The Athletic - Boston Neely: "We have to be as brutally honest as possible"

[HumBucker]

I think you have to grant that some of the management moves/signings over the past several years just didn't pan out for reasons that probably couldn't have been anticipated.

I mean, be fair. Did anyone really predict that the David Backes that showed up in Boston would bear almost no resemblance to the one in St. Louis? Sure, he was older, but to just have almost no impact as a player whatsoever? Compounded by the surgery (diverticulitis), injuries, etc.

Rick Nash. Beleski. Even Hayes to some degree. It's easy to look at what happened with 20/20 hindsight, but if you're honest, you have to grant that there was some justification for bringing these guys in. The fact that they ended up immediately turning into ghosts of their former selves as soon as they donned a spoked B – it's pretty hard to say you saw that coming.

Maybe their judgment was coloured by the Recchi and Iginla experiences – veteran guys past their primes who nonetheless came in and had an impact?

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I think you have to grant that some of the management moves/signings over the past several years just didn't pan out for reasons that probably couldn't have been anticipated.

I mean, be fair. Did anyone really predict that the David Backes that showed up in Boston would bear almost no resemblance to the one in St. Louis? Sure, he was older, but to just have almost no impact as a player whatsoever? Compounded by the surgery (diverticulitis), injuries, etc.

Rick Nash. Beleski. Even Hayes to some degree. It's easy to look at what happened with 20/20 hindsight, but if you're honest, you have to grant that there was some justification for bringing these guys in. The fact that they ended up immediately turning into ghosts of their former selves as soon as they donned a spoked B – it's pretty hard to say you saw that coming.

Maybe their judgment was coloured by the Recchi and Iginla experiences – veteran guys past their primes who nonetheless came in and had an impact?

Yes it was easy to see backes would break down. Hell nearly everyone called it immediately.

Double that with trading away a massive fan favorite and ideal Bruin for those exact same concerns.

Hayes was easy to see. They traded a 50pt player for a guy with 66 points in 170 games. Hayes sucked before coming here, but all they saw was 6'5 and get rid of soft Reilly

Beleskey was a 20pt player that they signed on the heels of 1 "breakout" season, as much as 32 points can be called breaking out.

All 3 were clearly them going for any size and ignoring all red flags. They pissed on our head and tried to tell us it was raining.

There was no "ghost of former selves" they were exactly what they are here. Fringe NHL'ers

 

[Gordoff]

I think you have to grant that some of the management moves/signings over the past several years just didn't pan out for reasons that probably couldn't have been anticipated.

I mean, be fair. Did anyone really predict that the David Backes that showed up in Boston would bear almost no resemblance to the one in St. Louis? Sure, he was older, but to just have almost no impact as a player whatsoever? Compounded by the surgery (diverticulitis), injuries, etc.

Rick Nash. Beleski. Even Hayes to some degree. It's easy to look at what happened with 20/20 hindsight, but if you're honest, you have to grant that there was some justification for bringing these guys in. The fact that they ended up immediately turning into ghosts of their former selves as soon as they donned a spoked B – it's pretty hard to say you saw that coming.

Maybe their judgment was coloured by the Recchi and Iginla experiences – veteran guys past their primes who nonetheless came in and had an impact?

Actually in regards to Backes, and Beleskey the majority of people here were very much against the signings. I just figured that the front office knows more about this stuff and those players in particular that they knew what they were getting into.

 

[GordonHowe]

I'll say they were lucky to get the one they got.

I would, too. But, they earned it as well. Three game seven's, Thomas playing out of his mind, etc. They were deserving.

 

[GordonHowe]

They probably don't have a gem in ZS, but who knows? You hear about them trying to change his entire game and it's puzzling. Then you hear from @lost peanut that they didn't bring him back this year possibly because of cap management issues and bonuses, and that' just a really shitty way to go about developing offensive talent. And it's certainly not the first time a young offensively minded player has expressed similar issues with how they were treated/developed.

And... ZS is not a gem. It's not his fault he was drafted so high. Bring him up, along with JZ, and see what they have, finally. Then get rid of both if they're drek. Which, unfairly, they probably are.

