Prospect Info: Bruins Prospects XXII

[DKH]

Agreed, the #1 center position desperately needs to be addressed next offseason when all the cap opens up for them.

Addressed hopefully by March 1

 

[UncleRico]

Addressed hopefully by March 1

Even better

 

[HustleB]

Addressed hopefully by March 1

DeBrusk, Swayman + for Lindholm or am I way off. What’s the plan?

 

[GoBs]

Agreed, the #1 center position desperately needs to be addressed next offseason when all the cap opens up for them.

Lol we have said this for 5 years

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

Lol we have said this for 5 years

Almost as if #1 centers aren’t easy to come acquire.

 

[UncleRico]

Almost as if #1 centers aren’t easy to come acquire.

There was quite a few available to be acquired this offseason, but the bruins wasted a large portion of their assets on 3 month rentals.

 

[ODAAT]

Almost as if #1 centers aren’t easy to come acquire.

exactly and/or to draft unless a team is sitting in a top 5 pick position

wonder if the Penguins have a better succession plan for Crosby than the B`s did for Bergy or DK? Doubt it, there simply isn`t one

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

There was quite a few available to be acquired this offseason, but the bruins wasted a large portion of their assets on 3 month rentals.

Lol, and if they didn’t, people still would have complained they didn’t load up.

 

[UncleRico]

Lol, and if they didn’t, people still would have complained they didn’t load up.

Last year they spent $4.5m on future cap, two firsts and two second round picks on 5 players who are no longer with the team.

That’s terrible asset management any way you slice it.

I don’t think people would have been complaining if they spent less than that.

 

[JOKER 192]

Last year they spent $4.5m on future cap, two firsts and two second round picks on 5 players who are no longer with the team.

That’s terrible asset management any way you slice it.

I don’t think people would have been complaining if they spent less than that.

It's called going all in , which was the right move under the circumstances.

 

[UncleRico]

It's called going all in , which was the right move under the circumstances.

Wholeheartedly disagree, it was a desperation move that predictably backfired. You don’t short term invest in rentals with two centers in your top 6 who are over the age of 35. That’s a losing formula.

Plenty of teams have gone all in. You’d be hard pressed to find one team in history that went all in as hard at the bruins did the past season and got such a minimal return.

Now this teams prospect pool is going to be much worse for the ladder part of this decade and they likely just wasted 2-3 years on the pasta/McAvoy/swayman core

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

Last year they spent $4.5m on future cap, two firsts and two second round picks on 5 players who are no longer with the team.

That’s terrible asset management any way you slice it.

I don’t think people would have been complaining if they spent less than that.

We’re not doing this because if the Bruins had won the Cup after selling future pieces, there wouldn’t be a peep about it. I don’t do MMQB’ing.

 

[UncleRico]

We’re not doing this because if the Bruins had won the Cup after selling future pieces, there wouldn’t be a peep about it. I don’t do MMQB’ing.

When you live in the hypothetical world of playing the “what if they won” game then it’s easy to deflect poor decision making like you are right now.

However the reality is the Bruins lost and they did so while using more future assets than any team in recent memory. All for a first round exit.

So you can live in this detached little fantasy world of what ifs, but the reality is the GM of the Bruins mortgaged multiple years with of future assets that will likely have negative repercussion for the rest of the decade, all for one season, and failed miserably.

 

[JOKER 192]

Wholeheartedly disagree, it was a desperation move that predictably backfired. You don’t short term invest in rentals with two centers in your top 6 who are over the age of 35. That’s a losing formula.

Plenty of teams have gone all in. You’d be hard pressed to find one team in history that went all in as hard at the bruins did the past season and got such a minimal return.

Now this teams prospect pool is going to be much worse for the ladder part of this decade and they likely just wasted 2-3 years on the pasta/McAvoy/swayman core

Hindsight is 20/20 . I don't know what your position was at the time but almost everyone was on board.

A flu bug going through the dressing room at the wrong time and the top 2 C came up injured did them in . Was that predictable? Maybe, it has happened the last few years so I guess that's true to some extent. IDK , I don't have that kind of privileged information .

But, if management knew Bergy and Krecji were ailing then it was the wrong move, otherwise, it was the right move.

 

[UncleRico]

Hindsight is 20/20 . I don't know what your position was at the time but almost everyone was on board.

A flu bug going through the dressing room at the wrong time and the top 2 C came up injured did them in . Was that predictable? Maybe, it has happened the last few years so I guess that's true to some extent. IDK , I don't have that kind of privileged information .

But, if management knew Bergy and Krecji were ailing then it was the wrong move, otherwise, it was the right move.

It’s an injury issue every year. This year with bergy it was his back, last year it was his elbow, before that it was his nagging groin injury for a couple years in a row.

So if you are asking if an injury was predictable, well based on recent history it was more probable than not.

However the predictable part was actually not being able to win with two centers playing in the top 6 over the age of 35. It hasn’t been done in the modern NHL, it’s a losing formula. The only team to ever be able to do it was the 1971 Montreal canadiens when there were 14 teams. An anomaly.

So at the very best they went with a formula that hasn’t been done in 50+ years and back when it was an entirely different league.

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

When you live in the hypothetical world of playing the “what if they won” game then it’s easy to deflect poor decision making like you are right now.

However the reality is the Bruins lost and they did so while using more future assets than any team in recent memory. All for a first round exit.

So you can live in this detached little fantasy world of what ifs, but the reality is the GM of the Bruins mortgaged multiple years with of future assets that will likely have negative repercussion for the rest of the decade, all for one season, and failed miserably.

Lmao. Nothing funnier than MMQB’ing.

 

[JOKER 192]

It’s an injury issue every year. This year with bergy it was his back, last year it was his elbow, before that it was his nagging groin injury for a couple years in a row.

So if you are asking if an injury was predictable, well based on recent history it was more probable than not.

However the predictable part was actually not being able to win with two centers playing in the top 6 over the age of 35. It hasn’t been done in the modern NHL, it’s a losing formula. The only team to ever be able to do it was the 1971 Montreal canadiens when there were 14 teams. An anomaly.

So at the very best they went with a formula that hasn’t been done in 50+ years and back when it was an entirely different league.

That's nonsense, lots of things haven't been done until they have. There are many ways to skin cat as they say, this is just another example.

Seems to me with every team that wins a cup there's a new formula.

One year it's speed.
One year it's size.
One year it's D
The next year it's no D
Then it's Goaltending
Then it's no Goaltending
WHICH f***ING ONE IS IT?

Answer: all of the above.

 

[Kegs]

That's nonsense, lots of things haven't been done until they have. There are many ways to skin cat as they say, this is just another example.

Seems to me with every team that wins a cup there's a new formula.

One year it's speed.
One year it's size.
One year it's D
The next year it's no D
Then it's Goaltending
Then it's no Goaltending
WHICH f***ING ONE IS IT?

Answer: all of the above.

If I was building a team I’d be going big defensive and fast. That’s my dream team.

 

[UncleRico]

That's nonsense, lots of things haven't been done until they have. There are many ways to skin cat as they say, this is just another example.

Seems to me with every team that wins a cup there's a new formula.

One year it's speed.
One year it's size.
One year it's D
The next year it's no D
Then it's Goaltending
Then it's no Goaltending
WHICH f***ING ONE IS IT?

Answer: all of the above.

@PlayMakers had a good stat a couple months back about age of certain players on teams that had won the cup the past 10-15 years.. maybe they can share it again.

 

[JOKER 192]

@PlayMakers had a good stat a couple months back about age of certain players on teams that had won the cup the past 10-15 years.. maybe they can share it again.

Yes I saw that. Man I hate stats. All logic goes out the window when we employ stats.

Toss a coin , sometimes relevant sometimes totally irrelevant.

 

[JOKER 192]

If I was building a team I’d be going big defensive and fast. That’s my dream team.

Me it would be big fast and nasty.
Skill is optional, if you fit the above criteria, the rest Is secondary.

 

[rfournier103]

Yes I saw that. Man I hate stats. All logic goes out the window when we employ stats.

Toss a coin , sometimes relevant sometimes totally irrelevant.

I like to say that the numbers never lie, but they don’t tell the whole story.

 

[JOKER 192]

I like to say that the numbers never lie, but they don’t tell the whole story.

Exactly, I don't think of stats as irrelevant but it really jerks my chain when they are presented as the be all , end all . They are just another tool . Not irrelevant but if you're running your team based exclusively stats you're going nowhere.

 

[HustleB]

@PlayMakers had a good stat a couple months back about age of certain players on teams that had won the cup the past 10-15 years.. maybe they can share it again.

are you suggesting a team only invest for a playoff run if they have a top 2C under 26 yo. This all feels like sour grapes to me.

 

[UncleRico]

are you suggesting a team only invest for a playoff run if they have a top 2C under 26 yo. This all feels like sour grapes to me.

I’m saying they should have been investing in a young center over the past decade at some point to make it so they weren’t relying on two centers over the age of 35 in top 6 roles.

Especially since the number one center, bergy, has dealt with numerous injuries/nagging injuries come playoff time the past 5 years between the herniated disk, the elbow surgery and the multi year nagging groin injury.