A Bridge Too Far

[finchster]

A lot of subjectivity in how to apply any estimate of probability of success. Including what does "make the grade" mean (my term, in this case I meant be a significant contributor to the team that drafted the player).

So the 20% is what I figured was a reasonable rate of success for the pool of 'D' prospects, regardless of the round they were drafted in. If the pool were all 1st or 2nd rounders, I'd expect something north of 20% maybe.

At any rate, I was thinking that 2 out of the top 8 D prospects become significant contributors (let's say 1 top pair, 1 2nd pair) to the Bruins in the next several years. Of the remaining 6, some may get their cup of coffee but not stick, some may flame out, some may turn out to be Trotman, some may be moved before they get any shot with the B's.

Give me 1 top pair and 1 2nd pair (ok, that's 25%, but I can't have .6 of a guy be a top 4) 1 3rd pair, 1 traded for some other need and 2 flame outs and I'll call it a succcess.

I wrote a thread about this a while back, I will quote it here

....
With an influx of prospects there is a bit of excitement/debate over their projections.I don't want to complain about Sweeney/Neely, or to judge which prospects will 'bust' or not. The point of this thread is to simply remove the human element and to statistically analyse draft picks and decide what is a good/ bad/realistic return on our draft picks/prospects.

http://proicehockey.about.com/od/prospects/f/draft_success.htm



So let's start by saying on average 19-20% of drafted players make it to the NHL. With seven rounds in the draft, you should be getting one player a year and every third year two players who become career NHL'ers. Getting three players in one draft can set your team up for a decade. For example, Boston drafted Kessel, Lucic, and Marchand in one draft. Tampa in 2011 drafted Namestnikov, Kucherov and Palat, young producing guys that helped put them up to the top of the league.

We all know that not all draft picks are equal, first round picks are significantly more valuable than other picks.



First round picks have a 63% chance of becoming NHL players and second round picks have a 25% chance of becoming NHL players. More recent studies have first round picks as high as 80%, which I believe was buoyed by the 2003 draft class.

But again, not all first round picks are equal. The Bruins picked five first round picks in two seasons; picks 13-14-15 in 2015, and picks 14, 29 in 2016.

As you can see, the probability of picks 14-16 playing 200 games or more is around 50% and the pick 29 is just below 40%. (ORANGE LINE)

So to the purpose of this thread, what is a realistic return on our five first round picks and four second round picks? What is a good/bad/realistic return?

Between Zboril, DeBrusk, Senyshyn, McAvoy, and Frederic, a realistic expectation is that 2-3 players will become NHL regulars and the others will not. Between Carlo, Forsbacka-Karlsson, Lauzon and Lindgren, a realistic expectation is one player will become an NHL player and the others will not. Out of nine players, four would be the average. Five to six becoming NHL players would be great and two (or less)to three would be bad.

So before we pencil everyone in the line up in the future, (Because I still remember Krejci, Kalus, and Karsums destroying the league and I also remember Spooner, Knight and Khokhlachev killing the league), think about this for just one minute. Four guys from the nine picks is a pretty realistic expectation. More than that is great and less than that is bad.

 

[DKH]

I wrote a thread about this a while back, I will quote it here

And why Red Sox number 1 prospect in Baseball America at the time Donny Sadler was a bust but the number 2 guy Nomar Garciaparra was a star

The Bruins need to hope they keep the right guys

 

[BB88]

Huh? What are you talking about

I don't agree that this bridge style is going to work if the goal is to win the Cup.

 

[DKH]

I don't agree that this bridge style is going to work if the goal is to win the Cup.

Oh. Yes. The bridge would be what they are doing now.

If you are all on or all out there is no bridge. The pain will be coming it's do you want it later or now.

Most Bruins fans want to maximize Bergeron and Krejci and then take a few years off and get in position to grab a Marner and Matthews

 

[Therick67]

Oh. Yes. The bridge would be what they are doing now.

If you are all on or all out there is no bridge. The pain will be coming it's do you want it later or now.

Most Bruins fans want to maximize Bergeron and Krejci and then take a few years off and get in position to grab a Marner and Matthews

Dude, you're a Bruins fan - pain was the norm before 2011.

