Mr. Make-Believe
The happy genius of my household
...
Who am I referring to? And what could this potentially mean for the Bruins' offense?
Who am I referring to? And what could this potentially mean for the Bruins' offense?
It's goals by the Bruins defensemen, and what it means is that they're getting bad production out of their forwards if the D has a third of their total goals. You can interpret that a couple of different ways. One, the offense will start kicking in and perform up to acceptable levels, or two, the d will tail off and this team won't be able to buy a goal. Either way, the reliance on the d to score is not a great place to be. This state that MMB brings up is like a microcosm of why their PP is so terrible, IMO.
You need your forwards to score. So far, they're not.
It's goals by the Bruins defensemen, and what it means is that they're getting bad production out of their forwards if the D has a third of their total goals. You can interpret that a couple of different ways. One, the offense will start kicking in and perform up to acceptable levels, or two, the d will tail off and this team won't be able to buy a goal. Either way, the reliance on the d to score is not a great place to be. This state that MMB brings up is like a microcosm of why their PP is so terrible, IMO.
You need your forwards to score. So far, they're not.
Krug and Hamilton are a renaissance
It's goals by the Bruins defensemen, and what it means is that they're getting bad production out of their forwards if the D has a third of their total goals. You can interpret that a couple of different ways. One, the offense will start kicking in and perform up to acceptable levels, or two, the d will tail off and this team won't be able to buy a goal. Either way, the reliance on the d to score is not a great place to be. This state that MMB brings up is like a microcosm of why their PP is so terrible, IMO.
You need your forwards to score. So far, they're not.
I agree with you, Lonnie, but I still see good scoring opportunities from the forwards and decent puck possession - in theory (let me carry the one and divide by pi) this should lead to goals.
Can always count on LSCII to give you the negative view of something.
A negative out of a positive? Yep. That's a LSCII post...
Bottom line, the Bruins are scoring just fine with a 3,12 goals per game, good for 7th in the league...
It's ironic that I lay out two possible scenarios, one positive and one negative, and the only thing you two see is the negative. Maybe you guys should take a long look in the mirror before you start pointing fingers and labeling people. Just a thought...
Hey, you and I both know I only read the first line of each post.
You're absolutely right. They are still getting chances, so things should swing back the other way soon enough. That's what I keep hoping for and fully expect to happen at least. So far the play of the d has been very similar to last year's play off run. Lots of goals coming from the back end, not so much from the forwards. I didn't think it would hold up for the long run then, nor do I feel that's likely to happen here. It's nice that they have guys at all positions that can fill the net if need be, but I'd like to get more of a consistent contribution from several of their key forwards.
The single biggest change this team has undergone in 5 years. A defense corp that can move their feet and the puck.