Player Discussion Mason Lohrei

[Dennis Bonvie]

It doesn’t help that he’s paired with a plug all the time now either.

He struggled defensively at Green Bay and figured it out year 2. He struggled defensively at OSU and figured it out. His track record is to rise to the occasion at each level.

Bruins should be giving him more rope not less.

Ah, its the guy he plays with argument.

Peeke lovers could probably say the same.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Ah, its the guy he plays with argument.

Peeke lovers could probably say the same.

Don’t the guys he plays with directly influence his plus/minus, since that’s how you measure players?

 

[hrdpuk]

Ah, its the guy he plays with argument.

Peeke lovers could probably say the same.

D is a pair

 

[mjhfb]

Can't say I've been a fan of him paired with Andrew Peeke.

He's done his best work with McAvoy but I could probably say that about every LD on the team with maybe the exception of Hampus.

I can see why they wouldn't want Lohrei on the top pair going against other teams best lines.

You'd think Lohrei and Carlo would work well but didn't seem to be the case in a small sample size.

It think that's a problem, similar to the forward lines - there just hasn't been any pairings that everyone can agree are great and want to leave alone. A good game here, a stretch there, but not much chemistry overall. Like the forwards.

 

[mar2kbos]

He needed more time in Providence. His defense game is inexperienced. He has a forwards mindset, and they are allowed to make mistakes for risks because defense can cover for them. When you are one of the last guys back flipping it out is the safest smartest play. That’s when the forward mind comes out in Lorhei when he tries risky moves at the wrong times. A couple of years in Providence drilling defense in him would have helped.

 

[BruinDust]

It think that's a problem, similar to the forward lines - there just hasn't been any pairings that everyone can agree are great and want to leave alone. A good game here, a stretch there, but not much chemistry overall. Like the forwards.

It's been musical chairs all season trying to find lines/pairings that work. Far cry from the Claude Julien days when it was the same lines/pairings night after night.

 

[BiteThisBurrows]

Well when you are winning you leave it the same and if you're losing you tinker. Julien was winning.

Problem with Lohrei is he's the only D man who is actually an offensive threat and so with such an anemic offense you kind of have to play him to try to generate something and so D mistakes will happen. It's a Catch 22.

 

[PlayMakers]

Can't say I've been a fan of him paired with Andrew Peeke.

He's done his best work with McAvoy but I could probably say that about every LD on the team with maybe the exception of Hampus.

I can see why they wouldn't want Lohrei on the top pair going against other teams best lines.

You'd think Lohrei and Carlo would work well but didn't seem to be the case in a small sample size.

They may be starting to view Peeke as their #2RD. Last night, in what was a big game for Boston, Carlo played 16 minutes while Peeke played 18.

Or maybe they're seeing what life would look like without Carlo?

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Don’t the guys he plays with directly influence his plus/minus, since that’s how you measure players?

Yes, but given Lohrei is -16 and no other Bruins defender is worse than -4, I think any of his D partners could comfortably point in his direction and say "Mason buddy, the problem is you". Not that they would of course, and of course it's not that simple and none of the others are blameless either, far from it. But it's very safe to say that right now he's the worst defender in his own end on the team. Which, as I've said up thread, is not me writing him off or thinking the Bs shouldn't persevere with him. It's just acknowledging current reality.

That said, the team's play as a whole is definitely relevant. If the Bruins could score and win more it'd be easier to cover defensive lapses, if the rest of the team played better defensively Lohrei would get exposed less, if the whole team was playing better and with more confidence it would pick Mason up with it and he'd almost certainly also be performing better. That's usually how it is with kids and depth players - they rise and fall with the stars and the team as a whole. It's probably also largely why Lohrei at least looked better in the back end of last season compared to now.

I was going to try to dig a little more into how Lohrei's being used within games, but the Natural Stat Trick website is down so we'll leave that alone. Anyway, basically they're trying to give him a lot of offensive zone draws but otherwise not sheltering him much. He's seeing solid minutes, many against quality opposition, and, like the others, doing the rounds in terms of partners. It's a heavy workload for a kid who's still learning. For all the faults I think we've seen enough to warrant sticking with him and hoping that upside fully materializes. But equally I don't think he's untouchable - if the right deal came along that included him, I'd consider it.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

They may be starting to view Peeke as their #2RD. Last night, in what was a big game for Boston, Carlo played 16 minutes while Peeke played 18.

Or maybe they're seeing what life would look like without Carlo?

If it's anything I suspect more the latter. For all that Carlo has been disappointing this season, Peeke while a little more reliable this year hasn't exactly been starring either. But even that aside, on pure ability and whatever his flaws Carlo is twice the player Peeke is. There's no way IMO you'd ever consider swapping them in terms of their position and seniority long-term.

He's very tradeable though, and there's a very strong case that he should be traded, not that this is the thread for it. So yeah, if there's anything to that, I'm leaning that way.

 

[BruinDust]

They may be starting to view Peeke as their #2RD. Last night, in what was a big game for Boston, Carlo played 16 minutes while Peeke played 18.

Or maybe they're seeing what life would look like without Carlo?

It's worth exploring. We poke fun at the Leafs all the time for running it back with the Core 4 over and over but they've been trying to win with McAvoy-Carlo as RD 1/2 now for 8 years now.

Clearly Carlo is one of the more marketable players on the roster given his pedigree/experience/age/contract status.

Sometimes I wonder if they would be better off with a more well-rounded player behind McAvoy on RD, someone to better share the overall load. Maybe you'd get more out of McAvoy that way, reduce his minutes a little bit and get more out of the minutes he does play. When I saw Rasmus Andersson was available earlier today I thought about a Andersson-Carlo swap but Calgary probably wouldn't be interested in that.

No doubt Carlo and Peeke both bring similar elements and lack some of the same elements to their games. Are they redundant even if Carlo is the better player.

 

[PlayMakers]

It's worth exploring. We poke fun at the Leafs all the time for running it back with the Core 4 over and over but they've been trying to win with McAvoy-Carlo as RD 1/2 now for 8 years now.

Clearly Carlo is one of the more marketable players on the roster given his pedigree/experience/age/contract status.

Sometimes I wonder if they would be better off with a more well-rounded player behind McAvoy on RD, someone to better share the overall load. Maybe you'd get more out of McAvoy that way, reduce his minutes a little bit and get more out of the minutes he does play. When I saw Rasmus Andersson was available earlier today I thought about a Andersson-Carlo swap but Calgary probably wouldn't be interested in that.

No doubt Carlo and Peeke both bring similar elements and lack some of the same elements to their games. Are they redundant even if Carlo is the better player.

I was thinking about a different RD too, but I was thinking more along the lines of what or who is the best partner for Lindholm. Hampus played his best hockey with Clifton as his RD, but that could have also been because they were used differently. Lindholm-Carlo is usually their shut down pair. They get buried with all the Dzone starts.

I wonder if that's one of the reasons McAvoy is struggling a bit this year, without Lindholm he's getting more of those starts and it's a shift in thinking. He got beat for a goal against the Islanders because he left the zone early and when we turned it over he was out of position.