How Low Can You Go?

[smithformeragent]

Steve Miller said you've got to go through hell before you get to heaven.

My question for the LF is this; How bad does team need to get?

Let me frame it. I heard Felger say today that this team absolutely needs to qualify for the playoffs next year in order to save face and salvage the brand. Respectability is a term that gets brought up. The idea of three consecutive DNQs is unacceptable to many.

I totally disagree with that mentality. I'm in favor of taking a step or multiple steps back in order to rebuild this thing the right way. They tried slapping a bandaid on this thing and seeing what happens. Again, this roster projects to be worse next year than it was the previous year.

How bad are you willing to be and how long a rebuild are you as a fan willing to endorse? this team missed the playoffs in the post lockout season of 2005/2006 and the subsequent Dave Lewis season of 06/07. That 06/07 season saw the changing of the guard with the Chiarelli regime and bringing in Chara and Savard. The next season they add Clode and give the Canadiens a run for their money in the playoffs. Respectability was achieved in year 2. By year 3, they were regular season juggernauts, coming within a point of the Presidents' Trophy.

Do you think they can reload on the fly? If not, what is your rebuild model? I don't think anyone wants to see an Edmonton Oilers like run of failure, but would a bottom 5 finish next year be the worst thing for this club? Wouldn't it be a better thing than finishing 9-11th in the conference?

I'm willing to sit through multiple bad seasons and I'm willing to deal major pieces, meaning anyone on this roster including Bergeron.

 

[ReggieMoto]

I am 100% against blowing the team up. There are far too many good pieces in place to burn it all down. In my view the only problem is with the defense. Fix the blue line first then tinker to fine tune.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Steve Miller said you've got to go through hell before you get to heaven.

My question for the LF is this; How bad does team need to get?

Let me frame it. I heard Felger say today that this team absolutely needs to qualify for the playoffs next year in order to save face and salvage the brand. Respectability is a term that gets brought up. The idea of three consecutive DNQs is unacceptable to many.

I totally disagree with that mentality. I'm in favor of taking a step or multiple steps back in order to rebuild this thing the right way. They tried slapping a bandaid on this thing and seeing what happens. Again, this roster projects to be worse next year than it was the previous year.

How bad are you willing to be and how long a rebuild are you as a fan willing to endorse? this team missed the playoffs in the post lockout season of 2005/2006 and the subsequent Dave Lewis season of 06/07. That 06/07 season saw the changing of the guard with the Chiarelli regime and bringing in Chara and Savard. The next season they add Clode and give the Canadiens a run for their money in the playoffs. Respectability was achieved in year 2. By year 3, they were regular season juggernauts, coming within a point of the Presidents' Trophy.

Do you think they can reload on the fly? If not, what is your rebuild model? I don't think anyone wants to see an Edmonton Oilers like run of failure, but would a bottom 5 finish next year be the worst thing for this club? Wouldn't it be a better thing than finishing 9-11th in the conference?

I'm willing to sit through multiple bad seasons and I'm willing to deal major pieces, meaning anyone on this roster including Bergeron.

That's very gracious of you.

I'm 63. I'm not willing to sit through any more bad seasons. However, it seems inevitable.

 

[BB88]

I was ready/wanted this season to be painfull, develop prospects, fix the issues throughout the year, add a high end/elite prospect and make moves in the offseason (2016) and start fighting back, I thought they could do it with wasting just 1 year of prime of Bergeron/Rask/Marchand.


If they say we are going to do full rebuild and leave Bergeron to lead the youngsters I'd be absolutely fine with it, but how do you do it with Chias gift contracts.
This mediocrity can't continue, I don't want to see a team that fights for a playoff spot year after year but you already know before the season starts they don't even have a chance, we can't have another season where more talent walks out than they are able to add.

But if they can find away to make a trade for elite D-prospect/young D-player and avoid full rebuild that would be great also.

 

[BruinDust]

Steve Miller said you've got to go through hell before you get to heaven.

My question for the LF is this; How bad does team need to get?

Let me frame it. I heard Felger say today that this team absolutely needs to qualify for the playoffs next year in order to save face and salvage the brand. Respectability is a term that gets brought up. The idea of three consecutive DNQs is unacceptable to many.

