactful.

I genuinely don't know if you're being intentionally obtuse or not.

You're pointing to 12 game and saying he is definitely an impact player. Well 5 of those games came in the Tampa series where like everyone else he was ineffective, so it's really 7 games. In those 7 games was he an impact player? Yes, he was, the sheer volume of his production makes that true, let alone how timely some of his goals were in big moments.

Seven games does not clearly define anyone as an impact player. It does not guarantee he will be an impact player. You're treating this tiny sample as definitive proof of your argument, all while ignoring he was also remarkably lucky to be so productive on his shots, at a rate not even Wayne Gretzky himself could sustain. If he had scored at his normal 10% you would not be saying he is an impact player. If you see a .220 hitter bat .400 for a week do you think he is the next Ted Williams? If you see a .330 hitter bat .500 for a week do you think he is Babe Ruth reborn?

Maybe he will be an impact player. I'm not saying he won't be. The point is it remains to be seen, no matter how much you insist we already know this because of what he did in one playoff series.
 

Mainehockey33

Powerplay Specialist
Jul 15, 2011
10,225
7,764
Maine
The definition of impact.

To have a strong effect on someone or something.

Weird, it doesn’t say anything about shooting percentage and sample sizes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad