Some Bruins Info From Elliotte Friedman

[GloryDaze4877]

No, I think he means playing him with Krejci. Might not have been a bad idea after Griffith, Fraser, Kelly, Paille, Smith and Gagne didn't work out in that spot.

I'm pretty sure I knew exactly what he meant

My point (if it wasn't painfully obvious) was that Loui could have easily had 26 goals or more if he had finished the opportunities he had.

I don't have an issue with keeping Loui...IF the B's move Lucic for a younger F and a d-man. Otherwise, I would like to see Loui shipped to somebody like NAS for a guy like Ekholm.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You make it sound like Julien was coaching the Sabres FFS. That's not case, he should have had that team in the playoffs. It's funny, but I went to a game in CGY where they were up 3-0 and lost because they sat back and didn't do jack ****, guess what, they missed the playoffs by a point, a point they should have gotten in that game.


Julien had a ****** year, just like a bunch of the players, but on talent alone they should have been in the playoffs.

BUt down the stretch when this team needed goals, we got force fed Greg Campbell 15 mins a game.

Was that the Calgary game where Miller got hurt in the 2nd period with the B's up 3-0 and they had to play with 5 defensemen for the rest of the game? That could have been a factor.

And as stated before, the 5 games Campbell played 15 minutes, Bruins went 4-1.

 

[BNHL]

No, I think he means playing him with Krejci. Might not have been a bad idea after Griffith, Fraser, Kelly, Paille, Smith and Gagne didn't work out in that spot.

He thinks the 2 open nets Eriksson missed somehow somehow contributed to the collapse of Carl Soderberg. Carl would have had 18 points in the last 40 games and Eriksson 24 goals,of which 10 would have had been assisted by Carl.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

He thinks the 2 open nets Eriksson missed somehow somehow contributed to the collapse of Carl Soderberg. Carl would have had 18 points in the last 40 games and Eriksson 24 goals,of which 10 would have had been assisted by Carl.

I wish it was ONLY two open nets. Soderberg created countless opportunities during the course of the year that Loui and Kelly failed to finish. Yet Loui is somehow being deified all of a sudden for being nothing more than a good all-around player, when he was supposed to much better than that when the B's acquired him. First, it was the unfamiliarity with "the system", then it was the concussions (legit IMO), then it was his lack of quality linemates, which I think is a crock of ****.

The funny part about how much better (supposedly) Loui was this year is that last season in 61 games he had 37 pts (.60 ppg)...while this year he averaged more TOI than any B forward and put up 47 pts in 81 games (.58 ppg).

So he got more ice time and produced less?

 

[Scotto74]

Boychuk?

not with that cap hit.

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

Why does Sweeney think 96 points is good ? To me, that is a red flag on this guy.

Back when he played, this would be like finishing with 70-75 points.

Did he say it was good? Or did he say that the team didn't need to be stripped down?

One of those means he's happy with it, one of those means he recognizes the need to improve but sees that they obviously don't need to blow everything up.

 

[Ice Nine]

I'm pretty sure I knew exactly what he meant

My point (if it wasn't painfully obvious) was that Loui could have easily had 26 goals or more if he had finished the opportunities he had.

I don't have an issue with keeping Loui...IF the B's move Lucic for a younger F and a d-man. Otherwise, I would like to see Loui shipped to somebody like NAS for a guy like Ekholm.

This is actually my view of the situation, put perfectly.

No issue with Eriksson, but one of Krejci, Eriksson, or Lucic have to be moved to fill needs. And since the B's seem happy to let Soda walk, that means Krejci is staying. And that leaves Lucic or Eriksson -- one of them should be moved (with others, potentially) for an F or a young D.

I also am a fan of Ekholm.

 

[Ice Nine]

I wish it was ONLY two open nets. Soderberg created countless opportunities during the course of the year that Loui and Kelly failed to finish. Yet Loui is somehow being deified all of a sudden for being nothing more than a good all-around player, when he was supposed to much better than that when the B's acquired him. First, it was the unfamiliarity with "the system", then it was the concussions (legit IMO), then it was his lack of quality linemates, which I think is a crock of ****.

The funny part about how much better (supposedly) Loui was this year is that last season in 61 games he had 37 pts (.60 ppg)...while this year he averaged more TOI than any B forward and put up 47 pts in 81 games (.58 ppg).

So he got more ice time and produced less?