I totally disagree with that mentality. I'm in favor of taking a step or multiple steps back in order to rebuild this thing the right way. They tried slapping a bandaid on this thing and seeing what happens. Again, this roster projects to be worse next year than it was the previous year.

How bad are you willing to be and how long a rebuild are you as a fan willing to endorse? this team missed the playoffs in the post lockout season of 2005/2006 and the subsequent Dave Lewis season of 06/07. That 06/07 season saw the changing of the guard with the Chiarelli regime and bringing in Chara and Savard. The next season they add Clode and give the Canadiens a run for their money in the playoffs. Respectability was achieved in year 2. By year 3, they were regular season juggernauts, coming within a point of the Presidents' Trophy.

Do you think they can reload on the fly? If not, what is your rebuild model? I don't think anyone wants to see an Edmonton Oilers like run of failure, but would a bottom 5 finish next year be the worst thing for this club? Wouldn't it be a better thing than finishing 9-11th in the conference?

I'm willing to sit through multiple bad seasons and I'm willing to deal major pieces, meaning anyone on this roster including Bergeron.

3 DNQs in a row hasn't happened to this franchise since Bobby Orr's rookie year (66-67 when they DNQ'd for the last of 8 straight DNQs).

A DNQ three-peat would be a total embarrassment to this franchise.

 

[TheBigBadB]

Unfortunately they can't do a full rebuild, too many NMC and NTC. They will get 10 cent to the dollar trying to trade these guys. So we are going to be stuck in mediocrity for awhile.

 

[CDonns]

For me it's picking a direction and figuring out if it's time go full rebuild or look for young defenseman who help sooner rather than later and shake up the core. Right now we are stuck in no man's land. I prefer the latter. We have enough assets to fix the defense and a deep prospect pool to possibly rebuild on the fly. We should be able to compete until Bergeron's twilight years if the defense is fixed immediately.

 

[TwineTickler]

I am 100% against blowing the team up. There are far too many good pieces in place to burn it all down. In my view the only problem is with the defense. Fix the blue line first then tinker to fine tune.

100% with you. I'm okay with moving some pieces if you think it benefits the team and makes sense moving forward, but Bergeron deserves to be on a title contender here before he exits his prime. Wasting his early 30s would be really really depressing. He doesn't deserve that and there are pieces in place. Retool the D, get rid of the guys you dont like and bring in some guys you think will fit better.

 

[smithformeragent]

Do you have the capital and cap space to bring the defense to a contending level over the course of one to two years?

Take into consideration Chara's decline. That make it realistic that you need to bring in three top four defensemen. Can you do that and still afford to pay Marchand?

If not, and your concern is wasting Bergeron's prime, then do you consider moving him assuming that he is on board?

 

[BruinDust]

Unfortunately they can't do a full rebuild, too many NMC and NTC. They will get 10 cent to the dollar trying to trade these guys. So we are going to be stuck in mediocrity for awhile.

If they are on the verge of missing next year's playoffs around the trade deadline, than a full-blown rebuild is the only way to go.

3 DNQs in a row and still trying to re-tool the Bruins will be an absolute joke.

 

[BruinDust]

Do you have the capital and cap space to bring the defense to a contending level over the course of one to two years?

Take into consideration Chara's decline. That make it realistic that you need to bring in three top four defensemen. Can you do that and still afford to pay Marchand?

If not, and your concern is wasting Bergeron's prime, then do you consider moving him assuming that he is on board?

Getting 3 to go with Chara (whether one of those 3 is Krug) will be very hard to do asset wise and cap wise.

Bruins absolutely need one young D on a cheap contract to step up and solidify a Top 4 job.

Also can you get a couple Top 4 D without giving them NMCs. Assuming you can, then you can realistically go with 4 D next year making north of 5 mil per, and your cap problem could be solve the following summer as one of them would likely be claimed in the expansion draft. Sucks to lose a valuable asset for free but it would clear up the cap space for Marchand's raise.

 

[BB88]

Like someone said before
Chychrun+Yandle could be a game changing offseason, but how do you make it happen and is Sweeney trying to make it happen?

 

[Fenway]

Steve Miller said you've got to go through hell before you get to heaven.

My question for the LF is this; How bad does team need to get?

