Management Is there Precedence for this in Boston (or other team) Hockey History?

[ODAAT]

It's not about the paper thing. Look at Bruins's D. They will not survive against a top team. Kevan Miller on the 1st pairing? Come on !

doesn`t even have to be a "top team" Trapper, just a team with speed, THAT is the issue, too slow to keep up in a 7 gamer IMO, doesn`t mean I want to see them miss the playoffs though

 

[CombatOnContact]

So, what's wrong to miss the playoffs for a long term and sustain success? McQuaid, Kevan Miller and Morrow are limited D-man. Zee is aging and his game is sinking fast. Aside Seids and Krug, we have very few to show. If an injury occur, our depth is Trotman and Colin Miller, a rookie. I don't think the Bruins will go very far as constitued.

You can't guarantee long term success. Short term is much easier to predict. And here now, the bruins are in the playoffs, and their competition, other than Washington, are all beatable. That's WITH Eriksson in the lineup. Without him, missing the playoffs this year after they battled all year, bad message to the vets if you ask me...

I'm good with trading Loui if we get upgrades immediately.

I'll be thrilled if we buy and make this team stronger.

I'll be very disappointed if we sell Loui for futures.

 

[PB37]

You can't guarantee long term success. Short term is much easier to predict. And here now, the bruins are in the playoffs, and their competition, other than Washington, are all beatable. That's WITH Eriksson in the lineup. Without him, missing the playoffs this year after they battled all year, bad message to the vets if you ask me...

I'm good with trading Loui if we get upgrades immediately.

I'll be thrilled if we buy and make this team stronger.

I'll be very disappointed if we sell Loui for futures.

I agree. Right now, the cupboard is full of futures. The Bruins just had three first round picks with two more to come in a few months. They have a red hot AHL goal scorer and the AHL's league leading point getter. The talent and projectable's of said talent is as good as it's ever been. As long as we don't sell off a sizeable chunk of our top non NHL assets I'm fine with upgrading the current NHL roster for a better playoff run via the trade deadline.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

doesn`t even have to be a "top team" Trapper, just a team with speed, THAT is the issue, too slow to keep up in a 7 gamer IMO, doesn`t mean I want to see them miss the playoffs though

We can't beat anyone with speed and we can't beat anyone that's physical.

Who the heck are we beating?

 

[indy]

NO WAY do you let Loui leave with no return. He is a top player and worth a lot. The bidding will rise through this week and you can bet Sweeney already has offers.

The valuable chips Loui is worth are part of the plan.

I think this team makes the playoff AFTER trading Lou.

 

[Aeroforce]

The salary cap-induced parity in all leagues has managed to keep more teams in contention til the end.

As was discussed in a main board thread, hockey is less dominated by star players and there are chance occurrences that may give lesser teams a fighting chance; more so than say in the NBA.

So it's a balancing act. Perhaps Sweeney and Neely behind closed doors concede that they would be in over their heads in a seven game series against elite opponents.

So they have to weigh gaining playoff experience for younger players and making money for the owner vs. putting the pieces together for a more serious run in the near future.

Despite lots of fan bases being mobilized, I'm trying to think of the last Cinderella team in any sport to make a serious run or win it all.

 

[jgatie]

Despite lots of fan bases being mobilized, I'm trying to think of the last Cinderella team in any sport to make a serious run or win it all.

Not that hard to think of; the LA Kings won the Cup as the 8th conference seed (13th overall by record) in 2012.

 

[ODAAT]

We can't beat anyone with speed and we can't beat anyone that's physical.

Who the heck are we beating?

creampuff teams

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Not that hard to think of; the LA Kings won the Cup as the 8th conference seed (13th overall by record) in 2012.

And not only did they win that year, but they walked over everyone on their way.

 

[Aeroforce]

And not only did they win that year, but they walked over everyone on their way.

That is a good point on the '12 Kings. Granted I'm viewing this with the benefit of hindsight but considering how successful the Kings have been since then, and how they steamrolled through the playoffs (16-3 including a 4-1 domination of the President's Trophy winning Canucks), I tend to look at the ho-hum first part of their season (before Sutter, Carter, etc.) as the anomaly of that season; not the dominating finish.

