98.5 The Sports Hub Felger: I think Jim Montgomery is on the hot seat

BiteThisBurrows

Registered User
Feb 11, 2022
946
1,976
Who's getting a free pass?

Does anyone honestly think that the Front Office, Coaching Staff and Players have shrugged this off and don't give a shit?

They know more than anyone, the huge opportunity that was squandered. Possibly the LAST opportunity that many of them will ever have.....That's hardly getting a free pass here.

Just because everyone in the organization isn't publicly flogging themselves about it on Beacon Street, doesn't mean they don't care or are getting a free pass. They are going to have to wear that stink on them for the rest of their careers, until they do something to make people forget.....Like the 2011 team did, after the 2010 playoff implosion.
I don't think this is true. I think years from now if you asked any of them about their careers (thinking the old stars like Bergeron and Marchand etc) they will say I'm most proud of 2011. Also proud to be part of a team that set an NHL record for most wins and points, and then they will talk about players and relationships.
It'll be just like Chara. They will blot out the bad stuff. It's human nature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gordoff

Dr Quincy

Registered User
Jun 19, 2005
28,711
10,571
Isn't "Do your job" Belichick's mantra?

SweenNeely: Did their job.

Monty in playoffs: Did NOT do his job.

Most of the Bruins in playoffs: Did NOT do their jobs.

So, most people want to see players moved (mostly b/c we have to) but some bc they aren't playoff caliber. Fine.

But, no consequences for Monty? How does that even make sense? A lot of coaches in professional sports have been let go for a lot less. This was an historic EPIC failure. Definitely top 5 in all Bruins sports one might argue.

Monty did not have this team ready to go to war and he seemed totally inept and clueless. For those arguing that the players failed, yes, it's true that most of them did. But my question to them is, if it's mostly/or completely the players' fault, then why do we need coaches at all? Do coaches perform a valuable function? Is their performance in whatever function that is a part of a team's success or failure? If the answers to those questions are yes, then I can't see how anyone can honestly hold Monty blameless in any of this.
Who made the decision to fire a coach who is playing in the 2nd rd in order to bring in a coach who people are now saying is chiefly responsible for losing in the 1st?

Sweeney did a great job assembling talent for 1 more run. But if he picked the wrong coach, why isn't that on him? He went out on a limb to pick a guy with some serious questions. People are now saying that guy cracked in the playoffs. Sweeney takes some of that blame.
 

Nothingbutglass

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
4,022
3,192
Who made the decision to fire a coach who is playing in the 2nd rd in order to bring in a coach who people are now saying is chiefly responsible for losing in the 1st?

Sweeney did a great job assembling talent for 1 more run. But if he picked the wrong coach, why isn't that on him? He went out on a limb to pick a guy with some serious questions. People are now saying that guy cracked in the playoffs. Sweeney takes some of that blame.
Because the players didnt want to play for Cassidy? Krecji, DeBrusk might not have been back if he was still here.
 

Donnie Shulzhoffer

Rocket Surgery
Sep 9, 2008
15,762
11,315
Foxboro, MA
Who made the decision to fire a coach who is playing in the 2nd rd in order to bring in a coach who people are now saying is chiefly responsible for losing in the 1st?

Sweeney did a great job assembling talent for 1 more run. But if he picked the wrong coach, why isn't that on him? He went out on a limb to pick a guy with some serious questions. People are now saying that guy cracked in the playoffs. Sweeney takes some of that blame.
Because the coach was a big meanie and Don caved to his roster
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gordoff

BruinDust

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
24,441
22,002
What more were you expecting?

If I could sum it up, a more conservative-style game. When I think back to his 2018 run in DC under Trotz, he was that solid steady presence. Physical but not running around out of position. Less aggressive offensively in the defensive and neutral zones. He was a rock for them in 2018, probably their best defensive player.
 

Bruinswillwin77

My name is Pete
Sponsor
May 29, 2011
22,287
11,300
Hooksett, NH
If I could sum it up, a more conservative-style game. When I think back to his 2018 run in DC under Trotz, he was that solid steady presence. Physical but not running around out of position. Less aggressive offensively in the defensive and neutral zones. He was a rock for them in 2018, probably their best defensive player.
Ahh ok. I didnt watch their playoff run so I can't comment on that but he definitely started out well. Maybe under JM's system and him knowing the team he was playing with he felt more comfortable taking chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruinDust

BruinDust

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
24,441
22,002
Ahh ok. I didnt watch their playoff run so I can't comment on that but he definitely started out well. Maybe under JM's system and him knowing the team he was playing with he felt more comfortable taking chances.

