Player Discussion Peter Cehlarik - III

[PlayMakers]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

 

[Dr Hook]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

I was hoping he'd get on the scoresheet, but I thought he played well also. He looked like a different player from last season where he had tendency to give up on plays/pucks too easily. He's been more energetic overall, hustling, and it does look like his skating has improved also.

 

[elMatador]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

He also killed over a minute on PK. I thought Cassidy would like to have anybody but him getting out of the penalty box after they killed 5 on 3. A mental note to Bruce to think twice next time.

Overall I liked his second game more than the first one a week ago. After Backes withdrew himself from the game the bottom 6 were mess. Those lines didn't get going until the 3rd period. He didn't take any penalty, didn't make any costly turnover, managed the puck nicely apart for the brain fart cutting to the middle in the 3rd period. There was no replay but I believe that pass from Krejci for a tap in was to his feet.

 

[Mick Riddleton]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

I agree and that offside play was really just not having chemistry with players. Onus is on the guy without the puck to straddle the line or have a feel for the play. Way way over blown in here. Happens all the time. I would rather have him then Ritchie or Backes. I still want to see Seny and at least they can showcase some guys if a trade is ever going to happen.

 

[BruinsNetwork]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

School is out for the weekend and you’re just dropping knowledge on a Sunday.

 

[Friar85]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

Based on his comments after each of the last two games, Cassidy strongly disagrees. Would be surprised if PC is in Boston much longer.

 

[Pia8988]

You're all nuts.

I think he's played very well in his two games up. He creates a scoring chance almost every shift. He makes slick plays thru the neutral zone to spring guys, he gets in on the forecheck and creates turnovers, he's strong on the walls and in front of the net, and is a crafty playmaker in the offensive zone.

His Corsi For is 63% . That leads the team. His relative Corsi is also tops among forwards, better than Marchand, Pasta, everyone. And it's not like he's on a great line. He's been bouncing around the lineup and playing mostly in the bottom6.

63% corsi, but it's only two games. Just under 21 minutes of total ice time with an almost 90% ozs rate. Cehlarik himself has accounts for 1 shot attempt (this is attempt, not on goal) the entire time and 1 scoring chance. Pretty much all his positive comes from the Ranger game, he was not good in the Ottawa game.

So now we have one game where while Cehlarik was on the ice they were 22-9 in shots for however only 1 attempt came from Cehlarik himself.

Meh.

 

[BigGoalBrad]

Based on his comments after each of the last two games, Cassidy strongly disagrees. Would be surprised if PC is in Boston much longer.

Yeah read those in the Globe hardly flattering.

The guys got size and skill. He’s a good option for where he is overall on the organizations depth chart.

 

[Blowfish]

Yeah read those in the Globe hardly flattering.

The guys got size and skill. He’s a good option for where he is overall on the organizations depth chart.

It was a mix bag of comments in the globe...Cehlarik isn't a Cassidy player - that is clear. Speed pace puck pursuit.

I can't argue Cassidy's system because the bruins are playing at an exceptional level right now. Entertaining hockey.

Hoping Cehlarik can bring it up a notch. He has an element of skill / size that is difficult to find. Like many have said perhaps a change of scenery is needed.

You have to believe the next 2 games are make/break time for Cehlarik...

Senny/Hughes next up.

 

[PlayMakers]

Based on his comments after each of the last two games, Cassidy strongly disagrees. Would be surprised if PC is in Boston much longer.

That’s Cassidy’s problem, and IMO, a flaw of his. He just doesn’t seem to be a fan of players like Cehlarik and Heinen. Both of those guys are smart defensive players, they win pucks and board battles and they make their lines better with their playmaking.

In Cassidy’s defense, Cehlarik has been inconsistent in Boston in the past but Heinen is a similar player who, no matter how well he plays, is constantly pushed down the lineup despite the gaping hole at RW that’s been there for four years.

These guys make their lines better, with or without scoring, but it’s very hard for them to earn his trust. Jake DeBrusk, on the other hand, can go 8 or 9 games without a point and he doesn’t even get taken off the first PP unit. Maybe he prefers his wings to be puck carriers and not passers... I don’t know. But I think he’s missing the boat.

 

[PlayMakers]

63% corsi, but it's only two games. Just under 21 minutes of total ice time with an almost 90% ozs rate. Cehlarik himself has accounts for 1 shot attempt (this is attempt, not on goal) the entire time and 1 scoring chance. Pretty much all his positive comes from the Ranger game, he was not good in the Ottawa game.

So now we have one game where while Cehlarik was on the ice they were 22-9 in shots for however only 1 attempt came from Cehlarik himself.

Meh.

I agree 2 games is a small sample but we can can only judge him on the games he’s played, and as a playmaker, a lot of the shots are going to come from plays he sets up. He sent Bjork and Coyle on a 2on1, he set up the D for 3 or 4 shots with his corner work...

He consistently puts up strong Corsi numbers, year in, year out. Last year, his presence on the DeBrusk line boosted their Corsi more than almost any other player, including Pasta and Heinen.

 

[dafoomie]

He's not Cassidy's type of player and it almost doesn't matter what he does.

After Backes went down he went well out of his way to not play him until the 3rd period. Throw him a bone before you complain to the press about his production.

 

[DarrenBanks56]

He's not Cassidy's type of player and it almost doesn't matter what he does.

After Backes went down he went well out of his way to not play him until the 3rd period. Throw him a bone before you complain to the press about his production.

he had a couple shifts with krejci and they looked great. he belongs on that line. i remember donato had chance after chance with this team while getting power play time. still got longer looks while playing worse with better players.

 

[AngryMilkcrates]

Was pretty shocked Cehlarik was sent down again. I figured he would at least get a few weeks until someone healthy came back to replace him.

What the heck happen? I did not think he looked bad. What am I missing here?

 

[KlausJopling]

Was pretty shocked Cehlarik was sent down again. I figured he would at least get a few weeks until someone healthy came back to replace him.

What the heck happen? I did not think he looked bad. What am I missing here?

My thought is, if Ritchie was out instead of Backes he would still be in the lineup today. In the past they have matched Kuraly against Malkin. So they want an energy/defensive player with Kuraly.

 

[neelynugs]

don't remember all the feedback, but today cassidy said stuff like "he needs to be harder to play against,
needs to get to the harder areas, liked some of the things he did, etc"

 

[BigGoalBrad]

Was pretty shocked Cehlarik was sent down again. I figured he would at least get a few weeks until someone healthy came back to replace him.

What the heck happen? I did not think he looked bad. What am I missing here?

Might have something to do with waivers. They are only going to be able to send him down so many times without exposing him.

He didn't displace Ritchie in those 2 games. I think the 2 are pretty even overall but I guess Ritchie can throw fists somewhat adequately and Cehlarik can't.

I'm with Playmakers consider me a fan of the guy especially in the context of being a fringe prospect/player and definitely think hes better than a couple recent first round picks.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

That’s Cassidy’s problem, and IMO, a flaw of his. He just doesn’t seem to be a fan of players like Cehlarik and Heinen. Both of those guys are smart defensive players, they win pucks and board battles and they make their lines better with their playmaking.

In Cassidy’s defense, Cehlarik has been inconsistent in Boston in the past but Heinen is a similar player who, no matter how well he plays, is constantly pushed down the lineup despite the gaping hole at RW that’s been there for four years.

These guys make their lines better, with or without scoring, but it’s very hard for them to earn his trust. Jake DeBrusk, on the other hand, can go 8 or 9 games without a point and he doesn’t even get taken off the first PP unit. Maybe he prefers his wings to be puck carriers and not passers... I don’t know. But I think he’s missing the boat.

That must be it.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Was pretty shocked Cehlarik was sent down again. I figured he would at least get a few weeks until someone healthy came back to replace him.

What the heck happen? I did not think he looked bad. What am I missing here?

I think it's as simple as Cassidy really doesn't like him and as others have said, he doesn't play in a way that fits the Cassidy system. Too soft on the puck, compete level just isn't quite there, and second-guesses himself too often.

I thought he was ok in his first game but then near invisible against the Sens, however despite that I do think it is harsh to send him back down so quickly - I thought he'd done enough and it would only be fair to give him 1-2 more games to properly find his feet again at NHL level.

But not to be and I think the writing is now well and truly on the wall for Cehlarik - he definitely has the capacity to be an NHLer, but he needs to get out of the Bruins to achieve it.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

That’s Cassidy’s problem, and IMO, a flaw of his. He just doesn’t seem to be a fan of players like Cehlarik and Heinen. Both of those guys are smart defensive players, they win pucks and board battles and they make their lines better with their playmaking.

In Cassidy’s defense, Cehlarik has been inconsistent in Boston in the past but Heinen is a similar player who, no matter how well he plays, is constantly pushed down the lineup despite the gaping hole at RW that’s been there for four years.

These guys make their lines better, with or without scoring, but it’s very hard for them to earn his trust. Jake DeBrusk, on the other hand, can go 8 or 9 games without a point and he doesn’t even get taken off the first PP unit. Maybe he prefers his wings to be puck carriers and not passers... I don’t know. But I think he’s missing the boat.

I agree Cassidy clearly doesn't rate Cehlarik, but IMO he increasingly adores Heinen. Has used him as a utility player for all kinds of assignments, has been talking up his flexibility, smarts and compete level, and is now giving him a shot on the second line.

Danton's proven his ability to be hard on the puck, responsible, willing to listen and do what's asked of him, and increasingly to make good plays, and he's being rewarded for it. I think if as a player you can show Cassidy that you can work hard on your game and tailor it to suit his and the team's style of play, then he'll honor it and that player will earn his trust. It just takes a little time, and I don't have a problem that Heinen's mostly been on the 3rd until now - he's had a chance to hone his game and hopefully now be in a position to make the most of the step up.

I think Cehlarik's just too far away from the required standard at the moment, at least in Cassidy's eyes, and my guess is the frustration for Bruce is that he keeps coming back up to Boston with the same perceived flaws. I think Cehlarik probably needs to start looking for another team if he wants a serious shot at the top level.

 

[BruinsNetwork]

He's not Cassidy's type of player and it almost doesn't matter what he does.

After Backes went down he went well out of his way to not play him until the 3rd period. Throw him a bone before you complain to the press about his production.

Yup. It’s not about making excuses for Cehlarik either, contrary to what his critics say. The fact of the matter is he’s a serviceable player in the NHL and the coach just doesn’t like his style of play. It’s just not a good fit and things like this happen.

My guess is that Cehlarik eventually goes on to find a good fit elsewhere in the show and probably turns into a 40-point player.

 

[Jonathan17]

That’s Cassidy’s problem, and IMO, a flaw of his. He just doesn’t seem to be a fan of players like Cehlarik and Heinen. Both of those guys are smart defensive players, they win pucks and board battles and they make their lines better with their playmaking.

In Cassidy’s defense, Cehlarik has been inconsistent in Boston in the past but Heinen is a similar player who, no matter how well he plays, is constantly pushed down the lineup despite the gaping hole at RW that’s been there for four years.

These guys make their lines better, with or without scoring, but it’s very hard for them to earn his trust. Jake DeBrusk, on the other hand, can go 8 or 9 games without a point and he doesn’t even get taken off the first PP unit. Maybe he prefers his wings to be puck carriers and not passers... I don’t know. But I think he’s missing the boat.

I think I’ve figured Cerhalik out tonight. It’s the opposite of Heinen. Cerhalik is more like Coyle, very good hockey sense and weak hands. He sees the play but can’t make it (aside from his 10’ pass to Krejci tonight). Coyle will also, once in a while, make some jaw-dropping play, combining skill and vision, but those are a lucky fluke when his hands catch up to his brain. Heinen, on the other hand, is all skill and poor hockey sense. He has slow reactions and, given a choice, usually makes the wrong one. He’s been better lately going with the most obvious play in front of him. Bjork is pretty much the same but with more speed and less talent. So Cerhalik is to Coyle as Bjork is to Heinen, overall. Both Cerhalik and Bjork can appear very good defensively because their weaknesses are covered up by playing defense (Cerhalik can read the play and throw his stick in the lane. Bjork’s speed allows him to close gaps on his slow reads), but overall, I don’t think Cerhalik and Heinen compare at all. That’s my read.

 

[Sheppy]

^

Charlie Coyle is 500X the player Cehlarik is.

He’s bland, he’s not aggressive, he doesn’t really use his size. He’s just... kind of... there.

I’m over it. Next! I guess?

 

[CDJ]

I think I’ve figured Cerhalik out tonight. It’s the opposite of Heinen. Cerhalik is more like Coyle, very good hockey sense and weak hands. He sees the play but can’t make it (aside from his 10’ pass to Krejci tonight). Coyle will also, once in a while, make some jaw-dropping play, combining skill and vision, but those are a lucky fluke when his hands catch up to his brain. Heinen, on the other hand, is all skill and poor hockey sense. He has slow reactions and, given a choice, usually makes the wrong one. He’s been better lately going with the most obvious play in front of him. Bjork is pretty much the same but with more speed and less talent. So Cerhalik is to Coyle as Bjork is to Heinen, overall. Both Cerhalik and Bjork can appear very good defensively because their weaknesses are covered up by playing defense (Cerhalik can read the play and throw his stick in the lane. Bjork’s speed allows him to close gaps on his slow reads), but overall, I don’t think Cerhalik and Heinen compare at all. That’s my read.

I don’t agree with a single thing you said

 

[esmith3283]

I think he belongs on an NHL roster just not sure it's with the Bruins.