You want Lohrei locked into the top6 or top4? You said top6 but then the context made me think you meant top4. Fwiw, I think he's locked into the top6 even if they get a veteran D. I think they break him in the way they did Krug, 3rd pair at ES (while he learns to defend in the NHL) and 1st PP.
I don't think there's any reality where they build a team that puts Geekie on the 4th line. He's a strong 3rd liner. I don't think they need to sign 4 forwards either, or 3 forwards for that matter. They need a 1c and they need a play driver to replace DeBrusk, preferably with a RW to play with Marchand. Other than Lindholm, the UFA options are meh, IMO.
Guentzel is the only 'play driver' in the UFA class, but he's going to get paid Pasta money and I don't think they can afford both Lindholm and Guentzel. Lindholm is the bigger priority.
Reinhart is a career 30/30 guy who had a great season and you're going to end up paying for 90 point Reinhart not 60 point Reinhart. I don't think he's a play driver and I don't think you can afford both Reinhart and Lindholm. Plus, Reinhart and Lindholm play the same spot on the PP.
Stamkos isn't coming here. He and Pasta play the same spot on the PP. I think "fit" matters and you only have one PP1 bumper. You are selling someone on having that job and those goals.
Marchessault is not a play driver, not young and looking to get paid. Laine has baggage that would give me pause and he plays the same spot on the PP as Pasta. Toffoli isn't a play driver. Perron isn't young and isn't a play driver...
I'd be down for Necas. I like the idea of using Ulmark for a secondary scorer but I'm also okay with them using him for a 1st round pick.
So, I think they're going to look at those less than perfect UFA fits and say, why get locked into a long, expensive contract for someone we're not sure is going to work. Let's take a flyer on someone cheap and see if Lysell or Merkulov can beat them out of a job. At least Lysell can be a dynamic play driver. Maybe he's still not mature enough, that seems to be the opinion of those in the know, but that's why you sign the vet as insurance. And, there are good fits on defense, guys who could be impactful players, so I think that's why they lean that way.
I agree that Chiarelli’s teams were tough, intimidating and fun to watch… and I agree that Sweeney’s teams for the most part have not been tough or intimidating, but I don’t think that was an issue for the Bruins this year. I thought they were just as physical as Florida. We had just as many blow up hits as they did and outhit them in the series overall. No, we weren’t the 2011 Bruins but we lost that series on skill not toughness IMO.
(This is my new "unlike" button -- I see it as an oddly shaped pile of blue dog shit).
