(Assumptions aside) Grzelcyk Vs. Clifton might surprise you.

[DiggityDog]

I can recall when the thinking was "You can't win a Cup with Tim Thomas in goal".

However, Grzelcyk has been a minus player in all four playoff seasons he's been in. Big or small, that's not a good sign.

Ha I said the same thing about Thomas, another winner take I had was after Marchand’s first stint in the NHL I said “this guys never going to amount to much”

To get it back on topic I like both Clifton and Gryz. They both bring something to the table in really opposing ways. I would be loathe to lose either one to Seattle, my money is still on Lauzon though, but Clifton’s contract has me rethinking that.

 

[bme44]

First I would like to thank Colt.45Orr for your insightful posts on this .

For me if you can sign Reilly for under 2mil leaving Gryz exposed is a no brainier.

McAvoy LD ??5milplus solid physical 2 way D

Carlo Reilly
Clifton Lauzon

workable and affordable top six , this leaves Zboril as your 7th.

I know you have to find that first pairing LD ,but they are out there . Don do your job.

This also allows you money to address the forwards in particular the bottom six.
Come trade deadline address any areas that need to be improved for a long playoff run

 

[Baddkarma]

Gryzzy is a regular season stat hero and a playoff roll of the dice. His game, like alot of D, goes to crap when a team starts the heavy fore-check.

As others in this thread have eluded to Gryzz gets you into the playoffs with really good regular season performance and that's nothing to sneeze at. He is however a 3rd pair guy in the playoffs at best when the games get real tight and physical.

Not his fault the Bs have been forced to move him up the lineup when the D falls apart due to injury or poor performance (or lack of depth due to failed draft and development).

 

[member 96824]

I like it. Get a head start on Wright and Bedard as our 1-2 punch up the middle

 

[rocketdan9]

Hopefully Seattle stays away from Clifton

 

[BruinDust]

First I would like to thank Colt.45Orr for your insightful posts on this .

For me if you can sign Reilly for under 2mil leaving Gryz exposed is a no brainier.

McAvoy LD ??5milplus solid physical 2 way D

Carlo Reilly
Clifton Lauzon

workable and affordable top six , this leaves Zboril as your 7th.

I know you have to find that first pairing LD ,but they are out there . Don do your job.

This also allows you money to address the forwards in particular the bottom six.
Come trade deadline address any areas that need to be improved for a long playoff run

I wonder what people think of Reilly vs. Gryz. Do they see a significant gap between these two players?

Your suggestion of signing Reilly to leave Gryz exposed is actually pretty good if we say the two players are fairly similar overall in terms of where they are best suited and what do they bring to the table.

Sign Reilly, let Seattle take Gryz, and now you've protected the rest of your roster and your probably no worse off if the two players are about equal.

I haven't seen that suggested around here before but it's actually a sound idea. I like it.

 

[bme44]

I wonder what people think of Reilly vs. Gryz. Do they see a significant gap between these two players?

Your suggestion of signing Reilly to leave Gryz exposed is actually pretty good if we say the two players are fairly similar overall in terms of where they are best suited and what do they bring to the table.

Sign Reilly, let Seattle take Gryz, and now you've protected the rest of your roster and your probably no worse off if the two players are about equal.

I haven't seen that suggested around here before but it's actually a sound idea. I like it.

To clarify Reilly has to be signed at significant less than Gryz is making. 1.5mill+less . Both players have strengths and weaknesses. I feel both Lauzon and Clifton have more upside than we have seen to this point. They could make a very cost effective third pairing . In a salary cap era money really matters

 

[Pia8988]

Amazing so many are saying kick Gryz to Seattle instead of the smarter option. Trading him. Boston is already on the shorter end of assets and people want him gone because they remember game 6 the most. Even then. The biggest reason they lost wasn't even close to being Gryz. It was the abomination that was Charlie Coyle and whoever graced the 3rd line. Our GM gave him a NMC to go with his long term deal though, so exposing him to Seattle isn't even an option.

 

[Lobster57]

Amazing so many are saying kick Gryz to Seattle instead of the smarter option. Trading him. Boston is already on the shorter end of assets and people want him gone because they remember game 6 the most. Even then. The biggest reason they lost wasn't even close to being Gryz. It was the abomination that was Charlie Coyle and whoever graced the 3rd line. Our GM gave him a NMC to go with his long term deal though, so exposing him to Seattle isn't even an option.

