Post-Game Talk: GAME 12 - It don't come easy - BRUINS 3 Whalercanes 2 F

Seidenbergy

Registered User
Nov 2, 2012
7,232
2,988
I keep hearing people claim that we need to break up the top line because "it is easy to stop a one-line team like the Bs from scoring". If it's so easy, why can't other teams do it?

Last year during the regular season, the Bs ranked 6th in the entire league in goals scored at 3.26 goals per game. They were literally only 6 goals away from being ranked #2. Nobody could stop them.

"Well....that's because they faced a lot of bad teams. Things change in the playoffs." Folks say.

OK. In the playoffs last season, the Bs actually increased their rate of scoring to the tune of 3.42 goals per game.


I couldn't be less of a fan of breaking up the top line.
 

Tmac37

Registered User
Apr 1, 2018
1,592
2,053
Formerly Tmac21
I keep hearing people claim that we need to break up the top line because "it is easy to stop a one-line team like the Bs from scoring". If it's so easy, why can't other teams do it?

Last year during the regular season, the Bs ranked 6th in the entire league in goals scored at 3.26 goals per game. They were literally only 6 goals away from being ranked #2. Nobody could stop them.

"Well....that's because they faced a lot of bad teams. Things change in the playoffs." Folks say.

OK. In the playoffs last season, the Bs actually increased their rate of scoring to the tune of 3.42 goals per game.


I couldn't be less of a fan of breaking up the top line.

Agreed, but Bruce has to know when to balance it out if they are getting shut down and no other line is producing, like he smartly did against Carolina.
 

Dr Hook

It’s Called Ruins
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2005
14,056
20,783
Tyler, TX
I keep hearing people claim that we need to break up the top line because "it is easy to stop a one-line team like the Bs from scoring". If it's so easy, why can't other teams do it?

Last year during the regular season, the Bs ranked 6th in the entire league in goals scored at 3.26 goals per game. They were literally only 6 goals away from being ranked #2. Nobody could stop them.

"Well....that's because they faced a lot of bad teams. Things change in the playoffs." Folks say.

OK. In the playoffs last season, the Bs actually increased their rate of scoring to the tune of 3.42 goals per game.


I couldn't be less of a fan of breaking up the top line.

I think this is a good post. I am advocating for it on a temporary basis at least, though, so we can get another line going: either one of the young forwards steps up, or we make a move to get a scoring winger for the second line. Long-term I want to keep those guys together. Short-term I'd like to see the balance just to get the secondary scoring trending in the right way.
 

TheReal13Linseman

Now accepting BitCoin
Oct 26, 2005
12,122
4,825
Nation's Capital
That line scores, except when you get hammered in 4 straight playoff games by a quality Tampa team and only score 7 goals in the series. You guys are missing the point entirely. Whether that line scores, or not, WE (or to satisfy DKH, "THEY" [i.e., the Bruins]) don't win with just that one line.
 

Seidenbergy

Registered User
Nov 2, 2012
7,232
2,988
That line scores, except when you get hammered in 4 straight playoff games by a quality Tampa team and only score 7 goals in the series. You guys are missing the point entirely. Whether that line scores, or not, WE (or to satisfy DKH, "THEY" [i.e., the Bruins]) don't win with just that one line.

The Bruins scored 13 goals in that (5 game) series.


You guys are missing the point entirely. Whether that line scores, or not, WE (or to satisfy DKH, "THEY" [i.e., the Bruins]) don't win with just that one line.

Not missing the point at all. Simply disagreeing with it. Last year literally proved it.
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
"We" bugs you? Y'mean , it also bugs you when a newspaper prints a headline such as "WE WIN!!!"?

It must also really, really bug you, then, when the "Royal We" is used, (e.g., "We are not amused...")

But, ok, on second thought, you're right, "I" am better than that; I'll revise. "I" have enough talent at what I do, but "THEY" (the Bruins) do not.

OK, back to the matter at hand: Sure, in theory, the "pair" philosophy could work. In our case, we really have no choice but to employ it. But, while a one "awesome" line/3 JAG line team is not hard to stop; a two "good" line/2 JAG line team is not all that much harder to stop. And I think we're in dreamland to think we can ice a decent 3 line team at this point.

For me the question is: When does the panic button get pushed? Is it a temporal thing (i.e., after Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year, etc.)? Or is it a points/standings thing?

What bugs me about the “we” thing is that “we the fans” are not part of the team. We feel like we are, and often seem to care more about the outcome of the games, but we aren’t. So, when people say, “we need to add another scorer”, it’s not accurate and for whatever reason it bothers me.

Anyway, can you explain to me why I should be worried about “pushing the panic button” when the team is 7-3-2 and tied for 2nd? That’s a 109 pt pace for the season.

It’s not going to happen, but if the first line and Krejci scored 400 points and the team finishes with a 109 pts and a playoff spot, I’m not going to hit the panic button. The only way I’m hitting the button is if the the lines other than the 1st continue to not score, and the team doesn’t win.
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
That line scores, except when you get hammered in 4 straight playoff games by a quality Tampa team and only score 7 goals in the series. You guys are missing the point entirely. Whether that line scores, or not, WE (or to satisfy DKH, "THEY" [i.e., the Bruins]) don't win with just that one line.

It wasn’t DKH, it was me who didn’t like the “we” usage.

I think I’m a little offended that you didn’t know the difference.
 

Dr Hook

It’s Called Ruins
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2005
14,056
20,783
Tyler, TX
What bugs me about the “we” thing is that “we the fans” are not part of the team. We feel like we are, and often seem to care more about the outcome of the games, but we aren’t. So, when people say, “we need to add another scorer”, it’s not accurate and for whatever reason it bothers me.

Except that without the fans, there is no team. Where are the Whalers, Nordiques, Atlanta Flames/Predators, California Seals, Cleveland Barons etc. So we is kind of correct in this sense.
Besides, Gary Bettman has assured me that I matter, so there you have it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TCB

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
Except that without the fans, there is no team. Where are the Whalers, Nordiques, Atlanta Flames/Predators, California Seals, Cleveland Barons etc. So we is kind of correct in this sense.
Besides, Gary Bettman has assured me that I matter, so there you have it.

If you are not employed by the team, you are not a “we”.

Please tell me that you are not one those people that buys a B’s or Pat’s jersey and puts your name on the nameplate.
 

Dr Hook

It’s Called Ruins
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2005
14,056
20,783
Tyler, TX
Please tell me that you are not one those people that buys a B’s or Pat’s jersey and puts your name on the nameplate.

Nope :laugh: I find that lame for starters, but also impractical to have nameplates at all. I have two B's jerseys without nameplates. One, because if a player retires or gets traded it is still relevant and two, because they were cheaper without.

Anyway, "we" is just an identification thing, I don't think anyone really thinks it "we" in the formal sense. If they do, they need help. A fanbase is a community, and the team is part of it is all. I'm okay with you being bugged by it- the thought has occurred to me too, even if I use the "we" occasionally. I'll do my best not to use it in reply to any of your posts though :D
 

TCB

Registered User
Dec 15, 2017
12,777
22,385
North Of The Border
Except that without the fans, there is no team. Where are the Whalers, Nordiques, Atlanta Flames/Predators, California Seals, Cleveland Barons etc. So we is kind of correct in this sense.
Besides, Gary Bettman has assured me that I matter, so there you have it.

I always get a chuckle out of the people who oppose the terminology of we by a die-hard - loyal sports fan. I mean its not like everyone doesn't know your actually not physically part of the team. Your a loyal die-hard fan, who's been cheering and routing for a team for yrs, its like a parent saying to their kids were going to win this one tonight or we should of won that one.

Ive coached both at HS and College levels and its pretty nice to hear parents, family members, facility staff and basically fans use the terminology WE, because it takes more than just the players/coaching staff to become a successful team.

Any team will tell you a good home crowd becomes the 12th man . The Seattle Seahawks felt that so much they recently divvied up some dough so they could use the trade-mark. I think any devoted fan who cheers, follows and supports their teams, year after year, haves the right to say WE and that the players and Organizations would welcome it. Now a fan who jumps ship and only becomes a fan once that team starts winning, well thats debatable, as their more like a fair-weather fan. Who hasn't earned that right.:laugh:
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->