Speculation: What Went Wrong?

[ON3M4N]

Last season you had some guys with career years. Sweeney thought it'd be their new norm.....and it wasn't. This team lacks leadership after guys like 63 & 88 (at least from outside looking in). Lastly, this team doesn't know what it's identity is. They seem to want to play a fast skilled game, but they lack speed & skill. This off-season they got bigger and slower....but they don't play a heavy punishing game.

 

[bme44]

I wonder why.

Swayman distraction is the obvious one (he plays for the name on his back not the crest on the front ). Montgomery distraction ?????? Let's start with those two

 

[PlayMakers]

On Dom's podcast tonight, Mick Colageo said he would almost like to see the Bruins stand pat and run it back with the same team next year.

He goes on to say how he thought the off-season moves would be good (as did 90% of the board here) and a re-set without the Swayman contract distraction, without Swayman taking 30 games to get up to NHL caliber goaltending, without Marchand undergoing 3 off-season surgeries, without Lindholm playing hurt... What would that look season like? Would just fixing those issues give you 5 more wins? 5 more wins would put them in first place in the Eastern Conference.

He said Sweeney passes by him every game and he's dying to ask what the appetite is for that approach. He also says he doesn't think they can do that. Losing requires changes.... but it gives you a sense as to what Mick thinks went wrong.

 

[Dr Hook]

They can’t run it back. Mick might be right that the team would be a bit better if they did, but there are some deeper structural flaws that need to be corrected as so many in-depth posts here in this thread have pointed out.

 

[BruinDust]

On Dom's podcast tonight, Mick Colageo said he would almost like to see the Bruins stand pat and run it back with the same team next year.

He goes on to say how he thought the off-season moves would be good (as did 90% of the board here) and a re-set without the Swayman contract distraction, without Swayman taking 30 games to get up to NHL caliber goaltending, without Marchand undergoing 3 off-season surgeries, without Lindholm playing hurt... What would that look season like? Would just fixing those issues give you 5 more wins? 5 more wins would put them in first place in the Eastern Conference.

He said Sweeney passes by him every game and he's dying to ask what the appetite is for that approach. He also says he doesn't think they can do that. Losing requires changes.... but it gives you a sense as to what Mick thinks went wrong.

This is where his argument looses me.....

Let's take Marchand. 3 surgeries or not, he's on pace for the same numbers basically as last year. On pace for the same number of goals and 4 less assist. Is he thinking this 36-37 year old player was about to exceed his numbers from last year this year? Marchand had almost 30 goals last year (29). Did he expect him to get back to 35-40?

Then you have Lindholm, as unproductive as he's been, his not much off last years pace. On pace for one less goal and the same number of assist, albeit in 7 less games if Lindholm were to play all 82. Should the team off been expecting some massive jump in his production coming to Boston?

Up to game 26, Swayman had a pts. % of .558. From Game 27 for him on New Year's Eve onward, it drops to .375. So as far as contributing more points to the cause, Swayman has provided less points on average in January than he did October through December.

 

[GordonHowe]

I still think it's the forward group that is the critical flaw. Not enough speed to win puck races, transition through the neutral zone, gain zone entry, push the opposing D-men back so they can't cheat with their gap control. Not enough quality shooters up front, lacking both velocity and finish. And they don't pass or distribute the puck well enough as a forward group as they lack skill, execution and chemistry.

So because of all of that, they spend far too little time in the offensive zone and far too much time back-peddling and defending. In previous year's under Monty and Cassidy, they'd work that puck around the offensive zone maintaining possession, giving their D-men a chance to catch their breath, and wearing down opposing defenders. The best defense today is spending lots of time in the offensive zone and less time in your own zone.

I'd also like to see them tweak the right-side of the D-corps, specifically moving out Carlo for a more-well rounded D-man like a Rasmus Andersson (as an example). But that to me is secondary to them having a philosophical change in how they construct their forward group. Doesn't mean they need to go all skill/speed/shooting, but they need a better mix than what they have now. It's a forward group built to win in in the NHL from 5-10 years ago, not built for the modern game here in 2025.

Question is......are Sweeney, Neely, Bradley, and now Chara, the right people to make this philosophical change?

Time, a steep learning curve and a clear understanding that the way good teams win in today's NHL is very different than it was when Z stalked the Boston blueline.

With the indispensable assistance of many lieutenants -- and a general who knew how to construct a deep, balanced roster, the captain established and fostered a commitment to team excellence, hard work, and most important, a commitment to each other.

The success of Zdeno's captaincy was not a foregone conclusion, something many forget or take for granted. It didn't spring to life full blown. There were growing pains and rocky times, especially early on.

As we all know, Chara loves challenges and puts every scintilla of his being into meeting them. Not least to prove the naysayers wrong.

(Jeremy Swayman has a chip on his shoulder that redounds to the benefit of his team?

(Maybe when he grows up and proves he didn't behave like an entitled, shoot my mouth off to the media brat during his prolonged, damaging to all concerned holdout.

(How's that workin' for ya, Jeremy? Took one for himself, first and foremost. Then, perhaps the goaltending fraternity. His team? Not so much.

(Brad has always used the chip on his shoulder to great advantage, with a wink and smirk. Voila, time, space and opportunity opened up, as did a sure-fire HHOF career, however much the league office hates his guts, and he, theirs.)

Many -- many -- have underestimated Zdeno Chara, long before he was drafted by the Islanders as a gangly, slow, seemingly one-dimensional giraffe cut out for little more than imposing physicality on opponents, King Kong style.

Over a long, storied career, Chara made the doubters eat their words, *willing himself* to greatness as one of the best defenseman of his era, and like Terry O'Reilly in not dissimilar fashion, he worked his ass off at it.

I don't believe in a great many things, but I very much believe in Zdeno Chara.

By all counts, a singular, Hall Of Fame defenseman, unique and superlative leader on and off the ice, and not least, an exceptionally bright, compassionate and decent soul.

(Recall, as Captain, Z banned rookie "hazing," and even use of the term "rookie." It was *not* PC foolishness. It was about creating a team, an extended family, daresay a "brotherhood" who played for one another, stuck up for one another, cared about each other.

("All for one, one for all." Groan & roll 'em as you wish.)

That's a hell of a resume, and I challenge anyone to gainsay it.

Zdeno will bring everything he has, including a keen intellect, "hockey sense," insane work ethic, and exceptionally high standards across the board.

He has my hardy endorsement relative to the presently ill defined "consulting" & "advisory" role on offer.

He also has my unreserved endorsement as future General Manager of the Boston Bruins.

The sooner the better.

Open Letter to Sr. Charles Jacobs Dept.:

Snag Patrice 4 Prez while you're at it, Charlie.

* You demonstrated excellent judgement bringing in Peter Chiarelli, who eventually brought in Claude Julien, who... won you your first Stanley Cup since 1972 before both were unceremoniously kicked to the curb by the guy who remains in charge nearly a decade into his tenure.

How's that working out?

Rather shakily of late, yes?

Charlie, If you truly measure success in championships, as you have boasted repeatedly, one in the span of 53 years is rather thin gruel.

We know you care.

Show.

Don't tell.

 

[GordonHowe]

Swayman distraction is the obvious one (he plays for the name on his back not the crest on the front ). Montgomery distraction ?????? Let's start with those two

Start with Montgomery. Proceed disastrously.

 

[PlayMakers]

This is where his argument looses me.....

Let's take Marchand. 3 surgeries or not, he's on pace for the same numbers basically as last year. On pace for the same number of goals and 4 less assist. Is he thinking this 36-37 year old player was about to exceed his numbers from last year this year? Marchand had almost 30 goals last year (29). Did he expect him to get back to 35-40?

Then you have Lindholm, as unproductive as he's been, his not much off last years pace. On pace for one less goal and the same number of assist, albeit in 7 less games if Lindholm were to play all 82. Should the team off been expecting some massive jump in his production coming to Boston?

Up to game 26, Swayman had a pts. % of .558. From Game 27 for him on New Year's Eve onward, it drops to .375. So as far as contributing more points to the cause, Swayman has provided less points on average in January than he did October through December.

Eh, even if he didn't expect Marchand to produce more, it would be fair to expect him to play better in all other areas of the game. He really struggled out of the gate. He was -7 in October and this board was full of posts about him being washed up and a liability.

Yes, I think the team (and everyone here) expected Lindholm put up his career average of 22 goals and 56 points. Maybe more if he gelled with Pasta (who has the ability to elevate players as we're seeing with Geekie). Many folks, myself included, thought last year was an anomaly because of his knee injury, and that the healthy playoff Lindholm was the real Lindholm. Then he hurt his wrist and missed all training camp and now we're wondering the same thing again. Time will tell if that's all crap cuz we can't unload him now.

Swayman's poor play has been the biggest reason this season is a flop. I fully expect him to rebound next year with a proper off-season and training camp, but he struggled out of the gate and has been horribly inconsistent. (Fwiw, I also think this team's stellar goaltending was the single biggest reason for their success last season.)

 

[GordonHowe]

Eh, even if he didn't expect Marchand to produce more, it would be fair to expect him to play better in all other areas of the game. He really struggled out of the gate. He was -7 in October and this board was full of posts about him being washed up and a liability.

Yes, I think the team (and everyone here) expected Lindholm put up his career average of 22 goals and 56 points. Maybe more if he gelled with Pasta (who has the ability to elevate players as we're seeing with Geekie). Many folks, myself included, thought last year was an anomaly because of his knee injury, and that the healthy playoff Lindholm was the real Lindholm. Then he hurt his wrist and missed all training camp and now we're wondering the same thing again. Time will tell if that's all crap cuz we can't unload him now.

Swayman's poor play has been the biggest reason this season is a flop. I fully expect him to rebound next year with a proper off-season and training camp, but he struggled out of the gate and has been horribly inconsistent. (Fwiw, I also think this team's stellar goaltending was the single biggest reason for their success last season.)

The biggest reason for their failure is #28.

The 3C making 8 million.

He was the consensus best center out there.

While stout in the dot and, generally, defensively responsible against opponents' top lines, Lindholm has been a major disappointment and paramount reason for Boston's demise this season.

Remember, he was expected to center David.

A major whiff I, for one, did not see coming.

I guess there's a reason why Zadorov, whose arrival I looked forward to with great excitement, is now on his 6th club.

There appears to be a lack of discipline and hockey sense.

Very basic hockey sense.

Unfortunately, much to my surprise, it has added up to an 80 million plus disaster.

Good luck getting out of it.

I hope someone other than Don Sweeney and Cam Neely are in charge of sweeping up the vomit and putting the pieces back together.

Or rather, stripping it down and allowing the next steward to wipe clean and redraw the future of the Boston Bruins.


Somehow.

 

[PlayMakers]

The biggest reason for their failure is #28.

The 3C making 8 million.

He was the consensus best center out there.

While stout in the dot and, generally, defensively responsible against opponents' top lines, Lindholm has been a major disappointment and paramount reason for Boston's demise this season.

Remember, he was expected to center David.

A major whiff I, for one, did not see coming.

I guess there's a reason why Zadorov, whose arrival I looked forward to with great excitement, is now on his 6th club.

There appears to be a lack of discipline and hockey sense.

Very basic hockey sense.

Unfortunately, much to my surprise, it has added up to an 80 million plus disaster.

Good luck getting out of it.

I hope someone other than Don Sweeney and Cam Neely are in charge of sweeping up the vomit and putting the pieces back together.

Or rather, stripping it down and allowing the next steward to wipe clean and redraw the future of the Boston Bruins.


Somehow.

I agree Lindholm has been a major disappointment this season and have been very critical of his play. Zadorov, despite all the criticism he gets, leads the team in plus/minus so he's hardly the main reason we're losing games.

Guys coming to camp out of shape, a lack of leadership in Marchand's absence, slow starts from Pasta, Marchand, Geekie, Coyle... Carlo struggling, McAvoy playing injured, Hampus getting hurt, Monty's disastrous system changes... and the biggest drop off of all was in net, where we went from having one of the highest save percents in the league last year to one of the worst in the league this year. Our goalies are 45th and 54th in goals saved above expected. The only teams with goalies that low are Philly and Colorado (before they traded for a goalie to save their season).

 

[Aussie Bruin]

On Dom's podcast tonight, Mick Colageo said he would almost like to see the Bruins stand pat and run it back with the same team next year.

He goes on to say how he thought the off-season moves would be good (as did 90% of the board here) and a re-set without the Swayman contract distraction, without Swayman taking 30 games to get up to NHL caliber goaltending, without Marchand undergoing 3 off-season surgeries, without Lindholm playing hurt... What would that look season like? Would just fixing those issues give you 5 more wins? 5 more wins would put them in first place in the Eastern Conference.

He said Sweeney passes by him every game and he's dying to ask what the appetite is for that approach. He also says he doesn't think they can do that. Losing requires changes.... but it gives you a sense as to what Mick thinks went wrong.

That's lunacy. This forward group cannot win a Cup. Not with all the luck in the world. It's not even close. The defense has a higher potential, but would still need some change to make it truly formidable. Swayman can be good enough, sure, but it would take more than him standing on his head to turn this roster around.

I disagree too that 90% of the board thought the moves would be good. IMO that's too simplistic. I think almost all of us would happily admit we didn't think the team would play as badly as it has. That's been a real surprise and disappointment. But there were plenty here asking questions about Lindholm would be able to bounce back from his down season and how he would gel with this team, plenty asking whether the amount of money given to Zadorov could have been better spent elsewhere, lots querying whether the team had enough speed and skill and whether the clearly limited forward group had enough firepower to get by. The question marks and concerns were there even if many hoped or thought on balance it would all turn out more or less ok.

Looking only at the standings is misleading. The Bruins may only be 5 wins off 1st place in the crap shoot East but they are much further away from what a contending team looks like than that. Points are one thing, quality of play quite another, and their lack of quality is readily apparent both to the end and in the advanced stats. The gulf to where they need to be is vast.

I haven't actually heard the podcast so I don't mean to be too critical, but there sounds like a lot of 'what if' going on here than I never like and I think leads down a dangerous path to complacency. Every team has its challenges, adversity and bad luck, almost no team gets a perfect ride. I don't see Columbus making excuses, or Dallas taking a backwards step despite a pretty bad run of injuries. The good teams just get on with it and find ways to overcome. I don't think pointing to Marchand's surgeries helps any either. He had those operations because in hockey terms he's old and battered. Nothing's changing that. At this point in his career he is what he is, which to be fair is still pretty decent but there's no turning the clock back.

Can this roster play better? Of course. Would some better luck help? Yeah, to a point. But there's no serious Cup contender here. Mick is definitely right about one thing though - the idea of just running it back will never happen. The circumstances wouldn't permit it. Thank God for that.

 

[LouJersey]

I’ll preface this by stating that the season isn’t over by any stretch, and that the purpose of this thread is pure speculation.

However, with the team struggling, having fired the coach, having suffered multiple lopsided losses, and sporting a goal differential of -25, all of these factors beg certain questions.

• Is this simply a lack of talent, or is something else going on?
• Did the Swayman contract negotiations break something in the dressing room?
• Did Jim Montgomery entering the season as a lame duck, but seemingly not interested in extending his contract break something in the dressing room?
• Are there culture issues in the organization?
• Did any of the above influence the hiring of Zdeno Chara as a consultant with the organization?
• What other changes are needed both on the roster, behind the bench, and in the front office?
• Do you simply ride this season out?
• Elephant in the room: What becomes of the captain?

Lack of high end talent, I was as fooled as Sweeney was. I wanted Lysell and Poitras all year tho Hampus injury was big, have to think there are a few more wins there if healthy

Caused a slow start IMO, nothing in the room as far as him IMO.

Monty was a lame duck and had his eyes on St Louis since the summer IMO

Seems so

Absolutely...the current captain is not doing a good job it seems

New coach, sell the UFA plus Coyle. Hire Brett Peterson. Move Sweeney to President. Neely to Jacobs advisor

I sell and hope to get the 8 seed anyways and have Swayman work his magic

I deal Marchand and move on. McAvoy was named an assistant on team USA with alot of leaders there, so it's his time.

 

[Bruin4]

That's lunacy. This forward group cannot win a Cup. Not with all the luck in the world. It's not even close. The defense has a higher potential, but would still need some change to make it truly formidable. Swayman can be good enough, sure, but it would take more than him standing on his head to turn this roster around.

I disagree too that 90% of the board thought the moves would be good. IMO that's too simplistic. I think almost all of us would happily admit we didn't think the team would play as badly as it has. That's been a real surprise and disappointment. But there were plenty here asking questions about Lindholm would be able to bounce back from his down season and how he would gel with this team, plenty asking whether the amount of money given to Zadorov could have been better spent elsewhere, lots querying whether the team had enough speed and skill and whether the clearly limited forward group had enough firepower to get by. The question marks and concerns were there even if many hoped or thought on balance it would all turn out more or less ok.

Looking only at the standings is misleading. The Bruins may only be 5 wins off 1st place in the crap shoot East but they are much further away from what a contending team looks like than that. Points are one thing, quality of play quite another, and their lack of quality is readily apparent both to the end and in the advanced stats. The gulf to where they need to be is vast.

I haven't actually heard the podcast so I don't mean to be too critical, but there sounds like a lot of 'what if' going on here than I never like and I think leads down a dangerous path to complacency. Every team has its challenges, adversity and bad luck, almost no team gets a perfect ride. I don't see Columbus making excuses, or Dallas taking a backwards step despite a pretty bad run of injuries. The good teams just get on with it and find ways to overcome. I don't think pointing to Marchand's surgeries helps any either. He had those operations because in hockey terms he's old and battered. Nothing's changing that. At this point in his career he is what he is, which to be fair is still pretty decent but there's no turning the clock back.

Can this roster play better? Of course. Would some better luck help? Yeah, to a point. But there's no serious Cup contender here. Mick is definitely right about one thing though - the idea of just running it back will never happen. The circumstances wouldn't permit it. Thank God for that.

“On Dom's podcast tonight, Mick Colageo said he would almost like to see the Bruins stand pat and run it back with the same team next year.”

Lunacy in deed.

There isn’t a team out-there who can’t play the what if game to some degree, and like you said it’s a recipe for complacency when you start looking for excuses and except them.

They are a Offensively challenged team, only Pasta greatness has kept this team above water. Doesn’t matter if 100 percent of the board thought lindholm would be better, fact is, and all that counts is how he plays on the ice, and unfortunately it’s been very underwhelming.
A retool should be set in motion asap.

 

[LouJersey]

That's lunacy. This forward group cannot win a Cup. Not with all the luck in the world. It's not even close. The defense has a higher potential, but would still need some change to make it truly formidable. Swayman can be good enough, sure, but it would take more than him standing on his head to turn this roster around.

I disagree too that 90% of the board thought the moves would be good. IMO that's too simplistic. I think almost all of us would happily admit we didn't think the team would play as badly as it has. That's been a real surprise and disappointment. But there were plenty here asking questions about Lindholm would be able to bounce back from his down season and how he would gel with this team, plenty asking whether the amount of money given to Zadorov could have been better spent elsewhere, lots querying whether the team had enough speed and skill and whether the clearly limited forward group had enough firepower to get by. The question marks and concerns were there even if many hoped or thought on balance it would all turn out more or less ok.

Looking only at the standings is misleading. The Bruins may only be 5 wins off 1st place in the crap shoot East but they are much further away from what a contending team looks like than that. Points are one thing, quality of play quite another, and their lack of quality is readily apparent both to the end and in the advanced stats. The gulf to where they need to be is vast.

I haven't actually heard the podcast so I don't mean to be too critical, but there sounds like a lot of 'what if' going on here than I never like and I think leads down a dangerous path to complacency. Every team has its challenges, adversity and bad luck, almost no team gets a perfect ride. I don't see Columbus making excuses, or Dallas taking a backwards step despite a pretty bad run of injuries. The good teams just get on with it and find ways to overcome. I don't think pointing to Marchand's surgeries helps any either. He had those operations because in hockey terms he's old and battered. Nothing's changing that. At this point in his career he is what he is, which to be fair is still pretty decent but there's no turning the clock back.

Can this roster play better? Of course. Would some better luck help? Yeah, to a point. But there's no serious Cup contender here. Mick is definitely right about one thing though - the idea of just running it back will never happen. The circumstances wouldn't permit it. Thank God for that.

hall of fame post

I thought they would be a great team. It's not my job however, and that should not let Sweeney off the hook. I also thought Enron was a must buy, so.

 

[LouJersey]

“On Dom's podcast tonight, Mick Colageo said he would almost like to see the Bruins stand pat and run it back with the same team next year.”

Lunacy in deed.

There isn’t a team out-there who’s can’t play the what if game to some degree and like you said it’s a recipe for complacency, when you start looking for excuses and except them.

They are a Offensively challenged team, only Pasta greatness has kept this team above water. Doesn’t matter if 100 percent of the board thought lindholm would be better, fact is, and all that counts is how he plays on the ice, and unfortunately it’s been very underwhelming.Its more than apparent at least from this fans eye, a re-tool is a must.

you really only need to watch more hockey than the Bruins IMO to see they are very far behind in the skill department. With their defense and goaltending they could maybe make some noise, but they really have one guy that you can count on.

 

[nORRis8]

I’ll preface this by stating that the season isn’t over by any stretch, and that the purpose of this thread is pure speculation.