From a Bruins perspective, I don't envy the decisions upper brass has to make. Most would have looked at that Kings lineup and thought they were underachieving before their great finish (again with the benefit of hindsight); whereas most think with the current Bruins defense they are overachieving.

 

[dafoomie]

You've already traded Milan Lucic and Dougie Hamilton for picks going into the season. Suddenly dealing Eriksson is a problem now because you waited for his value to increase first?

If you can load up to be the best 8th seed you can be without compromising yourself in the future, go for it, but this attitude of sacrificing long term interests to stay the course with a bubble team is what leads to years of mediocrity. You went into the year with a plan, you're not any different than you thought you'd be, stay with it. The only surprise is how terrible the East is and the extent that your core players have elevated their game to carry you through the regular season.

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

That is a good point on the '12 Kings. Granted I'm viewing this with the benefit of hindsight but considering how successful the Kings have been since then, and how they steamrolled through the playoffs (16-3 including a 4-1 domination of the President's Trophy winning Canucks), I tend to look at the ho-hum first part of their season (before Sutter, Carter, etc.) as the anomaly of that season; not the dominating finish.

From a Bruins perspective, I don't envy the decisions upper brass has to make. Most would have looked at that Kings lineup and thought they were underachieving before their great finish (again with the benefit of hindsight); whereas most think with the current Bruins defense they are overachieving.

I still predict when all things are said and done, this team finishes between 7-10th in the conference. The same at the beginning of the season. While it's close from the wild card spot up to number 2, it's also pretty close right behind the wild card. 2 games could but the Bruins in 2nd. 2 games could put the Bruins on the outside looking in.

We aren't acquiring a polished top pairing defenseman at the deadline. If we acquire defensemen, they either are going to have growing pains, or warts of their own. Preferably a guy with room to grow.

I move ANY player that's not in the plans next season. Whether it be UFA's to be, prospects around the waiver exempt cutoff. And start building now, and make a push with THAT team. I hope Sweeney has a direction he's going, and he has to stick with it.

 

[patty59]

You've already traded Milan Lucic and Dougie Hamilton for picks going into the season. Suddenly dealing Eriksson is a problem now because you waited for his value to increase first?

If you can load up to be the best 8th seed you can be without compromising yourself in the future, go for it, but this attitude of sacrificing their long term interests to stay the course with a bubble team is what leads to years of mediocrity.

I understand the premise of what you're saying, but I'm not sure I see how keeping him would sacrifice the future, they'll have had 5 first round picks in the 2 consecutive drafts either way. I could get it if they had no 1st this year, but they have 2 and had 3 last year.

I would like for them to keep him and sign him, but if they do trade him I'd like to see some immediate help, not a rental but someone who can come in a be here for a few years at least.

 

[dafoomie]

I understand the premise of what you're saying, but I'm not sure I see how keeping him would sacrifice the future, they'll have had 5 first round picks in the 2 consecutive drafts either way. I could get it if they had no 1st this year, but they have 2 and had 3 last year.

I would like for them to keep him and sign him, but if they do trade him I'd like to see some immediate help, not a rental but someone who can come in a be here for a few years at least.

How about not having those assets available to you in the offseason to start building your 2016-17 roster? Eriksson might be the most valuable player available at the deadline.

A roster player directly for Eriksson would be nice, but take what you can get and use it to get one later. The guys they need don't get moved until the offseason.

 

[patty59]

You don't see how retaining what is possibly the most valuable player available at the trade deadline is sacrificing their long term interests? How about not having those assets available to you in the offseason to start building your 2016-17 roster?

A roster player directly for Eriksson would be nice, but take what you can get and use it to get one later. The guys they need don't get moved until the offseason.

that's why i'd prefer they sign him, which is looking unlikely at this time.

To be honest I'm tired of them making trades for futures. I'd like to make a trade where they get the better player back and that's not likely to happen with Eriksson. I'm also not convinced you'll be able to take what you get from him and flip it for help at the draft.

I get the idea of getting the most value out of players, I just think the best value you can get from Eriksson is by keeping him.

Horton, Seguin, Iginla, Lucic are all top line wingers they've let go in the past few years. Now it's looking like Eriksson will be added to that list, at some point you need to start keeping these guys.

 

[bruins repeat time]

NO WAY do you let Loui leave with no return. He is a top player and worth a lot. The bidding will rise through this week and you can bet Sweeney already has offers.