Still going to lose someone in expansion though, so whatever you get back for Gryz must be better than whoever you end up losing in the draft.

 

[Pia8988]

Still going to lose someone in expansion though, so whatever you get back for Gryz must be better than whoever you end up losing in the draft.

Since it'd be Sweeney making the deal, it'd be a hard maybe leaning towards no. Another GM. Easy yes.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

what a weird post and IMO a swing & a miss. and the funny thing isn't that I disagree about Grzelcyk's shortcomings. I actually agree with @LouJersey that he's ideally a 3rd pair D. I'd greatly prefer to have 2 other LD that can bump him down to the 3rd pair but would also be totally willing to part with him in the right scenario.

What I disagree with is:
1. suggesting that we should let Seattle take him for free
2. framing the anti-Gryz argument as a choice between Gryz & Clifton

I like Cliffton don't love the idea of losing him either, but this argument is such a weird way to approach this topic. These 2 are not competing for the same spot on the depth chart so that's the first senseless thing about this debate. Then you basically cherry pick "important numbers" designed to make Clifton look better while ignoring a slew of numbers that favor Gryz (for example Clifton being on the ice for 4 PP goals against in this playoffs and having only a marginally better ES goal differential than Gryz). And to be clear, I agree with you regarding Grzelcyk's overall value to the team, I just think you're not doing yourself any favors by framing the argument in this way. Clifton is a good bottom pair D and a loveable player, but there is basically no scenario in which he is more than a 3rd pair RD on this team when everyone is healthy. There's no way they'd swap him full time to the left side and move him up and while I agree that his hitting game is a huge asset, the rest of his game is pretty mediocre and he has never really shown an ability to play higher in the lineup. He got exploited pretty badly once Carlo went down this year, for example.

Now if your concern is that exposing Clifton means he's gone and then we're stuck with the more expensive Grzelcyk, that's a chance I'm willing to take because I think Gryz has more trade value. With that said I think there's a good chance they pass on Clifton anyway, but it just depends on their needs at the time. They could just as easily take a Lauzon or a Ritchie.

I think Grzelcyk has more value than Clifton and for that reason alone he's the guy I'd protect in the expansion draft, but ideally I'd see both guys replaced or at least force Clifton into a full time 7th D role. Now, if Seattle wants to offer a draft pick in exchange for us exposing Gryz then I'd be all ears.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

my number was only 5 on 5. As for your, like sam girard part. He got abused far worse than gryz did

Girard is a much better player and got absolutely targeted and bullied by the huge, heavy Vegas forecheck over the series and (like Grzk) was just in an absolute daze late in the series. All this just backs up my point on trying to win with small D in the playoffs vs. big, heavy teams.

The Ahcan part. You're being disingenuous and you know it.

How so? Are you capable of arguing the point? Did Gryz not get the least amount of PK time on the team? If he is so great defensively then he shouldn't be so sheltered right?

You say he's been anchored by Gryz, why are McAvoy's numbers always better when Gryz in next to him.

Compared to what? Lauzon? Lololololol
Lauzon isn't a top pairing Dman either. I'm saying to use the savings on Gryz to help get McAvoy a real top-pairing D for the first time in his career, or at least one more capable than Gryz (or Lauzon).

Be better Colt.

You've obviously got a little chubby for Gryz and a hate for Lauzon. Time for you to take your own advice.

Man if only Gryz could be as defensively responsible at Lauzon and let in goals at a higher rate. f***ing bum. If you're gonna say Gryz can't defend, to turn around and claim Lauzon can. Big f***ing oof there.

Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

Notice how McAvoy's numbers improve next to Gryz and Lauzon craters when away from Charlie. Someone was the anchor, but it wasn't Matt Grzelcyk

Do you work for that website or do you watch games and use your eyes? McAvoy is (obviously) better when he is playing offensively aggressive (to the point of cocky) and using his long strides to attack and attack and attack. He has to play as the first-option attacking D to fully optimize his abilities (he did this all playoffs long).

Interesting though, Gryz started the year w McAvoy and through the first 4 games,

McAvoy went 0 pts in 4 games for a ppg of 0 (too short of sample-size, but wait...)

Gryz is injured (again) in the 5th game and comes back March 3rd.