 

[Deuce17]

You're right. I didn't look at it that way. I guess we just unresonalbly want or expect a first round pick to work out. That being the case I wonder if there's any value at all in him? Can they get a 4th round pick for him? Is he going to end up in Europe or Russia in a year?
It's sadly abysmal that 2/3s of those picks are iffy. Any idea where Zboril is in that pecking order? Defensemen usually take longer to ripen, he's got the speed and an edgy on-ice attitude from what we're told but is he another bust? Obviously I just don't know. Not to change the subject but I just read that article on Tyler Seguin and was thinking, imagine if we still had him and Blake Wheeler? Oh well.

Ya man I get it and I think you just gave the reason we all talk about him so much and fixate on/want him to succeed....draft position. We want some of the sting from that disastrous draft to go away by getting something out of him. As far as Zboril and other Providence prospects I’d prob defer to SaxonEric or someone who sees them much more than me

 

[member 96824]

I think you're overrating this player group. I think they've won exactly as many as they should have. 0 Cups would have been disappointing and 2+ would have been exceeding expectations. I hate going back and looking at certain games or plays and saying they should have won this year if they had done x, y, z. This is a good group, but they're not a great group. I find it hard to believe they deserved more than 1 Cup. For that reason, I can't be disappointed in them and I can't say "what if". My expectations for them just weren't that high.

It's not even just on the players. There's never been a point where I honestly thought Sweeney and Cassidy were a Cup-winning GM and coach. I just don't consider them to be that good and it's the way I've felt since they were hired. They're good enough to build a good team, but I think that's their limit.

This this group right now, yeah absolutely I agree with you...but when talking about the tenure of Cam Neely as President IMO it's a bit of a different conversation.

For example, in the summer of 2011, the Bruins had just picked 2nd overall and 9th overall in the last 12 months while winning a cup in between. They sat with a 25 year old Bergeron, 24 year old Krejci, 22 year old Lucic, 22 year old kid named Marchand that just exploded into a top 6 player. Their starting goalie was old, but the perfect succession plan was already in place as a 23 year old Tuukka Rask had already shown he was ready to take the net. Chara looked better than ever at 33.

I'm going to be honest, I don't really recall anyone saying "yeah that was probably the only one." I remember more side glances of like "uhhh....we really have something here"

Fast forward 10 years, no more cups.

The GM has been changed, the coach has been changed, the scouting staff has been overhauled god knows how many times, Cam Neely and Scott Bradley remain..

oh well, spilled milk. Like I mentioned earlier, can't change the past..just have to learn from it. Hopefully that's what Cam's "being honest with ourselves" is...

 

[member 96824]

Did anyone really predict that the David Backes that showed up in Boston would bear almost no resemblance to the one in St. Louis?

Yes. A lot of people.

Many were saying at the time "Man, that contract is going to stink" but a lot of people were saying "This contract already stinks. Backes isn't the same player he was"

Confirmed with Link: - Bruins Sign Backes!

I do agree with your post regarding Rick Nash though, that was the right player at the right time..and he was arguably our best player on the ice against Tampa in 18. Had he not had his career ended, it would have been interesting to see if he would have re-signed here. I think the fit would have worked.

 

[HumBucker]

Yes it was easy to see backes would break down. Hell nearly everyone called it immediately.

Double that with trading away a massive fan favorite and ideal Bruin for those exact same concerns.

Hayes was easy to see. They traded a 50pt player for a guy with 66 points in 170 games. Hayes sucked before coming here, but all they saw was 6'5 and get rid of soft Reilly

Beleskey was a 20pt player that they signed on the heels of 1 "breakout" season, as much as 32 points can be called breaking out.

All 3 were clearly them going for any size and ignoring all red flags. They pissed on our head and tried to tell us it was raining.

There was no "ghost of former selves" they were exactly what they are here. Fringe NHL'ers

I remember a lot of people concerned about the length of Backes' contract, and that for the last years of it, he would be an albatross. That's different than getting a player that had very little impact whatsoever. I think a lot of people assumed he'd likely be fine as a 3C.

 

[Blowfish]

I think you have to grant that some of the management moves/signings over the past several years just didn't pan out for reasons that probably couldn't have been anticipated.

I mean, be fair. Did anyone really predict that the David Backes that showed up in Boston would bear almost no resemblance to the one in St. Louis? Sure, he was older, but to just have almost no impact as a player whatsoever? Compounded by the surgery (diverticulitis), injuries, etc.

Rick Nash. Beleski. Even Hayes to some degree. It's easy to look at what happened with 20/20 hindsight, but if you're honest, you have to grant that there was some justification for bringing these guys in. The fact that they ended up immediately turning into ghosts of their former selves as soon as they donned a spoked B – it's pretty hard to say you saw that coming.

