Former Bruins Ryan Donato - II

[RussellmaniaKW]

Thanks, man. I enjoy our back and forth as well, despite us being on opposite ends most of the time.

To me, Donato has very little to do with my point. They got better now, which as a fan, is all that matters. What RD becomes, I couldn't tell you. I honestly don't think he'll be much more than a second line kind of guy, which now that I said it means he's going to be a super star.

So I'm not overly concerned that they gave up on him too early as much as I am about seeing the pattern of quite a few young guys having the same issue with the organization. I fear that could be a possible problem at some point, which is far more interesting to discuss than Ryan Donato, IMO.

the funny thing about Donato to me is that he seemed to think it was so unfair that he got sent back down when the reality is I felt like Bjork was treated worse. I still really think they should have thrown Bjork a bone & let him play in the WC...at the time nobody was really head & shoulders above him & they were hurting for skill. Meanwhile Cehlarik arguably outplayed Donato in camp & yet Donato was the one on the opening night roster. If Donato had a little self-awareness he might have recognized that guys like Bjork & Cehlarik had more of an uphill battle than he did. I just really don't think his attitude was proportionate to his situation.

 

[LSCII]

the funny thing about Donato to me is that he seemed to think it was so unfair that he got sent back down when the reality is I felt like Bjork was treated worse. I still really think they should have thrown Bjork a bone & let him play in the WC...at the time nobody was really head & shoulders above him & they were hurting for skill. Meanwhile Cehlarik arguably outplayed Donato in camp & yet Donato was the one on the opening night roster. If Donato had a little self-awareness he might have recognized that guys like Bjork & Cehlarik had more of an uphill battle than he did. I just really don't think his attitude was proportionate to his situation.

He absolutely thought he shouldn't have been sent down. Which was wrong. He needed seasoning in the worst way. Way too easy to get knocked off the puck and he was too much of spectator for long stretches rather than reading and reacting to the play in front of him. That being said though, how much was it in his head to play the way they wanted versus playing and reacting how he'd do it naturally? Which is what I took his comments from last night to be more about. Him just playing without worrying.

 

[Chief Nine]

You take that back right now!! lol

I know. I regretted posting that as soon as I hit Post Reply

 

[LSCII]

I know. I regretted posting that as soon as I hit Post Reply

Probably felt a little dirty even saying it too, right??

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

I do have CI and do watch a lot of FLA games (big Barkov fan).

Just like people here said Reilly Smith was soft and sucked.. then gets to FLA and puts up pts and PKs, and goes to Vegas and looks good in all situations.

Vatrano isn't "great" or anything, but he's a 20 goal scorer from the 3rd line (sometimes 2nd) and 2nd unit pp.

It's not like Boston has had a hard time with secondary scoring or anything this year, so I can see why we'd be worried about a player turning into a 20+ goal scorer.

Why is it that people are happy with a guy who brings NO goals and "not much else" but if he scores goals and "not much else" it's a problem?

the Reilly Smith comp isn't really fair IMO. Smith had already shown he was a pretty good player when he was traded. Vatrano (& Donato) hadn't shown much of anything. Citing Reilly Smith and the "he's soft & sucks" crowd is kind of a loaded argument because smart people recognized he was good all along. quoting the dumbest HF arguments to prove a point is a pretty loose foundation.

I do think certain players flourish individually when put in situations where the organization is less focused on team success.

 

[Chief Nine]

Probably felt a little dirty even saying it too, right??

Haha yup!

 

[Dr Hook]

Here is something else I remembered from the Globe story that I felt was off with him:

“There’s definitely things I need to work on,” Donato said, “and the strength thing is one thing. I know last year nobody would say that I was getting pushed off my skates. I think it’s something people say he’s fallen down a few times, maybe it’s a little bit of nerves, maybe a little excited to play, but I know I’m a strong hockey player. I’ve had people at every level tell me I’m strong with the puck, so all of a sudden to have it said now, I know my abilities."

So he was told by the coaches he needed to get stronger on his skates, and he starts off by acknowledging it, but then kind of says, well, but I am actually strong on my skates and they are wrong? It just seems like he wasn't in agreement with what the coaches felt he needed to be doing.

Just throwing that out there, not to throw shade on Ryan, but clearly there was not a connection of the minds happening with him and the staff.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Hasn't that typically been the approach in the past though? I don't ever recall any public statements about any situations like these but almost always you hear a "I heard from someone close" "I heard from a B's employee" "I heard from a agent who heard from a scout" etc. and then it trickles its way out to the masses.

maybe I'm naive, but I just don't buy that there's some conspiracy or organizational mandate to trash guys on the way out. I think when high profile players are shipped out it usually is for a reason (whether justified or not is a case by case debate). The organization like any pro sports org generally tries to keep these things quiet & isn't going public. Then the player gets traded & you start seeing things leak into the press.

We can either choose to believe the organization is going to the press to put spin on things or that the press is coming to them (obviously this happens after a trade, it's their job to report on it) and they are just giving them what they can.

I think you don't hear the negative stuff before a trade because
1. it's in the the org's best interest to keep it quiet in hopes they can work through it or at least not lower the player's value
2. if it's not a well known problem then there aren't going to be reporters digging into the issue so it just doesn't come up

it just makes sense that you'd hear these things after a big trade because that's when you have the most prying eyes.

occam's razor & all that

 

[trenton1]

Not everyone is blessed with the ability to articulate. I try not to go over the top when a kid says he thinks deserves something I’m the context of saying he is working harder to achieve those goals. This is tantamount to every persons realization at some point that this life is more difficult then expected.

That's true.
If english was his second language or he was 18 and jumping off a bus in medicine hat with a microphone stuck in his face I'd give many passes.
And twists and re-contextualization can and do happen in the media. But this wasn't a hit piece that was looking to sensationalize a comment. I think it was a small indicator that Donato has a bit of a skewed view of the situation he found himself in. He basically said both the wrong thing and the right thing back to back. But he still said the wrong thing in a forum that, generally, allows for record striking... that is, if the subject is self-aware enough.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

He absolutely thought he shouldn't have been sent down. Which was wrong. He needed seasoning in the worst way. Way too easy to get knocked off the puck and he was too much of spectator for long stretches rather than reading and reacting to the play in front of him. That being said though, how much was it in his head to play the way they wanted versus playing and reacting how he'd do it naturally? Which is what I took his comments from last night to be more about. Him just playing without worrying.

his comments after the trade came off as a parting shot at the Bruins coaching staff & org. When you read them in the context of the Globe article I think that's 100% a reasonable interpretation. We knew he disagreed with their plan for him & where they saw him in his progression so I see no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt on yesterday's comments.

 

[Chief Nine]

his comments after the trade came off as a parting shot at the Bruins coaching staff & org. When you read them in the context of the Globe article I think that's 100% a reasonable interpretation. We knew he disagreed with their plan for him & where they saw him in his progression so I see no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt on yesterday's comments.

Ergo my reasoning that he's an entitled not self-aware snot

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

No, I think he was traded because the Wild think he will be better than what Charlie Coyle has given them. I'm just saying if he was deemed expendable because of that it's ridiculous.

I think it was a factor after the fact but if Don Sweeney let that influence his decision on trading Donato then he's not doing his job correctly

Here's a different take on this:
These guys are humans and the team invests a lot of money into them. You can't expect a GM to make personnel decisions purely in a "what happens on the ice" vacuum.

I think there's a major trust factor in the player/organization relationship, especially with young players. The player has to trust that the organization knows what they're doing and has their best interests in mind while laying out a plan for their development as a player. The org has to trust that the player is going to do right by the team, follow the plan and work hard to improve. All the while they both need to recognize the common goal of the success of the team.

