Bruins invited Ville Leino to training camp/Matt Fraser signed (1yr, two way)

[LSCII]

There must be plenty of worthy young players that havent gotten a fair shake by management. Put your list out so we'll see kids that have been suppressed by this Bruins "Culture". Unless Youre referring to Sauves of the world?

I'm sorry if you're not sure about the prospect pool that the Bruins currently have. Seeing as this is hockey's future you can probably find it readily available on the site, no?

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/teams/boston_bruins/

And again, are you trying to say that Jay "stick a fork in me" Pandolfo brought more upside two years ago than potentially some of the younger guys they had? Or that overpaid bottom of the roster guys like Campbell, Thornton, Kelly, etc last year were so invaluable that a guy like Spooner (who out produced Kelly when he was up last year, BTW) couldn't have taken over those spots and helped solve the cap crunch?

 

[DoubleAAAA]

Pretty much. That Carolina series in 09, and to a lesser extent the series against Washington in '12 drove me up the wall. We all knew they were better than what they showed.

Chia's job is to put the guys in place, not to motivate them to win (That probably falls a bit on coaching as well.)

It's also really freaking hard to do. Every team has playoff let downs. We're holding up Chicago as a standard of excellence, since Claude took over for the B's the Hawks have failed to make the playoffs/win a series in 3 of those 7 years, Kings 4 of those 7. Bruins only twice.

Obviously at different stages but, it's not easy to have continual playoff success even when you do have a strong team.

 

[LSCII]

It's also really freaking hard to do. Every team has playoff let downs. We're holding up Chicago as a standard of excellence, since Claude took over for the B's the Hawks have failed to make the playoffs/win a series in 3 of those 7 years, Kings 4 of those 7. Bruins only twice.

Obviously at different stages but, it's not easy to have continual playoff success even when you do have a strong team.

And what's the easiest way to sustain success? Drafting players that continually make the team and overturn the bottom of the roster. You eliminate cap issues and you lengthen the cup window by doing this. You don't overpay bottom of the roster guys to keep them, and bring in veterans just trying to stick in the league on short term, cheap money deals because it essentially locks out the youth, shortens the cup window, and puts you in cap jail.

 

[ksp1957]

His plans have the Bruins as perennial Cup contenders and all his core is signed long term.

It's a good time to be a Bruins fan. That Julien-Chiarelli-Chara-Bergeron-Krejci era will come down as one of the best if not the best in team history.

It's a nice time to be a Bruins fan. They are relevant again and who knows how long that's going to be. As to the bolded statement... the 1970's Bruins say hello...

 

[Nibbler]

Please sign Leino!

Love,
A Sabres fan

 

[Stone Clode]

And what's the easiest way to sustain success? Drafting players that continually make the team and overturn the bottom of the roster. You eliminate cap issues and you lengthen the cup window by doing this. You don't overpay bottom of the roster guys to keep them, and bring in veterans just trying to stick in the league on short term, cheap money deals because it essentially locks out the youth, shortens the cup window, and puts you in cap jail.

Lon, you say it likes its such a simple solution. If it were that easy, every team would do it. Also, hindsight is 20/20 here.

That being said, I hold him accountable for the things you mentioned. I'm not avoiding that.

 

[DoubleAAAA]

And what's the easiest way to sustain success? Drafting players that continually make the team and overturn the bottom of the roster. You eliminate cap issues and you lengthen the cup window by doing this. You don't overpay bottom of the roster guys to keep them, and bring in veterans just trying to stick in the league on short term, cheap money deals because it essentially locks out the youth, shortens the cup window, and puts you in cap jail.

And teams that do that still experience the same let-downs in the playoffs a la Chicago.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

And teams that do that still experience the same let-downs in the playoffs a la Chicago.

I dunno, I wouldn't consider Chicago's let downs the same. They've made the conference Finals 4 times in this era, won the cup twice, and this year lost to the eventual champs in G7 OT. They've been quite a bit better than the Bruins in this era.

LA's window started later if we're being fair (2 years I'd say), and they've been to 3 conference Finals and won 2 cups. I'd say they've been more successful as well. Especially when you figure that they've both played in the tougher conference of the two.

 

[Pica]

I'm sorry if you're not sure about the prospect pool that the Bruins currently have. Seeing as this is hockey's future you can probably find it readily available on the site, no?

