Bradely
Registered User
- Sep 17, 2021
- 3,793
- 3,771
Yep.... we are all getting accustomed to what is now rendered unreasonable, accepting what should not be accepted....$65 just to park for the game? Sweet merciful.
Yep.... we are all getting accustomed to what is now rendered unreasonable, accepting what should not be accepted....$65 just to park for the game? Sweet merciful.
I guess my Hulu bill isn't to bad after all.$65 just to park for the game? Sweet merciful.
As long as relationship building isn’t asking the entire team to hand over their phones so he can scroll through their family photos.
I have empathy for rigors of what these guys do despite the high psycheck every season. But I’m having a really hard time hearing about a team that is holding a grudge against a player because he leaned into the business side of the job for a few months.
If this really is a big factor in their struggles, I’m pretty concerned. I know they’re all human but that seems like the quite the collective fragility and not enough pride.
Ullmark isnt lighting the fire right now. I love the trade and what we got back.We shouldve just traded swayman and kept ullmark.
training camp wouldve been normal and we wouldve had more money to spend.
I still blame Swayman for this horrid start
Sacco nice press conference. Let's go!
Ullmark isnt lighting the fire right now. I love the trade and what we got back.
So if he posts it a week ago, he's wrong. He posts on the day, he's just guessing. That's convenient.Coach on the hot seat already drops a lifeless 5-1 decision vs an awful Columbus team? Poster was 1000% correct
I thought I heard Sweeney say "contracts were offered to Jim."Sweeney making it clear that the players showed up to camp unprepared "Did they think it was going to be easy?"
Speaks specifically about the Lindholm and Zadorov signings. Pretty frank assessment.
Asked about Montgomery's lame duck status entering the season. Says they were in negotiations on an extension.
On a team where team friendly to fair market deals have long been part of the culture, I can understand that a player who asks for an exorbitant "protect the market for goalies" amount as an RFA who never held the #1 job before might rub some the wrong way.
Pasta and McAvoy took some astronomical deals and no discounts for sure. Swayman was the guy who was going to change it because of all the stupid ELC guys signing 8.5-9 million dollar deals, max years. He is 26 and I believe he and Oettinger were always going to get these kinds of contracts.On a team where team friendly to fair market deals have long been part of the culture, I can understand that a player who asks for an exorbitant "protect the market for goalies" amount as an RFA who never held the #1 job before might rub some the wrong way.
It's much simpler in both cases. Hell in all three if you include Julien. Actually surprised that those who still hate that they fired Cassidy aren't singing the same song about Claude.
All three had success at the job. All three had won the Jack Adams. All three faced some adversity and when asked "what are you gonna do about it", the answer wasn't good enough.
Julien actually dramatically changed his approach in the year he was let go, but the results didn't follow him. Cassidy came in and the team saw instant results (he was the right hire)... But when the time came for him to answer the question, he stayed the course and it was felt that it wasnt enough to get then where they wanted to go.
Montgomery took over and saw instant results (he was the right hire). But two years later we're seeing a disconnect between how the roster is built and his coaching style and tasked with pulling out of the nosedive, his answer appears to be to turn on the throttle.
In all three instances, you have good head coaches... And in all three you have the right move to let them go. And they (so far) are a blazing 2/2 on who they've chosen as replacements.
Yeah I'm disappointed that Montgomery's tenure didn't last longer. But the play I'm really questioning this time around, is if Sacco shows any indication that they can go 3/3. Their intern replacement feels like the f***-up. I hope I'm wrong.
Pasta and McAvoy took some astronomical deals and no discounts for sure. Swayman was the guy who was going to change it because of all the stupid ELC guys signing 8.5-9 million dollar deals, max years. He is 26 and I believe he and Oettinger were always going to get these kinds of contracts.
The guy makes some good points, especially about Monty's lack of playoff success and mismanaging assets - letting Bergeron play and get injured, playing Ullmark even though he was hurt, etc. Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back, better decisions could have been made.
And I agree: lots of blame to go around. The one narrative I'd question, though, for a couple of reasons, is this idea that Sweeney went for size in the off-season at the expense of speed. Several people have said this. Yes, he added Zadorov for more size and snarl on the backend, but he also added E Lindholm, who is not big. And, by deciding to keep Poitras up with the big club, that's almost like an "add," and Potsy is definitely not big.
I suppose one could argue that losing DeBrusk meant that Brazeau or Geekie move up, and they're a little bigger, but they were also here last year. Of the other new guys that were new adds, Kastelic and Koepke, Kastelic has size, but he's also been one of the more effective players this season, and in general, the heavy (with Beecher) 4th line has been maybe the only consistently effective line thus far.
So, other than Zadorov, where is this off-season move towards size that appears to be sinking the team right now?
The other thing is, isn't getting bigger, especially on the backend, what everybody said we needed in order to handle teams like the Panthers in the playoffs? That's what I heard so many people say after last year's loss to the Panthers.
It's like a never-ending pendulum of opinion between size and speed/skill.
We need size!
Now we're too slow! We need speed!
Now we're too small! We need size!
and so on....
Perhaps or maybe he had already decided to step away after the season. I wish him all the best because he’s a great person off the ice and a good coach.Have to wonder if Monty disagreed with direction Cam and Don were going in and he didn’t want to be here
I call him Zad the badSTOP CALLING ZADOROV "Z" THAT NICKNAME CAN'T BE PASSED DOWN THIS IS BULLSHIT.
I heard that theory on the radio today. That there was a kind of carryover from 15 years of structure and culture and Monty rode those coattails.Many say that Montgomery didn't select the players that cost him his job.... very true but it the reverse he didn't select the players that earned him his first year record as coach of the Bruins. I would suggest that he fell into his first year's record because the players were almost managing themselves. ...great players with chemistry. So maybe he was never a good coach? My opinion.
Felger said it was either a lie by Sweeney or Monty was low-balled beyond belief.I thought I heard Sweeney say "contracts were offered to Jim."
Man, Monty must be kicking himself for not signing. He would have had a lot more gravitas if he had just signed an extension, and worst case scenario he'd be getting paid for the next 2 years to sit at home, or get paid double to coach someone else.
Felger said it was either a lie by Sweeney or Monty was low-balled beyond belief.