If they laid out a plan for Donato that included sending him to Providence for seasoning and his response was to complain very publicly that he didn't agree with their plan for him then that is a pretty serious violation of that mutual player/organization trust. I don't think it's unreasonable at all for a GM to think that if the player seemingly doesn't trust the org to do right by him any more then why should we trust him to do what we're asking him to do.

I think once that trust is broken it's not impossible to fix it, but when evaluating the value of that player to the organization this stuff definitely weighs in to that assessment. I definitely don't think they traded him simply because of that Globe article, but I believe it was absolutely a factor and I have no problem with that.

 

[Chief Nine]

Here's a different take on this:
These guys are humans and the team invests a lot of money into them. You can't expect a GM to make personnel decisions purely in a "what happens on the ice" vacuum.

I think there's a major trust factor in the player/organization relationship, especially with young players. The player has to trust that the organization knows what they're doing and has their best interests in mind while laying out a plan for their development as a player. The org has to trust that the player is going to do right by the team, follow the plan and work hard to improve. All the while they both need to recognize the common goal of the success of the team.

If they laid out a plan for Donato that included sending him to Providence for seasoning and his response was to complain very publicly that he didn't agree with their plan for him then that is a pretty serious violation of that mutual player/organization trust. I don't think it's unreasonable at all for a GM to think that if the player seemingly doesn't trust the org to do right by him any more then why should we trust him to do what we're asking him to do.

I think once that trust is broken it's not impossible to fix it, but when evaluating the value of that player to the organization this stuff definitely weighs in to that assessment. I definitely don't think they traded him simply because of that Globe article, but I believe it was absolutely a factor and I have no problem with that.

Can't argue any of this. The Bruins were likely already in negotiations with Minnesota about Donato for Coyle before the article appeared but that definitely didn't help his stock here for sure

 

[LouJersey]

Here's a different take on this:
These guys are humans and the team invests a lot of money into them. You can't expect a GM to make personnel decisions purely in a "what happens on the ice" vacuum.

I think there's a major trust factor in the player/organization relationship, especially with young players. The player has to trust that the organization knows what they're doing and has their best interests in mind while laying out a plan for their development as a player. The org has to trust that the player is going to do right by the team, follow the plan and work hard to improve. All the while they both need to recognize the common goal of the success of the team.

If they laid out a plan for Donato that included sending him to Providence for seasoning and his response was to complain very publicly that he didn't agree with their plan for him then that is a pretty serious violation of that mutual player/organization trust. I don't think it's unreasonable at all for a GM to think that if the player seemingly doesn't trust the org to do right by him any more then why should we trust him to do what we're asking him to do.

I think once that trust is broken it's not impossible to fix it, but when evaluating the value of that player to the organization this stuff definitely weighs in to that assessment. I definitely don't think they traded him simply because of that Globe article, but I believe it was absolutely a factor and I have no problem with that.

His quote on the situation did not appear as whining complaining ala Koko to me.

He’s in Providence, but Ryan Donato insists, ‘I know I’m an NHL player’ - The Boston Globe

“It’s definitely emotionally hard,” he said. “I want to be there, and I believe that I deserve to be there, but it’s not my call. And I’m going to do everything in my power to do everything to get better as a player here so when I do get my chance again, they have no choice but to keep me up.”

“There’s definitely things I need to work on,” Donato said, “and the strength thing is one thing. I know last year nobody would say that I was getting pushed off my skates. I think it’s something people say he’s fallen down a few times, maybe it’s a little bit of nerves, maybe a little excited to play, but I know I’m a strong hockey player. I’ve had people at every level tell me I’m strong with the puck, so all of a sudden to have it said now, I know my abilities.

“There’s guys I look up to that have gone through these types of peaks and downs. For me as a player, I know I’m an NHL player and it’s just a matter of time until I find my stride. I showed it in spurts last year and I know that I can and I know I will eventually. It’s just getting that chance.”

