Player Discussion Nick Ritchie

[LSCII]

Sweeney, on Richie's expected role:
"It was an area that we felt we needed to address from some interior ice play, size and strength, net-front play, contested puck battles – things that we feel Nick will bring to the table for us."

Sweeney also mentioned that he expected the same things that Richie did with Anaheim. And its been pointed out that Richie's big-hitting years were years ago. So I think it reasonable to assume Don thought he was trading for a guy with size, strength and some skill... not a hitting machine.

Rewrite the narrative now that he's not really doing what he was obtained for?

Bruins Acquire Forward Nick Ritchie From Anaheim For Danton Heinen

Here’s everything Bruins G.M. Don Sweeney said after Monday’s trade deadline

I understand your question completely. We do believe he adds an element to our hockey club that we didn’t have prior to today and we’re happy about it. There’s some big-bodied hockey that’s going to be played moving forward, and I think that he’s a part of that.

 

[LouJersey]

Sweeney, on Richie's expected role:
"It was an area that we felt we needed to address from some interior ice play, size and strength, net-front play, contested puck battles – things that we feel Nick will bring to the table for us."

Sweeney also mentioned that he expected the same things that Richie did with Anaheim. And its been pointed out that Richie's big-hitting years were years ago. So I think it reasonable to assume Don thought he was trading for a guy with size, strength and some skill... not a hitting machine.

If so he should have acquired someone with more speed that could actually get to those areas. We will see.

 

[Lobster57]

Meh. The Bruins have plenty of team toughness. They stand up for each other. Different guys will drop the gloves when needed. There was definitely a need for a guy like Ritchie and I'd be fine with adding another if he can play but I don't buy this notion the Bruins are not tough. Just for a comparison sake, let's look at the guys from the SC team that were the go-to's.

2011: Lucic, Thornton, Campbell, McQuaid, Boychuk, and Chara. Missing anyone?

2020: Ritchie, Wagner, Kuraly, and Chara. Lauzon has it in him and has shown to be tough and physical.

The differences up front are that Lucic was a prime Top 6 option while being one of the most feared physical players in the league and Thornton was a tough guy who could actually play and fight. Campbell didn't back down but got the bag beat out of him most of the time.

Team toughness is there pretty regularly and was there pretty regularly for that earlier squad as well. Krug and Marchand have no issues standing up for teammates even if they're small.

I don't know.... I think the toughness thing is over blown.

You're definitely missing Ference and Horton. The thing about the 2011 team compared to most teams, Bruins or otherwise, is that there was toughness all through the lineup. Lucic and Horton were top 6 tough, 2011 Chara was a top 5 d-man in the league. The current guys are middle of the lineup, at best.

 

[incidental otter]

Rewrite the narrative now that he's not really doing what he was obtained for?

Bruins Acquire Forward Nick Ritchie From Anaheim For Danton Heinen

Here’s everything Bruins G.M. Don Sweeney said after Monday’s trade deadline

Rewrite the narrative now that he's not really doing what he was obtained for?

Bruins Acquire Forward Nick Ritchie From Anaheim For Danton Heinen

Here’s everything Bruins G.M. Don Sweeney said after Monday’s trade deadline

If posting in-context quotes from the GM "rewrites the narrative", my conclusion is that the narrative is wrong.

 

[BMC]

My biggest issue with Nick Ritchie is his lack of speed. He just can't keep up with the play. He looks like Shawn Thornton did during Shawn's last season with the Bruins. Yeah, that bad.

 

[LSCII]

If posting in-context quotes from the GM "rewrites the narrative", my conclusion is that the narrative is wrong.

Did you read what I linked to? Included your quote but expanded on them as well for more context. But semantics, I guess.

Let's just get down to business. Is Nick Ritchie in your top 6 or bottom 6?

 

[arider1990]

Did you read what I linked to? Included your quote but expanded on them as well for more context. But semantics, I guess.

Let's just get down to business. Is Nick Ritchie in your top 6 or bottom 6?

Is the 9th floor an answer?

 

[LSCII]

Is the 9th floor an answer?

Not preferably. But also not preferable having him in a top 6 role that's needed to score, no? Bottom 6 is what I've consistently said about him. Good 4th liner, marginal 3rd is my spot for him. Certainly not 17 minutes of TOI and 2 minutes of PP TOI like he got in the Tampa game. Last game with him getting 12 minutes out of the top 6, you notice I didn't say a word, no?

 

[incidental otter]

Did you read what I linked to? Included your quote but expanded on them as well for more context. But semantics, I guess.

Let's just get down to business. Is Nick Ritchie in your top 6 or bottom 6?

No semantics: your links are unpersuasive.

Your quote begins with Donnie comparing the Richie brothers' scoring abilities, not their hitting. It is 100% consistent with my conclusion, and - aside from using "big bodied" instead of "strong" - is consistent with Don's other statements about the player. See the video below, and note the utter lack of Don mentioning hitting or fighting or banging.

And your other link is some schlub's guess at Richie's role... they didn't bother to acknowledge Sweeney's public statements, or even mention "team sources". Weaksauce.

I think Richie is a bottom 6 player.

 

[LSCII]

No semantics: your links are unpersuasive.

Your quote begins with Donnie comparing the Richie brothers' scoring abilities, not their hitting. It is 100% consistent with my conclusion, and - aside from using "big bodied" instead of "strong" - is consistent with Don's other statements about the player. See the video below, and note the utter lack of Don mentioning hitting or fighting or banging.

And your other link is some schlub's guess at Richie's role... they didn't bother to acknowledge Sweeney's public statements, or even mention "team sources". Weaksauce.

I think Richie is a bottom 6 player.

So I'm wrong and misguided but you agree with me. Got it. Makes sense bc he is a bottom 6 player. Glad we reached a consensus on this.

 

[GordonHowe]

Did you read what I linked to? Included your quote but expanded on them as well for more context. But semantics, I guess.

Let's just get down to business. Is Nick Ritchie in your top 6 or bottom 6?

Bottom six. At best.

 

[Dr Hook]

Bottom six. At best.

Unless he find some sort of zip for his zap or manages to do a Kevan Miller and improve his skating, bottom six at best. If he can play with more energy and improve his skating even somewhat he could be very valuable.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

He’s better than Brett but that isn’t saying much.

I love the guy’s attitude. He plays physical, doesn’t take any shit, and will take on pretty much anyone.

That being said, he can be an anchor in an almost literal sense purely because of his lack of foot speed. There are entire games where he simply looks like he cannot keep up.

I am hopeful that he is a real asset in the chippier games, but he shouldn’t be anywhere near the top two lines at any point, no matter what other problems arise IMO

 

[GordonHowe]

Unless he find some sort of zip for his zap or manages to do a Kevan Miller and improve his skating, bottom six at best. If he can play with more energy and improve his skating even somewhat he could be very valuable.

 

[GordonHowe]

I agree.

 

[NDiesel]

My biggest issue with Nick Ritchie is his lack of speed. He just can't keep up with the play. He looks like Shawn Thornton did during Shawn's last season with the Bruins. Yeah, that bad.

It's literally the same issue we had with Backes. The guy could play physical but he couldn't get to the puck carrier quick enough.

 

[Sens]

I watched Pat Maroon cause havoc all night and he’s not the fleetest of foot

 

[LSCII]

I watched Pat Maroon cause havoc all night and he’s not the fleetest of foot

Sure, against a Columbus team that isn't what you'd call fast. Ritchie vs the Canes though? Not sure that's a real solid match up for Nick based on the skating issues mentioned above. But in limited doses, sure, he could bring some physicality.

 

[BruinsNetwork]

It was a heated game from the start, and OF COURSE the other teams shit stirrers show up and our guy does not. Whether he's played 1, 10 or 100 games for the Bruins, that's not acceptable. The guy could be a Lucic type but does he even have an interest in becoming that? No doubt in my mind the brass spoke to him about that game afterwards. This is what he said after the two regular season Tampa games he was a part of

“I think there are a lot of teams that have built their teams to play against Boston and I think Boston has built their team to play against some of those their teams,” said Ritchie. “You can see it a lot, especially in those two Tampa Bay games, especially the one in Boston. It was physical, there was scoring, the crowd was into it. It was a playoff style and I think that’s a lot more of what you’d see moving on once you get into it with those other teams in the Eastern Conference.”

Bruins' Nick Ritchie managing through tumultuous times

Sorry, not buying the "needs time" part to play physically.

If so he should have acquired someone with more speed that could actually get to those areas. We will see.

Sounds like you bought it.

 

[remer]

I watched Pat Maroon cause havoc all night and he’s not the fleetest of foot

Sure, against a Columbus team that isn't what you'd call fast. Ritchie vs the Canes though? Not sure that's a real solid match up for Nick based on the skating issues mentioned above. But in limited doses, sure, he could bring some physicality.

I would agree that Pat Maroon is way slower than Ritchie and he played a huge role for Tampa last night. Columbus is a very quick team.
Cut Nick some slack. The Bruins need someone who can win puck battles along the boards. Henien was a nice player but he didn't scare anyone in board battles.

 

[LSCII]

I would agree that Pat Maroon is way slower than Ritchie and he played a huge role for Tampa last night. Columbus is a very quick team.
Cut Nick some slack. The Bruins need someone who can win puck battles along the boards. Henien was a nice player but he didn't scare anyone in board battles.

Eh, it depends on what you want. Ritchie's game is slow. Heinen could at least keep up with the pace of play. Ritchie is more physical, but Heinan was better positionally. I honestly feel that most of the praise Ritchie is getting is coming from the folks that truly disliked Heinan's game and to me it's silly. I look at each player as an individual and for me Ritchie slots in at best as a marginal 3rd line option but more is honestly a 4th liner, while Heninen had the flexibility to play up and down the entire line up.

 

[BB88]

I don't get the inconsistent intensity/physicality with this guy. He knows any shift he can be a dominant force. But it's just not consistent. He needs to bring the hits to the game more. His style suits Coyle well once they enter the offensive zone. He's good down low and puck protection.

Some guys just have that constant loose cannon attitude. Tom Wilson for example. Its frustrating because Ritchie could bring something close to that (the physicality aspect) but it just doesn't click every shift.

He's an NHLer but starting to think he's a higher end 4th liner who can take shifts on the 3rd line and contribute some.

Really interested to see how he does in real playoff games, where he was traded for.

Build for playoffs so let’s see

 

[rocketdan9]

was on ice for two of the goals

but overall thought played a decent game. Offensive end held down sticks, made good little passes along the walls

Helped create open look for Bjork and Wagner

 

[Blowfish]

was on ice for two of the goals

but overall thought played a decent game. Offensive end held down sticks, made good little passes along the walls

Helped create open look for Bjork and Wagner

Not bad not great....still say Studnicka over him makes the team better.

 

[BruinsBtn]

He lost board battles and coverage on both of Carolina's even strength goals and did nothing positive.

Get Kuhlman in there.