Management 1 PM May 22nd - Charlie, Cam, Don and Monty address media - NESN

[Fenway]

Wednesday, May 22 at 1 p.m. (TD Garden, Boston, MA)
- End of season press conference with CEO and Alternate Governor Charlie Jacobs, President Cam Neely, General Manager Don Sweeney and Head Coach Jim Montgomery

- Media should enter through back security and proceed to Legends Club on Level 3

- Light refreshments will be provided to the media​

Click to read more...

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I hate that it is but I think the regular season success paired with the shortcomings in recent history has made it something that plays in the background while you do other things rather than planning for it.

You know every player and what they bring and what the game is going to look like.

A top line C ignites a new look or reason to watch. When the turnover is 3rd 4th liners it's essentially the same team that didn't do it when it mattered in the past.

Remember the feeling when Pastrnak emerged?
Savard and Chara?
Seguin?
Lucic and Horton?

It's been a long time since something new/exciting and reason for optimism. I loved the Lindholm during the record-setting year on D but that didn't last.

I was hoping the Bergeron exit (as tragic as it was) would usher in a new 1st line C. Maybe this summer. Doubtful but I'd watch talent or a new reason to think this doesn't end the same way next year.

And yet here you are posting on a message board about the team after the season is over in May.

 

[Over the volcano]

I hate that it is but I think the regular season success paired with the shortcomings in recent history has made it something that plays in the background while you do other things rather than planning for it.

You know every player and what they bring and what the game is going to look like.

I didn't know Lorhei would be a top pair defenseman for this club in the playoffs. Or that Swayman would dominate like hie did. Brazzeau was a surprise and Geekie as the #1 center to end the year. . .

And let's not even go back to last year, I don't think anyone expected that roster or performance when the year started.

Think the hindsight bias is just a little strong right now.

 

[NDiesel]

I hate that it is but I think the regular season success paired with the shortcomings in recent history has made it something that plays in the background while you do other things rather than planning for it.

You know every player and what they bring and what the game is going to look like.

A top line C ignites a new look or reason to watch. When the turnover is 3rd 4th liners it's essentially the same team that didn't do it when it mattered in the past.

Remember the feeling when Pastrnak emerged?
Savard and Chara?
Seguin?
Lucic and Horton?

It's been a long time since something new/exciting and reason for optimism. I loved the Lindholm during the record-setting year on D but that didn't last.

I was hoping the Bergeron exit (as tragic as it was) would usher in a new 1st line C. Maybe this summer. Doubtful but I'd watch talent or a new reason to think this doesn't end the same way next year.

Ah yes, the whole board knew exactly what Beecher and Brazeau and Poitras and Lohrei was going to bring before the season started...yaaawn get us something shiny and interesting.

I'm not trying to pick on you, because I generally like your posts, but the posts I see here in May are starting to get to me I think...

 

[LouJersey]

I've transitioned to more of a 'when does next years playoff schedule come out?' and tuning in then unless there is an actual 1st line C in town to watch.

I enjoy hockey. In a sim league with a bunch of people here that post and that makes it even more entertaining. I went until age 26-27 before I could see the Bruins more than 8 or so times a year so I appreciated watching 75 games a year the past 25 years. I get the irritation with not winning it all. I watch alot of Devils, Rangers and Islanders as well being from that area and they peak and valley a lot.

I guess what I am trying to say is over the years the "1c" have come and gone and the players change but we root for the crest and we all will always watch (I mean we all post on a message board so we are all kind of nuts) and hope for another 2011.

If you aren't enjoying it there a lot of other things to do, and I have done a lot and sports are just sports now.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

I get what you are saying.

I think the things you say they are unwilling to do are things that all good NHL franchises don't do. I think they went away from that when they traded way too much for an on-the-downside-of his- career Rick Nash in 2018.

In 2019 they added Charlie Coyle & Marcus Johansson in February and both were instrumental in getting the team to the finals. Adding even more was no guarantee they even get that far.

Seems to me Sweeney has been willing to go for it right from start. But you can only make the deals that are there to be made.

As for owners, most of them are happy to make a profit without a championship. But they also know they make more profit if they do win it all.

I'm curious though in terms of what you're suggesting they could do differently? Seems to me they trade for as much as they can every deadline and in many ways that is what has cost them long term but you seem to be saying they should have done more at the deadlines so what? You'd have traded away all the draft picks? Poitras? Lohrei? What else could they have done?

I think I can respond to both of you by saying that I'm not in major disagreement with management or with a lot of what Sweeney's done. A lot is sensible and, as has been said, in line with other sensible franchises. My quibbles are more minor.

But as to what I'd do differently, in terms of the year-to-year, it depends. Last two years, zero complaints. Sweeney went all in last year as he absolutely should have, equally this year he did very little which again was IMO correct. One roster and scenario was worth betting the house on, the other quite the opposite. But 2019 and 2020, for example, were somewhat disappointing. Coyle and MoJo were fine, but not addressing the gaping hole on Krejci's right was inexcusable to me. Then Kase and Ritchie the following year were underwhelming, and there was a clear deficiency on D that again was ignored. I know, hindsight and all that, and in 2019 Tampa were looking nigh-on unstoppable (until they weren't), and trades are hard, and Covid messed up 2020 anyway, but if you're in there to win it I'd rather you go all the way. I felt in those years Don hedged his bets a bit. Whereas last year he didn't hold back. Of course it still ended badly, but I at least appreciated that he'd given the roster every possible chance.

More broadly as regards the general operation of the team over the longer-term, it's kind of hard to specify because it gets into what ifs pretty quickly and is dependent on circumstances. What I could say is I'd like the team to be willing to take on a little more risk, more willing to bring in some fresh voices and views (e.g. they seem to have no desire to change up the coaching staff whereas I feel a new assistant in the mix could be very beneficial), more willing to aim that little bit higher even if it means the costs of failure might be higher. In principle I'd have no problem with the team going open-eyed into a proper rebuild, should the time be right, which I fully accept it isn't now, because their alternative strategy of re-tooling on the fly has been very effective. But I think it or something like it should be on the table as an option if and when required.

So yeah, not asking for wholesale changes, just in an ideal world I'd love to see some more, hmmm, maybe 'dynamism' is the right term. For the most part though, reasonably content.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think I can respond to both of you by saying that I'm not in major disagreement with management or with a lot of what Sweeney's done. A lot is sensible and, as has been said, in line with other sensible franchises. My quibbles are more minor.

But as to what I'd do differently, in terms of the year-to-year, it depends. Last two years, zero complaints. Sweeney went all in last year as he absolutely should have, equally this year he did very little which again was IMO correct. One roster and scenario was worth betting the house on, the other quite the opposite. But 2019 and 2020, for example, were somewhat disappointing. Coyle and MoJo were fine, but not addressing the gaping hole on Krejci's right was inexcusable to me. Then Kase and Ritchie the following year were underwhelming, and there was a clear deficiency on D that again was ignored. I know, hindsight and all that, and in 2019 Tampa were looking nigh-on unstoppable (until they weren't), and trades are hard, and Covid messed up 2020 anyway, but if you're in there to win it I'd rather you go all the way. I felt in those years Don hedged his bets a bit. Whereas last year he didn't hold back. Of course it still ended badly, but I at least appreciated that he'd given the roster every possible chance.

More broadly as regards the general operation of the team over the longer-term, it's kind of hard to specify because it gets into what ifs pretty quickly and is dependent on circumstances. What I could say is I'd like the team to be willing to take on a little more risk, more willing to bring in some fresh voices and views (e.g. they seem to have no desire to change up the coaching staff whereas I feel a new assistant in the mix could be very beneficial), more willing to aim that little bit higher even if it means the costs of failure might be higher. In principle I'd have no problem with the team going open-eyed into a proper rebuild, should the time be right, which I fully accept it isn't now, because their alternative strategy of re-tooling on the fly has been very effective. But I think it or something like it should be on the table as an option if and when required.