Let me frame it. I heard Felger say today that this team absolutely needs to qualify for the playoffs next year in order to save face and salvage the brand. Respectability is a term that gets brought up. The idea of three consecutive DNQs is unacceptable to many.

I totally disagree with that mentality. I'm in favor of taking a step or multiple steps back in order to rebuild this thing the right way. They tried slapping a bandaid on this thing and seeing what happens. Again, this roster projects to be worse next year than it was the previous year.

How bad are you willing to be and how long a rebuild are you as a fan willing to endorse? this team missed the playoffs in the post lockout season of 2005/2006 and the subsequent Dave Lewis season of 06/07. That 06/07 season saw the changing of the guard with the Chiarelli regime and bringing in Chara and Savard. The next season they add Clode and give the Canadiens a run for their money in the playoffs. Respectability was achieved in year 2. By year 3, they were regular season juggernauts, coming within a point of the Presidents' Trophy.

Do you think they can reload on the fly? If not, what is your rebuild model? I don't think anyone wants to see an Edmonton Oilers like run of failure, but would a bottom 5 finish next year be the worst thing for this club? Wouldn't it be a better thing than finishing 9-11th in the conference?

I'm willing to sit through multiple bad seasons and I'm willing to deal major pieces, meaning anyone on this roster including Bergeron.

 

[Bad Puck Bounce]

3 DNQ's would probably be an entire front office clearing and a whole new coaching staff.

Don't want it to come to that at all.

 

[CDonns]

Do you have the capital and cap space to bring the defense to a contending level over the course of one to two years?

Take into consideration Chara's decline. That make it realistic that you need to bring in three top four defensemen. Can you do that and still afford to pay Marchand?

If not, and your concern is wasting Bergeron's prime, then do you consider moving him assuming that he is on board?

We have to assume C. Miller, O'Gara, Zboril, Lauzon, or Carlo could grow into a top 4 dman. The cap doesn't concern me if Seids is gone before the end of next year, we don't go for one of the top wingers in the summer, or if Krejci were to be moved. Marchand should be locked up till 2022 so his contract ends with Bergeron's and you should have flexibility with Spooner and Pastrnak. I'd be interested in acquiring Yak if the price ain't too bad.

 

[CDonns]

Like someone said before
Chychrun+Yandle could be a game changing offseason, but how do you make it happen and is Sweeney trying to make it happen?

If Colombus, Calgary, or Winnipeg were at 5 and he is available it should make it easier as they all seem to have already good defensive cores for the future.

 

[whatsbruin]

Sweeney definitely has his work cut out for him. It will be very hard to make the needed changes due to the contracts that several of the players you want gone have. If they do miss a 3rd year, they
need to make massive strides in the rebuild. Another year like this, where they missed and have little to show for a rebuild would be terrible.

I think you keep Chara, Krug, McQuaid, and maybe Liles. Try to get 2 of the best D'men you can, hopefully at least #3's, and if possible get a 3rd D'man and ship out
Liles. I'd be happy with Chara as a #4, and not sure you can trade McQuaid. I'm hoping some of his bad play at the end of the year was due to his concussion.
Honestly don't know about C. Miller nor Morrow. After I've typed this I see the D
is almost the same as this year, so that isn't good. I guess dump McQuaid and go
with the best of C. Miller and Morrow.

Pretty sure Eriksson is gone, so you need a top line winger.
Look to improve on Stemp, but have him as a back up.
I'd look for a 3rd line winger and go with Accari and Vatrano on the 4th.
Vatrano may become a good nhl'r, but I wouldn't count on it for next year.

Forwards

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Do you have the capital and cap space to bring the defense to a contending level over the course of one to two years?

Take into consideration Chara's decline. That make it realistic that you need to bring in three top four defensemen. Can you do that and still afford to pay Marchand?

If not, and your concern is wasting Bergeron's prime, then do you consider moving him assuming that he is on board?

Not really.

Have to step in it somewhere along the line.

 

[njbruin*]

Do you have the capital and cap space to bring the defense to a contending level over the course of one to two years?

Take into consideration Chara's decline. That make it realistic that you need to bring in three top four defensemen. Can you do that and still afford to pay Marchand?

If not, and your concern is wasting Bergeron's prime, then do you consider moving him assuming that he is on board?

I think someone has to go and I'm warming up to the idea that Rask might offer the best return for the Bruins.

