Management Jim Montgomery

[TD Charlie]

Can Monty put Coyle between Pastrnak and Coyle? That would be a consistently dangerous line.


I like Brind'Amour for sure. Not ready to give up on Montgomery yet but if Rod was available, hell yes.

I dont think that's possible. Now if you mean Marchand Coyle Pastrnak, sure. I believe that did happen off and on for much of game 5

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

I dont think that's possible. Now if you mean Marchand Coyle Pastrnak, sure. I believe that did happen off and on for much of game 5

If he was a good coach, he could do it...

My bad, I do want to see that line together for the game. I thought it was Heinen up there but I'm all sorts of jumbled I guess.

 

[GordonHowe]

Brazeau for Beecher isn't the reason they lost but I still have a hard time understanding that move.

We all know the playoffs is a ramped up pace. More physical, more dump-and-chase. Here's Brazeau who speed-wise is borderline for an NHL player, no past history to show he can handle the increased pace. No games of NHL playoff experience period. Coming off an injury. I thought there was a clear risk to dressing him and minimal reward. I just didn't see what the rational was to dress him and sit a (supposedly) healthy player from a winning line-up.

Do you see the rational now?

Does anyone?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

He also completely reconfigured the lines. I thought Debrusk-Zacha-Pastrnak and Marchand-Coyle-Geekie looked really good in games 3 and 4. No need to stray from that. But yes, the effort from the players was also abysmal

Not just the effort.

The execution.

Sean McDonough and Ray Ferrero were actually joking about how terrible Boston was. Said they couldn't make a 5-foot pass.

 

[UncleRico]

Monty is 0-4 in elimination games...I don't have faith in this guy. I'd love for him to prove me wrong Thursday.

They’ll win the series, but to your point

I don’t think it’s a Montgomery problem. This has spanned multiple coaches at this point. It’s a DNA of the team thing.

 

[NDiesel]

They’ll win the series, but to your point

I don’t think it’s a Montgomery problem. This has spanned multiple coaches at this point. It’s a DNA of the team thing.

We rarely are in agreement on a lot of topics but I always appreciate you being one of the few to call out the players instead of scapegoating the coach.

There's no excuse for the piss poor effort last night and it happens often enough that I'm not sure how anyone can blame it on lineup decisions and not the players continually showing up to play only when they feel like it.

 

[UncleRico]

We rarely are in agreement on a lot of topics but I always appreciate you being one of the few to call out the players instead of scapegoating the coach.

There's no excuse for the piss poor effort last night and it happens often enough that I'm not sure how anyone can blame it on lineup decisions and not the players continually showing up to play only when they feel like it.

That’s exactly what it is to me, is effort. I don’t put lack of effort on the coach. The offense took the first 45-50 minutes of the game off, turned it on for 10-15 minutes and came out flat in OT.

Should be able to score 2 goals in regulation for a win. Offense was a complete no show.

 

[stevebeans]

They’ll win the series, but to your point

I don’t think it’s a Montgomery problem. This has spanned multiple coaches at this point. It’s a DNA of the team thing.

Results speak for themselves. This team has been absolutely terrible in the postseason since the early teens. In 18-19 they were gifted the easiest road to the cup finals they’ve probably ever had (and still choked to a lesser Blues team)

I thought it was Bruce, but then last season they did it again. Crushed the regular season and then played soft when it mattered (meanwhile, Bruce wins the cup).

I also thought it had to do with the even tempered core of Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, etc but they’re also gone and the team still plays lifeless. (Great guys and players but they strike me as “okey dokey!” leaders who aren’t going to call people out)

Could it be pasta? He’s been virtually invisible this series and since the start of the 2019 playoffs, these are his numbers

64gp - 29 goals. He has had 5 multi goal games in that stretch which account for 11 of them. That means since the start of the 2019 playoffs, he’s had 59 games with 18 goals.

That also means he has gone scoreless in 41 of those games.

Kind of brutal for the 8th highest paid player in the league

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Brazeau for Beecher isn't the reason they lost but I still have a hard time understanding that move.

We all know the playoffs is a ramped up pace. More physical, more dump-and-chase. Here's Brazeau who speed-wise is borderline for an NHL player, no past history to show he can handle the increased pace. No games of NHL playoff experience period. Coming off an injury. I thought there was a clear risk to dressing him and minimal reward. I just didn't see what the rational was to dress him and sit a (supposedly) healthy player from a winning line-up.

Before he was injured, Brazeau looked like a player that could make an impact, rather than a 4th liner. Monty probably wanted to see if he could help the offense with his combo of good hands and size. I agree, replacing Beecher was questionable. Considering the terrible time the B's had on faceoffs, he has to be thinking about putting Beecher back in.

 

[Number8]

Amazing how anyone could have watched that performance and blame the coach because he swapped out a 4th liner and number 6 defenseman.

Those changes impacted speed, faceoff success, correct alignment of D pairs vis an vis RD/LD, and the ability to get the puck out of the D zone. And to be fair, anyone looking at the changes pre-game would have been able to see that likely outcome.

Hard to imagine you didn’t see shortcomings in those areas last night. Granted there were many others as well — too many to mention.

My question to you is, what was the objective behind making those changes and, perhaps more importantly, why make them at this juncture of the series?

I’m open to a rationale argument but am being truthful in saying I haven’t seen any to date.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Amazing how anyone could have watched that performance and blame the coach because he swapped out a 4th liner and number 6 defenseman.

The way I see it Monty has made a couple of questionable decisions that were probably unhelpful. It's a factor. But on the list of reasons why the Bruins lost G5 it's a fair way down.

Can the coach do better? Yes. Can the players? Far more emphatically so.

 

[SPLBRUIN]

The way I see it Monty has made a couple of questionable decisions that were probably unhelpful. It's a factor. But on the list of reasons why the Bruins lost G5 it's a fair way down.

Can the coach do better? Yes. Can the players? Far more emphatically so.

In my opinion the coaches job is to give his team the best possible chance to win, that's all he can do. Does anybody think that those changes he made last night put them in that position. The moves almost appeared desperate if it wasn't for the fact Boston was in complete control of the series. The team immediately became much slower and worst on Faceoffs up front and smaller and softer on D. If Boston loses this series he has given Sweeney strong grounds to fire him, back to back embarrassing playoff collapses will do that.

 

[duffy]

Before he was injured, Brazeau looked like a player that could make an impact, rather than a 4th liner. Monty probably wanted to see if he could help the offense with his combo of good hands and size. I agree, replacing Beecher was questionable. Considering the terrible time the B's had on faceoffs, he has to be thinking about putting Beecher back in.

Hard to say what he's thinking. He makes changes just for change it seems. If the Bruins lose this series after going up 3-1 like last year, then I think the coach has to go!

 

[DominicT]

Hard to say what he's thinking. He makes changes just for change it seems. If the Bruins lose this series after going up 3-1 like last year, then I think the coach has to go!

The coach that loses this series will be gone.

No doubt in my mind.

 

[KnightofBoston]

The coach that loses this series will be gone.

No doubt in my mind.

Do you think that was a given either way or true now for Monty simply because they went up 3-1, and, optics and all that?

 

[DominicT]

Do you think that was a given either way or true now for Monty simply because they went up 3-1, and, optics and all that?

I don't think it was a given. I felt someone needed to pay for last year, even if it was an assistant coach.

But two years in a row? Losing after being up 3-1, yeah the coach needs to go. Its not the same team, but the same coach, so yeah, someone needs to pay.

That said, I still think they win the series and Keefe is the one fired.

 

[KnightofBoston]

I don't think it was a given. I felt someone needed to pay for last year, even if it was an assistant coach.

But two years in a row? Losing after being up 3-1, yeah the coach needs to go. Its not the same team, but the same coach, so yeah, someone needs to pay.

That said, I still think they win the series and Keefe is the one fired.

Agreed, from start to finish

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I don't think it was a given. I felt someone needed to pay for last year, even if it was an assistant coach.

But two years in a row? Losing after being up 3-1, yeah the coach needs to go. Its not the same team, but the same coach, so yeah, someone needs to pay.

That said, I still think they win the series and Keefe is the one fired.

Do you think Sweeney and/or Neely have any say in the changes Monty makes?

If they do (and I would think they must) wouldn't it be difficult to justify firing him because of those changes?

 

[bruinmann77]

Monty is gone if the lose this series

 

[Dr Quincy]

I don't think it was a given. I felt someone needed to pay for last year, even if it was an assistant coach.

But two years in a row? Losing after being up 3-1, yeah the coach needs to go. Its not the same team, but the same coach, so yeah, someone needs to pay.

That said, I still think they win the series and Keefe is the one fired.

Same top 2 Cs. One of whom has zero goals in 17 career playoff games, the other has 1 goal in his last 12 playoff games.

Maybe the GM who decided to go with these 2 "top 6" Cs should go.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Do you think Sweeney and/or Neely have any say in the changes Monty makes?

If they do (and I would think they must) wouldn't it be difficult to justify firing him because of those changes?

Why would you feel they must, when they've had three coaches now that haven't made a peep about interference with their playoff roster decisions?

Obviously, Sweeney makes the calls on who gets sent to and from Providence during the season, but you seem to be implying something different.

 

[SPLBRUIN]

Do you think Sweeney and/or Neely have any say in the changes Monty makes?

If they do (and I would think they must) wouldn't it be difficult to justify firing him because of those changes?

I can't see any world in which Sweeney or Neely encouraged/told Monty to put in Brazeau in game 5. That would likely also apply to Gryz.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Those changes impacted speed, faceoff success, correct alignment of D pairs vis an vis RD/LD, and the ability to get the puck out of the D zone. And to be fair, anyone looking at the changes pre-game would have been able to see that likely outcome.

Hard to imagine you didn’t see shortcomings in those areas last night. Granted there were many others as well — too many to mention.

My question to you is, what was the objective behind making those changes and, perhaps more importantly, why make them at this juncture of the series?

I’m open to a rationale argument but am being truthful in saying I haven’t seen any to date.

I don't know if either Beecher or Shattenkirk are banged up.

I know Shattenkirk was not good in the first 4 games.

I believe they wanted to get Brazeau in the lineup as soon as he was healthy because of his play before the injury. Choosing Beecher to take out is certainly questionable after Zacha and Coyle were so bad on faceoffs in Game 4. But no one seems to be mentioning Beecher won 1 out 7 faceoffs in Game 3. And he was the least experienced forward in the lineup.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Why would you feel they must, when they've had three coaches now that haven't made a peep about interference with their playoff roster decisions?

Obviously, Sweeney makes the calls on who gets sent to and from Providence during the season, but you seem to be implying something different.

I'm implying that the coach talks to his GM about who he is going to put in the lineup. I don't think a coach would consider that interference. After all, the GM is his boss, right?

I can't see any world in which Sweeney or Neely encouraged/told Monty to put in Brazeau in game 5. That would likely also apply to Gryz.

No, but if Sweeney really didn't want to play either guy, I could see him convincing Monty not to do it.

 

[BlackFrancis]

I'm implying that the coach talks to his GM about who he is going to put in the lineup. I don't think a coach would consider that interference. After all, the GM is his boss, right?

I can see it as a possibility, but certainly not a must. You said Sweeney and/or Neely - two guys that, to my knowledge, have never coached an organized children's hockey game, never mind NHL - have a say on the game day roster decisions and that would somehow interfere with their ability to fire the coach in charge of that roster.

I know what you're trying to say here, but it sure seems like ascribing certainty to speculation. Charlie Jacobs is Neely's boss. Does he get a say? Big JJ? Jerry Jr.? Peggy?

I think the only must here is Montgomery hands in the roster every game day, and gets strung up as a piñata when those rosters look sketchy. I don't think it matters who you or I or anyone else feels more richly deserves to have the candy beaten out of them.