In the time that Grz is out, McAvoy goes
14pts in 15 games for a ppg of .93!!! Best hockey of his career.


When Grzy returns to his role, McAvoys numbers soon dips.

McAvoy had a .44 PPG this season when Gryz was in the line-up
McAvoy had a .93 PPG this season when Gryz was injured/out of the line-up (big chunk of the season).

Please address.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

what a weird post and IMO a swing & a miss. and the funny thing isn't that I disagree about Grzelcyk's shortcomings. I actually agree with @LouJersey that he's ideally a 3rd pair D. I'd greatly prefer to have 2 other LD that can bump him down to the 3rd pair but would also be totally willing to part with him in the right scenario.

What I disagree with is:
1. suggesting that we should let Seattle take him for free
2. framing the anti-Gryz argument as a choice between Gryz & Clifton

I like Cliffton don't love the idea of losing him either, but this argument is such a weird way to approach this topic. These 2 are not competing for the same spot on the depth chart so that's the first senseless thing about this debate. Then you basically cherry pick "important numbers" designed to make Clifton look better while ignoring a slew of numbers that favor Gryz (for example Clifton being on the ice for 4 PP goals against in this playoffs and having only a marginally better ES goal differential than Gryz). And to be clear, I agree with you regarding Grzelcyk's overall value to the team, I just think you're not doing yourself any favors by framing the argument in this way. Clifton is a good bottom pair D and a loveable player, but there is basically no scenario in which he is more than a 3rd pair RD on this team when everyone is healthy. There's no way they'd swap him full time to the left side and move him up and while I agree that his hitting game is a huge asset, the rest of his game is pretty mediocre and he has never really shown an ability to play higher in the lineup. He got exploited pretty badly once Carlo went down this year, for example.

Now if your concern is that exposing Clifton means he's gone and then we're stuck with the more expensive Grzelcyk, that's a chance I'm willing to take because I think Gryz has more trade value. With that said I think there's a good chance they pass on Clifton anyway, but it just depends on their needs at the time. They could just as easily take a Lauzon or a Ritchie.

I think Grzelcyk has more value than Clifton and for that reason alone he's the guy I'd protect in the expansion draft, but ideally I'd see both guys replaced or at least force Clifton into a full time 7th D role. Now, if Seattle wants to offer a draft pick in exchange for us exposing Gryz then I'd be all ears.

I wouldn't be surprised if Clifton has more value for Seattle at the deadline than Gryz.

Salary, size, style of play all point to Clifton --who also raises his play in the playoffs whereas Gryz's drops off. Clifton has Orlov vibes, those guys are in demand for teams.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

bottom line is gryz takes too much off the cap.
for us to win with gryz he would have to be a 6th defenseman.
thats way too much cap space for a 6th dman.

And this is my point.... Gryz (to me) has his strengths but is (after all his sheltering) a 3rd pairing D.

I'll take the 3rd pairing RD for 1m over the 3.687m LD

I think it is a real discussion to have as there is a decision to be made on which one to protect.
Russellmania is right in that a conversation should take place to be seen if Seattle would move a pick to get Gryz, but (for me personally) that wouldn't change who I would protect.

 

[BruinsNetwork]

Matt Grzelcyk is a saving grace for this team when it comes to transitional play and driving possession in the right direction. Everyone wants to get bigger and badder and stronger, but I still don't think players like Grzelcyk is why this team lost or has been losing series. I think it's what happens when there's a lack of competition in the lineup and a lack of willingness to cut ties with veterans who mirage this idea of a "safety net" like Wagner and Kuraly.

I mean, yeah Grzelcyk had one really bad game and that was definitely an ugly one, especially given his uncharacteristic unforced turnovers. That said, how did all the big players fair in the lineup this postseason?

Miller, cheap-shotted and knocked out.
Lauzon, banged up from his rugged style of play and clearly not 100%.
Carlo, biggest defender and knocked out by a smaller player.
Zboril, bigger than Grzelcyk and also knocked out of the lineup.
Ritchie, just a minimal impact in two series that were tailored to his skillset.

It's clearly an unpopular opinion, but I still maintain the Bruins didn't lose because of size. They lost because they had two legitimately horrible options on L4 (Kuraly and Wagner) being routinely caved in each time they were on the ice. Cassidy was essentially throwing anytime he put them out there and the analytics back that up. Nick Ritchie, Charlie Coyle (injured, in his defense) and Jake DeBrusk were all in the same boat as well. Size is certainly something relevant to the NHL, but so is transition and play-driving from the backend.

The team lacked assertion, hustle and conviction outside of L1 and L2. It's not about being the biggest and baddest players on the ice, it's about being desperate to win and I just didn't see enough of that from this group this year or even in 2019 against the Blues (Especially on home ice in Game 7). Rask being injured obviously didn't help because he couldn't be the backbone for as many desperation saves as he would usually make given his detrimental injury.

I don't want Cassidy fired because I think he's a good coach, but I would certainly bring up Jay Leach to assist him on the bench for next season because that's a guy who's players seldom–if ever–take a night off on the ice. Cassidy's coaching and personnel decisions certainly played a decision in what happened this post season, as did injuries, bad luck and stagnating players. It's always easy to blame the small defensemen and GM though.

Leaving Matt Grzelcyk exposed would ensure that Seattle would take him. Even if they didn't want him, they would just turn around and trade him for something significant in value. This fanbase's hatred for smaller players, especially defensemen, is sometimes outrageous.

Even from a pure hockey standpoint and roster building angle, I would 100% protect Grzelcyk over Clifton. If I'm Seattle, I would take Clifton in a heartbeat, but I would take Grzelcyk even quicker if he were to be available.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Girard is a much better player and got absolutely targeted and bullied by the huge, heavy Vegas forecheck over the series and (like Grzk) was just in an absolute daze late in the series. All this just backs up my point on trying to win with small D in the playoffs vs. big, heavy teams.



How so? Are you capable of arguing the point? Did Gryz not get the least amount of PK time on the team? If he is so great defensively then he shouldn't be so sheltered right?



Compared to what? Lauzon? Lololololol
Lauzon isn't a top pairing Dman either. I'm saying to use the savings on Gryz to help get McAvoy a real top-pairing D for the first time in his career, or at least one more capable than Gryz (or Lauzon).


You've obviously got a little chubby for Gryz and a hate for Lauzon. Time for you to take your own advice.



Do you work for that website or do you watch games and use your eyes? McAvoy is (obviously) better when he is playing offensively aggressive (to the point of cocky) and using his long strides to attack and attack and attack. He has to play as the first-option attacking D to fully optimize his abilities (he did this all playoffs long).

Interesting though, Gryz started the year w McAvoy and through the first 4 games,

McAvoy went 0 pts in 4 games for a ppg of 0 (too short of sample-size, but wait...)

Gryz is injured (again) in the 5th game and comes back March 3rd.

In the time that Grz is out, McAvoy goes
14pts in 15 games for a ppg of .93!!! Best hockey of his career.


When Grzy returns to his role, McAvoys numbers soon dips.

McAvoy had a .44 PPG this season when Gryz was in the line-up
McAvoy had a .93 PPG this season when Gryz was injured/out of the line-up (big chunk of the season).

Please address.

to be fair McAvoy had his actual best offensive stretch of his career during this year's playoffs while playing mostly with Gryz.

 

[UncleRico]

If gryz is your #4 defender then you are in a good spot. His salary around the league is right where #4 defenders are paid. Problem was he was forced into a top line role much of the year and in the playoffs.

Everyone here can sit here and compare clifton and gryz head to head stats, but realistically the aren’t really comparable at all because the reality is gryz was going up against opposing teams top two lines the majority of the time while clifton was going against opposing teams bottom two lines.

I have no problem moving on from gryz, but I’m not exposing him in the draft. I’d rather keep him and package him in a deal. He has much more trade value around the league than clifton, who at the start of the year didn’t even crack the bruins top 6 and wouldn’t have been playing if it weren’t for injuries.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Matt Grzelcyk is a saving grace for this team when it comes to transitional play and driving possession in the right direction. Everyone wants to get bigger and badder and stronger, but I still don't think players like Grzelcyk is why this team lost or has been losing series. I think it's what happens when there's a lack of competition in the lineup and a lack of willingness to cut ties with veterans who mirage this idea of a "safety net" like Wagner and Kuraly.

I mean, yeah Grzelcyk had one really bad game and that was definitely an ugly one, especially given his uncharacteristic unforced turnovers. That said, how did all the big players fair in the lineup this postseason?