Maybe their judgment was coloured by the Recchi and Iginla experiences – veteran guys past their primes who nonetheless came in and had an impact?

Many of us saw this coming...you might be right perhaps the Recchi (not Iginla or Jagr) experience clouded judgement. It kills me knowing the bruins could be down right dangerous (Bolts territory) if it weren't for some really bone headed decisions.

 

[LSCII]

Yes. A lot of people.

Many were saying at the time "Man, that contract is going to stink" but a lot of people were saying "This contract already stinks. Backes isn't the same player he was"

Confirmed with Link: - Bruins Sign Backes!

I do agree with your post regarding Rick Nash though, that was the right player at the right time..and he was arguably our best player on the ice against Tampa in 18. Had he not had his career ended, it would have been interesting to see if he would have re-signed here. I think the fit would have worked.

It's always scary to look back at previous takes, but in this case I nailed it. Said the team got slower instantly when they signed him.

 

[LSCII]

Why do I get the feeling by reading Neely's comments that we're all gonna see a Behind the B's where Cam says "If Pasta were half of Point in that series, we win" to be aired right after dumping Pasta for a backup goalie, a bottom 6 wing, and a 5th dman?

 

[MattFromFranklin]

Why do I get the feeling by reading Neely's comments that we're all gonna see a Behind the B's where Cam says "If Pasta were half of Point in that series, we win" to be aired right after dumping Pasta for a backup goalie, a bottom 6 wing, and a 5th dman?

I laughed reading this, but at the same time I’m absolutely terrified, given the fact that Neely, who is a mediocre hockey mind and too emotional, somehow is still employed and has a say in hockey decisions.

 

[MattFromFranklin]

I think you have to grant that some of the management moves/signings over the past several years just didn't pan out for reasons that probably couldn't have been anticipated.

I mean, be fair. Did anyone really predict that the David Backes that showed up in Boston would bear almost no resemblance to the one in St. Louis? Sure, he was older, but to just have almost no impact as a player whatsoever? Compounded by the surgery (diverticulitis), injuries, etc.

Rick Nash. Beleski. Even Hayes to some degree. It's easy to look at what happened with 20/20 hindsight, but if you're honest, you have to grant that there was some justification for bringing these guys in. The fact that they ended up immediately turning into ghosts of their former selves as soon as they donned a spoked B – it's pretty hard to say you saw that coming.

Maybe their judgment was coloured by the Recchi and Iginla experiences – veteran guys past their primes who nonetheless came in and had an impact?

Quite a few of us did, myself included. I thought the contract would get ugly by year 4, and he’d be a passenger for 2 years. Unfortunately, I gave Backes credit for 1 more year, as he became a total passenger by the 3rd year.

Plenty of people, myself included, also thought that the Beleskey contract would be an abomination, as he just wasn’t a very skilled player. I thought he’d be our version of the Ville Leino contract. His shooting percentage was far greater than any year in his career, he had a fluke year in a contract year, and he was playing with Getzlaf and Perry. I can’t even skate, but I could score 15 goals blindfolded if I got to play with Perry and Getzlaf when they were still productive.

 

[LSCII]

I laughed reading this, but at the same time I’m absolutely terrified, given the fact that Neely, who is a mediocre hockey mind and too emotional, somehow is still employed and has a say in hockey decisions.

There's no doubt Neely has had his finger prints on quite a few questionable moves, and it's insane to me that they'd allow it. The guy played the game but has shown zero propensity to evaluate either NHL talent or incoming kids. So why he would have a say in anything related to the roster is beyond me.

 

[Spooner st]

Mainly I say this because no one really knows how it might have turned out. Chances are it would not have worked. But we'll never know and anyone that claims they do know with certainty is either full of shit or blessed with powers that the average human doesn't possess. It is more emblematic of an organizational approach that it is the specific player, anyway. He is just a perfect example.

I remember Sweeney in an interview saying before training camp last year... prospects need to seize the opportunities, when and if those opportunities are given.

 

[Dr Hook]

I remember Sweeney in an interview saying before training camp last year... prospects need to seize the opportunities, when and if those opportunities are given.