However, with the team struggling, having fired the coach, having suffered multiple lopsided losses, and sporting a goal differential of -25, all of these factors beg certain questions.

• Is this simply a lack of talent, or is something else going on?
• Did the Swayman contract negotiations break something in the dressing room?
• Did Jim Montgomery entering the season as a lame duck, but seemingly not interested in extending his contract break something in the dressing room?
• Are there culture issues in the organization?
• Did any of the above influence the hiring of Zdeno Chara as a consultant with the organization?
• What other changes are needed both on the roster, behind the bench, and in the front office?
• Do you simply ride this season out?
• Elephant in the room: What becomes of the captain?

All very good questions.

I think the Swayman contract talks and how things were handled on both sides hurt. "Good faith" was hurt by it to a degree.
Letting Jake just walk.
Trusting Swayman is a #1 when it has been proven questionable.
Was that a Jacobs move to hire Z?
Marchand's yoyo season.
Montgomery looking like he just wanted out of Boston and St.louis was just biding it's time.
Thinking that solutions for our issues can be found in Providence.
Losing Foligno's obvious leadership.

 

[BruinDust]

Eh, even if he didn't expect Marchand to produce more, it would be fair to expect him to play better in all other areas of the game. He really struggled out of the gate. He was -7 in October and this board was full of posts about him being washed up and a liability.

Yes, I think the team (and everyone here) expected Lindholm put up his career average of 22 goals and 56 points. Maybe more if he gelled with Pasta (who has the ability to elevate players as we're seeing with Geekie). Many folks, myself included, thought last year was an anomaly because of his knee injury, and that the healthy playoff Lindholm was the real Lindholm. Then he hurt his wrist and missed all training camp and now we're wondering the same thing again. Time will tell if that's all crap cuz we can't unload him now.

Swayman's poor play has been the biggest reason this season is a flop. I fully expect him to rebound next year with a proper off-season and training camp, but he struggled out of the gate and has been horribly inconsistent. (Fwiw, I also think this team's stellar goaltending was the single biggest reason for their success last season.)

Marchand had bit of a slow start but to my eyes his stride isn't as explosive as it once was, his wrister doesn't have the same consistent zip that it did when he was putting up 40. I said it last summer that the Bruins No.1 priority should of been to find a No.2 forward to slot behind Pasta so that the aging Marchand would be forward No.3. And Mick C. wants to run it back with a soon-to-be 37 year old Marchand as forward No. 2?

Lindholm was a miscalculation by the front office. We can blame his wrist all we want but I don't see how it affects his legs. Honestly there were times the past few weeks I'd see Letteri and think it was Lindholm and vice-versa with their similar skating stance and posture. He's just not the guy Don Sweeney spent two years salivating at the chance to acquire.

We completely diverge on Swayman. I think the play of Swayman and Korpisalo (along with the production of Pasta) are the ONLY two reasons this team is even sniffing a playoff spot. This is just a very poorly built roster of skaters, that is why they are in the shape they are in. They need to reevaluate the mix on D, they need to remake the forward group in the off-season, at least 3-4 new bodies while seeing some long-term guys (Frederic, Coyle, maybe even Marchand) go bye-bye, along with the entire coaching staff.

 

[Dizzay]

1. Swayman has been pretty bad this season. We've had elite goaltending for years now, dating back to the Thomas and Rask era. Then Rask and Halak, then Ullmark and Swayman. This season is the first time we've had a starter who has struggled and the back up wasn't any better.

2. Not enough talent in the top 6. Plain and simple.

3. Our defense has been riddled by injuries and McAvoy has had the worst year of his career, maybe Carlo as well.

4. Coaching staff unable to adjust......PP and PK stink

 

[nORRis8]

Just not a good hockey team and sooner everyone gets on board with that and starts the process to fixing it the better.Can debate till cows come home but it's not a good team

There's some nastily bad contracts as well.
One in particular was signed in October
I said back in September...drop Swayman sign Lankinen.
Canucks did for 875,000.00 and he's having an incredible year . Young. Capable. Was just playing with crappy teams.
Can't imagine what we could do with 7,000,000+.

 

[BigGoalBrad]

Swayman fleecing us after we moved a former Vezina winner to promote him and Frederic Coyle and Carlo taking the summer off and thinking they were McAvoy/Pasternak caliber talents good enough to do so sort of effected the entire roster. Ml

Middle roster guys aren't great Lysell out of camp vs Brazeau might have helped things.