Miller, cheap-shotted and knocked out.
Lauzon, banged up from his rugged style of play and clearly not 100%.
Carlo, biggest defender and knocked out by a smaller player.
Zboril, bigger than Grzelcyk and also knocked out of the lineup.
Ritchie, just a minimal impact in two series that were tailored to his skillset.

It's clearly an unpopular opinion, but I still maintain the Bruins didn't lose because of size. They lost because they had two legitimately horrible options on L4 (Kuraly and Wagner) being routinely caved in each time they were on the ice. Cassidy was essentially throwing anytime he put them out there and the analytics back that up. Nick Ritchie, Charlie Coyle (injured, in his defense) and Jake DeBrusk were all in the same boat as well. Size is certainly something relevant to the NHL, but so is transition and play-driving from the backend.

The team lacked assertion, hustle and conviction outside of L1 and L2. It's not about being the biggest and baddest players on the ice, it's about being desperate to win and I just didn't see enough of that from this group this year or even in 2019 against the Blues (Especially on home ice in Game 7). Rask being injured obviously didn't help because he couldn't be the backbone for as many desperation saves as he would usually make given his detrimental injury.

I don't want Cassidy fired because I think he's a good coach, but I would certainly bring up Jay Leach to assist him on the bench for next season because that's a guy who's players seldom–if ever–take a night off on the ice. Cassidy's coaching and personnel decisions certainly played a decision in what happened this post season, as did injuries, bad luck and stagnating players. It's always easy to blame the small defensemen and GM though.

Leaving Matt Grzelcyk exposed would ensure that Seattle would take him. Even if they didn't want him, they would just turn around and trade him for something significant in value. This fanbase's hatred for smaller players, especially defensemen, is sometimes outrageous.

Even from a pure hockey standpoint and roster building angle, I would 100% protect Grzelcyk over Clifton. If I'm Seattle, I would take Clifton in a heartbeat, but I would take Grzelcyk even quicker if he were to be available.

with all due respect, please try to consider all the arguments and try to consider that not everyone who criticizes Grzelcyk is doing so purely because of size prejudice.

I realize he's an asset and has trade value. And yes his possession metrics are terrific. The problem is that results (goals) matter, and possession metrics only get you so far. The most elite play driving players at most will spend 65% of the time attacking. That's great and a big advantage for the team, but those guys still need to able to defend in that other 35% of the time. (In Gryz's case in the playoffs it's more like 45% of the time). If a guy gets exploited in his own zone often enough then at some point that has to negate the positive benefit from his transition game. In Grzelcyk's case a clear pattern has emerged. He puts up elite regular season possession numbers and his on ice goal differential falls in line, but in the playoffs he has been exposed repeatedly. I was curious what his career goal ES differential looked like in the playoffs and it's actually worse than I expected. He's career -12 in the playoffs. His ES goal differential is a -13. That is the worst goal differential for any currently active Bruins defender, even including guys no longer with the Bruins:
NHL Stats
As a percentage, the only guys worse are John Moore & Lauzon.

And yes, goals as a stat are less reliable than shot metrics because of lack of volume, but that's the challenge with hockey analytics. Goals are a less reliable predictor, but are inherently more important. At a certain point, you have to acknowledge the results and not just the indicators. We're not talking about a tiny sample size here. Gryz has 54 career playoff games, including a lot of ice time this year with the Bruins best forwards and is one of the worst Bruins D throughout his career when it comes to goal differential.

Gryz and his lack of size are far from the only reason the Bruins lost, and I don't think anyone here is saying that's the case, but whenever you get eliminated from the playoffs it's valid to look at your team's weaknesses during that playoff run and it's clear to me that Grzelcyk and his spot on the roster are absolutely an area where they need to improve.

 

[Gordoff]

I have said from day one that Cliffy is a better d-man than the credit he receives. Gryz is injury prone and Cliffy just seems to absorb the heavy hard hits and feeds off of it. He is a great skater and can carry the puck better than Grz. Cliffy does deserve more playing time on the PP but will Cassidy allow it. Cassidy seems to have his favorites and I never cared for a coach who shows partiality. If you have earned the time then give it and I don't see that with Butch.

When I suggested this I was torn a new orifice by the illuminati here.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

Matt Grzelcyk is a saving grace for this team when it comes to transitional play and driving possession in the right direction. Everyone wants to get bigger and badder and stronger, but I still don't think players like Grzelcyk is why this team lost or has been losing series. I think it's what happens when there's a lack of competition in the lineup and a lack of willingness to cut ties with veterans who mirage this idea of a "safety net" like Wagner and Kuraly.

I mean, yeah Grzelcyk had one really bad game and that was definitely an ugly one, especially given his uncharacteristic unforced turnovers. That said, how did all the big players fair in the lineup this postseason?

Miller, cheap-shotted and knocked out.
Lauzon, banged up from his rugged style of play and clearly not 100%.
Carlo, biggest defender and knocked out by a smaller player.
Zboril, bigger than Grzelcyk and also knocked out of the lineup.
Ritchie, just a minimal impact in two series that were tailored to his skillset.

It's clearly an unpopular opinion, but I still maintain the Bruins didn't lose because of size. They lost because they had two legitimately horrible options on L4 (Kuraly and Wagner) being routinely caved in each time they were on the ice. Cassidy was essentially throwing anytime he put them out there and the analytics back that up. Nick Ritchie, Charlie Coyle (injured, in his defense) and Jake DeBrusk were all in the same boat as well. Size is certainly something relevant to the NHL, but so is transition and play-driving from the backend.

The team lacked assertion, hustle and conviction outside of L1 and L2. It's not about being the biggest and baddest players on the ice, it's about being desperate to win and I just didn't see enough of that from this group this year or even in 2019 against the Blues (Especially on home ice in Game 7). Rask being injured obviously didn't help because he couldn't be the backbone for as many desperation saves as he would usually make given his detrimental injury.

I don't want Cassidy fired because I think he's a good coach, but I would certainly bring up Jay Leach to assist him on the bench for next season because that's a guy who's players seldom–if ever–take a night off on the ice. Cassidy's coaching and personnel decisions certainly played a decision in what happened this post season, as did injuries, bad luck and stagnating players. It's always easy to blame the small defensemen and GM though.

Leaving Matt Grzelcyk exposed would ensure that Seattle would take him. Even if they didn't want him, they would just turn around and trade him for something significant in value. This fanbase's hatred for smaller players, especially defensemen, is sometimes outrageous.

Even from a pure hockey standpoint and roster building angle, I would 100% protect Grzelcyk over Clifton. If I'm Seattle, I would take Clifton in a heartbeat, but I would take Grzelcyk even quicker if he were to be available.

No problem with your argument here. I disagree with parts but I can respect this opinion based on how you presented it.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

with all due respect, please try to consider all the arguments and try to consider that not everyone who criticizes Grzelcyk is doing so purely because of size prejudice.

I realize he's an asset and has trade value. And yes his possession metrics are terrific. The problem is that results (goals) matter, and possession metrics only get you so far. The most elite play driving players at most will spend 65% of the time attacking. That's great and a big advantage for the team, but those guys still need to able to defend in that other 35% of the time. (In Gryz's case in the playoffs it's more like 45% of the time). If a guy gets exploited in his own zone often enough then at some point that has to negate the positive benefit from his transition game. In Grzelcyk's case a clear pattern has emerged. He puts up elite regular season possession numbers and his on ice goal differential falls in line, but in the playoffs he has been exposed repeatedly. I was curious what his career goal ES differential looked like in the playoffs and it's actually worse than I expected. He's career -12 in the playoffs. His 5v5 goal differential is a -13. That is the worst goal differential for any currently active Bruins defender, even including guys no longer with the Bruins:
NHL Stats
As a percentage, the only guys worse are John Moore & Lauzon.

And yes, goals as a stat are less reliable than shot metrics because of lack of volume, but that's the challenge with hockey analytics. Goals are a less reliable predictor, but are inherently more important. At a certain point, you have to acknowledge the results and not just the indicators. We're not talking about a tiny sample size here. Gryz has 54 career playoff games, including a lot of ice time this year with the Bruins best forwards and is one of the worst Bruins D throughout his career when it comes to goal differential.

Gryz and his lack of size are far from the only reason the Bruins lost, and I don't think anyone here is saying that's the case, but whenever you get eliminated from the playoffs it's valid to look at your team's weaknesses during that playoff run and it's clear to me that Grzelcyk and his spot on the roster are absolutely an area where they need to improve.

Fantastic, measured post. Well said.

 

[Gordoff]

I don't have a problem with either guy.....but that's the key --- either, not both. While trends come and go in the game, it's clear that right now the emphasis is on punishing defensemen in order to create turnovers or to wear them down.

It's become so clear to me that I'm starting to question the thoughts that I've formed regarding upgrading the forward ranks, only weeks ago.

Meaning --- if you asked me at the beginning of the playoffs what would your ideal off season be? I would have replied, re-sign Hall and Krejci and get at least two more 20-25 goal forwards and a defenseman.

Today, I'm still all for re-signing Hall and Krejci, but in order to have a shot at the cup, I'd say they need to add 2 defensemen and 2 bottom 6 forwards that hit and can chip in offensively, while getting rid of a redundant defenseman or two.

To put it in terms of names/players: Start of playoffs I'd have pushed for them to sign TH an DK as well as Savard, Martinez or Oleksiak, while adding a Garland and Hyman/Saad.

Today: re-sign TH and DK sign one of Hyman and two of Savard, Oleksiak, Martinez, etc. While moving one of Grzelcyk, Clifton and adding a couple of Coleman, McGinn types.

I'm much more comfortable with this defense corps: McAvoy, Carlo, Lauzon, Oleksiak, Savard, Clifton/Grzelcyk.

Than I am with: McAvoy, Carlo, Lauzon, Oleksiak or Savard, Clifton and Grzelcyk.

None of it will happen of course....but I think they're better off focusing their efforts on building a sturdy defense.

I don't see any differences in the defenses that you listed above? What am I missing?

 

[Gordoff]

I have a better idea, lets worry about how we are going to replace the bottom-six forward and add a guy that can score goals so we need to worry less about Gryz being a small person.

That's not a better idea it's a different idea.

 

[sarge88]

I don't see any differences in the defenses that you listed above? What am I missing?

One had Oleksiak and Savard with one of Clifton or Grzelcyk.

The other had Clifton and Grzelcyk with one of Savard or Oleksiak.

 

[Pia8988]

Girard is a much better player and got absolutely targeted and bullied by the huge, heavy Vegas forecheck over the series and (like Grzk) was just in an absolute daze late in the series. All this just backs up my point on trying to win with small D in the playoffs vs. big, heavy teams.



How so? Are you capable of arguing the point? Did Gryz not get the least amount of PK time on the team? If he is so great defensively then he shouldn't be so sheltered right?



Compared to what? Lauzon? Lololololol
Lauzon isn't a top pairing Dman either. I'm saying to use the savings on Gryz to help get McAvoy a real top-pairing D for the first time in his career, or at least one more capable than Gryz (or Lauzon).


You've obviously got a little chubby for Gryz and a hate for Lauzon. Time for you to take your own advice.



Do you work for that website or do you watch games and use your eyes? McAvoy is (obviously) better when he is playing offensively aggressive (to the point of cocky) and using his long strides to attack and attack and attack. He has to play as the first-option attacking D to fully optimize his abilities (he did this all playoffs long).

Interesting though, Gryz started the year w McAvoy and through the first 4 games,

McAvoy went 0 pts in 4 games for a ppg of 0 (too short of sample-size, but wait...)

Gryz is injured (again) in the 5th game and comes back March 3rd.

In the time that Grz is out, McAvoy goes
14pts in 15 games for a ppg of .93!!! Best hockey of his career.


When Grzy returns to his role, McAvoys numbers soon dips.

McAvoy had a .44 PPG this season when Gryz was in the line-up
McAvoy had a .93 PPG this season when Gryz was injured/out of the line-up (big chunk of the season).

Please address.

McAvoy’s individual numbers aren’t my concern. The Boston Bruins are a better team when gryz-mcavoy are together, defensively and offensively than any other combination. The #1 goal should be to get the Boston Bruins to score more goals and allow less. Gryz-McAvoy does that better than any combination on the roster so far.

lauzon isn’t defensively responsible by default just because he is worthless in the offensive end. He is just a bad player.

Im fine keeping gryz or trading him. But kicking out the door for nothing. That’s just stupid and the would be the work of a bad GM.

All this focus and angst in the wrong direction. Gryz isn't the sole reason or even top 3 they lost to the Islanders.