Player Discussion David Backes

[EverettMike]

Also, if Backes looked awful in the pre-season and had zero points I'd feel the exact same way.

It would be meaningless.

 

[mikelvl]

I'm hoping that Backes is one of those guys who has put up decent numbers by the end of the season and you have no idea how or when he accomplished it. Maybe all of those banged in goals from the crease aren't sexy enough to notice that he is a good player. It's just that, to my amateur eye, he looks like a slow barge floating down the river during most games.

 

[BNHL]

Well you should let NHL coaches know so they stop basing any decisions on it.

So how come when it leads to teams making good decisions, see Brandon Carlo for example, pre-season has value. Or was the coaching staff making a good decision just a fluke?

But because they can also make bad decisions based on pre-season (and they can), it no longer has value.

Can't have it both ways.

Pre season is 4 effin games with partial rosters filled with a mix of vets and wannabes. Obviously they thought that Carlo and Heinen and O'Gara deserved a look to start in Boston,2 failed, and that Backes' production was fairly meaningless. So the coaching staff made the decision to keep Carlo, Heinen and O'Gara and put Backes on the wing. Keeping Carlo was a good decision,keeping Heinen and O'Gara wasn't and we are seeing what they think about Backes' preseason.

 

[BruinDust]

I'm not having it both ways. Pre-season games and stats are some of the worst tools for evaluation we have.

Plenty of players have looked good in pre-season yet they still didn't make the team. That's because the team is factoring in far more meaningful indicators of readiness, and that's why Carlo made it.

And even in the pre-season, you can see if a guy is physically ready for the NHL at practice and camp. Games against half squads played at half speed are a terrible way to judge something.

Stats and pre-season performance certainly aren't the be-all and end-all, and your right when you say teams are also considering a bunch of other factors when deciding on who makes the team, what line or pairing they are on, etc. etc.

But it's like advanced stats, pre-season performance is just one more tool in the toolbox in player evaluation. You don't think Carlo's play and composure in pre-season didn't have a fairly decent impact on him making the team out of camp as a 19-year old.

But it has value, whether you like it or not.

I wonder if you asked Carlo if his pre-season play had any impact on him getting a chance with the Bruins what he would say.

I got my doubts he would tell you it didn't really matter, that he could of stunk up the joint in pre-season and he still would of made the team.

 

[BNHL]

I'm hoping that Backes is one of those guys who has put up decent numbers by the end of the season and you have no idea how or when he accomplished it. Maybe all of those banged in goals from the crease aren't sexy enough to notice that he is a good player. It's just that, to my amateur eye, he looks like a slow barge floating down the river during most games.

Where have I seen this before?

 

[BruinDust]

Pre season is 4 effin games with partial rosters filled with a mix of vets and wannabes. Obviously they thought that Carlo and Heinen and O'Gara deserved a look to start in Boston,2 failed, and that Backes' production was fairly meaningless. So the coaching staff made the decision to keep Carlo, Heinen and O'Gara and put Backes on the wing. Keeping Carlo was a good decision,keeping Heinen and O'Gara wasn't and we are seeing what they think about Backes' preseason.

I'm not even sure what this even means.

You say wannabes like it's a bunch of beer-leaguers who won a contest to attend pre-season.

And why was keeping Heinen and O'Gara bad decisions. Both showed enough to show they are fairly close to being NHL players.

 

[EverettMike]

Stats and pre-season performance certainly aren't the be-all and end-all, and your right when you say teams are also considering a bunch of other factors when deciding on who makes the team, what line or pairing they are on, etc. etc.

But it's like advanced stats, pre-season performance is just one more tool in the toolbox in player evaluation. You don't think Carlo's play and composure in pre-season didn't have a fairly decent impact on him making the team out of camp as a 19-year old.

But it has value, whether you like it or not.

I wonder if you asked Carlo if his pre-season play had any impact on him getting a chance with the Bruins what he would say.

I got my doubts he would tell you it didn't really matter, that he could of stunk up the joint in pre-season and he still would of made the team.

So in what world does he look like a stud in camp and at practice, but looks like a dolt in the games? How often does that happen? I'll say almost zero percent of the time.

Also, why do young players that have great camps sometimes not make the team?

Again, this convo is all cause you wanted to look at Backes stats in the pre-season. Which is absurd.

 

[Pia8988]

I'm not even sure what this even means.

You say wannabes like it's a bunch of beer-leaguers who won a contest to attend pre-season.

And why was keeping Heinen and O'Gara bad decisions. Both showed enough to show they are fairly close to being NHL players.

O'Gara is in Providence first as a numbers game with how many NHL contracts there already are in Boston.

Heinen in my eyes played well, but just didn't get any production. A line of 3 play makers also wasn't on of Claude's better moves.

 

[BruinDust]

So in what world does he look like a stud in camp and at practice, but looks like a dolt in the games? How often does that happen? I'll say almost zero percent of the time.

Also, why do young players that have great camps sometimes not make the team?

Again, this convo is all cause you wanted to look at Backes stats in the pre-season. Which is absurd.

We'll let's just agree to disagree on the value of pre-season performance.

I'm done.

 

[BNHL]

I'm not even sure what this even means.

You say wannabes like it's a bunch of beer-leaguers who won a contest to attend pre-season.

And why was keeping Heinen and O'Gara bad decisions. Both showed enough to show they are fairly close to being NHL players.

Coaching decisions made by pre season performances brought O'Gara,Carlo and Heinen to Boston. O'Gara was overmatched here,Heinen was friggin invisible and Carlo continued to impress. Backes' big pre season production was against other teams' Heinens and O'Garas mixed in among the vets. The staff concluded that Backes' past NHL winger production trumped what they saw during pre season and 2 games here. I don't know what else to tell you.you want him at center and the coaching staff thus far wants him at wing. I'm sure they have all the stats that we have,then some.

 

[Dr Hook]

They didn't need a 3rd line center and he now has 6 points in his last 17 games at wing. I'll give him slack due to Krejci's recovery and a poor PP,but that's lousy production.

No argument from me that the production isn't what we expect as replacement for Loui, but I don't think he's been a poor player for us. His past seasons have been productive, and if we get out of him what STL got from him last year which is 45 points plus the heart and leadership, we've done okay in my book. He has 9 pts in 18, not great production, but on pace to be about where he ended up last season.

Whether that is worth the price tag we paid for him is another story, but I can't fault Backes for that one- he got what we were willing to pay him. So the question is whether a 50-60 point C/W with the intangibles he brings is value for money.

 

[BruinDust]

Coaching decisions made by pre season performances brought O'Gara,Carlo and Heinen to Boston. O'Gara was overmatched here,Heinen was friggin invisible and Carlo continued to impress. Backes' big pre season production was against other teams' Heinens and O'Garas mixed in among the vets. The staff concluded that Backes' past NHL winger production trumped what they saw during pre season and 2 games here. I don't know what else to tell you.you want him at center and the coaching staff thus far wants him at wing. I'm sure they have all the stats that we have,then some.

My take from this is coaching staff is right, the rest of us are clearly wrong, they have the same data we do, so we shouldn't question their decisions. I will not question Claude's decisions on a message board again.

 

[KrejciMVP]

I feel like Backes fit in well playing with Pasta and Marchand.

 

[DKH]

The 10% is the spice of life

DKH, I do have a question for you that I think you're in a great position to answer because you know your hockey. Pretend Sweeney didn't have Neely breathing down his neck for the playoffs and pretend Neely didn't have the owners doing it to him. Rewind back to when Rinaldo, Bekesky, Hayes, McQuaid, maybe Miller, Liles, Moore, (I'll be consistent with this), Backes, Nash and others were signed. I won't say Krug because I do believe at the time they did it it was and still is the right choice. So undo all that stuff, now give more roster spots to kids, Reilly Smith is just a struggling but young 3rd line winger, and with all that cap flexibility and probably back to back top 10 picks, picture us going forward. You get all your Carlo's and company, your expansion draft protection is rather simple given how young the team is, AND you're now in a position to take on players that other teams can't protect because you're dripping in cap space and protection slots potentially.

Now in my bizarro world version of this where we're still bringing in all your fav kids over the next 2-3 years, do you think there's a possibility for a really good foundation for a team? We've flush with draft picks we don't waste, and the canvas to paint can really go in so many directions. Honestly we know the other version of the team misses the playoffs, and we're probably 65-70% to miss this year. So the net-net on all this is a potentially way stronger team in 2018 and for sure projecting out. And 2016-2017 goes exactly the same in the playoffs (ie none). You see that as a maybe?

good stuff

I think Sweeney is operating in the do the best for the Bruins long term while obviously trying to do a 2015-6 San Jose Sharks. He's likely safe even if they end up at 95 points and 9th place.

They/he are in a precarious spot- they are half way to being good and half way to being bad. Going all in or all out makes no sense. They have a core and they have picks so the course they have chosen I agree with.

I'd say it's probably 50/50 they make it- because of health would be why they don't. They aren't deep and losing Rask or Chara would take away a huge chunk of their defensive side.

The core forwards other than Pasta and Marchand are all at least 30.

If I had to bet I'd say they have a 70% shot at being in the 90-99 point range. If you split it you are at 95 and we know what that usually entails

I did not like what I considered excess overpayments at the deadline in the form of what I judged extra picks in the Stempniak and Liles deals. My view may be way off

I understand keeping Loui without getting players back- ie Shattenkirk. First place team kind of backed them into keeping him. Unless you get multiple first round picks I don't know how you sell trading him for nothing to help know to the players and the season ticket holders.

I'd just keep playing and see what January 1st brings....all those prospects are adding miles and experience and they only need to hit on a couple like Carlo and Pastrnak and they may have something

 

[DKH]

My take from this is coaching staff is right, the rest of us are clearly wrong, they have the same data we do, so we shouldn't question their decisions. I will not question Claude's decisions on a message board again.

I could write a book on questioning Claude's decisions.

Him choosing a broken down 1 skate in the pond Stephane Yelle forcing Chiarelli to waive Nate Thompson was unbelievable. History shows I was correct. Losing him for nothing was ABSURDLY absurd.

Oh and he sends Sobotka to Providence that same time when he was with Wheeler the second best guy in camp

Under Claude

Jags 0 goals in 22 playoff games
Seguin 1 goal in last 27 games a Bruins

Wheeler a healthy scratch
Marchand 0 G 1 A 20 Games
Krejci 0 G 33 Games

Hamilton calls agent or parents every night over Claude

He's a great coach but many of these guys are scared ****less of him and between his defensive system and love for vets it's ok to question him

I actually think Claude is getting better as a coach

 

[Boston Bruno]

I feel like Backes fit in well playing with Pasta and Marchand.

I dont disagree, but the sample size was small to make that drastic of a permanent shift.

To take Marchand away from Bergeron is borderline heresy.

On Backes,
I feel like Backes has under performed, much like Krecji, Bergeron and Krug.
They get the cash, they can have the feet put to the fire.

May not be "their fault" GMs give out contracts, but come on - lets go with a little consistency.

I will say of the 4 I mentioned, Backes has been the better of them but still leaves fans wanting.

 

[EverettMike]

good stuff

I think Sweeney is operating in the do the best for the Bruins long term while obviously trying to do a 2015-6 San Jose Sharks. He's likely safe even if they end up at 95 points and 9th place.

They/he are in a precarious spot- they are half way to being good and half way to being bad. Going all in or all out makes no sense. They have a core and they have picks so the course they have chosen I agree with.

I'd say it's probably 50/50 they make it- because of health would be why they don't. They aren't deep and losing Rask or Chara would take away a huge chunk of their defensive side.

The core forwards other than Pasta and Marchand are all at least 30.