The valuable chips Loui is worth are part of the plan.

I think this team makes the playoff AFTER trading Lou.

I don't believe they could do better than 8th with the loss of loui and if no major players are added. I would guess they don't make it at all though.

 

[BruinLVGA]

that's why i'd prefer they sign him, which is looking unlikely at this time.

To be honest I'm tired of them making trades for futures. I'd like to make a trade where they get the better player back and that's not likely to happen with Eriksson. I'm also not convinced you'll be able to take what you get from him and flip it for help at the draft.

I get the idea of getting the most value out of players, I just think the best value you can get from Eriksson is by keeping him.

Horton, Seguin, Iginla, Lucic are all top line wingers they've let go in the past few years. Now it's looking like Eriksson will be added to that list, at some point you need to start keeping these guys.

Amen to this.

Furthermore, we need to consider that Krejci is 30. He is basically ppg this year. It is criminal to give to such a high quality center Beleskey, who is really a 3rd liner, and Pastrnak, a 19 yo, still very raw player. It is wasting a prime asset who hasn't got anymore a boatload of prime years like 4-5 years ago.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

That is a good point on the '12 Kings. Granted I'm viewing this with the benefit of hindsight but considering how successful the Kings have been since then, and how they steamrolled through the playoffs (16-3 including a 4-1 domination of the President's Trophy winning Canucks), I tend to look at the ho-hum first part of their season (before Sutter, Carter, etc.) as the anomaly of that season; not the dominating finish.

From a Bruins perspective, I don't envy the decisions upper brass has to make. Most would have looked at that Kings lineup and thought they were underachieving before their great finish (again with the benefit of hindsight); whereas most think with the current Bruins defense they are overachieving.

Carolina and Edmonton played in the finals for the cup... then missed the playoffs... obvious Cinderella teams there

florida in baseball comes out of no where overnight and wins... then dismantles

Oakland is famous for being Cinderella team in baseball

many people think we were a Cinderella team when we won our cup

the los vegas odds makers rarely pick the two finalists... usually someone else enters the mix

 

[dafoomie]

I get the idea of getting the most value out of players, I just think the best value you can get from Eriksson is by keeping him.

Horton, Seguin, Iginla, Lucic are all top line wingers they've let go in the past few years. Now it's looking like Eriksson will be added to that list, at some point you need to start keeping these guys.

They couldn't keep all those guys because they overextended themselves on 30+ year old non-core players which is what Eriksson is.

There's no chance he signs, there's no reason to let him go for nothing. Get the best deal you can and go from there.

 

[Ten Thousand Hours]

They couldn't keep all those guys because they overextended themselves on 30+ year old non-core players which is what Eriksson is.

There's no chance he signs, there's no reason to let him go for nothing. Get the best deal you can and go from there.

Eriksson is a core player. I'd rather keep him and create room another way.

 

[dafoomie]

Eriksson is a core player. I'd rather keep him and create room another way.

Would you rather let Marchand go?

 

[BruinLVGA]

They couldn't keep all those guys because they overextended themselves on 30+ year old non-core players which is what Eriksson is.

There's no chance he signs, there's no reason to let him go for nothing. Get the best deal you can and go from there.

How many non core players are 2nd in points for their team, in back to back years while being trusted to close to highest TOI by their coach?

 

[BruinLVGA]

Would you rather let Marchand go?

Hypothetically speaking, with Marchand signed at 6.5 per, Eriksson at 6, would mean Eriksson - Marchand - Bergeron - Krejci would be signed at the SAME cap hit as Chicago's Toews-Kane-Hossa... (that's 26.35m)

 

[Ten Thousand Hours]

Would you rather let Marchand go?

That's not necessary either. We should keep our core players (including Eriksson and Marchand) and fill the depth spots with all the prospects we have coming up. Hayes isn't really needed on this team. And I'd rather give someone something else to take Seidenberg off our hands than lose a good player.

 

[dafoomie]

How many non core players are 2nd in points for their team, in back to back years while being trusted to close to highest TOI by their coach?

Ones on teams that aren't good? Lee Stempniak leads the Devils in points. Obviously they're intent on not repeating Chiarelli's mistakes which is why they're not paying him.