 

[smithformeragent]

I think someone has to go and I'm warming up to the idea that Rask might offer the best return for the Bruins.

No snark intended;

Which clubs can/would take on a $7 per year goalie?

I feel like top of the line starting goalies are all but impossible to move in the cap world.

 

[FROMSHORETOCHARA]

I think someone has to go and I'm warming up to the idea that Rask might offer the best return for the Bruins.

They may move rask but the return for a goalie won't be great especially when you back out the assets they'll need to trade for....another goalie. Since no gm is going to stake his job on Malcolm sub an or some other kid replacing Rask.

 

[njbruin*]

No snark intended;

Which clubs can/would take on a $7 per year goalie?

I feel like top of the line starting goalies are all but impossible to move in the cap world.

Oh I realize its a tough trade but Krejci's going nowhere especially with the hip surgery. They won't move Bergy, Chara won't waive his NTC so its either Marchy or Rask. I feel Rask is more replaceable at a cheaper contract , question is what team is desperate enough for a netminder to go that route - Dallas ???, Philly ???

 

[Ice Nine]

Steve Miller said you've got to go through hell before you get to heaven.

My question for the LF is this; How bad does team need to get?

Let me frame it. I heard Felger say today that this team absolutely needs to qualify for the playoffs next year in order to save face and salvage the brand. Respectability is a term that gets brought up. The idea of three consecutive DNQs is unacceptable to many.

I totally disagree with that mentality. I'm in favor of taking a step or multiple steps back in order to rebuild this thing the right way. They tried slapping a bandaid on this thing and seeing what happens. Again, this roster projects to be worse next year than it was the previous year.

How bad are you willing to be and how long a rebuild are you as a fan willing to endorse? this team missed the playoffs in the post lockout season of 2005/2006 and the subsequent Dave Lewis season of 06/07. That 06/07 season saw the changing of the guard with the Chiarelli regime and bringing in Chara and Savard. The next season they add Clode and give the Canadiens a run for their money in the playoffs. Respectability was achieved in year 2. By year 3, they were regular season juggernauts, coming within a point of the Presidents' Trophy.

Do you think they can reload on the fly? If not, what is your rebuild model? I don't think anyone wants to see an Edmonton Oilers like run of failure, but would a bottom 5 finish next year be the worst thing for this club? Wouldn't it be a better thing than finishing 9-11th in the conference?

I'm willing to sit through multiple bad seasons and I'm willing to deal major pieces, meaning anyone on this roster including Bergeron.

I have to say I strongly agree.

I despise a management philosophy that aims simply to be "good enough" to make the playoffs, but has no chance at actually contending.... and doing so either for a few extra bucks at the gate or for "respectability", as Felger says, with whom and for what reason I have no idea.

I would much more prefer doing badly for 2-3 years in order to retool/rebuild a championship contending side, than simply scrapping in or out of the playoff picture year in and out.

This was a year where we could have played mainly kids and been prepared to to not only miss the post-season, but finish badly with the aim to come back hard in a year, with top draft pics and other assets acquired. Instead, we were buyers at the deadline, when he had absolutely no chance at a Cup win, and now we're in the worst possible season position: no post-season but also low draft pic.

I don't think we're quite at the full rebuild stage, but after icing two mediocre teams these last seasons, with low pics again, Sweeney is going to have to move some mountains to address the significant talent gap on this Not Very Good Bruins Team (tm).

 

[Burt Reynolds]

I think someone has to go and I'm warming up to the idea that Rask might offer the best return for the Bruins.

Isn't goalie trade value traditionally very low? and with him making what he does for as long as he does, I'm not sure we get much beyond a 1st+

 

[smithformeragent]

Oh I realize its a tough trade but Krejci's going nowhere especially with the hip surgery. They won't move Bergy, Chara won't waive his NTC so its either Marchy or Rask. I feel Rask is more replaceable at a cheaper contract , question is what team is desperate enough for a netminder to go that route - Dallas ???, Philly ???

I think the Dallas example is a good one. Think high achieving regular season teams that fold in the playoffs and feel that a legitimate top 5 franchise goalie can be the difference maker. I suppose the next question becomes "What is the return?". I'm not as much concerned about who replaces Rask. If you're going into rebuild mode, that becomes redundant to me.