Bruins old and slow? Check the stats!

[tarheelhockey]

I've never heard this about the Pens. The secret sauce for the Pens was being a crappy team at the right time,

What I meant by that is the Pens were at least a decent team, and usually a contender, for about 30 years straight with the exception of one little gap, during which time Crosby and Malkin fell in their lap. By 2020 were indeed plenty of people saying things like “never bet against the Pens, everyone says they’re too old but they just keep winning” as if there was some dark magic keeping them from missing the playoffs. And of course that was foolish because the Pens WERE getting older and slowing down, and there wasn’t another Crosby in the wings to keep things going.

Is there another Chara, Bergeron, Rask in the wings for Boston? If not, this is the normal life cycle of a team losing A-level talent and replacing it with draftees who are young and promising but not as good. We saw this when Detroit was high on their own fumes with Nyqvist and Tatar and DeKeyser, decent players who would obviously become superstars because it was the Red Wings and they had magic.

Pasta being old and slow and past his peak is certainly a take.

Not what I said. I said his current state will very likely prove to be his peak, meaning he will start to decline in a couple of years. 110-point seasons past age 30 for a winger are almost unheard of, the sort of thing you might get from Jagr or Kucherov, but not even Ovechkin ever came close. Betting on Pastrnak to be at that level in a few years, that would certainly be a take.

 

[PaulD]

What I meant by that is the Pens were at least a decent team, and usually a contender, for about 30 years straight with the exception of one little gap, during which time Crosby and Malkin fell in their lap. By 2020 were indeed plenty of people saying things like “never bet against the Pens, everyone says they’re too old but they just keep winning” as if there was some dark magic keeping them from missing the playoffs. And of course that was foolish because the Pens WERE getting older and slowing down, and there wasn’t another Crosby in the wings to keep things going.

Is there another Chara, Bergeron, Rask in the wings for Boston? If not, this is the normal life cycle of a team losing A-level talent and replacing it with draftees who are young and promising but not as good. We saw this when Detroit was high on their own fumes with Nyqvist and Tatar and DeKeyser, decent players who would obviously become superstars because it was the Red Wings and they had magic.



Not what I said. I said his current state will very likely prove to be his peak, meaning he will start to decline in a couple of years. 110-point seasons past age 30 for a winger are almost unheard of, the sort of thing you might get from Jagr or Kucherov, but not even Ovechkin ever came close. Betting on Pastrnak to be at that level in a few years, that would certainly be a take.

Hilarious how some of these critics who cant shit on Bruins present season year after year .....start bashing the teams future seasons. Tarheel transferring that to Pastrnac as well.
Talk about reaching.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Hilarious how some of these critics who cant shit on Bruins present season year after year .....start bashing the teams future seasons. Tarheel transferring that to Pastrnac as well.
Talk about reaching.

What about saying Pastrnak is likely to peak in his late 20s and then slow down is shitting on him?

You’re falling into exactly the pattern I’m talking about. Pointing out that a team has lost a lot of HOF-level talent, and is gradually moving toward post-peak of their top remaining talent without any obvious replacements on the way, is not “bashing”. It’s living in reality where time progresses whether we like it or not.

 

[Nothingbutglass]

What about saying Pastrnak is likely to peak in his late 20s and then slow down is shitting on him?

You’re falling into exactly the pattern I’m talking about. Pointing out that a team has lost a lot of HOF-level talent, and is gradually moving toward post-peak of their top remaining talent without any obvious replacements on the way, is not “bashing”. It’s living in reality where time progresses whether we like it or not.

Do we need to worry about it now? What does that have to do with the Bruins being old ond slow?

 

[Auston Marlander]

I checked the stats

Boston a team continually deemed old, slow with poor prospects are within top 3 youngest, tallest, and heaviest in the league. They are bigger and faster. Going to be interesting to see how this team performs moving forward. Good on Sweeney for keeping the team competitive and entertaining to watch.

Between the speed stats Wasted Talent shared and the fact the Bruins are the 16th oldest team in the league. You might want to check the stats before posting.

Neither of those things mean they are a bad team, but buddy, you're taking the strangest approach to prove it.

 

[Halakitlikethat]

Bruins are a good team. A wel oiled machine. Similar to Toronto, it’s all about the playoffs with them. If I’m a B’s fan, I’m not happy about how the team has performed in the playoffs the last couple years.

 

[Czechboy]

McAvoy - 27
Pastrnak - 28
Swayman - 25

The only top player the old title remotely applies to is Marchand at 34

I was very confused reading this.. does the OP know Krejci, Chara, Thomas and Bergeron retired?

Legit looking at puckpedia to see who the old stars are?

Marchand and ??????

 

[tarheelhockey]

Do we need to worry about it now? What does that have to do with the Bruins being old ond slow?

It was just a point made in the flow of conversation. If you don’t want to think about it, don’t.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

I think it’s safe to say you’ll find otherwise if you don’t cherry pick examples.

Using all of the best wingers in the game today as examples isn't cherry picking. Try harder.

Not what I said. I said his current state will very likely prove to be his peak, meaning he will start to decline in a couple of years. 110-point seasons past age 30 for a winger are almost unheard of, the sort of thing you might get from Jagr or Kucherov, but not even Ovechkin ever came close. Betting on Pastrnak to be at that level in a few years, that would certainly be a take.

Yeah totally unheard of, except for literally last year when the top wingers in the game put up their best seasons in their early 30s.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

I was very confused reading this.. does the OP know Krejci, Chara, Thomas and Bergeron retired?

Legit looking at puckpedia to see who the old stars are?

Marchand and ??????

Apparently Pasta is going to fall off a cliff in a couple years, because unlike Kucherov and Panarin, he just won't be able to keep up in his 30s.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Using all of the best wingers in the game today as examples isn't cherry picking. Try harder.

First, you didn’t use “all” the best wingers, as you ignored counter-examples like Tkachuk, Marner, and Kaprizov. That’s the definition of cherry picking.

Second, you’re not even answering the right question. It’s not “what age are the best wingers in the game”, it’s “when did these wingers hit their peak season”. 2024 was an unusual season for older wingers in that we saw Kucherov and Panarin both go nova at an age when most are gradually falling off — those were historically relevant seasons, especially Kucherov’s, and not part of some greater pattern. Even at that, late-20s wingers generally experienced slight fall-offs from the prior years. Pasta had 47-63-110 last year, but the year before that it was 61-52-113. Rantanen had 42-62-104, but the prior year it was 55-50-105. That looks an awful lot like two guys peaking out as line-drivers and starting to crest that hill to where they start passing the puck a little more. Give it another couple of years and we’ll know how it plays out, but the strong likelihood is a gradual erosion in their production as they hit 30… everyone can’t be a Kucherov.

Thirdly, pull the lens back and get away from the individualized examples. It’s a statistical fact that skaters typically hit their peaks around age 24, suffer a slight falloff through about age 27, and then decline steadily. This chart is just one example but the data has been crunched over and over with the same results.

A New Look at Aging Curves for NHL Skaters (part 1)

Obviously some players will defy that curve, as that’s how averages work. But it’s not smart to bet your franchise on any given player being that guy. But if you think you’re smart enough to do it, go right ahead. Again, a couple years will bear out the results.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yeah totally unheard of,

are almost unheard of

Please argue in good faith.

 

[PaulD]

What about saying Pastrnak is likely to peak in his late 20s and then slow down is shitting on him?

You’re falling into exactly the pattern I’m talking about. Pointing out that a team has lost a lot of HOF-level talent, and is gradually moving toward post-peak of their top remaining talent without any obvious replacements on the way, is not “bashing”. It’s living in reality where time progresses whether we like it or not.

The sky is falling in Boston....being hearing that for 5 years.
I'm not "falling into any pattern" .....just not buying this crap. Why don't you try judging the Bruins in what they are doing instead of what you predict they will do.
2019 they were dippose to start dropping out iof contention ....2023 had the best season in NHL history. And what you want us to take from that is this can't last forever? Yea.....no kidding. Now can't we get back to this season.

What about saying Pastrnak is likely to peak in his late 20s and then slow down is shitting on him?

You’re falling into exactly the pattern I’m talking about. Pointing out that a team has lost a lot of HOF-level talent, and is gradually moving toward post-peak of their top remaining talent without any obvious replacements on the way, is not “bashing”. It’s living in reality where time progresses whether we like it or not.

""TIme progresses whether we like it or not"

Ya don't say.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Why don't you try judging the Bruins in what they are doing instead of what you predict they will do.
2019 they were dippose to start dropping out iof contention ....2023 had the best season in NHL history. And what you want us to take from that is this can't last forever? Yea.....no kidding. Now can't we get back to this season.

Well last season they experienced a 16 point drop in the standings and were a first round out. That’s easy to understand as they lost Bergeron, Krejci, Orlov and replaced them with some meh aging guys. They were still a good-enough team, no shame in 109 points, but the people saying they were due for a sharp falloff were… right.

This year they’ve lost Ullmark and DeBrusk, and gave 7 and 6 year contracts to Elias Lindholm and Zadorov who are both about to turn 30. Marchand turns 37 this year and is coming off a 67-point season. What exactly are you saying you expect from them going forward? Improvement? If so, how much and where do you see that coming from?

 

[PaulD]

Bruins are a good team. A wel oiled machine. Similar to Toronto, it’s all about the playoffs with them. If I’m a B’s fan, I’m not happy about how the team has performed in the playoffs the last couple years.

yea, but look who they lost to.
23 and 24 Panthers are all world.

 

[PaulD]

Well last season they experienced a 16 point drop in the standings and were a first round out. That’s easy to understand as they lost Bergeron, Krejci, Orlov and replaced them with some meh aging guys. They were still a good-enough team, no shame in 109 points, but the people saying they were due for a sharp falloff were… right.

This year they’ve lost Ullmark and DeBrusk, and gave 7 and 6 year contracts to Elias Lindholm and Zadorov who are both about to turn 30. Marchand turns 37 this year and is coming off a 67-point season. What exactly are you saying you expect from them going forward? Improvement? If so, how much and where do you see that coming from?

They will make play offs and have to go through a Florida if they want to win the east. Same challenge as everyone else in the Atlantic.
Adding Lindholm , and Zadorov replacing little Gryzlek says they are a better team than the one who just lost to the Cup champs in 6 games.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

First, you didn’t use “all” the best wingers, as you ignored counter-examples like Tkachuk, Marner, and Kaprizov. That’s the definition of cherry picking.

They aren't in their 30s yet, and don't support your argument either. Why would I include people in their 20s in the equation? You take past and present examples to illustrate a point like this, and your whole mental approach is flawed.

Second, you’re not even answering the right question. It’s not “what age are the best wingers in the game”, it’s “when did these wingers hit their peak season”.

I think its pretty clear you are going to move goal posts as you see fit.

 

[tarheelhockey]

They will make play offs and have to go through a Florida if they want to win the east. Same challenge as everyone else in the Atlantic.
Adding Lindholm , and Zadorov replacing little Gryzlek says they are a better team than the one who just lost to the Cup champs in 6 games.

Ok, and have you found anyone saying the Bruins are missing the playoffs?

 

[PaulD]

Ok, and have you found anyone saying the Bruins are missing the playoffs?

Did I say I did?
Have you found anyone saying
time does not progress whether we like it or not. ha!

Every post in not an open invitation to an argument. Some are just opinions and predictions buddy.

Cheers

 

[tarheelhockey]

They aren't in their 30s yet, and don't support your argument either. Why would I include people in their 20s in the equation? You take past and present examples to illustrate a point like this, and your whole mental approach is flawed.

You said “the best wingers in the world are all late 20s/early 30s” while simply ignoring the ones who aren’t. That’s the absolute definition of a cherry-picked argument.

You would include players in their early and mid 20s as a matter of being accurate. Or honest.

I think its pretty clear you are going to move goal posts as you see fit.