STOP LOOKING AT POINTS PER GAME. IT'S MISLEADING.

Rather, you need to put those stats in context.

Context: Eriksson's point total increased from only 37pts in the year before to 47 pts last year.

He's on rise, you see. The numbers don't lie!

 

[What The Puck]

STOP LOOKING AT POINTS PER GAME. IT'S MISLEADING.

Rather, you need to put those stats in context.

Context: Eriksson's point total increased from only 37pts in the year before to 47 pts last year.

He's on rise, you see. The numbers don't lie!

And if you add Smith to Eriksson's point totals, they are greater than tyler's stats! That means we won the trade because Loui is a great all-around player! Even though we don't talk about injuries so Tyler's stats would have been even greater (we only do that for Loui, am I doing this right?).

Bottom line, the guy is a disappointment. Let's revisit the Loui thread from earlier in the year. Who said 47 points was good enough? Everyone is ragging on Smith, but he's a far cheaper option for only seven less points.

 

[alg363636]

And if you add Smith to Eriksson's point totals, they are greater than tyler's stats! That means we won the trade because Loui is a great all-around player! Even though we don't talk about injuries so Tyler's stats would have been even greater (we only do that for Loui, am I doing this right?).

Bottom line, the guy is a disappointment. Let's revisit the Loui thread from earlier in the year. Who said 47 points was good enough? Everyone is ragging on Smith, but he's a far cheaperoption for only seven less points.

Smith over Loui saves us less than 1 million.

It all depends on what you think Smith is. Is he a 50 point guy from last season and he's sophomore slumping or is he a 30-40 point, third line tweener we saw this season?

Personally, I think he's going to be a perennial 35ish point guy. He will show flashes of scoring talent and second line abilities and then fall into an extended scoreless slump. And Smith's slumps aren't just pointless - they're really, really bad. He is a hazard on the ice.

This is all food for thought though - not advocating one over the other. I know what your opinion is though

 

[What The Puck]

Smith over Loui saves us less than 1 million.
… I know what your opinion is though

Loui will be getting a raise. And my thought is that the only reason Smith is still here at that price is because the organization is foolishly doubling down on that crappy trade. I don't hide my feelings about Loui the player. Maybe he's a fantastic guy off the ice, I don't know. But I just can't get over how we traded a franchise All-Star for… this guy. I just can't figure out how we can trade so many top All-Star draft picks for nothing in return. As a fan, it makes me lose my ****.

 

[BNHL]

Loui will be getting a raise. And my thought is that the only reason Smith is still here at that price is because the organization is foolishly doubling down on that crappy trade. I don't hide my feelings about Loui the player. Maybe he's a fantastic guy off the ice, I don't know. But I just can't get over how we traded a franchise All-Star for… this guy. I just can't figure out how we can trade so many top All-Star draft picks for nothing in return. As a fan, it makes me lose my ****.

Was Seguin 1st or 2nd team All Star?

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

Loui will be getting a raise. And my thought is that the only reason Smith is still here at that price is because the organization is foolishly doubling down on that crappy trade. I don't hide my feelings about Loui the player. Maybe he's a fantastic guy off the ice, I don't know. But I just can't get over how we traded a franchise All-Star for… this guy. I just can't figure out how we can trade so many top All-Star draft picks for nothing in return. As a fan, it makes me lose my ****.

The only reason you hate Loui seems to be because he isn't Seguin.

I can't possibly understand how you can hold that against him and let that cloud your view of him as a player.

He was much better this year. There is no denying that, even if his assist total was disappointing. And that's not me saying we won the ****ing trade.

 

[What The Puck]

The only reason you hate Loui seems to be because he isn't Seguin.

No. It's more than that. I see him as being soft, slow moving, boring, and not a physical player. I don't ever feel like he cares about the game because I never see that kind of emotion from him. Do you think Loui cares about the Stanley Cup? Do you think he wants to win? Do you think he has the will to win? What has happened, ever, with Loui that would make you believe any of these things?

I see him as being a shadow of his former self in Dallas. I see him as being easily replaceable and better off being traded for picks.

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

No. It's more than that. I see him as being soft, slow moving, boring, and not a physical player. I don't ever feel like he cares about the game because I never see that kind of emotion from him. Do you think Loui cares about the Stanley Cup? Do you think he wants to win? Do you think he has the will to win? What has happened, ever, with Loui that would make you believe any of these things?

I see him as being a shadow of his former self in Dallas. I see him as being easily replaceable and better off being traded for picks.

Fair enough, I feel like you generally never make that clear in your posts about the guy, instead focusing on complaining about the trade that sent him here.

I don't really know if he cares about the Stanley Cup or if he wants to win. I'm not really sure where he's had the chance to show that here, other than after he scores a goal.

I do know that he's a good player at a good cap hit, which is certainly valuable to pretty much every team these days. If they trade him (and I think they might), so be it. I think the best deal would be a good hockey trade, rather than a salary dump for picks.

 

[patty59]

No. It's more than that. I see him as being soft, slow moving, boring, and not a physical player. I don't ever feel like he cares about the game because I never see that kind of emotion from him. Do you think Loui cares about the Stanley Cup? Do you think he wants to win? Do you think he has the will to win? What has happened, ever, with Loui that would make you believe any of these things?

I see him as being a shadow of his former self in Dallas. I see him as being easily replaceable and better off being traded for picks.

WTF are you talking about here? What has shown you that he doesn't want to win the up or doesn't care about winning?

Like ****ing really

 

[Kaoz]

Was Seguin 1st or 2nd team All Star?

Was the kid at the all-star game? Oh he was? Then he's an All-Star.

37 goals, 40 assists, 77 points in 71 games?

Since you seem to be such a fan of trivia:
1. Which of the current Bruins have ever put up better then a PPG?
2. Which have scored 37 or more goals in a single season?
3. Who was the last Bruin to put up better then a PPG in any one season?

But keep trotting out that company line, semantics ftw! It was a stupid trade, and a horrible return that directly impacts the Bruins immediate past, present and future.

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

Was the kid at the all-star game? Oh he was? Then he's an All-Star.

I'm pretty sure that's not what WTP meant, because by that logic they traded one all star for another.

But keep trotting out that company line, semantics ftw! It was a stupid trade, and a horrible return that directly impacts the Bruins immediate past, present and future.

Did someone say otherwise? Are you arguing something nobody's saying?

 

[Kaoz]

I'm pretty sure that's not what WTP meant, because by that logic they traded one all star for another.

Did someone say otherwise? Are you arguing something nobody's saying?

I'm pretty sure "WTP" (what the hell is WTP) meant to imply Seguin wasn't an all-star by trotting out a rather silly one line question pertaining to All star team voting that takes place at the end of the season, which is why I pointed out he was an All-Star based on the fact that he played in the All-Star game (we still call those guys All-Stars right?). As for the logic of trading one All Star for another, Eriksson was an All Star what, 4 years ago? By that logic, once an all star always an all star. Let's have Cam Neely lace em up.

Was Seguin an all-star? Yes he was.

You're in support of that one line, sarcastic quip that adds no value type of reply... good for you. Continue steering HF down the right path.

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

I'm pretty sure "WTP" (what the hell is WTP) meant to imply Seguin wasn't an all-star by trotting out a rather silly one line question pertaining to All star team voting that takes place at the end of the season, which is why I pointed out he was an All-Star based on the fact that he played in the All-Star game (we still call those guys All-Stars right?). As for the logic of trading one All Star for another, Eriksson was an All Star what, 4 years ago? By that logic, once an all star always an all star. Let's have Cam Neely lace em up.

Was Seguin an all-star? Yes he was.

You're in support of that one line, sarcastic quip that adds no value type of reply... good for you. Continue steering HF down the right path.

"WTP" refers to the poster What the Puck, who the poster you quoted was replying to.

I don't know why you're so uptight, but whatever. Sorry for "steering HF down the wrong path" whatever the **** that means

 

[Lobster57]

I'd like to propose a new bylaw for the Bruins board.

Any poster who brings up Tyler Seguin in a thread that doesn't involve the Dallas Stars, or is mentioned in connection/comparison to Loui Eriksson, Reilly Smith, Joe Morrow or even Matt Fraser, shall immediately have their avatar permanently changed to a picture of Thomas Plekanec.

 

[Kaoz]

"WTP" refers to the poster What the Puck, who the poster you quoted was replying to.

I don't know why you're so uptight, but whatever. Sorry for "steering HF down the wrong path" whatever the **** that means

It's a fatal flaw really.

I saw someone allude to the fact that Seguin wasn't an All Star, I know he was, I make the point, you respond asking why I had felt the need to point out that those observations were erroneous, I respond to you, you tell me I'm up tight, you look awesome... profit?