It's you who keep telling us page after page Bruins should have played their young talent instead of vets and only name youve come up with is Spooner. Surely there must be lots and lots more NHL-ready talent that brass has wasted in minors instead of bringin them to Boston?

 

[DoubleAAAA]

I dunno, I wouldn't consider Chicago's let downs the same. They've made the conference Finals 4 times in this era, won the cup twice, and this year lost to the eventual champs in G7 OT. They've been quite a bit better than the Bruins in this era.

LA's window started later if we're being fair (2 years I'd say), and they've been to 3 conference Finals and won 2 cups. I'd say they've been more successful as well. Especially when you figure that they've both played in the tougher conference of the two.

They also lost in the 1st round twice in a row after winning the cup the first time.

I agree on the Kings and it remains to be seen if they can sustain it, but they certainly appear to be in good shape. They do have lots of long term $ tied up in some players who could reach the downside of their usefulness well before those contracts are up. It'll be interesting to watch. It's also interesting that they haven't been fantastic regular season teams when they've had playoff success.

 

[Stone Clode]

It's you who keep telling us page after page Bruins should have played their young talent instead of vets and only name youve come up with is Spooner. Surely there must be lots and lots more NHL-ready talent that brass has wasted in minors instead of bringin them to Boston?

This. Lonnie, don't argue that they should have implemented youth in the forwards. The problem was (due to their drafting), they DIDN'T HAVE ANYONE. Spooner wasn't ready 2 years ago, and Hamill, Sauve, and Caron weren't good enough. They dealt Colborne, who wasn't good enough. Fact of the matter is, they signed Pandolfo out of necessity. They probably could have made a better choice, yeah, sure. Letting the kids play, it wasn't an option though. Who would they have played?

 

[Fire Sweeney]

They also lost in the 1st round twice in a row after winning the cup the first time.

I agree on the Kings and it remains to be seen if they can sustain it, but they certainly appear to be in good shape. They do have lots of long term $ tied up in some players who could reach the downside of their usefulness well before those contracts are up. It'll be interesting to watch. It's also interesting that they haven't been fantastic regular season teams when they've had playoff success.

They don't have the luxury of playing teams like Washington and Montreal in the Western conference or even the modern-day Red Wings.

 

[NeelyDan]

I'm sorry if you're not sure about the prospect pool that the Bruins currently have. Seeing as this is hockey's future you can probably find it readily available on the site, no?

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/teams/boston_bruins/

And again, are you trying to say that Jay "stick a fork in me" Pandolfo brought more upside two years ago than potentially some of the younger guys they had? Or that overpaid bottom of the roster guys like Campbell, Thornton, Kelly, etc last year were so invaluable that a guy like Spooner (who out produced Kelly when he was up last year, BTW) couldn't have taken over those spots and helped solve the cap crunch?

Can we expand the scope of this debate beyond Jay Pandolfo? I don't know that he's the most effective example.

 

[LSCII]

And teams that do that still experience the same let-downs in the playoffs a la Chicago.

Sure because only one team gets to win it all every year, so by default that's going to happen. But in terms of organizational philosophies, I'd prefer the Chicago strategy over Boston's. I don't like wasting money, time, and roster spots on useless players just because they're veterans and may not have as exaggerated ups and downs like a younger guy.

Let me put it another way for you. Brad Marchand's first year in the league playing full time, he put up 21 goals and was one of their best players. The year before, he got 20 odd games, scattered over the course of the season, on various lines. I'm not saying he would have scored 20 goals that year if he'd been given a regular roster spot and role, but would he have been that bad? Could he not have provided more upside than a guy like Steve Begin? Or Miro Satan? Miro's time here was fine, but he was nothing more than a short term answer to a long term problem. Would they have been better served had they just bitten the bullet and gone with a young guy to start with? Keep in mind, that year Marchand was one of the last guys cut from camp, IICRC.

 

[LSCII]

Can we expand the scope of this debate beyond Jay Pandolfo? I don't know that he's the most effective example.

It's already included guys like Thornton, Campbell, Kelly, Begin, etc from years gone but, and Leino and Gagne potentially this year. So I'm not sure I follow your point. Maybe you should go back and reread, since you clearly missed those discussions.

 

[NeelyDan]

Ugh, nevermind. Enjoy bathing in your paranoia, lol.

 

[LSCII]

This. Lonnie, don't argue that they should have implemented youth in the forwards. The problem was (due to their drafting), they DIDN'T HAVE ANYONE. Spooner wasn't ready 2 years ago, and Hamill, Sauve, and Caron weren't good enough. They dealt Colborne, who wasn't good enough. Fact of the matter is, they signed Pandolfo out of necessity. They probably could have made a better choice, yeah, sure. Letting the kids play, it wasn't an option though. Who would they have played?

Even if you don't want to talk about forwards, or say they weren't ready, the same thing happened on the back end. Krug, Bart, Hammy, Miller, etc, all were not given a chance until they had zero other options. They brought in rubbish like Greg Zanon, Corey Potter, Joe Corvo, and Mike Mottau in order to not play the young guys in recent years.

For the record, Colborne had a tremendous camp the year before he was dealt, and when he got sent down, it was a surprise. They also didn't know if he was good enough then, because they hadn't given him a shot. So its real easy to say he wasn't ready now, after not equaling his draft pedigree, but at the time he looked ready.

 

[LSCII]

Ugh, nevermind. Enjoy bathing in your paranoia, lol.

So wait, you specifically call me out, I point out that the discussion was more inclusive of one player, and now you want to bow out? Nothing personal man, but that is some weak sauce right there.

 

[Number8]

Even if you don't want to talk about forwards, or say they weren't ready, the same thing happened on the back end. Krug, Bart, Hammy, Miller, etc, all were not given a chance until they had zero other options. They brought in rubbish like Greg Zanon, Corey Potter, Joe Corvo, and Mike Mottau in order to not play the young guys in recent years.

For the record, Colborne had a tremendous camp the year before he was dealt, and when he got sent down, it was a surprise. They also didn't know if he was good enough then, because they hadn't given him a shot. So its real easy to say he wasn't ready now, after not equaling his draft pedigree, but at the time he looked ready.

I don't think you can give the Bruins a hard time for determining (correctly it turns out) that Colborne wasn't good enough. Recent history in Toronto and Calgary confirms that they were right to cut their drafting losses.

It sounds as though you're saying "in hindsight he wasn't good enough, but Boston didn't even give him a shot to show them that".

If a guy's not good enough, don't you want to determine that early and move on with another plan?

Maybe I'm missing the argument.

 

[EverettMike]

If I had asked last year after the Game 7 loss if anyone would think it was a good sign if Ville Leino were on the team next year, I would have had to get restraining orders for most of this board people would have been so upset over that comment.

But now there are people saying they'd prefer him over Paille or that he might be a nice answer to the cap crunch or he might be a nice addition to the team.

So what happened?

 

[LouJersey]

I don't think you can give the Bruins a hard time for determining (correctly it turns out) that Colborne wasn't good enough. Recent history in Toronto and Calgary confirms that they were right to cut their drafting losses.

It sounds as though you're saying "in hindsight he wasn't good enough, but Boston didn't even give him a shot to show them that".

If a guy's not good enough, don't you want to determine that early and move on with another plan?

Maybe I'm missing the argument.

Jumbo Joe Part Deux was pretty good on Calgary last year..

 

[LouJersey]

If I had asked last year after the Game 7 loss if anyone would think it was a good sign if Ville Leino were on the team next year, I would have had to get restraining orders for most of this board people would have been so upset over that comment.

But now there are people saying they'd prefer him over Paille or that he might be a nice answer to the cap crunch or he might be a nice addition to the team.

So what happened?

Look into the sun at about 2pm and you will become blinded for a bit... Same thing happens to people here when the black and gold sweater (or white whatever is the practice jersey) goes on.... Some folks realize you cannot polish a turd however.

Had you suggested that you would have become

*EverettMike

 

[LSCII]

Jumbo Joe Part Deux was pretty good on Calgary last year..

Yep. Not a 20 goal scorer, but certainly respectable for his first full season. Sort of like Paille here. Didn't pan out in Buffalo because of expectations, but he's still an NHL player.

 

[Flannelman]

Yep. Not a 20 goal scorer, but certainly respectable for his first full season. Sort of like Paille here. Didn't pan out in Buffalo because of expectations, but he's still an NHL player.

Agreed. Not quite as intimidating as say Brian Boyle - but a bit more offensive touch. He can carve out a decent 3rd line career, I think.

 

[Kate08]

Look into the sun at about 2pm and you will become blinded for a bit... Same thing happens to people here when the black and gold sweater (or white whatever is the practice jersey) goes on.... Some folks realize you cannot polish a turd however.

Had you suggested that you would have become

*EverettMike

Get it right. The * goes AFTER the user name.