Also, no guarantee the bridge works

 

[HiyaGeorgii]

Callahan wanted a no movement clause and the Rangers didn't want to give it, so they dealt him. He would have been a horrible re-signing. They recouped those two #1's with being able to sign guys like Hayes and Vesey.

Duclair's happen all the time. Rangers gambled and lost. Bruins gambled with Wheeler and won. It happens.

Guys like Gropp, Buchnevich and Skjei are all prospects that rank right alongside the Bruins prospects in my opinion.

Also, the Rangers roster is pretty young.

Eight forwards 26 or under --Stepan 26, Krieder 25, Zuccarello 29, miller 23, Zbad 23, Hayes 24, Fast 24, Vesey 23, Lindberg 24, McDonagh 27, Staal 29, Skeji 22.

 

[bp13]

Oh. Yes. The bridge would be what they are doing now.

If you are all on or all out there is no bridge. The pain will be coming it's do you want it later or now.

Most Bruins fans want to maximize Bergeron and Krejci and then take a few years off and get in position to grab a Marner and Matthews

But Dan you're having it both ways. On the one hand you're telling us the pain is now but then also telling us you think this defense is middle of the road and they can actually contend this year or next. I mean which is it?

If you truly think they are "bridging" now, I wouldn't argue with you. I think they are too. But in that light I think the Backes signing was a misstep. Furthermore, I think the span of the bridge is too long. They need to be ready to compete in 2-3 years MAX, not minimum, or else the forward group starts to look questionable, especially David Backes. So I think Sweeney has little choice but to dip into this pool of supposed prospects, maybe add in a Pastrnak, and fix this defense.

 

[DKH]

But Dan you're having it both ways. On the one hand you're telling us the pain is now but then also telling us you think this defense is middle of the road and they can actually contend this year or next. I mean which is it?

If you truly think they are "bridging" now, I wouldn't argue with you. I think they are too. But in that light I think the Backes signing was a misstep. Furthermore, I think the span of the bridge is too long. They need to be ready to compete in 2-3 years MAX, not minimum, or else the forward group starts to look questionable, especially David Backes. So I think Sweeney has little choice but to dip into this pool of supposed prospects, maybe add in a Pastrnak, and fix this defense.

I am a bridge guy at heart but that's not an option so I'd rather load up now and worry later if it was between that and selling

Bridge first then load up and selling last resort

If they can't sign Marchand then I blow it up from Bergeron to Rask but I expect 63 to sign

They need not only Lindholm they need Trouba. I'm not sure the numbers of top prospects but you have enough - got to get them to take Hayes contract and Chara

 

[LouJersey]

But Dan you're having it both ways. On the one hand you're telling us the pain is now but then also telling us you think this defense is middle of the road and they can actually contend this year or next. I mean which is it?

If you truly think they are "bridging" now, I wouldn't argue with you. I think they are too. But in that light I think the Backes signing was a misstep. Furthermore, I think the span of the bridge is too long. They need to be ready to compete in 2-3 years MAX, not minimum, or else the forward group starts to look questionable, especially David Backes. So I think Sweeney has little choice but to dip into this pool of supposed prospects, maybe add in a Pastrnak, and fix this defense.

But why? Do you just want a total rebuild? You still need guys like Backes IMO. And if you agree they are bridging why deal a bunch for a defenseman right now? Isn't trading Pasta working against bridging? I'd hate to deal a bunch of guy for a Shattenkirk or Fowler and see them leave in a year or two.

 

[bp13]

But why? Do you just want a total rebuild? You still need guys like Backes IMO. And if you agree they are bridging why deal a bunch for a defenseman right now? Isn't trading Pasta working against bridging? I'd hate to deal a bunch of guy for a Shattenkirk or Fowler and see them leave in a year or two.

Well for one thing I wouldn't deal for a guy who wasn't signed or whom I didn't know would sign. But I think the reason they are bridging is because their defense sucks. I'm not certain their plan when they signed Backes was to bridge, I just think the end result of this defense is a lousy to mediocre team until it's fixed. And if they can't trade to fix it, then it won't have a shot at being fixed unless and until the prospects pan out. Meaning they are bridging whether they want to or not.

So my strategy, since they've had a ton of top 60 picks the last few seasons, would be to give up some youth and/or picks, prospects to acquire a top 3 dman. I think Lindholm takes them from a team who can't compete to one who can. And I think it validates the Backes signing. The Backes signing is fine IF the plan is to take advantage of his next 2-3 years. To do that, the D needs to get a lot better, not just a little. I think Lindholm makes them close to a lot better. Trouba, Shattenkirk? Less so, but certainly a big step.

 

[ddpk]

I think most of us understand a rebuild.

Don't waste 2nd round picks on the likes of Liles and Stempniak, while not trading Eriksson at the deadline then!!

Getting really annoyed and fed up with comments like this. I live in MTL. I hate this city and team more than people care to know. I am a Bruins fan through and through. I work for a Junior team, scout, and also work as an educator. I understand the intricacies and different POV that are out there as well as the tough decisions that you encounter when evaluating a team, players, etc, much less a franchise worth close to a billion dollars.
However, I think it's wrong to constantly play Monday morning QB and go back in time in order to make your opinion fit the narrative you are addressing.
Don Sweeney has been on the job for 16 months. He's building the team through the draft. Cap problems have been alleviated. Prospect cupboard is full on every level. Team has missed playoffs the last 2 years with 96 and 93 pts respectively. Team was good enough to make it but the players failed. Last year at the deadline team was 4th in the NHL. No GM in history would have sold pieces at that time. DS is trying to rebuild through the draft and build around the core which just added another Top C in Backes. I repeat, how can GM do a full rebuild when core and team was playing very well and close to 100 pts?? Trade Loui at the deadline. move him at the draft, go get Shattenkirk. WTF man. DS tried to re-sign Loui and just staying in talks till the end was so smart. It gave him the chance to communicate with Backes as backup if Loui went elsewhere. He obviously wanted 6 years and to go play with Sedins so what did you want our GM to do?? Oops, i forgot. He traded Velveeta cheese Dougie Hamilton and everyone lost it on him. Anyone in their right mind with a touch of hockey IQ knows Hamilton did not have TOP Pairing D in his DNA. Soft, not intense, and definitely lost when it comes to the D part of his game. You know DEFEND, what a DEFENCEMAN is there to do. Didn't have Z cleaning up his mess in CALGARY did he? So, ya trade for Shattenkirk. Umm, Bruins just drafted a better, younger, more complete version this past June. Anyone notice how BAD he was in the playoffs!?? Exposed every night, time and time again. Brutal. So Sweeney trading for him and having to pay HIM 7M$ and take on another Blues contract was what everyone wanted our GM to do!?? Like seriously. Enough.
Everyone knows Bruins need a D on the top pairing. Even my grandma who is from the mountains of Friuli, Italy knows this. The season hasn't started yet people. Rookie camp is starting tomorrow. Btw, DS STILL HAS ALL HIS ASSETS. I think the players need to take responsibility here and make it happen. Miller, Morrow, Carlo, O' Gara,...etc..they want to be a part of the solution. Go out there and make it happen. The G depth is better now. Should push Rask and Subban. F depth is there. Moore, Nash, Mueller, are moves that are being made for next April. That's a good things. Stability and trust can be built early on and give one of the BEST coaches in the League options and versatility and experience to help with the peaks and valleys that will come into play with the younger players.
This team is on the right track. I know that 1D eludes our team still but maybe just maybe patience will serve well at this time.
Over and Out.
D

 

[smack66]

I am a bridge guy at heart but that's not an option so I'd rather load up now and worry later if it was between that and selling

Bridge first then load up and selling last resort

If they can't sign Marchand then I blow it up from Bergeron to Rask but I expect 63 to sign

They need not only Lindholm they need Trouba. I'm not sure the numbers of top prospects but you have enough - got to get them to take Hayes contract and Chara

Agree wholeheartedly. Its going to be an interesting year with Marchand and I also think Chara might be in play come deadline depending how this team is doing.

 

[Bmessy]

I wrote a thread about this a while back, I will quote it here

Excellent post and chart!

I would be thrilled if 4 of our 9 prospects turned into NHLers. Having 44% of our first and second round picks from 15-16 would set us up great for the future. Considering we have 1 drafted player from the last 5 years on our current NHL roster that would be a vast improvement!

What I have issue with is the time it will take for those guys to develop. Some people seem to think our prospects will be making an NHL impact, ready to have the reigns handed over, in just 2 years.

Of those hypothetical 4 new NHLers how many will make it to the NHL in 2 years? 1 player? What are those numbers? If they make it to the NHL in 2 years, how long until they make an nightly impact?

It took Dougie Hamilton 2 full seasons of junior before making it to the NHL and another full NHL season before the training wheels came off. It takes time! And even after all that time he was a train wreck in his own end.
We do not have an NHL caliber top 4 D in 2 years. Just Torey Krug. Post Chara and pre prospects, there is a gaping hole of Kevan Miller and Adam McQuaid as our best defensemen. That is not a world I want to live in.

Development takes time. Especially for defenseman. Which is why no matter what happens we need to add some defensemen who can play now until our super rooks can take nightly NHL responsibilities. Any defensive help would be great. It doesn't have to be a Lindholm or a Trouba. But some help that is better than McQuaid or K. Miller for the next 3-4 years would really, really help this NHL squad. A better NHL defense would also help develop our young Dmen prospects the right way.

Trade for David Savard. Trade for one of Washingtons defenseman. They are tight to the cap and need to sign Kuznetsov and Carlson both in the next 2 years. Orlov? Alzner? Will LA need to move a Dman to keep Toffoli next year? Martinez? Michael Stone? Ryan Ellis? Now I'm rambling. I don't know.
Take advantage of teams that aren't dealing from a position of strength. Much like what happened to yourself a few short years ago. I just want some help on defense for the team now and to have a stable backend for the young propsects when they make it to the NHL.

 

[DKH]

Getting really annoyed and fed up with comments like this. I live in MTL. I hate this city and team more than people care to know. I am a Bruins fan through and through. I work for a Junior team, scout, and also work as an educator. I understand the intricacies and different POV that are out there as well as the tough decisions that you encounter when evaluating a team, players, etc, much less a franchise worth close to a billion dollars.
However, I think it's wrong to constantly play Monday morning QB and go back in time in order to make your opinion fit the narrative you are addressing.
Don Sweeney has been on the job for 16 months. He's building the team through the draft. Cap problems have been alleviated. Prospect cupboard is full on every level. Team has missed playoffs the last 2 years with 96 and 93 pts respectively. Team was good enough to make it but the players failed. Last year at the deadline team was 4th in the NHL. No GM in history would have sold pieces at that time. DS is trying to rebuild through the draft and build around the core which just added another Top C in Backes. I repeat, how can GM do a full rebuild when core and team was playing very well and close to 100 pts?? Trade Loui at the deadline. move him at the draft, go get Shattenkirk. WTF man. DS tried to re-sign Loui and just staying in talks till the end was so smart. It gave him the chance to communicate with Backes as backup if Loui went elsewhere. He obviously wanted 6 years and to go play with Sedins so what did you want our GM to do?? Oops, i forgot. He traded Velveeta cheese Dougie Hamilton and everyone lost it on him. Anyone in their right mind with a touch of hockey IQ knows Hamilton did not have TOP Pairing D in his DNA. Soft, not intense, and definitely lost when it comes to the D part of his game. You know DEFEND, what a DEFENCEMAN is there to do. Didn't have Z cleaning up his mess in CALGARY did he? So, ya trade for Shattenkirk. Umm, Bruins just drafted a better, younger, more complete version this past June. Anyone notice how BAD he was in the playoffs!?? Exposed every night, time and time again. Brutal. So Sweeney trading for him and having to pay HIM 7M$ and take on another Blues contract was what everyone wanted our GM to do!?? Like seriously. Enough.
Everyone knows Bruins need a D on the top pairing. Even my grandma who is from the mountains of Friuli, Italy knows this. The season hasn't started yet people. Rookie camp is starting tomorrow. Btw, DS STILL HAS ALL HIS ASSETS. I think the players need to take responsibility here and make it happen. Miller, Morrow, Carlo, O' Gara,...etc..they want to be a part of the solution. Go out there and make it happen. The G depth is better now. Should push Rask and Subban. F depth is there. Moore, Nash, Mueller, are moves that are being made for next April. That's a good things. Stability and trust can be built early on and give one of the BEST coaches in the League options and versatility and experience to help with the peaks and valleys that will come into play with the younger players.
This team is on the right track. I know that 1D eludes our team still but maybe just maybe patience will serve well at this time.
Over and Out.
D

Excellent post - please do drop in again

 

[bp13]

This suggestion that "cap problems have been alleviated" keeps getting repeated around here as though Sweeney pulled off some magical move to do it. This wasn't the Nick Punto trade of hockey here. He didn't swindle a team to eliminate his cap problems. He traded talent (Hamilton and Lucic) and he bought out Seidenberg. So basically, he threw in the towel on last year, likely this year, and possibly longer. Then used a fallback, last-ditch option on Seidenberg that still has them paying a percentage.

The end result, yes, was cap space. It was also at least one lost season and likely another one. So it's a double-edged sword here, not some stroke of management genius.

 

[LouJersey]

This suggestion that "cap problems have been alleviated" keeps getting repeated around here as though Sweeney pulled off some magical move to do it. This wasn't the Nick Punto trade of hockey here. He didn't swindle a team to eliminate his cap problems. He traded talent (Hamilton and Lucic) and he bought out Seidenberg. So basically, he threw in the towel on last year, likely this year, and possibly longer. Then used a fallback, last-ditch option on Seidenberg that still has them paying a percentage.

The end result, yes, was cap space. It was also at least one lost season and likely another one. So it's a double-edged sword here, not some stroke of management genius.

Lucic wasn't going to be resigned. How many players on a one year deal return 2 prospects and 2 firsts?

Hamilton wasn't signing here, Phoenix or Carolina. Who was the magical difference maker they missed out on? He was also moved for pieces to move to Phoenix for the 3rd overall which never materialized. He also wasn't going to sign an offer sheet anywhere, so play chicken with him? Why bother, he is a whiner and overrated. 15th overall plus two 2nds was a fine return for him.

How did he throw in the towel on last season? He actually made deals for NHL players at the deadline when they were solidly in a play-off spot.

How is he throwing away this season? He signed Backes, that's not white flag waving. Is he throwing away this season because he hasn't emptied the coffers yet to get a prized young defensemen? So this unnamed guy will take us from also rans to Stanley Cup contenders? If we are one player away (that's the gist I'm getting from you) how are we throwing this season away? We must have a pretty solid squad no?

 

[DKH]

This suggestion that "cap problems have been alleviated" keeps getting repeated around here as though Sweeney pulled off some magical move to do it. This wasn't the Nick Punto trade of hockey here. He didn't swindle a team to eliminate his cap problems. He traded talent (Hamilton and Lucic) and he bought out Seidenberg. So basically, he threw in the towel on last year, likely this year, and possibly longer. Then used a fallback, last-ditch option on Seidenberg that still has them paying a percentage.

The end result, yes, was cap space. It was also at least one lost season and likely another one. So it's a double-edged sword here, not some stroke of management genius.

Time will show he swindled Calgary unless Dougie can play with a little bit more of what the lion, scarecrow, and Tin Man got from Professor Marvel

If I was grading posts you get an A just for working Nick Punto into this.

 

[Oates2Neely]

Bouwmeester is a fit. How would he fit under Julien and what would he cost?

 

[Dr Quincy]

This is a list of defenseman drafted in the 1st and 2nd rounds of the 2013 and 2014 NHL drafts as well as they're NHL GP.

2013:
RD 1
Seth Jones - 240
Darnell Nurse - 71
Rasmus Ristolainen - 194
Josh Morrissey - 1
Ryan Pulock - 15
Nikita Zadorov - 89
Mirco Mueller - 50
Shea Theodore - 19

RD 2
Ian McCoshen - 0
Chris Bigras - 31
Robert Hagg - 0
Steven Santini - 1
Gustav Olofsson - 2
Tommy Vannelli - 0
Dillon Heatherington - 0
Carl Dahlstrom - 0
Madison Bowey - 0
Linus Arnesson - 0

2014:
RD 1
Aaron Ekblad - 159
Haydn Fleury - 0
Julius Honka - 0
Travis Sanheim - 0
Anthony DeAngelo - 0

RD 2

Dominik Masin - 0
Marcus Pettersson - 0
Andreas Englund - 0
Joshua Jacobs - 0
Julius Bergman - 0
Ryan Collins - 0
Roland McKeown - 0
Jack Dougherty - 0
Brandon Montour - 0
Johnathan MacLeod - 0
Alex Lintuniemi - 0

9 Players out of 34 that have 15 or more NHL games played. One was #1 overall and another dropped to #4.

I don't think assuming our defensive prospects will be ready to for top minutes in just 2 years of development is a good idea. Our 1st rounders? Maybe, they probably have a better chance. But it's not something I want to bank on.

I think we need outside D help before any of our prospects develop. Even if C. Miller or Morrow really bust out this year.

Also I left out 2012. I just wanted to show 2-3 years of development. 2012 was stacked year for Dmen. Maybe 2015 and 2016 will be too!

And what's important to realize about that list of guys who have played, is that some of them still aren't truly established... even as a top 6.

Morrisey
Pulock
Nurse
Mueller
Theodore

All those guys are 50-50 to start the year in the NHL. Mueller is probably less than that.

Again, this is the way most dmen go. A few years, get some games in, go up and down a bit. Most are 23 before they are truly established. But apparently 19 year old Lauzon is a lock for top 4 this year. We'll see.

 

[LouJersey]

Here is what I hope to see this year. My expectations aren't what some expect themselves obviously.

1. Colin Miller to get 70 games
2. Grizz/O'Gara/Morrow to displace Liles at some point during the season
3. Heinen/Vatrano/Griffith/DeBrusk- 2 of these guys to play top 9 for a decent amount of time and show they can play in this league regularly.
4. Moore, Nash and Liles shipped out at the deadline for picks.

 

[bp13]

Lucic wasn't going to be resigned. How many players on a one year deal return 2 prospects and 2 firsts?

Hamilton wasn't signing here, Phoenix or Carolina. Who was the magical difference maker they missed out on? He was also moved for pieces to move to Phoenix for the 3rd overall which never materialized. He also wasn't going to sign an offer sheet anywhere, so play chicken with him? Why bother, he is a whiner and overrated. 15th overall plus two 2nds was a fine return for him.

How did he throw in the towel on last season? He actually made deals for NHL players at the deadline when they were solidly in a play-off spot.

How is he throwing away this season? He signed Backes, that's not white flag waving. Is he throwing away this season because he hasn't emptied the coffers yet to get a prized young defensemen? So this unnamed guy will take us from also rans to Stanley Cup contenders? If we are one player away (that's the gist I'm getting from you) how are we throwing this season away? We must have a pretty solid squad no?

Yeah I'm just not sure how you're misreading me here.

I was screaming from the rooftops to trade Lucic before we overpaid him, so I loved that trade. But dealing Hamilton along with him for simply picks meant the team the next year was DOA. Now people give him credit for getting us out of a tough cap situation, but make no mistake he did it be trading away talent for a cheap prospect (C. Miller) and picks. That's not an accomplishment it's a paradigm shift.

As for competing last year, when you enter the season with that defense, you are punting. And everyone knew that, just like they know it now. If this team doesn't add a bona fide top 3 defender, they aren't going anywhere. If they do, they're in a pack of teams that might get lucky and make a run, but hardly a top contender. As for signing Backes, it's a fine signing if you plan to contend, but does anyone think this defense contends? That's the issue I keep coming back to. There's a fatal flaw. You can improve other areas and claim to be wanting to contend, but the fatal flaw is going to kill you. That's the one you need to address.

 

[DKH]

Yeah I'm just not sure how you're misreading me here.

I was screaming from the rooftops to trade Lucic before we overpaid him, so I loved that trade. But dealing Hamilton along with him for simply picks meant the team the next year was DOA. Now people give him credit for getting us out of a tough cap situation, but make no mistake he did it be trading away talent for a cheap prospect (C. Miller) and picks. That's not an accomplishment it's a paradigm shift.

As for competing last year, when you enter the season with that defense, you are punting. And everyone knew that, just like they know it now. If this team doesn't add a bona fide top 3 defender, they aren't going anywhere. If they do, they're in a pack of teams that might get lucky and make a run, but hardly a top contender. As for signing Backes, it's a fine signing if you plan to contend, but does anyone think this defense contends? That's the issue I keep coming back to. There's a fatal flaw. You can improve other areas and claim to be wanting to contend, but the fatal flaw is going to kill you. That's the one you need to address.

You always are well thought out and the removal of Hamilton with no real immediate replacement unless you were looking at Colin Miller which would be a huge stretch. But coming down the stretch they were somehow in first in division and second in conference.

They needed 8 points out of their last 24 to make the playoffs.

They fell apart - they broke down. The coach overused his guys and like a marathon runner they had nothing in the tank to beat a half AHL/NHL Devils & Ottawa teams the final week.

There was some whacky stat they had like a 99 % chance of making it with 3 weeks to go

But they didn't have Hamilton all that time and the coaches reluctantance to trust or develop younger players cost him down the stretch

They not only weren't punting they were first and goal at the 5 yard line even with that D

The D picture right now is better than the D last year- not even close

This year

The 2015 CHL guys are a year older more experienced and another year of physical maturity

They signed 2 four year college All Americans who will be at worse case in AHL learning from Kevin Dean & staff

No Irwin to start

No Seids who was taking a constant beating here

Krug healthy

Chara minutes we are being told cutting back

Colin Miller a year along

Cassidy will be good for the young guys - he's had most but Chara & Liles

If they are in first in Mid March in 2017 I like there chances

 

[EverettMike]

You always are well thought out and the removal of Hamilton with no real immediate replacement unless you were looking at Colin Miller which would be a huge stretch. But coming down the stretch they were somehow in first in division and second in conference.

They needed 8 points out of their last 24 to make the playoffs.

They fell apart - they broke down. The coach overused his guys and like a marathon runner they had nothing in the tank to beat a half AHL/NHL Devils & Ottawa teams the final week.

There was some whacky stat they had like a 99 % chance of making it with 3 weeks to go

But they didn't have Hamilton all that time and the coaches reluctantance to trust or develop younger players cost him down the stretch

They not only weren't punting they were first and goal at the 5 yard line even with that D

The D picture right now is better than the D last year- not even close

"More days in first place...."

"You are what you are." They were a fringe playoff team that couldn't get it done when the games got bigger. An 82 game sample is more indicative of what a team is than a 58 game sample size.

Plus, and this isn't Monday Morning QBing because lots of us said this for months, their hardest portion of the schedule was in March and April. Not to mention the power play had dramatically overachieved all year, and a return to the mean was to be expected, and that happened too, just like many of us said.

 

[DKH]

"More days in first place...."

"You are what you are." They were a fringe playoff team that couldn't get it done when the games got bigger. An 82 game sample is more indicative of what a team is than a 58 game sample size.

Plus, and this isn't Monday Morning QBing because lots of us said this for months, their hardest portion of the schedule was in March and April. Not to mention the power play had dramatically overachieved all year, and a return to the mean was to be expected, and that happened too, just like many of us said.

That's half the story but there are two sides here and this team wasn't the 1974-5 Capitals.

The sample size wasn't 58 games - 70 games they are a combined 10 points up in the two Cup finalists

They were flawed in retrospect they probably were a 90+ point team not a 100 + but it's a constant hammer of how bad they were. The final 12 games they were 30th in points - had they been 29th they are 7th seed and likely road kill but they made it in FWIW

Fact is they missed the playoffs

Fact is mid March 70 games they had second seed in Conference

I just don't think they sucked and the coach ran them into the ground

Whether I'm right or wrong or in the middle that's my take

 

[DKH]

Amazing that people really wanted to blow it up with not only a playoff spot at the time but home ice and first seed with 3 weeks left

I've never seen a team do it but it could have been done

Out of curiosity I'd have loved to see the local and national reaction if the Bruins in a secure playoff spot not even first had traded Loui Eriksson for a first round pick.

I think it would have been an absolute nightmare and Bergeron and Krejci and company would have lost it and the there would be no trust between management and players

Had they been 5 points out I can see it