Boston Bruins 24-25 Roster/Cap thread VIII

[The don godfather]

Come on sac get lindholm with pasta again.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Come on sac get lindholm with pasta again.

Yeah cuz they were f***in' dynamite together

 

[The don godfather]

Yeah cuz they were f***in' dynamite together

Gotta try again. Lindholm is a huge investment and him failing is depressing.

 

[Coach Parker]

I'm heavily in favor of adding Zegras too, but I don't see how they do that right now. That to me, is a deadline deal, when the Bruins have $6m in cap space.

I wonder if Anaheim would like a young prospect or a NHL ready D?

 

[bp14]

I think the club does a fine job breaking in kids. Lohrei, Brazeau, Swayman just in the last 2 years. 3rd line is where everyone integrates kids unless they're difference makers on Day1.

The problem has not been that they don't know how to develop kids it's that they haven't had many kids to develop.

Don't give up on Lysell. He's only 21.

You may end up wrong on Lysell but I love the post. They haven’t done poorly developing kids, fans just get restless.

Their issue is they haven’t drafted enough good ones to develop (due in some part to their success).

 

[Dr Hook]

Are we talking about the Yeti, because decent to good was definitely what he was when he finally came over. 297 points in 597 games is waaaaaaay more than Caron ever achieved

I wasn't the one that brought him up and I agree, he had a decent career. Thought the Bruins should have kept him for what it's worth. I was more thinking about Lars Jonsson. Probably should have pointed out that Soderberg was not a great comparison, though!

 

[Dr Hook]

I think they will get their chance in due time. Neither player had a good training camp. Neither player had a good start to the season in Providence. Lysell has only just started producing. He went 4 games without a point before his last 7. It doesn't help either player to call them up when they're not confident. I also don't think it helps a young player to call them up and drop them into a bad situation, like a team that's floundering.

The Bruins have been desperate to get their game on track. Desperate to get their defensive game, in particular, in order. I can see them saying let's stick with vets until we stop the bleeding defensively, then build our offense from there. (I fully expect to see Lysell before Christmas.)

I also don't really agree with this notion that they're ruining offensive players by teaching them two-way hockey. They didn't do that to Pasta. They haven't done that to Lohrei. I do think they try to help players improve their overall games (offense and defense) while in Providence but that's just development. Fans have to stop thinking about offense and defense like it's one or the other. The best players play both ways; Crosby, McDavid... They all realize at some point that playing good D just means you get the puck back sooner so you can spend more time with the puck (i.e. on offense). That's doubly important when you're not a Connor McDavid level talent (and the guys you mentioned were 3rd line talents at their absolute best).

Maybe it's a delusion I am laboring under- I fully admit that I could be doing just that. I seem to recall lots of coaches comments, most recently Bruce, but I think even Monty, about young guys needing to be harder on pucks and the like. I recall Clode not being a big one for rookies. Pasta I have a hard time with the comparison because his offensive talent is at the elite level. Anyway, I think that two-way hockey thing is great when the team is rolling and has a strong core. Right now, they could use all the offense help they can get and I am less concerned if a kid like Lysell is not hard enough on pucks or doesn't back check the greatest. He'll get there like Pasta has (still not great, but he is miles better than when he started).

That said, you make a good point about stopping the bleeding and getting the ship righted. We'll see. I hope you are right and that they really do have a commitment to young skilled guys that doesn't also require them to be junior Bergerons.

 

[PlayMakers]

I like Poitras, but I'm curious to hear what people think his ceiling is?

I don't see much more than a 15 goal, 35 point guy. I can easily be wrong but I think he's criminally overrated around here. Not saying he can't be a good piece for this team, but I think people need to look a little deeper here with their expectations.

I think he's going to become a two-way 60 point center. He's smart, he's creative, he's elusive, he has vision, he's really good at stealing pucks which leads to transition chances... I think he has a bit of a weird stride, but he's still fast when he turns it on and explosive in his cut backs.

 

[PlayMakers]

I wonder if Anaheim would like a young prospect or a NHL ready D?

Or our 1st round pick.

 

[wintersej]

I like Poitras, but I'm curious to hear what people think his ceiling is?

I don't see much more than a 15 goal, 35 point guy. I can easily be wrong but I think he's criminally overrated around here. Not saying he can't be a good piece for this team, but I think people need to look a little deeper here with their expectations.

If he was Chris Kelly or Marc Savard or anywhere in between I wouldn’t be shocked. I do think that folks assume his floor is higher than it is because he had a quick start so young. But you have to like the iq and the attitude/compete, just a question of if he will be big and/or quick enough to let his qualities shine.

 

[wintersej]

That's fair, but he's by no means a finished product. But as far as forwards, I guess Brazeau , as @PlayMakers pointed out is a good one, but then who? And Brazeau was older and came in with AHL experience which makes him a little different in my mind.


We have Merk and Lysell now that need time and on a scoring challenged team, they should be getting long looks. I just don't care for the general policy of bringing these skill guys like Senyshyn, Steen to some extent, JFK before his concussion, and sticking them on the 4th line and then sending them back because they didn't look good. I do see a deliberate policy of wanting them to have these complete 200 foot games before they get extended time in roles that best suit their skillsets. Maybe I am wrong in that but I know I am not alone in thinking that way.

I think that for the guys that are marginal offensively they, rightly, demand that they can play a full game. They don’t want to pay the rates for Spooners that can score 40 points but give it all back. I think that’s fair. They just haven’t had a lot of Pasta, Lorhei, etc guys where they can outscore warts to try to develop. Maybe how they treat Lysell will prove me wrong.

 

[BradMarchandismydad]

I think that for the guys that are marginal offensively they, rightly, demand that they can play a full game. They don’t want to pay the rates for Spooners that can score 40 points but give it all back. I think that’s fair. They just haven’t had a lot of Pasta, Lorhei, etc guys where they can outscore warts to try to develop. Maybe how they treat Lysell will prove me wrong.

I think there’s a lot of revisionist history with Spooner.

I recall when we traded him he was actually electric on the Bruins. That DeBrusk - Krejci - Spooner line was lighting it up.

I guess my point is that it’s okay to have some very offensively focused players. We can play defense, that part is clear. Let’s get some balanced lines and have people who can put the puck on the net or facilitate that function.

Easiest first step there is at least trying Lysell.

 

[PlayMakers]

Maybe it's a delusion I am laboring under- I fully admit that I could be doing just that. I seem to recall lots of coaches comments, most recently Bruce, but I think even Monty, about young guys needing to be harder on pucks and the like. I recall Clode not being a big one for rookies. Pasta I have a hard time with the comparison because his offensive talent is at the elite level. Anyway, I think that two-way hockey thing is great when the team is rolling and has a strong core. Right now, they could use all the offense help they can get and I am less concerned if a kid like Lysell is not hard enough on pucks or doesn't back check the greatest. He'll get there like Pasta has (still not great, but he is miles better than when he started).

That said, you make a good point about stopping the bleeding and getting the ship righted. We'll see. I hope you are right and that they really do have a commitment to young skilled guys that doesn't also require them to be junior Bergerons.

In terms of timing and the kids... when Sacco took over, they had 3 things they had to fix 1) effort/compete level, 2) team defense, 3) offense.

When Monty was fired, Sweeney, Sacco and the players all separately talked about how the first thing they had to do was elevate their effort and compete level. Would adding a young player(s), not known for their intensity, help them improve the team's compete level? No.

Next up was getting a handle on the team defense. Not allowing odd man rushes, defending the rush, standing up on the blue line, defensive zone coverage, defensemen not chasing, backside wings covering the slots, defensemen not chasing... Would adding a young player(s), not known for their defense, help them improve the team's defensive play? No.

I think it's safe to say that in the first 3 games, they have addressed the first two issues. They probably want to get 6, 8, 10 games of consistent results in those two areas before they feel like they're back, but so far so good.

The last challenge is to improve the offense. I think they want to see if the uptick in scoring chances and shot production will translate and get guys out of their slumps first, but we will see them try Lysell and Poitras there as well.