Speculation: Which of the following moves hurt the bruins most?

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

It’s a collection of all. All of the success the Bruins have been having over the last decade is in spite of the front office’s best efforts to make us mediocre.

However I’m going with the trades. Too many variables at play for 2015 and while it’s the highest upside “what if?”, it’s also not a guarantee that they wouldn’t have tried to make Mat Barzal into Greg Campbell and Kyle Connor into PJ Axelsson.

However..trades..collectively..the only thing they have to show for trading Tyler Seguin, Reilly Smith, and Dougie Hamilton is Jeremy Lauzon.

They’ve spent the following list to try and replace Reilly Smith and have landed on Ondrej Kase..for now:
two 1sts
2nd
4th
6th
7th
Ryan Spooner
Matt Beleskey
Ryan Lindgren
David Backes
Axel Andersson

Problematic.

But we got the opportunity to buy out Jimmy Hayes! What perfect asset management. /s

 

[Ratty]

Mark Stuart over Zach Parise.

....and Ryan Getzlaf

 

[KillerMillerTime]

Trading away a 19 year old future #1 center because you couldn’t help guide him to maturity was a major fail. Getting back turdichi for him was worse.

Had we kept Seguin, Krecji could have been moved in his prime for picks and assets to shore up whatever weakness we had at the time.

Talent is hard to find (as illustrated, apparently, by some of our draft choices) and harder to acquire. Letting it slip through your fingers without getting equal value is a damn shame.

He was 21 not 19.

 

[BruinDust]

Hindsight is always 20 20.
No one can predict the future with absolute certainty there are too many variables.
As in life choices are made and you live with the consequences, some good some bad.

Losing out on Iginla for the playoff run in 13 possibly cost them a cup.
Piss poor officiating in the 19 finals cost them another cup.
Those two things hurt most out of the last 10 years

Is it hindsight when some folks here questioned these moves the day they happened?

 

[Ratty]

He was 21 not 19.

Whatever. Point well made, young and immature.

 

[Number6]

Drafting Doug Morrison instead of Mark Messier in 1979 (Messier was drafted in the third round). It probably costs the Bruins multiple Stanley Cup, especially those of 1988 and 1990.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

The Senyshyn pick and not getting a good enough return for Seguin.

 

[BMC]

That 2015 draft was a killer and not in a good way.

As for Seguin- IIRC Jacobs supposedly told Chiarelli to get rid of Seguin yesterday. With instructions like that it is a wonder Chiarelli managed to get anyone decent back. And we blame management for quitting on Seguin because of his maturity issues but Seguin himself bears equal responsibility.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Mark Stuart over Zach Parise.

Or Ryan Getzlaf or Brent Burns.

Maybe it was too hard to choose between those 3 players. That's why they traded down so they wouldn't have to make a tough decision.

 

[Gordoff]

Or Ryan Getzlaf or Brent Burns.

Maybe it was too hard to choose between those 3 players. That's why they traded down so they wouldn't have to make a tough decision.

Ya know... as far fetched and kinda funny (and a bit scary) as this is, it's actually not a bad take. I've had a couple times in my (young) life where I've done exactly that.
My first wife comes to mind, but that's another story.

 

[Riley 88]

Just that thisthread exists, Shows the incompetence here. And this GM wants to make "Major changes"..............I'm scared.

 

[ON3M4N]

Going to go against the grain here and say Backes. The 2015 draft is obviously the fan favorite, but we have no idea what would have happened if we took the guys everyone says we should have. No idea how they would have developed in Boston, how they would have been used or how the team would look because its a rabbit hole of endless possibilities and what-if's.

So I'm going with Backes because his $6 million tied up a good part of our cap space while getting 3rd/4th line production (when healthy) out of him. That $6 million could have been used in better ways to improve the team, but it also wasn't an easy contract to move. IMO Kase was worth Axel + 2nd but with ANH taking Backes it bumped the 2nd to a 1st for this year. This is considered to be a pretty solid draft and not having a 1st rounder hurts.

With that I'm going to step out of this thread because in reality its just going to turn into an extension of the 2015 Draft Thread

 

[Dr Hook]

With that I'm going to step out of this thread because in reality its just going to turn into an extension of the 2015 Draft Thread

I thought the exact same thing after reading the premise of it A more cynical person than I would suspect this was an attempt to spread that infection past it's quarantine zone.

FWIW, I thought Backes too- that was atrocious. Now someone should start one about which of the following moves helped the Bruins the most (not me, though)

 

[Gordoff]

Maybe add to the choice list "hiring and not firing Scott f****ing Bradley?"

 

[BMC]

Maybe add to the choice list "hiring and not firing Scott f****ing Bradley?"

Him and John Whitesides. It's becoming clear that whatever he's telling them to do training wise isn't working anymore, they're getting hurt too often

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Drafting Doug Morrison instead of Mark Messier in 1979 (Messier was drafted in the third round). It probably costs the Bruins multiple Stanley Cup, especially those of 1988 and 1990.

Could have taken Glenn Anderson instead of Keith Crowder in the same draft.

But the B's did Ok in the first round that year.

 

[member 96824]

Maybe add to the choice list "hiring and not firing Scott f****ing Bradley?"

How dare you, that's the next GM in an exhaustive search you're talking about there.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The 2015 draft debacle. And it's not even close. Even if they take Debrusk with one of the three picks, they completely whiffed passing on Barzal, which should of been a no-brainer I don't care how many centers they had at the time. And how any scout could go to a St. John Seadogs game and come away thinking Jakub Zboril was a better D-man than Thomas Chabot needs to get their eyes checked. In my limited viewings of Zboril it was crystal clear this guy had a lot to learn about how to play the game, and got this far based on his physical athletic tools alone. Right now he looks like the Czech version of Jeff Jillson.

The rest ranked by least worst, to most worst.

Nash trade: I don't see this as a terrible deal. Lindgren at the time for most was considered the 4th best LD prospect (behind Zboril, Lauzon, and Vaak). They got rid of some of Belesky's money, and Spooner ended up being a fringe NHLer and quickly a non-NHLer.

Seguin trade: Without the terrible Smith-Hayes trade this deal isn't even that bad in the long-run. Would of came out relatively even had they just kept Smith, maybe even a win considering they did get 3 years of decent play out of Eriksson. But this deal on it's own merit didn't turn out terrible. It was the subsequent moves to the assets they did acquire, even if at the time the value looked light for a player of Seguin's age and pedigree.

Backes - Backes was coming off a playoff run where he was one of if not St. Louis's best player. They never used him right from the get go. Claude Julien, the same coach who had no problem with Joonas Kemppainen centering a line, tried to emulate Krejci + Horton/Iginla and made Backes his power winger. When he should of been the 3rd line center, getting some tough defensive match-ups, basically the role Coyle has now. Then Cassidy comes in and Backes as a winger just didn't fit his system, to be a winger in Cassidy's system you have to be able to skate well. One reason I'm against bringing in a guy like Bobby Ryan who is a below-average skater. It's Boston's own fault IMO that Backes didn't work out here and they eventually had to pay to get rid of him.

Hamilton trade - My biggest gripe in this move was they got zilch that could help them right away and accepted a package purely of futures. Sure their was the threat of a Chiarelli offer sheet, but regardless you don't take a lesser return based on that. They should of gotten at least one asset that was ready to step into the line-up and help the 2015-16 team. It's only now the Bruins are seeing any benefit of this deal. That's way too long.

yeah no, Backes was washed up and on the back 9 when they signed him. Julien got as much out of him as possible. And no, you dont give a guy a $6m a year for 5 years to come be your 3rd line center, that is top 6/1st line money in 2015.

the real slap to the face is they traded away the quintessential Bruins player and massive fan favorite in Lucic because they didnt want to pay an aging power forward big money in their 30s. What do they turn around and do, pay someone elses aging power forward the same f**king money as what Lucic got.

 

[Gordoff]

How dare you, that's the next GM in an exhaustive search you're talking about there.

 

[ON3M4N]

I thought the exact same thing after reading the premise of it A more cynical person than I would suspect this was an attempt to spread that infection past it's quarantine zone.

FWIW, I thought Backes too- that was atrocious. Now someone should start one about which of the following moves helped the Bruins the most (not me, though)

That would be in interesting discussion with a lot of quality choice IMO.

 

[BruinDust]

yeah no, Backes was washed up and on the back 9 when they signed him. Julien got as much out of him as possible. And no, you dont give a guy a $6m a year for 5 years to come be your 3rd line center, that is top 6/1st line money in 2015.

the real slap to the face is they traded away the quintessential Bruins player and massive fan favorite in Lucic because they didnt want to pay an aging power forward big money in their 30s. What do they turn around and do, pay someone elses aging power forward the same f**king money as what Lucic got.

Back 9? Yes. Washed up. Nope. Did you watch him in the 2016 playoffs at all? He was a beast for St. Louis that year. Julien had no idea how to use him, even if your right when you say that 6 million per for 5 years isn't good value for a 3rd line center. Oh wait, they pretty much just gave a similar contract to Coyle.

I totally agree they messed up trading Lucic because of fear he would decline because he's a "power forward" even though he's shown and had shown he's very durable. The game got a lot faster which is the biggest reason why Lucic isn't as effective as he once was. And barely anyone wants to fight him as fighting is way down league wide since he left Boston. It was a mistake to not sign him and then sign Backes to be a power winger. I fully supported the Backes signing when it happened, because based on his comments, he was being brought in to play mostly C with spot duty at RW, but it never turned out that way. Take some of the load off Bergeron defensively and Krejci offensively, but they never used him right. He may (likely) of ended up a 4th line C by year 3 of the deal, so the contract would of been bad, but he'd still be effective as a big defensive center (former Selke nominee as a C) who was pretty adept on face-offs. And given the way Boston/Cassidy use their 4th line, Backes would of been a effective piece centering the 4th line, albeit an overpaid one.

 

[Beesfan]

Yeah, that's the frustrating thing for me too. It's very okay to make mistakes, it's very not okay to not learn from mistakes and continue to repeat them.

It's been a very very good thing for this regime that Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, Chara, Lucic, and Marchand were already in place when they showed up and started patting themselves on the back. I'd say Kessel too but this group completely wasted one of the great fleecings in NHL history.

This team will have such a gaping hole at center in 1-2 years. Krejci and Bergeron are both still amazing players, but I also sense they are both very much nearing the end. This is probably Krejci's last year with the Bruins, and Bergeron is 35 and has that nagging groin issue that never goes away. I could see him retiring before his contract expires.

I really wonder what the internal conversations are like when it comes to identifying replacements for our top two centers. Are they counting on finding one in the draft this year or next year? In the 15 years since we drafted Krejci, and we have failed to identify a single #1 or #2 center in the draft (I don't count Seguin, he fell into our lap at #2 with a pick that wasn't ours, and we used him as a wing because he wasn't "strong enough" to be a center). Studnicka is at least trending well, but he has played 2 games, so I'm not calling him a 1/2 C yet. There just is no reason to believe that our drafting philosophy will identify a top line center outside of a lottery pick. We never take players like Point, Aho, Suzuki, etc.

The primary reason there is no sense is signing a super high end free agent (Hall, AP) is because we have no chance to be contenders in 2 years time and the balance of their contract will be a waste.

 

[JOKER 192]

The snowball effect that was started by the horrible 2015 draft has yet to say it's final words . So much of the dumb shit that went down afterwards could have been avoided.

 

[Over the volcano]

....and Ryan Getzlaf

... and Brent Burns.

Silver linings - no ones bitching about the Kessel or Thornton deals anymore.

 

[bbfan419]

I blame a lot of it on scouting and they've simply placed too much value on natural athletic ability. This problem goes back before Sweeney, before Chiarelli, before MOC even.

Scott Bradley is the one constant over this time period (been with the org. since 1993) and my guess he should take much of the blame for their approach to drafting and prospect player acquisition.

True our scouting staff although found some good players in the second round or later, they often miss out on top players in the first round.