Player Discussion Matthew Poitras II

[Dr Hook]

Sure but you can have vices and still work to improve your craft.

Taking care of your health as a professional athlete is a big part of the craft.

 

[PlayMakers]

Brazeau is one. I first talked about it in 2015-2016 when he was draft eligible.

I have all the respect in the world for him because he made it to the show. Now, if he had done what Milan Lucic or Kevan Miller or David Backes had done and hired a pro skating coach for an offseason or two, there is no telling what he could do. But the effort just wasn't there.

Zadorov for different reasons. He has skills and caan skate, but again, going back to junior, not much has changed. Zero effort to work on what needs work or to improve on the things he already does well.

I can include Max Jones in that as well.

Nothing new really, I wrote about their lack of efforts to put in the work in all of their draft years.

I would also add Charlie Coyle, Cole Koepke and Parker Wotherspoon onto the list.

Not everyone can be Bergeron and pick something new to work on every summer which made Bergeron into Bergeron. But man, work on something.

Honest question: in the amount of time Charlie Coyle has been with Boston, what one skill have you seen an improvement on?

I'm going to disagree with you on Charlie Coyle, I've seen him working on his game.

My son is an instructor at a hockey camp that runs all summer at Rodman Arena (I work out of that rink too) and Coyle is out there every day with a small group of NHL'ers training with Jon Lounsbury, who works for Adam Oates skill development group.

I've personally seen them spend a lot of time working on cutbacks (punch turns) and escapes from the corner. I could be misremembering but when Coyle first came here I thought he was like Brazeau down low, he'd just plant and shield, but now he tries to keep his feet moving and make tight turns to shake checkers.

OT: My son ran into him in street clothes after a workout and said "it was like meeting Captain America," the guy was so massive and broad it was hard to believe.

 

[mar2kbos]

I don't know ... I see a guy who works hard every shift, is reliable, plays tough minutes, has played EVERY game the Bruins have played in the last 4 years - scored 25 goals last year and had 60 points, doesn't that show he has improved his offensive skills? I'd say he has improved his puck possession on the cycle as well. Yes he isn't producing this year and isn't the offensive player we'd like him to be but there are way worse examples of "non improving" players on the Bruins to pick on IMO

It’s his contract more than his play, if he was 4mil guy I think most wouldn’t complain because of the things you mentioned. He had a good year last year but his career average he is mostly a 15-20 goal guy. A lot of players had career years last year that are off the mark from their usually production year in and out.

Wouldn’t have any problem with him except at this point we have dead money tied up in Lindholm who is not providing the kind of play expected of his role and contract. So if you can get a similar point producer player that had a lower cost than Coyle you have to look at it. He is replaceable as much as anyone outside of Pasta in the forward group (honorable mention to Geekie as he is an RFA and more cost controlled).

 

[Over the volcano]

OT: My son ran into him in street clothes after a workout and said "it was like meeting Captain America," the guy was so massive and broad it was hard to believe.

It's what bugs me about his not massive or broad team.

 

[False Start]

It’s his contract more than his play, if he was 4mil guy I think most wouldn’t complain because of the things you mentioned. He had a good year last year but his career average he is mostly a 15-20 goal guy. A lot of players had career years last year that are off the mark from their usually production year in and out.

Wouldn’t have any problem with him except at this point we have dead money tied up in Lindholm who is not providing the kind of play expected of his role and contract. So if you can get a similar point producer player that had a lower cost than Coyle you have to look at it. He is replaceable as much as anyone outside of Pasta in the forward group (honorable mention to Geekie as he is an RFA and more cost controlled).

4 Million gets you Will Borgen these days.

Coyle's $ is not large in the grand scheme of things.

It’s his contract more than his play, if he was 4mil guy I think most wouldn’t complain because of the things you mentioned. He had a good year last year but his career average he is mostly a 15-20 goal guy. A lot of players had career years last year that are off the mark from their usually production year in and out.

Wouldn’t have any problem with him except at this point we have dead money tied up in Lindholm who is not providing the kind of play expected of his role and contract. So if you can get a similar point producer player that had a lower cost than Coyle you have to look at it. He is replaceable as much as anyone outside of Pasta in the forward group (honorable mention to Geekie as he is an RFA and more cost controlled).

4 Million gets you Will Borgen these days.

Coyle's $ is not large in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

One of these guys is going to have to be nicknamed "One Iota!"

 

[DominicT]

I'm going to disagree with you on Charlie Coyle, I've seen him working on his game.

My son is an instructor at a hockey camp that runs all summer at Rodman Arena (I work out of that rink too) and Coyle is out there every day with a small group of NHL'ers training with Jon Lounsbury, who works for Adam Oates skill development group.

I've personally seen them spend a lot of time working on cutbacks (punch turns) and escapes from the corner. I could be misremembering but when Coyle first came here I thought he was like Brazeau down low, he'd just plant and shield, but now he tries to keep his feet moving and make tight turns to shake checkers.

OT: My son ran into him in street clothes after a workout and said "it was like meeting Captain America," the guy was so massive and broad it was hard to believe.

That's fine. Difference of opinions is what makes the world go round. I honestly thought more people would lash out at my opinion.

That said, you haven't changed my mind.

 

[jmon1313]

I'm genuinely surprised at the mention of guys like Wotherspoon/Koepke, not because I disagree or know any differently about either of them but because it seems so strange to me that guys like them would grind so hard during games and then put in a little effort off the ice.

Seems like a strange decision from them.

 

[PlayMakers]

That's fine. Difference of opinions is what makes the world go round. I honestly thought more people would lash out at my opinion.

That said, you haven't changed my mind.

No worries, like you said difference of opinions. Love the show by the way, I'm in the car a lot so I check out all the Bruins talk shows and your show is the one show where I come away every week having learned something.

OT: Do you only scout NHL potential level players? Or do you look at lower leagues, where there are D3 college hopefuls?

 

[Dr Hook]

I honestly thought more people would lash out at my opinion.

I can only speak for myself obviously, but I don't find anything strange or controversial in what you said. There are a lot of people in all walks of life that do what they need to do to get where they want to go, and then are content to maintain what got them there and nothing more. I don't see why professional athletes should be any different.

 

[DKH]

Brazaeau is one.

I thought he worked out this summer to get leaner and work on his first step - needed to be quicker

Not sure if that qualifies or are we looking at stick skills- release, tips, face offs etc

 

[Dr Hook]

I thought he worked out this summer to get leaner and work on his first step - needed to be quicker

Not sure if that qualifies or are we looking at stick skills- release, tips, face offs etc

I was just reporting what Dom said on the podcast in response to Lou's question about who. I have no actual idea if Braz did any of that, or what the criteria is other than smoking a dart or two between periods probably qualifies

 

[DominicT]

No worries, like you said difference of opinions. Love the show by the way, I'm in the car a lot so I check out all the Bruins talk shows and your show is the one show where I come away every week having learned something.

OT: Do you only scout NHL potential level players? Or do you look at lower leagues, where there are D3 college hopefuls?

I get to some U16, then Junior B, Junior A and of course OHL. I get some ISO videos I request in the QMJHL and the WHL. I spend about 4 hours a day on video. In weekends I catch up on games from Europe.

Honestly, I watch more hockey than any human probably should.

 

[PlayMakers]

I get to some U16, then Junior B, Junior A and of course OHL. I get some ISO videos I request in the QMJHL and the WHL. I spend about 4 hours a day on video. In weekends I catch up on games from Europe.

Honestly, I watch more hockey than any human probably should.

I'll PM you.

 

[DominicT]

I thought he worked out this summer to get leaner and work on his first step - needed to be quicker

Not sure if that qualifies or are we looking at stick skills- release, tips, face offs etc

I'm looking at all hockey skills. In 10 years of watching Brazeau he is basically the same player now as he was with the North Bay Battalion. If there is one noticeable improvement it is in his determination which can go a long way, but only get you so far.

I look at Brett Harrison in the same way Brazeau was in junior. Plenty of skill in some areas. But he lacks determination and compete. If he put in the work he needs to put in he is an NHL player.

Problem is everyone will tell you he doesn't.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

I don't know ... I see a guy who works hard every shift, is reliable, plays tough minutes, has played EVERY game the Bruins have played in the last 4 years - scored 25 goals last year and had 60 points, doesn't that show he has improved his offensive skills? I'd say he has improved his puck possession on the cycle as well. Yes he isn't producing this year and isn't the offensive player we'd like him to be but there are way worse examples of "non improving" players on the Bruins to pick on IMO

Coyle's definitely very consistent, clearly has good fitness. He's a worker. But personally I haven't really seen any improvement in his abilities. He had an exceptional year in terms of his production last season, now it's dropped back again. I think he simply had a career year rather than it showing any sustained improvement. Most middling players will have one or two. Puck possession is certainly a strength of his - I'm not sure it's better now than say 5 years ago, rather it seems to me he goes through stretches where he's really strong on pucks and looking to drive plays, and that's when he's at his best, and times when he goes into his shell a bit.

I'm not anti Coyle. I've disliked his contract from the start but that's on the GM not the player. Charlie himself is a solid player, pretty dependable. I don't think he's lazy by any means. He just seems to lack the will to go that extra mile. I would agree that he's probably not the worst in that regard, was just the one I felt like commenting on.

 

[Blowfish]

He isn't helping right now...skills are there but he needs to get much stronger. Let him develop some more in Providence at the same time let him reach his X - maturity and strength. Hopefully bruins connect him with skating coach.

 

[ODAAT]

You'd be surprised how many don't put in the effort to improve their games.

