Player Discussion Brett Ritchie

[bwunderlich]

i keyed in on him a lot last night and there was a ton of times where he could have laid a hit after a dman had just barely moved the puck but he actually actively avoided it.. say what you want about backes, but he for sure would have at least put his body into him to let them know we arent afraid of contact.. the washington defender actually braced, expected to get hit but nah. too bad.. he has what seems to be a good shot but never can get in a place to shoot.

Against the CAPS, who finish every check, I was livid when he peeled off at least 5 times. When players and more importantly defenders were expecting to get lit up and BR seemed to avoid any contact.

But to reward that style of play with PP time is all on Cassidy.

 

[BigBear83]

i actually have no problem with him on the pp, only to stand in front of the net.. at least he would be using his big frame for something.. i dislike jake there.. would rather have him use his skills somewhere else on the umbrella..ella ella ella ay

 

[Dr Hook]

Ritchie pretty much sucks. Jimmy Hayes 2.0 at this stage.

 

[ODAAT]

Ritchie is guilty of precisely one thing which is out of his control, he is built for 4th line, 3rd line minutes max. Other than that, when he has played, he`s done little if anything to hurt the team defensively, chipped in a little bit, uses his body on the wall to protect the puck. Absolutely not close to being a problem for the B`s other than the fact he should not be lining up beside #46

 

[Sheppy]

Ritchie pretty much sucks. Jimmy Hayes 2.0 at this stage.

Because they're almost the same height and weight? They're nothing alike.

 

[Sheppy]

Against the CAPS, who finish every check, I was livid when he peeled off at least 5 times. When players and more importantly defenders were expecting to get lit up and BR seemed to avoid any contact.

But to reward that style of play with PP time is all on Cassidy.

He may have peeled away but he still lead the team in hits while playing the least amount of minutes. He challenged Gudas, laid a big hit in the corner in the third, then tried to get something going with Hathaway.

 

[Dr Hook]

Because they're almost the same height and weight? They're nothing alike.

No because they are both useless out there.

 

[Sheppy]

No because they are both useless out there.

Oh, gotcha. Just an odd comparison. Why not Lindholm or Backes?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

He may have peeled away but he still lead the team in hits while playing the least amount of minutes. He challenged Gudas, laid a big hit in the corner in the third, then tried to get something going with Hathaway.

Good points.

Not to mention they are all factual.

 

[Son of Donegal]

He may have peeled away but he still lead the team in hits while playing the least amount of minutes. He challenged Gudas, laid a big hit in the corner in the third, then tried to get something going with Hathaway.

And he lost every puck battle while doing so.

It's nice that he hits and he is open to fighting but at some point it's about the puck.

The Bruins were losing battles all over the ice. Some of that has to do with size. More of it has to do with drive. TJ Oshie put this specific element on display for 60 minutes.

 

[Therick67]

He may have peeled away but he still lead the team in hits while playing the least amount of minutes. He challenged Gudas, laid a big hit in the corner in the third, then tried to get something going with Hathaway.

Gudas hit his bother Nick last week with a check that left him with a serious leg injury..

 

[Sheppy]

Again, I don't think Ritchie is anything more than a 4th liner. Maybe, MAYBE you play him on the third line when there's an injury. I think if the Bruins go and grab a capable top 6 player who can give you some physical attributes, they should do that. That would legit put everyone in the spot(s) they need to be.

Marchand - Bergeron - Pastrnak
DeBrusk - Krejci - Trade
Heinen - Coyle - Bjork
Wagner - Kuraly - Nordstrom/Ritchie/Backes

It seems pretty damn simple.

Are hits everything? Absolutely not, but when 90% of them are generated by ONE line, it's an issue. There's legitimately no balance.

Look at Washington, their top 9 is riddled with guys who will lay the body and get their hands dirty to create plays, attack d-men on the forecheck. The Bruins have ONE line that will do that.

 

[Dr Hook]

Oh, gotcha. Just an odd comparison. Why not Lindholm or Backes?

Hayes came to mind because he always left you wanting more. Backes we kind of just know that there isn't much left, but Ritchie is frustrating because like Hayes you can see some tools. Lindholm, while I am not a huge fan, at least brings some consistent value with his backchecking, energy, and defensive work.

 

[Sheppy]

Hayes came to mind because he always left you wanting more. Backes we kind of just know that there isn't much left, but Ritchie is frustrating because like Hayes you can see some tools. Lindholm, while I am not a huge fan, at least brings some consistent value with his backchecking, energy, and defensive work.

Lindholm has the energy of a sloth.

 

[Trap Jesus]

He's a weird player. It almost looks like he's laboring when he's skating out there (a la Backes), but he'll miraculously get a couple quality chances a game.

 

[Dr Hook]

Lindholm has the energy of a sloth.

You think so? I see him not really taking shifts off and playing hard when he's out there. Maybe I should have said hustle rather than energy. Either way, he brings about what you expect from the guy- 4th line defensive forward and solid PKing. Ritchie fails to meet expectations because those expectations are built off flashes and glimpses of what he could be if he put it all together.

 

[Sheppy]

You think so? I see him not really taking shifts off and playing hard when he's out there. Maybe I should have said hustle rather than energy. Either way, he brings about what you expect from the guy- 4th line defensive forward and solid PKing. Ritchie fails to meet expectations because those expectations are built off flashes and glimpses of what he could be if he put it all together.

I think a lot of people hate on Ritchie because he's playing in a position where they NEED a 20-25 goal scorer and they seem to address that with either Ritchie, or a revolving door of either Bjork, Heinen or someone from Providence. Everyone says "HE'S TRASH, HE'S NOT NHL MATERAL!" - So if you put Nordstrom on the 2nd line, or a Wagner they would suddenly produce? They're not really any better than Ritchie is, but they play their usual position on a nightly basis whereas Ritchie moves around pretty much every game.

They're putting Ritchie in a spot where people expect him to consistently put up points, he's not that player. He's a guy who can chip in here and there, provide physicality, drop the gloves when need be. He's not going to pot 20-25 goals, so that's why he sucks to most people on here. I don't think it's fair to expect 2nd line numbers from him.

Again, no issues with Ritchie becoming a 13th forward, or a 4th liner as long as they fix their lack of physicality in the top 9 with a guy who has proven he could produce as well as provide a little extra nastiness.

 

[Dr Hook]

I think a lot of people hate on Ritchie because he's playing in a position where they NEED a 20-25 goal scorer and they seem to address that with either Ritchie, or a revolving door of either Bjork, Heinen or someone from Providence. Everyone says "HE'S TRASH, HE'S NOT NHL MATERAL!" - So if you put Nordstrom on the 2nd line, or a Wagner they would suddenly produce? They're not really any better than Ritchie is, but they play their usual position on a nightly basis whereas Ritchie moves around pretty much every game.

They're putting Ritchie in a spot where people expect him to consistently put up points, he's not that player. He's a guy who can chip in here and there, provide physicality, drop the gloves when need be. He's not going to pot 20-25 goals, so that's why he sucks to most people on here. I don't think it's fair to expect 2nd line numbers from him.

I don't disagree, it's probably not fair (but when has that ever stopped anyone on this forum ). But here's the deal for me and not speaking for anyone else. If he is what he is, and fair enough if he is, why is he on the team at all? It wasn't like the Bruins needed another 4th line guy. So what was it about Ritchie that made him a Bruin? I think it was about two things: his size and his potential. He doesn't really play much like a big physical guy enough that would justify putting him out there over Nordstrom, Wagner, Kuraly, Kuhlman, Blidh etc. His potential is the other thing. Having watched him a good bit during his Stars tenure, it is clear that he has some skills and there is a solid middle 6 forward in there tool-wise. Then there is what you actually get out of him on a day-to-day basis.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You think so? I see him not really taking shifts off and playing hard when he's out there. Maybe I should have said hustle rather than energy. Either way, he brings about what you expect from the guy- 4th line defensive forward and solid PKing. Ritchie fails to meet expectations because those expectations are built off flashes and glimpses of what he could be if he put it all together.

Agree, I like Lindholm. Very responsible player.

 

[ODAAT]

I think a lot of people hate on Ritchie because he's playing in a position where they NEED a 20-25 goal scorer and they seem to address that with either Ritchie, or a revolving door of either Bjork, Heinen or someone from Providence. Everyone says "HE'S TRASH, HE'S NOT NHL MATERAL!" - So if you put Nordstrom on the 2nd line, or a Wagner they would suddenly produce? They're not really any better than Ritchie is, but they play their usual position on a nightly basis whereas Ritchie moves around pretty much every game.

They're putting Ritchie in a spot where people expect him to consistently put up points, he's not that player. He's a guy who can chip in here and there, provide physicality, drop the gloves when need be. He's not going to pot 20-25 goals, so that's why he sucks to most people on here. I don't think it's fair to expect 2nd line numbers from him.

Again, no issues with Ritchie becoming a 13th forward, or a 4th liner as long as they fix their lack of physicality in the top 9 with a guy who has proven he could produce as well as provide a little extra nastiness.

Terrific post but I think the hate for Ritchie would be the same if he were on the 4th line which is where he belongs.

It seems the B`s forward core is about as healthy as it can get, push Ritchie down and move skill up the lineup AND LEAVE THEM THERE, I think it would be beneficial for all parties involved. I like that Butch doesn`t have any allergies to moving players around the lineup and juggling lines, what I do have issues with is he has such a quick switch with it, if it ain`t working within a shift or two, he shifts things around, he`s like Keenan was with goalies.

It`s a balancing act but I see this player or that one moving up or down the lineup and then I see #74 rarely be shifted down then being tossed out on the PP to boot???

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

He's a weird player. It almost looks like he's laboring when he's skating out there (a la Backes), but he'll miraculously get a couple quality chances a game.

that can't possibly be due to lining up with Krejci who I'm told doesn't make his linemates better

 

[Kalus]

If only he was willing to stand in front of the net and take the punishment. If I was the coach, I wouldn't give him playing time until he started doing this consistently.

 

[Sheppy]

If only he was willing to stand in front of the net and take the punishment. If I was the coach, I wouldn't give him playing time until he started doing this consistently.

He literally did that when he was playing with Coyle. Coyle did the puck carrying and Ritchie was in front of the net.

 

[Mantis]

Send this useless plug to the AHL

 

[SPLBRUIN]

He has no passion for the game, time to move on from this failed experiment.