“I’ve done it before,” said Donato. “I know. And by no means that I’ve reached my abilities either. I truly believe that I can be not just an NHL player but a high-impact NHL player. A 30-goal scorer is something I aspire to be.”

 

[Chief Nine]

His quote on the situation did not appear as whining complaining ala Koko to me.

He’s in Providence, but Ryan Donato insists, ‘I know I’m an NHL player’ - The Boston Globe

“It’s definitely emotionally hard,” he said. “I want to be there, and I believe that I deserve to be there, but it’s not my call. And I’m going to do everything in my power to do everything to get better as a player here so when I do get my chance again, they have no choice but to keep me up.”

“There’s definitely things I need to work on,” Donato said, “and the strength thing is one thing. I know last year nobody would say that I was getting pushed off my skates. I think it’s something people say he’s fallen down a few times, maybe it’s a little bit of nerves, maybe a little excited to play, but I know I’m a strong hockey player. I’ve had people at every level tell me I’m strong with the puck, so all of a sudden to have it said now, I know my abilities.

“There’s guys I look up to that have gone through these types of peaks and downs. For me as a player, I know I’m an NHL player and it’s just a matter of time until I find my stride. I showed it in spurts last year and I know that I can and I know I will eventually. It’s just getting that chance.”

“I’ve done it before,” said Donato. “I know. And by no means that I’ve reached my abilities either. I truly believe that I can be not just an NHL player but a high-impact NHL player. A 30-goal scorer is something I aspire to be.”

I dunno Lou. If my boss came up to me and she said "Chief, you need to work on such and such" and I was quoted publicly refuting that like "I know she says I need to get better with x but I know I'm very good at x" I don't think that would sit too well with her.

And knowing my boss, she would have had me in her office with the door closed pretty shortly after

 

[Gee Wally]

His quote on the situation did not appear as whining complaining ala Koko to me.

He’s in Providence, but Ryan Donato insists, ‘I know I’m an NHL player’ - The Boston Globe

“It’s definitely emotionally hard,” he said. “I want to be there, and I believe that I deserve to be there, but it’s not my call. And I’m going to do everything in my power to do everything to get better as a player here so when I do get my chance again, they have no choice but to keep me up.”

“There’s definitely things I need to work on,” Donato said, “and the strength thing is one thing. I know last year nobody would say that I was getting pushed off my skates. I think it’s something people say he’s fallen down a few times, maybe it’s a little bit of nerves, maybe a little excited to play, but I know I’m a strong hockey player. I’ve had people at every level tell me I’m strong with the puck, so all of a sudden to have it said now, I know my abilities.

“There’s guys I look up to that have gone through these types of peaks and downs. For me as a player, I know I’m an NHL player and it’s just a matter of time until I find my stride. I showed it in spurts last year and I know that I can and I know I will eventually. It’s just getting that chance.”

“I’ve done it before,” said Donato. “I know. And by no means that I’ve reached my abilities either. I truly believe that I can be not just an NHL player but a high-impact NHL player. A 30-goal scorer is something I aspire to be.”

Except it appears he ignores his own father’s advice on applicable subjects.

I wish the kid well. He could turn into something special. But if anyone doesnt listen to advice given for ones own best interests it could be rough going.

I think it laughable for anyone equating this situation as a smear campaign similar to past ones real or imagined.

 

[Mount Kramer Cameras]

Here's a different take on this:
These guys are humans and the team invests a lot of money into them. You can't expect a GM to make personnel decisions purely in a "what happens on the ice" vacuum.

I think there's a major trust factor in the player/organization relationship, especially with young players. The player has to trust that the organization knows what they're doing and has their best interests in mind while laying out a plan for their development as a player. The org has to trust that the player is going to do right by the team, follow the plan and work hard to improve. All the while they both need to recognize the common goal of the success of the team.