Well done RB, well done (insert appropriate smiley). The fact that you don't understand what I mean when I say "supporting one line, sarcastic, erroneous quips might not be the best way to encourage legitimate hockey discussion" leads me to believe my last point is pretty much bang on.

Anywho, as we were. Seguin is bad rah rah. The fact that he put up offensive numbers last year that are unmatched by any current Bruin throughout any of their illustrious careers (so you can follow, I'm going back to the original point I made in retort to the allusion that Seguin wasn't in fact an NHL All Star last season) and has put up goal totals that haven't been seen in Boston for well over a decade (02-03 prime Glen Murray being fed by all star Joe "don't ask me what all-star team I was on" Thornton means nothing.

No more talking about things that make the current Bruins look bad *whispers* it hurts those guys over there with the pom poms right in the feels*

I'd like to propose a new bylaw for the Bruins board.

Any poster who brings up Tyler Seguin in a thread that doesn't involve the Dallas Stars, or is mentioned in connection/comparison to Loui Eriksson, Reilly Smith, Joe Morrow or even Matt Fraser, shall immediately have their avatar permanently changed to a picture of Thomas Plekanec.

Awesome, make the same law for anyone that talks about Boychuk. Christ am I tired of hearing about that guy and how trading him, Boston's greatest defenseman ever, has directly lead to this downward turn in the Bruins ability to win post season games. Let's just ban talking about the Bruins past altogether. Last year? That was last year dude, this is a new season. Don't talk about performances last year, that's in the past.

We should only be allowed to talk about the current Bruins and their future (unless of course there is an appropriate thread for it. Soderberg talk should be banned as well, he's not getting resigned.

 

[Lobster57]

Awesome, make the same law for anyone that talks about Boychuk. Christ am I tired of hearing about that guy and how trading him, Boston's greatest defenseman ever, has directly lead to this downward turn in the Bruins ability to win post season games. Let's just ban talking about the Bruins past altogether. Last year? That was last year dude, this is a new season. Don't talk about performances last year, that's in the past.

As soon as the Boychuk talk pervades every. ****ing. thread. on. the. board. i will. Also, I never said to ban anything, just that there should be a price of admission.

 

[Kaoz]

As soon as the Boychuk talk pervades every. ****ing. thread. on. the. board. i will. Also, I never said to ban anything, just that there should be a price of admission.

And Peter Chiarelli. He was so last year. Talk about that guy literally. pervades. every. ****ing. thread. It's almost like what he did has a direct impact on the current Bruins roster and merits, at times, discussion. I'm honestly offended every time I see that guys name in a thread since the accident (ask me about the accident).

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

It's a fatal flaw really.

I saw someone allude to the fact that Seguin wasn't an All Star, I know he was, I make the point, you respond asking why I had felt the need to point out that those observations were erroneous, I respond to you, you tell me I'm up tight, you look awesome... profit?

Well done RB, well done (insert appropriate smiley). The fact that you don't understand what I mean when I say "supporting one line, sarcastic, erroneous quips might not be the best way to encourage legitimate hockey discussion" leads me to believe my last point is pretty much bang on.

Anywho, as we were. Seguin is bad rah rah. The fact that he put up offensive numbers last year that are unmatched by any current Bruin throughout any of their illustrious careers (so you can follow, I'm going back to the original point I made in retort to the allusion that Seguin wasn't in fact an NHL All Star last season) and has put up goal totals that haven't been seen in Boston for well over a decade (02-03 prime Glen Murray being fed by all star Joe "don't ask me what all-star team I was on" Thornton means nothing.

No more talking about things that make the current Bruins look bad *whispers* it hurts those guys over there with the pom poms right in the feels*



Awesome, make the same law for anyone that talks about Boychuk. Christ am I tired of hearing about that guy and how trading him, Boston's greatest defenseman ever, has directly lead to this downward turn in the Bruins ability to win post season games. Let's just ban talking about the Bruins past altogether. Last year? That was last year dude, this is a new season. Don't talk about performances last year, that's in the past.

We should only be allowed to talk about the current Bruins and their future (unless of course there is an appropriate thread for it. Soderberg talk should be banned as well, he's not getting resigned.

You keep responding to arguments that nobody is making. Do you want me to respond to these hypothetical arguments? Is that how I can promote legitimate hockey discussion?