Boston Bruins 24-25 Roster/Cap thread XIII

[GordonHowe]

I'll give you my $.02 on that Gordie...

There is a relatively new offensive system called '3 high' where, at 5on5, a forward rotates out between the D, creating all sorts of attack options while also allowing for easy retrievals and keep ins. This came into the league 5 years ago and about half of the teams use it now to some degree.

At first a lot of coaches didn't love it because it pulls a forward away from the net, (and after all that's where the goals are scored) but what coaches have learned is that it wreaks havoc on defensive structures.

For example, a typical box and 1, like what the Bruins have deployed for 20 years to great success, does not allow the center to venture above the tops of the circles, his job is to stay low, support the D and be a second layer if a player gets beat. Well, when the other team puts 3 guys out above the circle and your system only allows 2 guys to go out that high, the other team has an advantage. They can run plays and give/go's that create problems. Teams that run this system (like Florida) give the Bruins fits, because if the Bruins chase, they're out of their structure, and if they stay home it looks like a power play and leads to long stretches of zone time.

This season, the Bruins tried going to more of a man to man with Monty, which really flopped. Then they went back to Julien's box+1 which helped, especially against teams that don't roll out 3 high, but they still struggled against teams that do.

I think, what we're seeing now under Sacco is something in between. They play a box+1 but the center has more freedom to play out high when the other team sets up that way. It's not quite a hybrid (where the forwards play man to man and the D play zone) and it's not quite a box+1 because you can have all three forwards in a line across the tops of the circles. But there is still some kind of a disconnect with regard to what they're doing because the other team starts roaming (like NJ did), our guys seem to get lost in coverage.

Long story short, I think the box+1 is going the way of the dinosaurs because offensive schemes have evolved. What's more, I'm not sure the Bruins know how to adapt.

Excellent post. Thank you for the elucidation.

My answer here is that they better adjust.

Period.

Again, what about Nikita?

 

[Blowfish]

Select the 3 players you wanted and then explain how the team would've kept them in the system, until Bergy and Krecji retired!
Let's hear it!

The 3 are obvious and valuable capital. Not much more to be said.

 

[TCB]

Select the 3 players you wanted and then explain how the team would've kept them in the system, until Bergy and Krecji retired!
Let's hear it!

Are you saying don't have 3 first round picks because your afraid you wont be able to keep them in your system/fit them in your roster?

If that was the fear why on earth make trades to acquire them ? Those players/picks are assets and your future,There's so many possibilities in what direction you can go with them to build your roster if you hit on them., it would of been such a great luxury to have. They missed that happens, but this seems like a pretty lame excuse on why.

 

[BruinDust]

Long story short, I think the box+1 is going the way of the dinosaurs because offensive schemes have evolved. What's more, I'm not sure the Bruins know how to adapt.

Very insightful stuff here. I think it adds more credence to having to change up the overall composition of this roster in the off-season. If the Box +1 is going the way of the dodo bird, they need to build a team to play a more modern defensive system.

I think it spells trouble for Carlo and Peeke, guys who I think excel in a Box + 1. With the left-side "locked in" more or less moving forward, they probably need to look at some right shot D-men with different skill-sets from these two to better balance the D-Corps.

 

[Fingertools]

Protas and Stankoven haven't played any center in the NHL. They're centers in the way that Marchand was a center (and is still listed as a center on NHL.com), but he was expected to be a winger. Tage Thompson (my bad about the draft year) has played more center than wing, but is playing mostly wing this season.

True enough about the positions as you say, my take was that they were drafted as centers and would seemingly be centers on the Bruins ..

 

[CellyHard]

Isn't that the report card?

Think about a strong team culture built, doubtless painstakingly, over twenty plus years.

Do you really want this character?

Do you really want baggage laden J.T. Miller, who is presently playing terrible hockey, BTW?

Not me.

If they believe Brad will bring back significant return, which he can, and if Marchand is ammenible, that unhappy option warrants serious consideration.

So do all trade possibilities.

*All trade possibilities.*

Beyond this, as Milbury suggests, finding out what they have in their prospects should be equally paramount.

And not for a single game so your parents can say they saw you play 11 minutes in the NHL. Or unceremoniously yanked around like Marc McLaughlin.

What, exactly, is going on here?

Jesus Christ.

What’s the point of a strong team culture if you aren’t willing to utilize that leadership to reinvigorate upcoming or incoming players

It makes no sense that people will throw shade at Zegras for who he is and in the same breath be like ‘we need to call up Lysell’

They have both been labeled selfish, defensively weak, showboats, you name it

It’s this mentality (but the culture!) has made us miss out on opportunities for many redeemable players over the years.

 

[JoeIsAStud]

True enough about the positions as you say, my take was that they were drafted as centers and would seemingly be centers on the Bruins ..

No way Stankhoven would be a Center on the Bruins.

 

[GordonHowe]

What’s the point of a strong team culture if you aren’t willing to utilize that leadership to reinvigorate upcoming or incoming players

It makes no sense that people will throw shade at Zegras for who he is and in the same breath be like ‘we need to call up Lysell’

They have both been labeled selfish, defensively weak, showboats, you name it

It’s this mentality (but the culture!) has made us miss out on opportunities for many redeemable players over the years.

Perhaps.

You're welcome to it.

 

[Fingertools]

No way Stankhoven would be a Center on the Bruins.

Actually, come to think of it you are most probably right!

 

[mjhfb]

I'll give you my $.02 on that Gordie...

There is a relatively new offensive system called '3 high' where, at 5on5, a forward rotates out between the D, creating all sorts of attack options while also allowing for easy retrievals and keep ins. This came into the league 5 years ago and about half of the teams use it now to some degree.

At first a lot of coaches didn't love it because it pulls a forward away from the net, (and after all that's where the goals are scored) but what coaches have learned is that it wreaks havoc on defensive structures.

For example, a typical box and 1, like what the Bruins have deployed for 20 years to great success, does not allow the center to venture above the tops of the circles, his job is to stay low, support the D and be a second layer if a player gets beat. Well, when the other team puts 3 guys out above the circle and your system only allows 2 guys to go out that high, the other team has an advantage. They can run plays and give/go's that create problems. Teams that run this system (like Florida) give the Bruins fits, because if the Bruins chase, they're out of their structure, and if they stay home it looks like a power play and leads to long stretches of zone time.

This season, the Bruins tried going to more of a man to man with Monty, which really flopped. Then they went back to Julien's box+1 which helped, especially against teams that don't roll out 3 high, but they still struggled against teams that do.

I think, what we're seeing now under Sacco is something in between. They play a box+1 but the center has more freedom to play out high when the other team sets up that way. It's not quite a hybrid (where the forwards play man to man and the D play zone) and it's not quite a box+1 because you can have all three forwards in a line across the tops of the circles. But there is still some kind of a disconnect with regard to what they're doing because the other team starts roaming (like NJ did), our guys seem to get lost in coverage.

Long story short, I think the box+1 is going the way of the dinosaurs because offensive schemes have evolved. What's more, I'm not sure the Bruins know how to adapt.

Nice post. That 3rd man very high was also trying for another quick one timer option since so many point shots are getting blocked, and not many teams have Makars or Hughes to walk the blue and find the seam.

 

[Dr Hook]

No way Stankhoven would be a Center on the Bruins.

Maybe the Bruins should adapt if they can sign certain players. They don't all have to be big 200ft players (and often light on skills).

 

[bruinsfan1968]

Are you saying don't have 3 first round picks because your afraid you wont be able to keep them in your system/fit them in your roster?

If that was the fear why on earth make trades to acquire them ? Those players/picks are assets and your future,There's so many possibilities in what direction you can go with them to build your roster if you hit on them., it would of been such a great luxury to have. They missed that happens, but this seems like a pretty lame excuse on why.

No I am not saying that and don't put words in my reply!. If you can't answer my question why waste my time?
Give details how it would all work out! If not, then move on!

 

[Dr Hook]

Select the 3 players you wanted and then explain how the team would've kept them in the system, until Bergy and Krecji retired!
Let's hear it!

JDB was a good pick, so that leaves two. Are you seriously arguing that they could not have kept Travis Konecny and Kyle Connor on the roster, for example? You need a center slot for Konecny so you don't sign Charlie Coyle. Why would Connor need to be frozen out because of Krejci and Bergeron? That's just one way you could do it with a might-have-been.

 

[TCB]

No I am not saying that and don't put words in my reply!. If you can't answer my question why waste my time?
Give details how it would all work out! If not, then move on!

 

[GordonHowe]

Very insightful stuff here. I think it adds more credence to having to change up the overall composition of this roster in the off-season. If the Box +1 is going the way of the dodo bird, they need to build a team to play a more modern defensive system.

I think it spells trouble for Carlo and Peeke, guys who I think excel in a Box + 1. With the left-side "locked in" more or less moving forward, they probably need to look at some right shot D-men with different skill-sets from these two to better balance the D-Corps.

I like Brandon. He is underrated and unappreciated by many.

However, I suspect things will continue as they are, and if that is the case, Carlo, Peeke, Frederic, John Beecher, Charlie Coyle, the Geek and Brad are trade bate.

I would add Zacha, but he is David's binkie.

Set again, I would trade anyone on this roster. That won't happen, but I wish it would. The same way I hope they miss the playoffs. Then and only then will change be in the office.

Regardless, the message is loud and clear ("Fire Sweeney!') after a consistently inconsistent Debbie Downer muddle of a season. From the Swayman holdout, to the Montgomery firing, to the poor passing, porous defense, to the absurd goal differential, abysmal power play and penalty kill, etc. it's been a complete cluster f*ck with no end in sight.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I like Brandon. He is underrated and unappreciated by many.

However, I suspect things will continue as they are, and if that is the case, Carlo, Peeke, Frederic, John Beecher, Charlie Coyle, the Geek and Brad are trade bate.

I would add Zacha, but he is David's binkie.

Set again, I would trade anyone on this roster. That won't happen, but I wish it would. The same way I hope they miss the playoffs. Then and only then will change be in the office.

Regardless, the message is loud and clear ("Fire Sweeney!') after a consistently inconsistent Debbie Downer muddle of a season. From the Swayman holdout, to the Montgomery firing, to the poor passing, porous defense, to the absurd goal differential, abysmal power play and penalty kill, etc. it's been a complete cluster f*ck with no end in sight.

You were calling for firing Sweeney when they had a 65 win season.

 

[PlayMakers]

Between 2015-2017 Sweeney batted .333 in R1, when you consider within the context of who was left on the table and taken immediately after (Connor or Barzal, Kyrou and Thomas) that's franchise altering.

I'm not disputing that Sweeney missed in the first round of 2015. I don't think anybody here really argues that.

What I'm trying to get across is that everyone misses. It's systemic. NHL teams hit on an average of 19% of their picks, so hitting on 33% as you pointed out, beats the odds by a fair bit, and the reality is that he actually hit on 10 of his 22 picks in those 3 years, including two franchise players in McAvoy and Swayman, two top4/top6 players in Carlo and DeBrusk, as well as Trent Frederic who most want to re-sign. That is remarkable compared to the odds.

By comparison, the Islanders got Barzal, but you know how many other hits the Isles had from 2015-2017? Two: Beauvillier and Sebastian Aho. From 2015 to 2022, they only have 6 hits and one of them is Oliver Wahlstrom. That's how drafting goes. That's typical.

To me, it's unfair to say change this one pick, but keep all the other picks the same and our franchise would be altered for the better. You can't have it both ways. That's not how probability works. You want to go back and fix the mistakes without crediting or changing any of the successes. Nobody bats a thousand.

The brain trust that picks Oliver Wahlstrom at 11th overall probably picks someone other than McAvoy or Swayman. And today we're having an argument because you can't believe we chose Dante Fabbro over the obvious pick McAvoy and how we can't compete without a #1D.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I'm not disputing that Sweeney missed in the first round of 2015. I don't think anybody here really argues that.

What I'm trying to get across is that everyone misses. It's systemic. NHL teams hit on an average of 19% of their picks, so hitting on 33% as you pointed out, beats the odds by a fair bit, and the reality is that he actually hit on 10 of his 22 picks in those 3 years, including two franchise players in McAvoy and Swayman, two top4/top6 players in Carlo and DeBrusk, as well as Trent Frederic who most want to re-sign. That is remarkable compared to the odds.

By comparison, the Islanders got Barzal, but you know how many other hits the Isles had from 2015-2017? Two: Beauvillier and Sebastian Aho. From 2015 to 2022, they only have 6 hits and one of them is Oliver Wahlstrom. That's how drafting goes. That's typical.

To me, it's unfair to say change this one pick, but keep all the other picks the same and our franchise would be altered for the better. You can't have it both ways. That's not how probability works. You want to go back and fix the mistakes without crediting or changing any of the successes. Nobody bats a thousand.

The brain trust that picks Oliver Wahlstrom at 11th overall probably picks someone other than McAvoy or Swayman. And today we're having an argument because you can't believe we chose Dante Fabbro over the obvious pick McAvoy and how we can't compete without a #1D.

Everyone is a draft expert with 20/20 hindsight.

Bratt and Hagel in the sixth round shows it all. And this isn’t the 70s when shit was weird either.

 

[PlayMakers]

Well I am not sure how the Bruins get what they need to be a threat .It probably has to start with their 1st based on what they have in the system or trade bait.Kind of afraid as a Bruins fan what they might do.Might end up setting themselves back further.

For me, if the choice is go into a 10 year rebuild, or make a risky deal to help add to this core, I go for the risky deal because the worst that could happen is it fails and you end up in a 10 year rebuild.

 

[PlayMakers]

Very insightful stuff here. I think it adds more credence to having to change up the overall composition of this roster in the off-season. If the Box +1 is going the way of the dodo bird, they need to build a team to play a more modern defensive system.

I think it spells trouble for Carlo and Peeke, guys who I think excel in a Box + 1. With the left-side "locked in" more or less moving forward, they probably need to look at some right shot D-men with different skill-sets from these two to better balance the D-Corps.

I think it calls for a new coach and coaching staff too. A crew that's always employed a man to man or hybrid system, that knows how to teach it and has a history of success with it.

 

[BruinDust]

I like Brandon. He is underrated and unappreciated by many.

However, I suspect things will continue as they are, and if that is the case, Carlo, Peeke, Frederic, John Beecher, Charlie Coyle, the Geek and Brad are trade bate.

I would add Zacha, but he is David's binkie.

I'm in no rush to move Zacha or Geekie. Both are the right age, like it or not Zacha being close to Pastrnak matters (plus they do play well together). Geekie is the 2nd best shooter on this team and they need better shooters. Untouchable no but I'm not looking to move him either.

The rest I'm fine with moving out. Brad is a special case, not so straightforward. I'm perfectly fine if this is Coyle, Beecher, Peeke and Frederic's last seasons here.

Specifically on Carlo, he's not a bad player but I also don't think he's as good as some make him out to be either. A bit of an analytic darling.. I'm not a fan of expected goals whatever. As a fan, I'm a bit tired of watching him, he is limited in many respects. They've tried for many years now to win with McAvoy/Carlo as RD 1 and 2 and I think it's time to change. I don't think he fits well with either Lohrei or Zadorov and limits flexibility in how they pair up their D. Can't count on Hampus to pair up with Carlo forever. 9 years and almost 700 games with the same team is a good run for a defensive D-man, I don't see anything wrong with simply wanting to see some change with the 2nd pair RD after all this time. He's not about to go elsewhere and start racking up Norris trophies or complimenting top pairs. We know what he is.

 

[BruinDust]

I think it calls for a new coach and coaching staff too. A crew that's always employed a man to man or hybrid system, that knows how to teach it and has a history of success with it.

Totally agree. Not sure if it was you or someone else posted a video where Debour was explaining how long to get a new system in place, but he said it took several months at the very least. They can't afford to have that drag out to maybe a full season trying to get their new system in place with an old coaching staff not truly familiar with how the system works.