The system likely had an impact. Orlov had 25 pts. in 30 games here. Far exceeding his career averages.

Hindsight being 20/20, Bruin definitely could of used more of that solid conservative game come playoff time, even if would of sacrificed some offense. Especially when the Bruins weren't getting much of that from the rest of the D at times. To use a baseball comparison, I expected a gold glove shortstop in Orlov, just that steady defensive presence, never too high, never too low, just a straight line. Consistent.
 

rocketdan9

Registered User
Feb 5, 2009
20,411
13,210
Add Orlov to the long-list of D-men the Bruins have acquired at the deadline that really never found their stride here.
Eh? Orlov was pretty darn good. He impacted game 7... with that shot/Bertuzzi tip.

Game 3... he made awesome pass to Debrusk for the tip in

Game 4.... he made that long pass to Pasta for the insurance goal

Produced offensively/unlike some of the other Bruins Ds

Cmon
 
Last edited:

PB37

Mr Selke
Oct 1, 2002
25,485
19,808
Maine
Eh? Orlov was pretty darn good. He impacted game 7... with that shot/Bertuzzi tip.

Game 3... he made awesome pass to Debrusk for the tip in

Game 4.... he made that long pass to Pasta for the insurance goal

Produced offensively/unlike some of the other Bruins D

Cmon

He was great at making offense. But he had a lot of bad moments in his own end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CharasLazyWrister

finchster

Registered User
Jul 12, 2006
10,633
2,121
Antalya
Because the players didnt want to play for Cassidy? Krecji, DeBrusk might not have been back if he was still here.
Well coaches have a shelf life- Cassidy was at the end of his it appears. However, the choice to fire a coach comes with the responsibility to find a coach to do better. With a much better roster, the playoff results were the same. I think the criticism of Montgomery being too much of a player’s coach is valid.

If the Bruins start slow next year, they have their scapegoat
 

BruinDust

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
24,441
22,002
Eh? Orlov was pretty darn good. He impacted game 7... with that shot/Bertuzzi tip.

Game 3... he made awesome pass to Debrusk for the tip in

Game 4.... he made that long pass to Pasta for the insurance goal

Produced offensively/unlike some of the other Bruins Ds

Cmon

He was great at making offense. But he had a lot of bad moments in his own end.

Is he a D-man or a forward? Was he only brought in for his offense?

Like I said in an earlier post, I expected a safer, more conservative-style D-man similar to how he played under Trotz. I'd trade some of that offense for better defensive play and more consistent break-outs. That's what Boston needed. Not a Ray Bourque impression without the defensive play. He should of dialed it back in the post-season. There is a reason his points totals in Boston far exceeded his normal production. That's on him and the coaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Hook

Dr Hook

It’s Called Ruins
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2005
14,088
20,863
Tyler, TX
Is he a D-man or a forward? Was he only brought in for his offense?

Like I said in an earlier post, I expected a safer, more conservative-style D-man similar to how he played under Trotz. I'd trade some of that offense for better defensive play and more consistent break-outs. That's what Boston needed. Not a Ray Bourque impression without the defensive play. He should of dialed it back in the post-season. There is a reason his points totals in Boston far exceeded his normal production. That's on him and the coaches.

I agree with this: he was a let down for what the Bruins really needed him to do and be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruinDust

BruinDust

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
24,441
22,002
I agree with this: he was a let down for what the Bruins really needed him to do and be.

The point totals really tell the tale. It's like night and day. For whatever reason, when he got here he felt like he could really open it up more. And if the coaches allowed him to do so, that's on them. EVERY hockey player enjoys creating offense, right down to the old school defensive D-man. So if he was permitted to play a more aggressive offensive style, I don't blame him. Especially if he thinks he's capable of it (and he was).

At the very least, the coaches should of had enough sense to try and get him (and quite frankly the rest of the D as well) to dial it back a notch and play it safer and more conservative come playoff time.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad