Player Discussion Jake DeBrusk VII

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.

The numbers haven’t looked good for Jake DeBrusk. In the thick of his seventh NHL season, the Bruins winger is paid first and foremost to score goals, because, well, that’s what scorers are paid to do. That’s why DeBrusk makes $4 million a year.

After Tuesday night’s 4-3 overtime loss to the Wild at TD Garden, however, the 27-year-old DeBrusk hasa mere four goals in 29 games. Not nearly good enough for a guy who lines up most nights with the club’s most talented and productive forwards and averages just over 17 minutes of ice time.

Four goals. For one of the league’s fastest skaters. For a guy who last season equaled his career high for goals (27) and established a career high in points (50).

Where’d that Jake DeBrusk go?

As of Tuesday morning, 267 NHLers — an average of more than eight per team — had more goals than DeBrusk. Seven Bruinshad more than four , including rookie pivot Matt Poitras (five), who boarded a flight Monday night to play in the World Junior Championship.

By coach Jim Montgomery’s eye, what he’s seeing from DeBrusk is not all bad. The second-year Bruins bench boss believes in the power of positivity.

Montgomery would find some redeemable touch in the hands that Venus de Milo lost. It’s why guys like playing for him. The ugly is just the starting point of beauty in Monty’s world. It’s why he’s here in the wake of Bruce Cassidy, whose public player evaluations were, shall we say, decidedly blunter and edgier.

“Umm,” Montgomery mused Tuesday morning when asked if he felt DeBrusk was using his best asset, speed, to create opportunities or if DeBrusk simply was fighting the puck. “I don’t think he’s, uhhh . . . I will say that I thought last game was one of his better games of the year — as far as his habits and details. And I thought it translated with some of the [scoring] looks that he got.”

DeBrusk went 0-0–0 on Saturday during the 17:19 he logged against the Rangers. He landed four shots on net, one below his season high, so he was at least “around it,” in hockey parlance.

When he’s flying, legs in full roadrunner mode, darting in off either wing, DeBrusk can be a legit scoring threat and menace off the rush. He is not, though, one to manufacture goals down low. Staking out a piece of ice and pushing his way to the front isn’t his game.

If he could add some feisty, sandpaper presence to his game, DeBrusk might not see protracted goal droughts such as his current one or the eight-game slump to start this season (0-3–3, 15 shots on net).

Truth is, more than 400 regular-season games into his career, it’s fair to assume the DeBrusk die has been cast. He’ll get his goals his way or not at all, and this season, it’s mostly been not at all.

He once more logged 0-0–0 and landed but one shot in 17:01 vs. the Wild. Worse, his last shift set up the Wild’s OT winner. DeBrusk fired wide from the left circle with 2:13 to go, leading directly to Minnesota’s three-on-one rush up the opposite wing. All of 0:07 after DeBrusk’s misfire, Kirill Kaprizov finished off the gimme rush with the game-winner. Ouch.

“Gotta get that on net,” said Montgomery. “And I don’t like the shot selection … and I don’t like both guys [DeBrusk and Charlie Coyle] going to the net all the way to the goal line. That’s what gives up the three on one the other way.”

Somewhere recently, though, Montgomery saw DeBrusk in the right time and place, puck on his stick, cutting toward the net.

“I thought for sure he was going to wire it,” the coach recalled. “Last game? Or two games ago? I’m not sure. But it was the off wing and he came down, and I thought, ‘Oh, this is going to be a really good shot.’ And he didn’t shoot it . . . I think he thought. And when you think, in that split second, the opening to shoot is gone.”

The season’s midpoint is fast approaching. DeBrusk needs to score. Whether the issue is his legs, his hands, or a mind that thinks too much (or too little in the case of the OT miscue), the numbers are adding up to a bad season.
Who is Steven Bruinshad?
 
Sure, I'm not calling him a 30 goal guy, I'm just saying I can see it now if we let him go, he's going to go elsewhere and compliment a lineup well and hit 30, just like when Leafs let Hyman go. Seems like a guy you keep at the right price to compliment your core guys.
He might do just that. My issue is it better be a place where he has a centre who can feed him scoring chances because he can’t produce his own or drive s line. He needs that situation imo. Anyway i want him traded but he is not going to get us much with his numbers. If he continues to not score what do do? He a ufa at end of year. Do you sign him for what you said snd hope he rebounds or move on.

Who is Steven Bruinshad?
The son of mr and mrs bruinshad
 
He might do just that. My issue is it better be a place where he has a centre who can feed him scoring chances because he can’t produce his own or drive s line. He needs that situation imo. Anyway i want him traded but he is not going to get us much with his numbers. If he continues to not score what do do? He a ufa at end of year. Do you sign him for what you said snd hope he rebounds or move on.
Not every guy is going to drive a line, and most guys that do are making well over 4.5-5 mil....if you can move him for a lateral move I'd say do it, but otherwise I keep him rather than lose him for nothing and hope he bounces back.

Hell...he could score 20 the rest of the season and this conversation is pointless
 
The question again isn't if Jake can play hockey. The question is if 6+ with term to Jake makes more season than 2 to Heinen while you bank cap space to land serious impact players.

We could finally weaponize our cap space to get more picks too.

