Confirmed with Link: Brett Ritchie a Bruin

[LouJersey]

Dissatisfaction at seeing the Bruins finally pick up a 6'3 220pd winger who will hit and stand up for himself and teammates.

Leafs traded for the 6'6 Harpur --he who splayed Kuraly's nose in a fight-- and I was really hoping that Harpur would have to have his next fight in Boston (facing either of our top fighters last year ) vs. Krug or Marchand.

I'm fine with him unless he's the 2 or 3 RW

 

[Fenian24]

At the end of the day, the goal is to score more goals than your opponent, does Ritchie actually help that? Not really.

Wanna know how to shut down goal scorers? Hit them, ask the "perfection" line about it from the finals.

 

[Fenian24]

Don't really get the need to load up on 4th line. They have guys like Blidh and Kuhlman who could've filled those slots internally. Gaunce is pretty interesting though since he has really good fancy stats, but Ritchie and Lindholm seem like a waste of roster spots to me.

They have no one in the organization that plays like Ritchie that is ready. Frederic hopefully in a year and Beecher in a couple but right now there is no one with Ritchies size that plays a physical game among the prospects.

 

[sarge88]

hoping he becomes john leclair

Someone mentioned Mike Knuble yesterday.

I'm not saying it will happen but after topping out at 38 goals at U of Michigan - Knuble's AHL high was 28 then in the NHL he went from seasons of:

7, 15, 12, 7 and 8 goals to seasons of 30, 21, 34, 24, 29, 27, 29 and 24.

I like to be optimistic -- but even if he doesn't progress to become a 15-20 goal guy, at least he hits, sticks up for teammates and, from my limited viewing of him, seems to hustle and work hard.

Still want them to do something significant to address the top 6, but I like this guy for the bottom 3-4 spots up front.

 

[sarge88]

Don't really get the need to load up on 4th line. They have guys like Blidh and Kuhlman who could've filled those slots internally. Gaunce is pretty interesting though since he has really good fancy stats, but Ritchie and Lindholm seem like a waste of roster spots to me.

My fear is that they are thinking about Blidh or Kuhlman as 3rd liners --- or at least potential ones.

 

[bb_fan]

Dissatisfaction at seeing the Bruins finally pick up a 6'3 220pd winger who will hit and stand up for himself and teammates.

Leafs traded for the 6'6 Harpur --he who splayed Kuraly's nose in a fight-- and I was really hoping that Harpur would have to have his next fight in Boston (facing either of our top fighters last year ) vs. Krug or Marchand.

Kuhlman man, don't you know we need Kulhman on that 4th line!

 

[Montecristo]

At the end of the day, the goal is to score more goals than your opponent, does Ritchie actually help that? Not really.

Does acciari?

 

[bruins repeat time]

Finally a forward who can scrap , how cant we like it

 

[bme44]

Anyone who thought Boston could afford to add anyone for the top 6 is delusional. Anyone who thought they could attach an average prospect to backes to dump his money is delusional. Toronto needed to add a 1st round pick to trade Marleau who had 1 year left and was more productive than backes was who has 2 years left. Backes cannot be moved for anything less than a 1st ++. Only way they could obtain a 2nd line winger was to trade Krug. If they don’t want to trade Krug, they can’t afford a top 6 forward. Simple.

Ritchie is a good fit. Boston needed the ability to inject some toughness. Ritchie can do that. He’s also got some offensive potential. The thing that I’m most optimistic about is that Sweeney seems to find these bottom line forwards in free agency and they always seem to work here better than anywhere they’d been previously. Nordstrom, schaller, acciari, Riley Nash, Wagner. I like Sweeney’s bottom line eyes. Id wager Ritchie comes in here and has a chance at 10+ goals and 20+ points which is good value for a million. I’d also not be surprised if lindholm ends up being a valuable contributor.

Great post

 

[Sheppy]

I like it. It’s low risk, and he’s still fairly young. He’s a big boy, uses his size well and will get his hands dirty.

Nothing not to like about this unless you’re expecting 20 goals.

 

[LSCII]

Does acciari?

At the end of the day, the move in and of itself is fine. Less money than Acciari and less term. Where people go sideways though, is assuming it was either overpay for Noel Acciari, or sign Brett Ritchie. There were other options, and probably cheaper alternatives at that. So does this hurt or help them? Meh. It's kind of a lateral move, imo. People projecting him to score 20+ need to really back those expectations down. If he comes in and provides a physical game and doesn't hurt them, I'll be fine wit this move.

 

[LSCII]

I like it. It’s low risk, and he’s still fairly young. He’s a big boy, uses his size well and will get his hands dirty.

Nothing not to like about this unless you’re expecting 20 goals.

This is exactly right. And your last point is the key. Nobody with any sense is expecting this guy to score 20 goals, and if you are, stop. Put down the pipe. Put down your glass. And sober the f*** up. He's not going to do that, ridiculous expectations aside.

 

[Mainehockey33]

KPD is embarrassing himself on twitter. Ritchie is Jimmy Hayes 2.0 apparently. Someone should ask him if Coyle is Hayes 3.0.

 

[PB37]

KPD is embarrassing himself on twitter. Ritchie is Jimmy Hayes 2.0 apparently. Someone should ask him if Coyle is Hayes 3.0.

Not an awful comp; I had a similar thought. Hayes went from scoring 19 goals to 13, 2 and 3 to close out his NHL career at 28 years old. Ritchie is on a similar trajectory.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Not an awful comp; I had a similar thought. Hayes went from scoring 19 goals to 13, 2 and 3 to close out his NHL career at 28 years old. Ritchie is on a similar trajectory.

Hayes was brought in as depth scoring and was hated because of a lack of effort. Ritchie is brought in as an option on the 4th line. Why would anyone compare a 4th liner to Hayes? Is Coyle Jimmy Hayes 3.0 because he’s big and from Massachusetts?

 

[PB37]

Hayes was brought in as depth scoring and was hated because of a lack of effort. Ritchie is brought in as an option on the 4th line. Why would anyone compare a 4th liner to Hayes? Is Coyle Jimmy Hayes 3.0 because he’s big and from Massachusetts?

The comp works when you look at things like size, effort, and wasted potential at similar ages. Both were also 2nd round picks. Hayes busted out with a decent 19 goal season and looked like he could be starting to carve himself out a career as a middle 6 power forward. Instead he flaked out and left the NHL after several sub par seasons in a row. Ritchie as well looked like he could make good on his potential but is currently squandering it.

 

[JOKER 192]

Maybe I'm alone on an Island here but I take Ritchie at 1M 1Y over Accari at 1.7M 3Y every day of the week . Ritchie may not amount to much but even on equal contracts I take Ritchie every time. Wasn't a huge Accari fan. Bold prediction , Ritchie out plays Simmonds who was signed to a 1Y 5M contract.

 

[Montecristo]

At the end of the day, the move in and of itself is fine. Less money than Acciari and less term. Where people go sideways though, is assuming it was either overpay for Noel Acciari, or sign Brett Ritchie. There were other options, and probably cheaper alternatives at that. So does this hurt or help them? Meh. It's kind of a lateral move, imo. People projecting him to score 20+ need to really back those expectations down. If he comes in and provides a physical game and doesn't hurt them, I'll be fine wit this move.

That’s all I expect from him. I don’t expect 20 goals. I expect acciaris production. Chiarellis biggest problem was overpaying for his 4th liners even though they are all pretty interchangeable for the most part. Ritchie is cheaper and you gave him less of a commitment. He also has a far higher ceiling so far in his nhl career than acciari. His career high is 24 points and acciari is 14. I don’t even expect 82 out of acciari. I’d pencil him for his same workload last year. 50-60 games, proabably 6-10 goals, 15-20 points, physical game. That’s what he is and that’s what his salary says he’ll be. Anything more is a fantastic signing.

 

[Mainehockey33]

The comp works when you look at things like size, effort, and wasted potential at similar ages. Both were also 2nd round picks. Hayes busted out with a decent 19 goal season and looked like he could be starting to carve himself out a career as a middle 6 power forward. Instead he flaked out and left the NHL after several sub par seasons in a row. Ritchie as well looked like he could make good on his potential but is currently squandering it.

One was signed for 1 year at 1M, one was traded for a promising top 6 winger who had a down year. Hayes’ AAV was double what Ritchie’s is. Any comparison before he plays a game as a Bruin is dumb, but don’t you think Paille could be just as likely of a comparison?

 

[PB37]

One was signed for 1 year at 1M, one was traded for a promising top 6 winger who had a down year. Hayes’ AAV was double what Ritchie’s is. Any comparison before he plays a game as a Bruin is dumb, but don’t you think Paille could be just as likely of a comparison?

Paille was a different type of player. Not nearly as big or overtly physical. He could lay a good hit though. Effort wasn't usually a problem either with Paille.

Hayes and Ritchie get classed together because they're both big power forward types, spotty effort cycles, and downhill trajectory after showing promise in their early years. I hope Ritchie pans out and the Bruins help him get his career back on track. I think you're looking at this from the standpoint of where they were in their careers when Bruins picked them up while I'm looking at it from another point.

 

[Mainehockey33]

@Dom - OHL is hoping Ritchie is Sweeney’s answer for Krejci’s RW.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Paille was a different type of player. Not nearly as big or overtly physical. He could lay a good hit though. Effort wasn't usually a problem either with Paille.

Hayes and Ritchie get classed together because they're both big power forward types, spotty effort cycles, and downhill trajectory after showing promise in their early years. I hope Ritchie pans out and the Bruins help him get his career back on track.

I just have a problem with calling a guy “player 2.0” before he plays a game as a Bruin. Let’s wait and see.

 

[Krupp]

Having had some time to think a bit more about this, I'm not sure what to expect from this fella.

If he's Acciari's replacement I wouldn't view that as a bad thing. But as Krejci's RW? f*** that. Bro had all of what, 6 points last season?

I would put Heinen on Krejci's wing first before this guy. As bottom 6, preferably fourth line material, he's fine. I'm not sure I'd trust him in the top 9, but if he came out on fire to make good on this 'prove it' deal I'd be pleasantly surprised

 

[Fenian24]

He isn't scoring 20, he might not score 10 but he will add some size and a little grit to the fourth line. If he hits, uses his well and drops the gloves more than 3 times a year, which is his average, I will be happy. I don't expect a speedy skilled winger at 6'4 for a million a year, I expect a big winger who will hit, stand up for his teammates and score once in a while.

 

[DominicT]

@Dom - OHL is hoping Ritchie is Sweeney’s answer for Krejci’s RW.

I am??