If they laid out a plan for Donato that included sending him to Providence for seasoning and his response was to complain very publicly that he didn't agree with their plan for him then that is a pretty serious violation of that mutual player/organization trust. I don't think it's unreasonable at all for a GM to think that if the player seemingly doesn't trust the org to do right by him any more then why should we trust him to do what we're asking him to do.

I think once that trust is broken it's not impossible to fix it, but when evaluating the value of that player to the organization this stuff definitely weighs in to that assessment. I definitely don't think they traded him simply because of that Globe article, but I believe it was absolutely a factor and I have no problem with that.

Indeed. Donato perhaps didn't realize that they were showing some restraint when saying 'work on your strength a little'. Behind closed doors they probably said something along the lines of 'he gets pushed around like a kid'. I think it made the decision slightly easier for them.

I don't intent to rag on Donato because almost everything else he said in the interview was that of a model pro.

 

[member 96824]

maybe I'm naive, but I just don't buy that there's some conspiracy or organizational mandate to trash guys on the way out. I think when high profile players are shipped out it usually is for a reason (whether justified or not is a case by case debate). The organization like any pro sports org generally tries to keep these things quiet & isn't going public. Then the player gets traded & you start seeing things leak into the press.

We can either choose to believe the organization is going to the press to put spin on things or that the press is coming to them (obviously this happens after a trade, it's their job to report on it) and they are just giving them what they can.

I think you don't hear the negative stuff before a trade because
1. it's in the the org's best interest to keep it quiet in hopes they can work through it or at least not lower the player's value
2. if it's not a well known problem then there aren't going to be reporters digging into the issue so it just doesn't come up

it just makes sense that you'd hear these things after a big trade because that's when you have the most prying eyes.

occam's razor & all that

Very good points that I would agree with...and to be fair, even though it's mostly the same people, the head of the front office has changed since that was more of the norm.

Thinking out loud, maybe it's the otherside we should be more skeptical of..the rumblings of "The team's saying he's got a Joe Sakic like work ethic" "He's got a massive IQ and the team is in love with what they're seeing" type stuff.

 

[Dr Hook]

Except it appears he ignores his own father’s advice on applicable subjects.

I wish the kid well. He could turn into something special. But if anyone doesnt listen to advice given for ones own best interests it could be rough going.

I think it laughable for anyone equating this situation as a smear campaign similar to past ones real or imagined.

All of us who are parents to grown children have felt that pain in some way. At the end of day, Ryan Donato is an adult and is going to what he thinks is right, whether it is or isn't. I wish him the best in Minnesota.

 

[BMC]

I do have CI and do watch a lot of FLA games (big Barkov fan).

Just like people here said Reilly Smith was soft and sucked.. then gets to FLA and puts up pts and PKs, and goes to Vegas and looks good in all situations.

Vatrano isn't "great" or anything, but he's a 20 goal scorer from the 3rd line (sometimes 2nd) and 2nd unit pp.

It's not like Boston has had a hard time with secondary scoring or anything this year, so I can see why we'd be worried about a player turning into a 20+ goal scorer.

Why is it that people are happy with a guy who brings NO goals and "not much else" but if he scores goals and "not much else" it's a problem?

I think it is obvious that the Bruins want/expect their players to play a complete game ("200 foot game")- play offense, be responsible defensively, earn PP/PK time. Players like Vatrano or Donato are essentially one trick offensive ponies who, if they wanted to remain with the Bruins, had to develop the other aspects of their game. For whatever reasons they did not do it or do it fast/well enough to suit management so they're no longer Bruins. Should the Bruins have been more patient with them? I don't see how they could have been since the Bruins' stated goal is to contend for the Cup and they don't have a lot of time left to do it before the present core declines further than it has.

 

[Dr Quincy]

BTW I think the B's made a good deal. I just think the post trade PR jobs always reek of insecurity.

 

[Dr Quincy]

I think it is obvious that the Bruins want/expect their players to play a complete game ("200 foot game")- play offense, be responsible defensively, earn PP/PK time. Players like Vatrano or Donato are essentially one trick offensive ponies who, if they wanted to remain with the Bruins, had to develop the other aspects of their game. For whatever reasons they did not do it or do it fast/well enough to suit management so they're no longer Bruins. Should the Bruins have been more patient with them? I don't see how they could have been since the Bruins' stated goal is to contend for the Cup and they don't have a lot of time left to do it before the present core declines further than it has.

Interesting because you love PJ and he didn't play a complete game. He was a 1 trick pony. And for a defensive F, he wasn't even very good on the PK. For years he was the B's #1 pk F, and for years they were in the bottom half of the league in PK %.

Shawn Thornton was a 1 trick pony.
Noel "6 Points" Acciari is a 1 trick pony.
So can we please stop with this "complete game" bunk? A "2way" player means they can play offense and defense. There are guys on the team who are as offensively "irresponsible" as some of the offensive guys that are "1 trick ponies" are defensively.

It's fine if you as a coach, gm or organization believes that a player who is a one way player defensively is better than a 1 way player offensively. I mean, I disagree, but at least be honest.

And again, I have no problem with trading Donato or getting back Coyle.... good deal. But perhaps the reason this team has the same number of championships in the last 45 years as the Carolina Hurriances is because of this kind of thinking that a guy who is a black hole on offense is actually a "2 way player".

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Interesting because you love PJ and he didn't play a complete game. He was a 1 trick pony. And for a defensive F, he wasn't even very good on the PK. For years he was the B's #1 pk F, and for years they were in the bottom half of the league in PK %.

Shawn Thornton was a 1 trick pony.
Noel "6 Points" Acciari is a 1 trick pony.
So can we please stop with this "complete game" bunk? A "2way" player means they can play offense and defense. There are guys on the team who are as offensively "irresponsible" as some of the offensive guys that are "1 trick ponies" are defensively.

It's fine if you as a coach, gm or organization believes that a player who is a one way player defensively is better than a 1 way player offensively. I mean, I disagree, but at least be honest.

And again, I have no problem with trading Donato or getting back Coyle.... good deal. But perhaps the reason this team has the same number of championships in the last 45 years as the Carolina Hurriances is because of this kind of thinking that a guy who is a black hole on offense is actually a "2 way player".

as opposed to thinking an offensive specialist minus the offense somehow isnt a black hole?

 

[LSCII]

Very good points that I would agree with...and to be fair, even though it's mostly the same people, the head of the front office has changed since that was more of the norm.

Thinking out loud, maybe it's the otherside we should be more skeptical of..the rumblings of "The team's saying he's got a Joe Sakic like work ethic" "He's got a massive IQ and the team is in love with what they're seeing" type stuff.

This is a sneaky good point, Brad. If he's lazy or unwilling to do the work now, why was it just a year ago that he was a hard working kid doing the right things to become an NHL player? It can't be both and it's not likely that he was willing to put in the effort in college but is not willing to do so at the pro level, can it?

 

[LSCII]

Interesting because you love PJ and he didn't play a complete game. He was a 1 trick pony. And for a defensive F, he wasn't even very good on the PK. For years he was the B's #1 pk F, and for years they were in the bottom half of the league in PK %.

Shawn Thornton was a 1 trick pony.
Noel "6 Points" Acciari is a 1 trick pony.
So can we please stop with this "complete game" bunk? A "2way" player means they can play offense and defense. There are guys on the team who are as offensively "irresponsible" as some of the offensive guys that are "1 trick ponies" are defensively.

It's fine if you as a coach, gm or organization believes that a player who is a one way player defensively is better than a 1 way player offensively. I mean, I disagree, but at least be honest.

And again, I have no problem with trading Donato or getting back Coyle.... good deal. But perhaps the reason this team has the same number of championships in the last 45 years as the Carolina Hurriances is because of this kind of thinking that a guy who is a black hole on offense is actually a "2 way player".

But but but....