At this point, I say no way to 6+ and term. He wants to stay at his current rate and do a 4X4, no problem. He will be a good third line guy. If he's not willing to take that, then pay Heinen a little more and use him as a third liner that can play up if needed and sign/trade for a top 6 wing.

Hell...he could score 20 the rest of the season and this conversation is pointless

Yep., if he gets on a tear and ends up with 25, it changes things. But that is a big if right now. T
 
I honestly think Jake just is what he is (and that's not a bad player). He's a third liner and will occasionally go on a streak and tease people into thinking he's a reliable top winger. He can fill in on a top 6, I like Jake. If he is willing to take smaller money for longer term (say, 4 ish mil to secure 5-6 years), I do it. If he wants bigger money, he has to be moved. If he wants to role the dice, sign a 1 year contract for 5 or 6, I do that too I think.

It'll be interesting to see how that unfolds.
 
I honestly think Jake just is what he is (and that's not a bad player). He's a third liner and will occasionally go on a streak and tease people into thinking he's a reliable top winger. He can fill in on a top 6, I like Jake. If he is willing to take smaller money for longer term (say, 4 ish mil to secure 5-6 years), I do it. If he wants bigger money, he has to be moved. If he wants to role the dice, sign a 1 year contract for 5 or 6, I do that too I think.

It'll be interesting to see how that unfolds.
His d and lack of consistency make him a lousy third liner. If he was a better passer and gave a smarter, more consistent effort, he would be a good second liner since he can skate and score.
 
Last edited:
To bad Beieta
His d and lack of consistency make him a lousy third liner. If he was a better passer and gave a smarter, more consistent effort, he would be a good second liner since he can score.
so he’s a bad defensive player ?

is this you or anyone of note saying this ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Donnie Shulzhoffer
Not every guy is going to drive a line, and most guys that do are making well over 4.5-5 mil....if you can move him for a lateral move I'd say do it, but otherwise I keep him rather than lose him for nothing and hope he bounces back.

Hell...he could score 20 the rest of the season and this conversation is pointless
and I hope he does.
 
let me put it this way

This board: Coyle is not a top 6 player

also this board: Debrusk is a top 6 player

do you see why this is silly?
 
I honestly think Jake just is what he is (and that's not a bad player). He's a third liner and will occasionally go on a streak and tease people into thinking he's a reliable top winger. He can fill in on a top 6, I like Jake. If he is willing to take smaller money for longer term (say, 4 ish mil to secure 5-6 years), I do it. If he wants bigger money, he has to be moved. If he wants to role the dice, sign a 1 year contract for 5 or 6, I do that too I think.

It'll be interesting to see how that unfolds.

So is Travis Konecny a 3rd liner? Over their careers they have the same goals per game and TK has one extra assist per every 10 games.
 
So is Travis Konecny a 3rd liner? Over their careers they have the same goals per game and TK has one extra assist per every 10 games.
Konecny has over 120pts more than Debrusk in their careers and is sitting on 16 goals this year in 31 games. He also drives the play on his line. So yes, he’s a top-6 forward.

I’d say Debrusk is a top-6 IF he were more consistent. But as it is, he’s almost a Michael Ryder type. If he isn’t scoring, he’s a liability in your top-6 because he just doesn’t do anything else overly well on a consistent enough basis. And I stress the term consistent because we’ve all seen him forecheck well, have physical shifts, make a good passing play. BUT he just can’t string all those things or even one of them together in consecutive shifts enough to be a meaningful player. He almost single-handedly lost this past game for the Bruins. Time to put someone up the lineup like Beecher and put him on the 4th line til you get what you want out of him.

Say what you will about Julien and Cassidy but Monty has swung the pendulum too far in the other direction to the point it’s almost the tail wagging the dog now.
 
I’ll push back and say that DeBrusk is a top 6 player that requires a real playmaking center to be useful. Most wingers in the game require that.

I’ll also say that Coyle is a great individual player, but he and DeBrusk do not have the chemistry for DeBrusk to be a 60 point guy.

DeBrusk has always seen his point totals drop playing alongside Coyle.

IDK if this is a Coyle issue or a DeBrusk issue or both.

Coyle is having a great season, but you do not want him to be your top six center while truly contending for a cup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gordoff
Agreed, he doesn't create plays.

But he has been above average defensively.

Despite the lack of offense this season, Pasta is the only Bruins forward with a better plus/minus than Jake right now.
Since you mentioned it.
1703169500853.png
 
I’ll push back and say that DeBrusk is a top 6 player that requires a real playmaking center to be useful. Most wingers in the game require that.

I’ll also say that Coyle is a great individual player, but he and DeBrusk do not have the chemistry for DeBrusk to be a 60 point guy.

DeBrusk has always seen his point totals drop playing alongside Coyle.

IDK if this is a Coyle issue or a DeBrusk issue or both.

Coyle is having a great season, but you do not want him to be your top six center while truly contending for a cup.

Don't think this is true at all.

DeBrusk scores mainly on scrambles in front, tip-ins or on individual rushes. Not the type to score off setups like Pasta or Marchand do. Like any other winger, his production wil probably be better if he's playing with a better center. Bergeron wasn't a real playmaker but Jake produced pretty well with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBruins
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad