Player Discussion David Backes

[LSCII]

Despite the overwhelming amount of players, both former and current, who have said otherwise, this is what you believe? A strong presence of leadership in the locker room is important, and we see this in other forms of work environment where you're dealing with multiple people working together.

To be succinct, yes. I do think it's nonsense. Think back to 2011. The Bruins went on this run and won the cup and they were lauded as having great leadership in the room, and as having veterans who set the tone. Flash forward to them spitting the bit against the Habs 3 years ago and then collapsing down the stretch run the last two seasons, and there's talk about how they need a good locker room guy and a tone setting presence, yet the same core leaders from the cup win are there.

To me, it all comes down to winning. If you do that, you have great leadership. If you don't, you have weak leadership. And how do you win in this league now? With skill. So if you have a skilled player that contributes, that's far better than any intangible, but that skill is all too often attributed to being a leader in the room, when in reality, it should be the other way around.

 

[DKH]

If you want to talk about team first guys and guys who stand up for their teammates, then why did Backes not stand up for his teammate in a meaningless preseason game when Radko Gudas ran Czarnik? You talk about sending messages and setting the tone, but why was it okay for him to go after Kadri and not Gudas? Especially given that Gudas delivered a cheap shot to one of his teammates, and Kadri is just a guy that he has a history with. Crap like that flies directly in the face of people stroking this guy over intangibles, no? I personally would rather he stays on the ice and not in the box over a POS like Kadri. He's got more value playing than sitting, unless there's an actual reason for him to do so.

Ok your right

 

[PB37]

To be succinct, yes. I do think it's nonsense. Think back to 2011. The Bruins went on this run and won the cup and they were lauded as having great leadership in the room, and as having veterans who set the tone. Flash forward to them spitting the bit against the Habs 3 years ago and then collapsing down the stretch run the last two seasons, and there's talk about how they need a good locker room guy and a tone setting presence, yet the same core leaders from the cup win are there.

To me, it all comes down to winning. If you do that, you have great leadership. If you don't, you have weak leadership. And how do you win in this league now? With skill. So if you have a skilled player that contributes, that's far better than any intangible, but that skill is all too often attributed to being a leader in the room, when in reality, it should be the other way around.

To give full credit to skill but ignoring the other parts to the equation that helps with a winning atmosphere is s very simplistic stance to take. When dealing with groups of people, having capable leaders are important. Is it a golden pass to an instant winning ticket? No - it's another piece to the jigsaw puzzle. Skill, good coaches, good health and luck all fit in too.

 

[BigGoalBrad]

To be succinct, yes. I do think it's nonsense. Think back to 2011. The Bruins went on this run and won the cup and they were lauded as having great leadership in the room, and as having veterans who set the tone. Flash forward to them spitting the bit against the Habs 3 years ago and then collapsing down the stretch run the last two seasons, and there's talk about how they need a good locker room guy and a tone setting presence, yet the same core leaders from the cup win are there.

To me, it all comes down to winning. If you do that, you have great leadership. If you don't, you have weak leadership. And how do you win in this league now? With skill. So if you have a skilled player that contributes, that's far better than any intangible, but that skill is all too often attributed to being a leader in the room, when in reality, it should be the other way around.

The last time the Bruins won a playoff game our enforcer who had been getting exposed all series by the opponents 4th line decided to squirt water in the face of the best player in the ice when the game was over.


That was moronic. But the next season the organization made a huge mistake in getting rid of him instead of Paille/Campbell.


Thornton should have been in the press box for the Montreal series...but he should have been a Bruin in 14/15 when we missed the playoffs by a point and dressed maybe 30-40 games and been the last of the Merlot line to leave Boston.


There is a middle ground this isn't black and white. Backes and Chara pummeling a couple guys Saturday night is a good thing though its probably not very significant. But we do want both guys to have 2-3 fighting majors McQuaid might be done as an NHL regular and K Miller messed his shoulder up and everyone else on the team simply isn't very good at it.

 

[CDJ]

To give full credit to skill but ignoring the other parts to the equation that helps with a winning atmosphere is s very simplistic stance to take. When dealing with groups of people, having capable leaders are important. Is it a golden pass to an instant winning ticket? No - it's another piece to the jigsaw puzzle. Skill, good coaches, good health and luck all fit in too.

If the only thing that mattered was skill Edmonton would not be Edmonton for past (what feels like a) decade.

 

[LSCII]

To give full credit to skill but ignoring the other parts to the equation that helps with a winning atmosphere is s very simplistic stance to take. When dealing with groups of people, having capable leaders are important. Is it a golden pass to an instant winning ticket? No - it's another piece to the jigsaw puzzle. Skill, good coaches, good health and luck all fit in too.

I think you missed my point. It's not that intangibles don't exist or don't matter. They do. It's just that when you're winning, they get attributed to the leaders on a winning team. When that same team hits a rough spot, the exact opposite is said. They need leaders, they need guys who stand up for teammates, etc.

In the case of Backes vs Kadri, I stand by my statement that it was a personal thing between the players and not because he was trying to pump the team up. And you know what? That's okay. I can accept that for face value without having to attribute it to him being a team first guy. By all accounts he is, but let's not fool ourselves about his motivation for that scrap.

 

[mikelvl]

I'm really impressed by Backes so far. Faceoffs have been a struggle, but other than that, he has been a key player whose style of play can wear down d-men. Once Bergy returns, he can really create a strong second line. I'm sure Krecji is looking forward to that!

 

[Bmessy]

Did Backes ever get criticized for his leadership skills in St Louis? They've blown many more chances than we have in recent years. They've been heavily favored many times and haven't done anything all while he was wearing the C for em. He'll fit right in!

FWIW He's looks pretty good. He'll be a good fit on Krejci's wing. Krejci needs that puck battling winger to help with the dirty work.

 

[PB37]

I think you missed my point. It's not that intangibles don't exist or don't matter. They do.

Umm... I'm not sure if you actually read what you write, but this is the post I initially responded to

Nah, not at all. I'm implying that intangibles and guys that are good in the room don't matter and that it all comes down to skill.

Kadri vs Backes: I think it was both. The team was down, and he knew Kadri would be willing based on their history.

 

[LSCII]

Umm... I'm not sure if you actually read what you write, but this is the post I initially responded to



Kadri vs Backes: I think it was both. The team was down, and he knew Kadri would be willing based on their history.

Sure and then I later clarified it. Either way, intangibles aren't something you can measure. In the case of Backes, do you like him because he's got them, or do you like him because he's a good player? I personally don't care why he's a good player (if it's due to intangibles or work ethic, or something else entirely), and I care only that he is a good player, if that makes sense. That's what I was trying to say in the above quoted post. Also, I wasn't saying you were incapable of understanding what I was saying, just that it wasn't being interpreted the way I meant it.

 

[LSCII]

Did Backes ever get criticized for his leadership skills in St Louis? They've blown many more chances than we have in recent years. They've been heavily favored many times and haven't done anything all while he was wearing the C for em. He'll fit right in!

FWIW He's looks pretty good. He'll be a good fit on Krejci's wing. Krejci needs that puck battling winger to help with the dirty work.

Some people have said exactly that. Like all the leadership and him being a great guy in the room didn't impact any change in STL. They still did what they do, so why does it matter? And that's part of why I said earlier I care more about his skill than his intangibles. Personally, I don't think it's fair to hold the failure of an entire organization on one player, just like I think people talking about his leadership and the impact it will have on this team is being overblown. What will really have an impact on this team and whether or not they have success is how he plays.

 

[b in vancouver]

To be succinct, yes. I do think it's nonsense. Think back to 2011. The Bruins went on this run and won the cup and they were lauded as having great leadership in the room, and as having veterans who set the tone. Flash forward to them spitting the bit against the Habs 3 years ago and then collapsing down the stretch run the last two seasons, and there's talk about how they need a good locker room guy and a tone setting presence, yet the same core leaders from the cup win are there.

To me, it all comes down to winning. If you do that, you have great leadership. If you don't, you have weak leadership. And how do you win in this league now? With skill. So if you have a skilled player that contributes, that's far better than any intangible, but that skill is all too often attributed to being a leader in the room, when in reality, it should be the other way around.

I get what you're saying about 'winning' - but I think that's more of a commentary thing than reality.

There's players like Linden and Iginla who weren't on great teams but were always known as exceptional leaders.
Even to your point about Boston - there's a reason why Chiarelli gave Thornton good money to get him out of Anaheim and traded for Recchi. Decent players but pros who knew when to be calm and when the team needed a spark. It's not coincidence that the team started to miss their influence.
And it goes both ways.... When Toronto was trying to build their team around Kessel, Phaneuf, JVR, Komisarek, etc. I laughed because no matter the talent, that core group of leadership wasn't going to do anything.

 

[PB37]

Sure and then I later clarified it. Either way, intangibles aren't something you can measure. In the case of Backes, do you like him because he's got them, or do you like him because he's a good player? I personally don't care why he's a good player (if it's due to intangibles or work ethic, or something else entirely), and I care only that he is a good player, if that makes sense. That's what I was trying to say in the above quoted post. Also, I wasn't saying you were incapable of understanding what I was saying, just that it wasn't being interpreted the way I meant it.

I like Backes because he's a good player on the ice and for his leader of men status. Hitchcock is still talking about him in St Louis and how they miss his abilities to command a room and take/give instructions.

 

[rainone99]

If you want to talk about team first guys and guys who stand up for their teammates, then why did Backes not stand up for his teammate in a meaningless preseason game when Radko Gudas ran Czarnik? You talk about sending messages and setting the tone, but why was it okay for him to go after Kadri and not Gudas? Especially given that Gudas delivered a cheap shot to one of his teammates, and Kadri is just a guy that he has a history with. Crap like that flies directly in the face of people stroking this guy over intangibles, no? I personally would rather he stays on the ice and not in the box over a POS like Kadri. He's got more value playing than sitting, unless there's an actual reason for him to do so.

Didn't Gudas get kicked out of the game?? Was Backes on the ice when it happened?? I think you should be pointing fingers and Hayes and Beleskey.. They were on the ice not Backes... If Gudas gets a game for the hit and Backes is not on the ice when the hit happens, how do you want him to respond?? You sure you understand how getting back at a player works?? Also do you really want you top center right now to go after Gudas?? I mean really?? Is that what he was brought in for??

 

[ashnathan]

Didn't Gudas get kicked out of the game?? Was Backes on the ice when it happened?? I think you should be pointing fingers and Hayes and Beleskey.. They were on the ice not Backes... If Gudas gets a game for the hit and Backes is not on the ice when the hit happens, how do you want him to respond?? You sure you understand how getting back at a player works?? Also do you really want you top center right now to go after Gudas?? I mean really?? Is that what he was brought in for??

This is what Randy is for.

 

[vjcsmoke]

I'll have to say, Backes has looked really good early. It looks like the B's made the right signing for the short term. But that contract will probably look pretty bad 3-4 years from now.

 

[Selke37]

Since #46 is not yet up to his game let Backes center Pasta - they have some chemistry already and Krejci can rejuvenate as 3C.

Heinen worked well with Pasta and Backes in the preseason or maybe try Spooner as LW. Pasta and Backes actually should be the core of our second Line.

 

[compan]

Didn't Gudas get kicked out of the game?? Was Backes on the ice when it happened?? I think you should be pointing fingers and Hayes and Beleskey.. They were on the ice not Backes... If Gudas gets a game for the hit and Backes is not on the ice when the hit happens, how do you want him to respond?? You sure you understand how getting back at a player works?? Also do you really want you top center right now to go after Gudas?? I mean really?? Is that what he was brought in for??

He didn't get kicked out, but you're right that Backes wasn't on the ice at the time of the hit. They were only on the ice at the same time later in the period for 42 seconds of 1 shift. Backes had already fought previously in the game as well.

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

Since #46 is not yet up to his game let Backes center Pasta - they have some chemistry already and Krejci can rejuvenate as 3C.

Heinen worked well with Pasta and Backes in the preseason or maybe try Spooner as LW. Pasta and Backes actually should be the core of our second Line.

I hope we see that when Bergy returns.

 

[Brewins]

I hope we see that when Bergy returns.

Spooner-Backes-Pasta makes sense, pasta has shown far more chemistry with those two than with krejci imo. Backes can be a more defensively responsible version of lucic. While providing heavy board play and a net front presence. The problem is, until Vatrano is back that leave DK with heinen, beleskey and hayes. I'd like to see MB-DK-Czar with hayes joining bergy and marchy. Not ideal with hayes on the 1st line but he can cycle well and play along the boards. If they can have career season with Connolly than hayes shouldnt hinder them too much.

 

[Kalus]

A couple of games ago he fought Kadri, last night it looked like he was trying to get Hall to go. Last year he fought Toewes, Kadri, and Benn.

A group of high end skill guys, all smaller than him, who don't typically fight.

I never watched him play outside of Bruins games in the past. With his hard hitting aggressive style I have to imagine that he gets challenged by tougher guys fairly often.

I am glad he's on the team but that's not a good look, in my view.

Also, he's not very good at fighting and so far his fight with Kadri and attempt at goading Hall have been costly to the team.

 

[DKH]

A couple of games ago he fought Kadri, last night it looked like he was trying to get Hall to go. Last year he fought Toewes, Kadri, and Benn.

A group of high end skill guys, all smaller than him, who don't typically fight.

I never watched him play outside of Bruins games in the past. With his hard hitting aggressive style I have to imagine that he gets challenged by tougher guys fairly often.

I am glad he's on the team but that's not a good look, in my view.

Also, he's not very good at fighting and so far his fight with Kadri and attempt at goading Hall have been costly to the team.

Actually I think that's brilliant strategy

 

[ODAAT]

A couple of games ago he fought Kadri, last night it looked like he was trying to get Hall to go. Last year he fought Toewes, Kadri, and Benn.

A group of high end skill guys, all smaller than him, who don't typically fight.

I never watched him play outside of Bruins games in the past. With his hard hitting aggressive style I have to imagine that he gets challenged by tougher guys fairly often.

I am glad he's on the team but that's not a good look, in my view.

Also, he's not very good at fighting and so far his fight with Kadri and attempt at goading Hall have been costly to the team.

how was it costly to the team? In Toronto the boys seemed to be playing with little to no energy and Backes, as he said, tried to get the team energized (I`m not one who believes, outside of a rare occasion, a scrap does that) but I get that`s what players do

As for going after smaller guys who are skilled and smaller? Who bloody cares, not like he`s chasing Johnny Gaudreau around the ice, he`s trying to take with him teams best players. It`s not like Toews and/or Benn are Marchand`s size

Anyways, not sure what your getting at, so far, love what I`m seeing from Backes and the "look" is very good

 

[Fenian24]

Actually I think that's brilliant strategy

Yup, Devils have one legit goal scoring threat and Backes should have had him in the box with him for the last minute of the game if the play had been called properly. Don't have to worry about Hall if he is sitting in the box and the Bruins have enough defensive forwards to cover for Backes.

Have been extremely pleased with his first four games.

 

[Kalus]

I suppose it's a matter of whether you believe in the Code or not.

I was brought up that way so that's how I think.

If you're gonna run around you have to answer the bell from time to time when challenged, sometimes that will be against tough guys but not necessarily the goons.

You don't go after smaller non fighter types unless they cheap shot someone on your team or something similar.

I get that things change. Just not the actions of what I consider to be a true leader.