Frankly I think it’s pretty clear that you haven’t tracked the argument in this thread. The question was one of diminished returns on players as they age. Everyone understands that Pasta is one of the best wingers going, and will likely be in the near future. The question is whether he will be as good to the point that the team won’t notice his diminished production with time.

This was all in response to a post that literally said the Bruins “defy aging”. They won’t. I’m just explaining why.

Did I say I did?
Have you found anyone saying
time does not progress whether we like it or not. ha!

Every post in not an open invitation to an argument. Some are just opinions and predictions buddy.

Cheers

If you don’t see anyone saying they’re falling off, then what is your argument here? A few posts ago you were talking about people saying the sky is falling, now they’re not?

And yes, anything posted on here is open to criticism. You’ve been here long enough to know how this works.

 

[PaulD]

You said “the best wingers in the world are all late 20s/early 30s” while simply ignoring the ones who aren’t. That’s the absolute definition of a cherry-picked argument.

You would include players in their early and mid 20s as a matter of being accurate. Or honest.



Frankly I think it’s pretty clear that you haven’t tracked the argument in this thread. The question was one of diminished returns on players as they age. Everyone understands that Pasta is one of the best wingers going, and will likely be in the near future. The question is whether he will be as good to the point that the team won’t notice his diminished production with time.

This was all in response to a post that literally said the Bruins “defy aging”. They won’t. I’m just explaining why.




If you don’t see anyone saying they’re falling off, then what is your argument here? A few posts ago you were talking about people saying the sky is falling, now they’re not?

And yes, anything posted on here is open to criticism. You’ve been here long enough to know how this works.

Nope I said they have been saying that every september since cup final 2019.
...and have been wrong every September since cup final in 2019.
The Bruins dooms day predictors are 0-5 in last 5 years. Maybe this year they get it right and go 1 - 6.
Or next year and be 1- 7. Ot the year after and go 1 for 8. ha!
But this Habs fan will believe it when he see's it.
Ya know.....like the leafs winning the play offs. Believe when I see it.

Cheers

 

[tarheelhockey]

Nope I said they have been saying that every september since cup final 2019.
...and have been wrong every September since cup final in 2019.
They aBruins dooms day predictors are 0-5. Maybe this year they get it right and go 1 - Or next year and be 1- 7.
But this Habs fan will believe it when I see it.
Ya know.....like the leafs winning the play offs. Believe when I see it.

Cheers

Maybe I’m missing something but how does that mean they “defy aging”? Their post-2019 success was directly tied to the emergence of young star players who weren’t relevant in 2019.

 

[PaulD]

Maybe I’m missing something but how does that mean they “defy aging”? Their post-2019 success was directly tied to the emergence of young star players who weren’t relevant in 2019.

Oh yea, you're definitely missing something.

agree to disagree

BTW.....who's your team. As I've stated I'm a Habs fan.
My guess yours is Canucks or Leafs.

Cheers

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

A team that's constantly above average but never wins is one of the worst places to be in pro sports.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

You said “the best wingers in the world are all late 20s/early 30s” while simply ignoring the ones who aren’t. That’s the absolute definition of a cherry-picked argument.

Its not an argument, its an observation. The fact that Panarin and Kucherov are universally regarded as the best wingers in hockey and just had their best years in their early 30s is certainly relevant.

You would include players in their early and mid 20s as a matter of being accurate. Or honest.

I would not, unless I am including Pasta himself, there isn't a single winger better than Kucherov. Who is in his early 30s. Nobody thinks Tkachuk is in that conversation, so I don't see your point.

Frankly I think it’s pretty clear that you haven’t tracked the argument in this thread. The question was one of diminished returns on players as they age. Everyone understands that Pasta is one of the best wingers going, and will likely be in the near future. The question is whether he will be as good to the point that the team won’t notice his diminished production with time.

Seems like an odd question to wonder if Pasta will be just as productive from 28-33+ as he was in his earlier years as wingers tend to age well into their early 30s, and its most likely that he will perform well for the next 5+ years rather than not. He may even have a career year ahead of him still. You suggesting otherwise came off as silly, and I think you know it.