So yeah, not asking for wholesale changes, just in an ideal world I'd love to see some more, hmmm, maybe 'dynamism' is the right term. For the most part though, reasonably content.

It's easy to say what moves worked out or didn't.

But it seems wrong to criticize moves not made. We really don't know who was available or what the price was. Right now the Bruins need center. Lots of talk about Lindholm. What if someone offers him $9 mil for 5 years? Should Sweeney top that simply because it would fill a need right now? Or should he be patient?

Seems in general we are on the same page though.

 

[TCB]

I didn't know Lorhei would be a top pair defenseman for this club in the playoffs. Or that Swayman would dominate like hie did. Brazzeau was a surprise and Geekie as the #1 center to end the year. . .

And let's not even go back to last year, I don't think anyone expected that roster or performance when the year started.

Think the hindsight bias is just a little strong right now.

Which one of these doesn't belong ?
You had me with you until you said Geekie as the number one center. The other players are more than capable of holding their spots moving forward. Geekie on the other hand is a 3rd liner who has the ability to play up when needed, but if he's the Bruins top Center heading into next year, which I'm sure he wont be but if he is, you my as well trade Marchand at the deadline for future assets.

 

[HumBucker]

I think I can respond to both of you by saying that I'm not in major disagreement with management or with a lot of what Sweeney's done. A lot is sensible and, as has been said, in line with other sensible franchises. My quibbles are more minor.

But as to what I'd do differently, in terms of the year-to-year, it depends. Last two years, zero complaints. Sweeney went all in last year as he absolutely should have, equally this year he did very little which again was IMO correct. One roster and scenario was worth betting the house on, the other quite the opposite. But 2019 and 2020, for example, were somewhat disappointing. Coyle and MoJo were fine, but not addressing the gaping hole on Krejci's right was inexcusable to me. Then Kase and Ritchie the following year were underwhelming, and there was a clear deficiency on D that again was ignored. I know, hindsight and all that, and in 2019 Tampa were looking nigh-on unstoppable (until they weren't), and trades are hard, and Covid messed up 2020 anyway, but if you're in there to win it I'd rather you go all the way. I felt in those years Don hedged his bets a bit. Whereas last year he didn't hold back. Of course it still ended badly, but I at least appreciated that he'd given the roster every possible chance.

More broadly as regards the general operation of the team over the longer-term, it's kind of hard to specify because it gets into what ifs pretty quickly and is dependent on circumstances. What I could say is I'd like the team to be willing to take on a little more risk, more willing to bring in some fresh voices and views (e.g. they seem to have no desire to change up the coaching staff whereas I feel a new assistant in the mix could be very beneficial), more willing to aim that little bit higher even if it means the costs of failure might be higher. In principle I'd have no problem with the team going open-eyed into a proper rebuild, should the time be right, which I fully accept it isn't now, because their alternative strategy of re-tooling on the fly has been very effective. But I think it or something like it should be on the table as an option if and when required.

So yeah, not asking for wholesale changes, just in an ideal world I'd love to see some more, hmmm, maybe 'dynamism' is the right term. For the most part though, reasonably content.

Spot on.

The last 2 seasons have to be seen as a set piece. Management went all in 2 seasons ago. Still the right move. It failed for several reasons, none of which were the fault of management, I don't think. More on the players and the coaches. Maybe - maybe - the injury to Bergeron could have been avoided had management strongly suggested that he sit out that game. But since when does a GM intervene in coaching/player decisions like that? That's on Bergeron, frankly, and Monty. A healthy Bergeron, Krejci and Ullmark, and better coaching decisions around goaltending, and that series may have had a different ending. Maybe.

And that's the other shoe. Because as we saw in the first game of the Rangers-Panthers series, sometimes the other team just plays better, and makes a very talented team look less effective. The Panthers are built for playoffs and they play a style of game that brings playoff success. As much as I hate them, I have to admire that (except for the cheating).

There's no magic bullet to guarantee playoff success. Games are mostly so closely fought that luck, bounces and health will always play a part.

Obviously management's job now is to upgrade this team where it needs it and build a roster that can 1) succeed in the regular season to get into the playoffs, and 2) go toe-to-toe with the Panthers and play a more physical playoff style of hockey. Not as easy as it seems. You need a balance of talent and snarl. But I think we're heading in the right direction, with added size up front and on D.

 

[Over the volcano]

Which one of these doesn't belong ?
You had me with you until you said Geekie as the number one center. The other players are more than capable of holding their spots moving forward. Geekie on the other hand is a 3rd liner who has the ability to play up when needed, but if he's the Bruins top Center heading into next year, which I'm sure he wont be but if he is, you my as well trade Marchand at the deadline for future assets.

Just filling it under things we didn't expect - seeing him slot in at #1 center in the playoffs was, well, unexpected.

 

[HumBucker]

The other thing about playoff post mortem analysis, is that series are often won or lost by a fraction of an inch. Two teams battle to a round one game 7 OT, anything can happen. But one team goes on to win the Cup, and the other is subjected to "what went wrong" and finger-pointing from all quarters - fans, media, etc. It could just as easily have gone the other way, but a puck took a weird bounce or deflected off a leg at the wrong time. There is an element of randomness to it all that can't be discounted.

I saw some people saying that essentially this B's team was not worthy because we barely made it out of the Leafs series, only thanks to Pasta's OT heroics (I would also give some credit to Lindholm and Swayman). But that's just the nature of the playoffs, and it cuts that way for every team. In 2011, how many game 7s? Three? How many OT games? Does that tarnish the Cup rings or the banner hanging in the rafters? Hardly.

The Stanley Cup is the hardest trophy to win in all professional sports. Only one team gets to hoist it, and among the 15 teams that fall along the way, there are some very, very good teams that - had fortune's touch fallen ever so slightly differently - may have been drinking champagne instead of tasting tears and fielding recriminations.

 

[Bruinfanatic]

The other thing about playoff post mortem analysis, is that series are often won or lost by a fraction of an inch. Two teams battle to a round one game 7 OT, anything can happen. But one team goes on to win the Cup, and the other is subjected to "what went wrong" and finger-pointing from all quarters - fans, media, etc. It could just as easily have gone the other way, but a puck took a weird bounce or deflected off a leg at the wrong time. There is an element of randomness to it all that can't be discounted.

I saw some people saying that essentially this B's team was not worthy because we barely made it out of the Leafs series, only thanks to Pasta's OT heroics (I would also give some credit to Lindholm and Swayman). But that's just the nature of the playoffs, and it cuts that way for every team. In 2011, how many game 7s? Three? How many OT games? Does that tarnish the Cup rings or the banner hanging in the rafters? Hardly.

The Stanley Cup is the hardest trophy to win in all professional sports. Only one team gets to hoist it, and among the 15 teams that fall along the way, there are some very, very good teams that - had fortune's touch fallen ever so slightly differently - may have been drinking champagne instead of tasting tears and fielding recriminations.

If the Leafs had played the first 4 games the way they did the last 3 the Bruins wouldn’t have gotten bye them .

 

[trenton1]

I wouldn't be surprised if the sticking point with Jake is that his side would want a sizeable no-trade clause of some kind. I think the prior trade requests from Debrusk make the Bruins leery of being stuck in a situation where he can't be easily moved in a deal that they want to make. His recent 2 year deal with no clauses was just that.
Prior history tells me that Sweeney always locks up his pending UFA players early when he really wants them. The "path" with Jake is probably a slight raise and a light if non-existent movement clause. Jake, to me, is likely a goner.

 

[Gordoff]

Which one of these doesn't belong ?
You had me with you until you said Geekie as the number one center. The other players are more than capable of holding their spots moving forward. Geekie on the other hand is a 3rd liner who has the ability to play up when needed, but if he's the Bruins top Center heading into next year, which I'm sure he wont be but if he is, you my as well trade Marchand at the deadline for future assets.

I would hate to trade Brad. That being said, I hope that option doesn't need to happen (I'm 99% sure it won't). Nothing (in hockey) would shock me more.
But, saying that, if Marchand were ever traded it would
be nice to have another teams fans understand him and
appreciate him (not that any other fanbase matters).
I just know that the dislike for him is at least mostly jealousy that
he isn't theirs. How would Vancouver Canuck, or Edmonton Oiler fans
etc feel about him on their teams?
I've said here that I was aggravated for by a few things that he's done like
the line change in Game 7, 2019 that he fumbled (the loss was a team loss) but the thought of him on
another team makes me wince.

 

[Bruinswillwin77]

I would hate to trade Brad. That being said, I hope that option doesn't need to happen (I'm 99% sure it won't).
But, saying that, if Marchand were ever traded it would
be nice to have another teams fans understand him and
appreciate him (not that any other fanbase matters).
I just know that the dislike for him is at least mostly jealousy that
he isn't theirs. How would Vancouver Canuck, or Edmonton Oiler fans
etc feel about him on their teams?
I've said here that I was aggravated for by a few things that he's done like
the line change in Game 7, 2019 that he fumbled but the thought of him on
another team makes me wince.

No way.

 

[bruinsfan1968]

If the Leafs had played the first 4 games the way they did the last 3 the Bruins wouldn’t have gotten bye them .

The Bruins could have played better in 1 game and finished the series in 5 games.

 

[Bruinswillwin77]

The Bruins could have played better in 1 game and finished the series in 5 games.

You mean game 2. Nvm I thought you said "game 1".

 

[Bruinfanatic]

The Bruins could have played better in 1 game and finished the series in 5 games.

I just no the Leafs totally changed their style of play after game 4 and it gave the Bruins fits ,Bruins power play was also very effective early on in the series.

 

[LouJersey]

I just no the Leafs totally changed their style of play after game 4 and it gave the Bruins fits ,Bruins power play was also very effective early on in the series.

Bruins super human goalie giving up 9 goals in 6 games + Matthews and Nylander missing 5 combined games = the only reason the Bruins won that series.

 

[Coach Parker]

Ah yes, the whole board knew exactly what Beecher and Brazeau and Poitras and Lohrei was going to bring before the season started...yaaawn get us something shiny and interesting.

I'm not trying to pick on you, because I generally like your posts, but the posts I see here in May are starting to get to me I think...

Oh I love seeing them emerge but there’s only so much excitement watching a player proved they belong in the NHL and fall into place in our system versus forcing the Bruins to change they way they play.

When you get a player that changes the fundamentals of Bruins hockey you enjoy the growth and development the team makes.

Chara and Savard changed it.
Lucic changed it.
Pastrnak changed it.
The perfection line changed it.

As a former coach I love watching development but for true excitement and optimism to arise you hope a player comes along and changes the way your team plays for the better and in a way that makes it exciting to watch.

I loved watching Florida change when Tkachuk arrived. The Edmonton power play. The speed transition Johnston and co brought to Dallas.

I hope that and doesn’t come across as wanting a new toy. It’s more like wanting more Lego pieces to add to the collection that allow you to make something new. Recently, it feels like the management team keeps stocking up on 2x4 rectangle pieces hoping the coach can get creative and build a spaceship when he's stuck building castles.

 

[Bruinfanatic]

Bruins super human goalie giving up 9 goals in 6 games + Matthews and Nylander missing 5 combined games = the only reason the Bruins won that series.

Don’t disagree but they also changed their style after game 4

 

[frankiess]

LOl ok live in fantasy world if you think earning a profit is not as important if not more so.

Fanworld. We live in Fanworld. A place where every owner and his management team wants to win the Cup. We think, or we at least want to think that there is integrity amongst management when it comes to the fans and the game.
There was a poster on main board one time and he said it right imo, the NHL is a cartel for making money and that's what the owners care about.

 

[TCB]

I would hate to trade Brad. That being said, I hope that option doesn't need to happen (I'm 99% sure it won't). Nothing (in hockey) would shock me more.
But, saying that, if Marchand were ever traded it would
be nice to have another teams fans understand him and
appreciate him (not that any other fanbase matters).
I just know that the dislike for him is at least mostly jealousy that
he isn't theirs. How would Vancouver Canuck, or Edmonton Oiler fans
etc feel about him on their teams?
I've said here that I was aggravated for by a few things that he's done like
the line change in Game 7, 2019 that he fumbled (the loss was a team loss) but the thought of him on
another team makes me wince.

I love Marchand and all he brings, but if he isn't resign this off season or by the deadline and the Bruins are a bubble team on making the playoffs come deadline, I'd be taking calls. Love him and will always appreciate what he has brought to the bruins all these years, but if that was the case which I don't foresee it being I'd move him in a heartbeat.

I do see them coming to an agreement with him before hand and I also don't see the Bruins as being a team who will be on the outside looking in at a playoff spot, i actually think there will better this upcoming season than last years club, but if that was the case I hope they would move him.

 

[HumBucker]

Fanworld. We live in Fanworld. A place where every owner and his management team wants to win the Cup. We think, or we at least want to think that there is integrity amongst management when it comes to the fans and the game.
There was a poster on main board one time and he said it right imo, the NHL is a cartel for making money and that's what the owners care about.

A little too knee-jerk cynical, imo. Obviously EVERY business exists to make money. But that doesn't mean they don't try to put out the best product and gain accolades and awards, which can then be used to better market their product and differentiate themselves from the competition.

Besides, even if it is just about money, winning a championship provides a franchise with way more merchandising opportunities to sell to fans.

 

[Over the volcano]

Oh I love seeing them emerge but there’s only so much excitement watching a player proved they belong in the NHL and fall into place in our system versus forcing the Bruins to change they way they play.

When you get a player that changes the fundamentals of Bruins hockey you enjoy the growth and development the team makes.

Chara and Savard changed it.
Lucic changed it.
Pastrnak changed it.
The perfection line changed it.

As a former coach I love watching development but for true excitement and optimism to arise you hope a player comes along and changes the way your team plays for the better and in a way that makes it exciting to watch.

I loved watching Florida change when Tkachuk arrived. The Edmonton power play. The speed transition Johnston and co brought to Dallas.

I hope that and doesn’t come across as wanting a new toy. It’s more like wanting more Lego pieces to add to the collection that allow you to make something new. Recently, it feels like the management team keeps stocking up on 2x4 rectangle pieces hoping the coach can get creative and build a spaceship when he's stuck building castles.

Thought Lorhei fundamentally changed the way they play when he was on the ice

 

[BiteThisBurrows]

It's easy to say what moves worked out or didn't.

But it seems wrong to criticize moves not made. We really don't know who was available or what the price was. Right now the Bruins need center. Lots of talk about Lindholm. What if someone offers him $9 mil for 5 years? Should Sweeney top that simply because it would fill a need right now? Or should he be patient?

Seems in general we are on the same page though.

This is spot on.

Sweeney said he was going to be "aggressive" in free agency and that should mean he will make some offers to some bigger names. He did not say he would be "stupid" in free agency. You can only go so high on these guys and you have to hope they'd maybe take a slightly lower number to play here because of the team and culture we have. Geekie, for example, wanted to be here and he played well. He was a solid add. We all want Lindholm or another big move but we have to wait and see what's actually possible.