They (Sweeney/Cassidy/Clode whoever) always pay lip service to that, though. Every summer when camp opens they get asked about young players and it is always "meritocracy, earn it, blah blah blah" which sounds good and what you'd expect but in practice it doesn't seem to work that way very often. There are exceptions, like JDB, and you then you scratch your head when he does stuff that would get other prospects sent down or benched. Yes, I know Jake occasionally gets sent to stand in the corner, but not often. Then there is the long rope given to subpar players for whatever reason- investment via a contract, a trade, whatever, "veteran" status, our wives are friends, who knows. It happens, but it does turn the whole idea of "you earn your spot" on its head much of the time.

 

[LSCII]

I remember Sweeney in an interview saying before training camp last year... prospects need to seize the opportunities, when and if those opportunities are given.

What opportunities? They get very few. And even in the case of Senyshyn this year, he got hurt and per dom, they kept him back in Providence because of potential time played bonuses. And they supposedly did that for a lot of guys as well, like Vaak and Zboril. Not for nothing, but I'd at least want to know if they have anything in those guys before they write them off. So why not give them a shot to see?

 

[BruinDust]

What opportunities? They get very few. And even in the case of Senyshyn this year, he got hurt and per dom, they kept him back in Providence because of potential time played bonuses. And they supposedly did that for a lot of guys as well, like Vaak and Zboril. Not for nothing, but I'd at least want to know if they have anything in those guys before they write them off. So why not give them a shot to see?

Depends on how many 4th line veteran grinders they decide to sign on Oct. 9th.

 

[DKH]

I would, too. But, they earned it as well. Three game seven's, Thomas playing out of his mind, etc. They were deserving.

Exactly

Sox 2004 Don’ get WS If Tony Clarke’s ground rule double ain’t a ground rule double the Sox lose game 5 to Yankees and series and it took a magical weird bounce

Patriots 2001 SB they lose in playoffs if Tuck Rule goes against him

life is one coulda shoulda woulda

they earned it

who knows If the slew foot is called against Accari last year the Bruins win in 6

they won 2011 and it was phenomenal 2 months of a roller coaster ride that took my breathe away - had them dead to many times to count

that series and watching Bobby Orr makes being a Bruins fan worthwhile

I do need to complete the trilogy seeing them win it live

 

[LSCII]

Depends on how many 4th line veteran grinders they decide to sign on Oct. 9th.

That's the really annoying part of it all. They bring in a collective bag of suck, and then use that to fill out the roster instead of letting the kids get a shot. It's infuriating and this is why I tend to question their development. Because if they've drafted as many guys as highly as they have over the last 5 years, why are most not progressing at all? To the point that the Brett Ritchies of the world look like better options? Something isn't right. Either their scouting sucks and they're picking bad players, or their development sucks and they're screwing up the guys they did pick. Shouldn't be hard to figure out, but it apparently is for some reason.

 

[DKH]

Depends on how many 4th line veteran grinders they decide to sign on Oct. 9th.

I would think 0

will be stunned if they do

I will lose it

 

[BruinDust]

I would think 0

will be stunned if they do

I will lose it

I don't want to see any Lindholm-like signings at the start of free agency. They only have so many roster spots and tons of guys who would need to clear waivers. Time to see what the likes of Zboril and Senyshyn can do. If they can't cut the mustard than make a trade during the season to fill in the gaps. Shouldn't be hard to do really. I know mid-season trades aren't really Sweeney's thing but most GM's seem capable of pulling of small mid-season deals.

 

[DKH]

I don't want to see any Lindholm-like signings at the start of free agency. They only have so many roster spots and tons of guys who would need to clear waivers. Time to see what the likes of Zboril and Senyshyn can do. If they can't cut the mustard than make a trade during the season to fill in the gaps. Shouldn't be hard to do really. I know mid-season trades aren't really Sweeney's thing but most GM's seem capable of pulling of small mid-season deals.

Actually Sweeney picked up Rick Nash - absolutely the right guy without vertigo courtesy of that dirt bag Cedric Paquette.

Coyle & Johansson home runs

 

[Dr Hook]

Actually Sweeney picked up Rick Nash - absolutely the right guy without vertigo courtesy of that dirt bag Cedric Paquette.

Coyle & Johansson home runs

Absolutely- no one is questioning those moves. On the other hand, maybe one or more them become unnecessary if they actually developed a prospect for the role instead of leaving them in Providence and then benching them repeatedly if they make mistakes when they do get a call up that finally ends in a send down. That is what we are talking about here. It's perfectly fine to go shop at the trade deadline if you have a need, but I think the beef here is that they are not bothering to really find out what they have in their prospects because the ice time is taken up by bottom 6/bottom pairing grinder types