There are several on this team.

it`s evident come game time who they are

Coyle's definitely very consistent, clearly has good fitness. He's a worker. But personally I haven't really seen any improvement in his abilities. He had an exceptional year in terms of his production last season, now it's dropped back again. I think he simply had a career year rather than it showing any sustained improvement. Most middling players will have one or two. Puck possession is certainly a strength of his - I'm not sure it's better now than say 5 years ago, rather it seems to me he goes through stretches where he's really strong on pucks and looking to drive plays, and that's when he's at his best, and times when he goes into his shell a bit.

I'm not anti Coyle. I've disliked his contract from the start but that's on the GM not the player. Charlie himself is a solid player, pretty dependable. I don't think he's lazy by any means. He just seems to lack the will to go that extra mile. I would agree that he's probably not the worst in that regard, was just the one I felt like commenting on.

Appreciate Coyle`s time in Boston, I move on from him, let Poitras take that spot, grow and learn in the role, there will be mistakes and room to grow but you won`t convince me Poitras can`t replace the whopping 19pts and -8 Coyle currently rocking

 

[BruinDust]

I like Matt Poitras. I think Matt Poitras is an NHL caliber player right here today.

But on a team with a smorgasbord of guys who can play center, is there any reason why they are tasking him with the responsibilities of playing center on a team desperately trying to qualify for a playoff spot?

In the offensive zone, it really doesn't matter. But defensively look at the 1st goal last night. Geekie turns it over in the offensive zone and Zacha had already changed. Because Zacha is the center, he's replaced by Poitras who fails to stop the Buffalo puck carrier once they cross the line, that lead to the 1st goal against. Meanwhile you have Coyle on his line who has played I'd say 99% of his time in Boston as a center.

They talk about details all the time this little detail set the rest of the game in motion. I really don't get the coaching staff's thought process here when you have piles of other options down the middle.

 

[DominicT]

I like Matt Poitras. I think Matt Poitras is an NHL caliber player right here today.

But on a team with a smorgasbord of guys who can play center, is there any reason why they are tasking him with the responsibilities of playing center on a team desperately trying to qualify for a playoff spot?

In the offensive zone, it really doesn't matter. But defensively look at the 1st goal last night. Geekie turns it over in the offensive zone and Zacha had already changed. Because Zacha is the center, he's replaced by Poitras who fails to stop the Buffalo puck carrier once they cross the line, that lead to the 1st goal against. Meanwhile you have Coyle on his line who has played I'd say 99% of his time in Boston as a center.

They talk about details all the time this little detail set the rest of the game in motion. I really don't get the coaching staff's thought process here when you have piles of other options down the middle.

Sacco left Geekie with Pasta and Zacha to see if they could build some chemistry and they did, where Montgomery would have broken them up after 1 game.

He is trying to do the same with Poitras and Marchand because obviously Lindholm and Marchand couldn't.

He is giving Poitras a long leash in hopes that it eventually clicks.

 

[BruinDust]

Sacco left Geekie with Pasta and Zacha to see if they could build some chemistry and they did, where Montgomery would have broken them up after 1 game.

He is trying to do the same with Poitras and Marchand because obviously Lindholm and Marchand couldn't.

He is giving Poitras a long leash in hopes that it eventually clicks.

I'm fine with him on that line and giving him a long look. Like you said, Lindholm and Marchand wasn't clicking (does Lindholm click with anyone on this team?). I like the kid and think he's part of the solution here.

But is there any reason why they can't go Marchand-Coyle-Poitras and not just on face-offs? Especially when we consider they've given 8 different players now significant time at C. They can shift Frederic to C and to the wing and back again ad nauseum, I find Poitras as a middle ice fixture at this stage perplexing given the circumstances.

 

[Over the volcano]

Is he shining brighter because of all the darkness around him? I mean if they had 3-5 legit prospects would he be thought of as fondly as he is right now.

 

[Hookslide]

I'm fine with him on that line and giving him a long look. Like you said, Lindholm and Marchand wasn't clicking (does Lindholm click with anyone on this team?). I like the kid and think he's part of the solution here.

But is there any reason why they can't go Marchand-Coyle-Poitras and not just on face-offs? Especially when we consider they've given 8 different players now significant time at C. They can shift Frederic to C and to the wing and back again ad nauseum, I find Poitras as a middle ice fixture at this stage perplexing given the circumstances.

I have seen enough of Poitras, anyone who thinks this kid is ready, are not thinking clearly, he had his chance, time to give Merkolov his look, although not sure it will be any different, but must be done and get a honest read on this kid.

 

[NDiesel]

Is he shining brighter because of all the darkness around him? I mean if they had 3-5 legit prospects would he be thought of as fondly as he is right now.

Probably a bit of what's going on - that said he looks like a lock for a decent career and seems to be amazing value at his draft position. Still plenty of "shine" even if we had a few more blue chip prospects ahead of him