If I had to bet I'd say they have a 70% shot at being in the 90-99 point range. If you split it you are at 95 and we know what that usually entails

I did not like what I considered excess overpayments at the deadline in the form of what I judged extra picks in the Stempniak and Liles deals. My view may be way off

I understand keeping Loui without getting players back- ie Shattenkirk. First place team kind of backed them into keeping him. Unless you get multiple first round picks I don't know how you sell trading him for nothing to help know to the players and the season ticket holders.

I'd just keep playing and see what January 1st brings....all those prospects are adding miles and experience and they only need to hit on a couple like Carlo and Pastrnak and they may have something

Wrong.

On February 28th the Bruins were third in the division. Florida and Tampa were both ahead of them (both had played one fewer game).

On February 29th the Bruins were also behind Detroit.

On March 1st they jumped back ahead of Detroit.

Unless you weren't being literal and just meant they were first place in your heart, what you said was factually wrong.

 

[JAD]

I believe it will take Backes at least 50 games to find his grove in Boston. It seems (and this may or may not be factual ) but it seems that when players first arrive in Boston after playing for another team it takes a while for them to adjust to the 'system'. In the long run I think Backes' production will increase, but for now I think he is trying to find balance between his offensive abilities and his defensive positioning and responsibilities.

 

[DKH]

Just an update on March 13, 2016 the Bruins were 1st in Division and 2nd in Conference I'd like to thank you for forwarding me that nugget and I agree it would be a huge (dump) to Bergeron, Marchand and the rest to pull the plug on the season for draft picks or prospects that wouldn't help immediately

I agree on all points

 

[LSCII]

Just an update on March 13, 2016 the Bruins were 1st in Division and 2nd in Conference I'd like to thank you for forwarding me that nugget and I agree it would be a huge (dump) to Bergeron, Marchand and the rest to pull the plug on the season for draft picks or prospects that wouldn't help immediately

I agree on all points

And that still would have been 2 weeks AFTER the trade deadline last year, no?

 

[EverettMike]

And that still would have been 2 weeks AFTER the trade deadline last year, no?

You don't get it. The standings two-and-a-half weeks later justifies the trade deadline moves, but the standings AT THE END OF THE ****ING SEASON don't matter at all.

 

[DKH]

And that still would have been 2 weeks AFTER the trade deadline last year, no?

Agree - pretty amazing they were first in mid March and missed

Lose on SO last game and they finish 7th

I can't speak for Bergeron or his teammates but if they traded Loui when they were a potential 2 seed for futures I'd ask for a trade.

This team isn't committed if they did that

 

[BNHL]

My take from this is coaching staff is right, the rest of us are clearly wrong, they have the same data we do, so we shouldn't question their decisions. I will not question Claude's decisions on a message board again.

First and foremost you brought up coaching decisions first;"Well you should let NHL coaches know so they stop basing any decisions on it.

So how come when it leads to teams making good decisions, see Brandon Carlo for example, pre-season has value. Or was the coaching staff making a good decision just a fluke?"

Secondly,I do believe that in the vast majority of situations,the coaching staff has much more info than we do to in which to base decisions,so I think they are right much more than most fans. I have no communication with Carlo,his former coaches,trainers or present coaches to get informed about his makeup,I do not see him in the weight room or at practice. I only know what I saw at a couple of pre season games but they had much more.

Maybe they are wrong about Backes but maybe they don't see any other viable options. As of now they disagree with you.

 

[JAD]

Just an update on March 13, 2016 the Bruins were 1st in Division and 2nd in Conference I'd like to thank you for forwarding me that nugget and I agree it would be a huge (dump) to Bergeron, Marchand and the rest to pull the plug on the season for draft picks or prospects that wouldn't help immediately

I agree on all points

Have to agree (and I did at the time ) because of where the Bruins where in standings near the trade deadline combined with the absolute possibility of making the playoffs (team moral and all the other intangibles that go with it ) - they could not trade Loui unless they where going get back an immediate impact player (and definitely not for futures). At that point Loui must be viewed as a rental by the team ( no assets lost to aquire him) and they retain the possibility of working out a contract extension. We know the rest of that story - each went their separate ways.

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

I like Backes and glad he's on the team.