Speculation: When Does Bruno Get The Boot?

[Armourboy]

Given the constant state of flux in NHL rosters from one season to the next, it seems fair to ask if integrating 3 new players into this system going pear-shaped is more the system or the players, or is it just nothing to worry about at all?

Not to slow the winning momentum in any way, but the last couple of games, even though we managed to win somehow, we looked, well, rancid in our execution for stretches of those games.

But then there's "saved by the poll post" reverse mojo to consider...

I think its just a case of a system working on paper, but if your players aren't the best in the world it falls down to some issues.

Our Dmen generally aren't good enough to do what Brunette wants on the offensive end, which leads to them being out of position and forcing forwards to cover for them, and not all forwards are good at that. Also because of that we are often seeing players like Forsberg stuck out there playing at the blue line rather than out there doing what we pay them for.

Secondly, he has some guys he is giving alot of ice time too that have no business getting it. We saw the same thing with Hynes and Granlund. He's also got some guys not getting ice time that don't make sense either.

Just in this last game you have Cole Smith pulling nearly 15 minutes while Evangelista got 7. Now if Evangelista is hurt then fine, but we don't know that so on the surface it just looks bad. It's also got some of us sitting back here just waiting for him to be benched.

At the end of it all I think Brunette is trying to play a system made for a fast, young team, but his former NHL grind it out mind just defaults to giving grinders and hardworkers the roster spots. Now I have no issue with giving guys spots for working hard, but they still gotta be good to go along with it.

 

[nullednumbed]

Funny to think I may have saved Brunos job by posting this last night

Indeed. Either way unless the wheels fall completely off I think he is safe for the season.

 

[Kat Predator]

I think its just a case of a system working on paper, but if your players aren't the best in the world it falls down to some issues.

Our Dmen generally aren't good enough to do what Brunette wants on the offensive end, which leads to them being out of position and forcing forwards to cover for them, and not all forwards are good at that. Also because of that we are often seeing players like Forsberg stuck out there playing at the blue line rather than out there doing what we pay them for.

Secondly, he has some guys he is giving alot of ice time too that have no business getting it. We saw the same thing with Hynes and Granlund. He's also got some guys not getting ice time that don't make sense either.

Just in this last game you have Cole Smith pulling nearly 15 minutes while Evangelista got 7. Now if Evangelista is hurt then fine, but we don't know that so on the surface it just looks bad. It's also got some of us sitting back here just waiting for him to be benched.

At the end of it all I think Brunette is trying to play a system made for a fast, young team, but his former NHL grind it out mind just defaults to giving grinders and hardworkers the roster spots. Now I have no issue with giving guys spots for working hard, but they still gotta be good to go along with it.

I can agree with that.

I guess my point was more that when you bring in 3 new skaters, you still have 15 guys who were there the year before and should know the systems and what is expected of them, etc. So why are they "freezing up" and the team looking so unable to execute anything? The 3 new guys haven't done anything at even strength, but neither have guys like ROR and Josi.

The other day AJ talked about how it will just take some time. Then I watch other teams and they have 3, 4, 5 new faces in their lineup from last year, and their play isn't completely incompetent for stretches. So, that reasoning doesn't seem to carry much water.

 

[101st_fan]

Just in this last game you have Cole Smith pulling nearly 15 minutes while Evangelista got 7. Now if Evangelista is hurt then fine, but we don't know that so on the surface it just looks bad. It's also got some of us sitting back here just waiting for him to be benched.

At the end of it all I think Brunette is trying to play a system made for a fast, young team, but his former NHL grind it out mind just defaults to giving grinders and hardworkers the roster spots. Now I have no issue with giving guys spots for working hard, but they still gotta be good to go along with it.

Smith had 13:12 at ES (plus PK time). Luke had 6:38 (plus 18 seconds of PP time). Now, which lines were creating chances and which were largely invisible? The Jankowski - Sissons - Evangalista line generated two shot attempts, neither of which was on goal. The 4th line had four SOG plus another seven attempts that were blocked or missed ... then there is that detail of them scoring twice and allowing none.

When the McCarrons and Smiths of the world get under 9 minutes of ES TOI, nobody bats an eye. When their line is creating chances and it is the only time to date this season where Smith gets over 10:30 of ES TOI, it becomes an issue ... even when Marchessault says they are the real first star of the game.

When the plugs are doing plug things, they don't see the ice much at ES. When they are creating, they get rolled out more often. When the 3rd line disappears, it gets a shorter leash.

 

[Kat Predator]

Smith had 13:12 at ES (plus PK time). Luke had 6:38 (plus 18 seconds of PP time). Now, which lines were creating chances and which were largely invisible? The Jankowski - Sissons - Evangalista line generated two shot attempts, neither of which was on goal. The 4th line had four SOG plus another seven attempts that were blocked or missed ... then there is that detail of them scoring twice and allowing none.

When the McCarrons and Smiths of the world get under 9 minutes of ES TOI, nobody bats an eye. When their line is creating chances and it is the only time to date this season where Smith gets over 10:30 of ES TOI, it becomes an issue ... even when Marchessault says they are the real first star of the game.

When the plugs are doing plug things, they don't see the ice much at ES. When they are creating, they get rolled out more often. When the 3rd line disappears, it gets a shorter leash.

Our 4th line effectively won that game, so can't complain too seriously.

Evangelista seems like he could be reaching his expiration date and might get to eat popcorn with Fabbro in the press box soon. Make way for Hinostroza. Question is, do they waive Tomasino or Parssinen first?

 

[originalpredfan]

Just a thought, but all three new players came from teams that have been successful the last few years so perhaps they are more accustomed to winning "systems" and are having trouble adjusting to a non winning syatem.

 

[101st_fan]

If any things are going to get Bruno in hot water to the point his job becomes jeopardized it will be the lack of an effective top nine when playing 5on5 and the middling PP with the talent brought in.


The team has seven goalscorers at 5on5 so far this season. - Forsberg, Novak, Nyquist (expected contributors) Schenn, Carrier, McCarron, Smith (the HF whipping boys). Only Forsberg and Novak have multiple 5on5 goals ... ten 5on5 goals thru eight games is a bit lacking.

The PP has no multiple goal scorers and has converted only five times. 17.2% with Forsberg, Stamkos, Marchessault, Josi, O'Reilly, Skjei, Novak is inexcusable.

Both of those issues are coaching problems. What are the lines? How is PP1 maximizing its members?

 

[ShagDaddy]

Brunette won’t get fired until after year 3

 

[Armourboy]

Brunette won’t get fired until after year 3

Only chance that doesn't happen is if the wheels just completely fall off and we end up down there with San Jose.

Haslam is going to be the wildcard. Just depends on if he stays more hands off like the owners have tended to be or if he is a bit more of a control nut and forces Trotz to do things. We just don't know.

 

[glenngineer]

Only chance that doesn't happen is if the wheels just completely fall off and we end up down there with San Jose.

Haslam is going to be the wildcard. Just depends on if he stays more hands off like the owners have tended to be or if he is a bit more of a control nut and forces Trotz to do things. We just don't know.

I have no idea how he will be. If he's like any owner, as long as he's making the money he expects to from his investment, my guess is he'll keeps his hands off.

On the flip side, if he wants to win a Cup, then all bets are off.

 

[Armourboy]

I have no idea how he will be. If he's like any owner, as long as he's making the money he expects to from his investment, my guess is he'll keeps his hands off.

On the flip side, if he wants to win a Cup, then all bets are off.

Right, we don't really know what he got into it for. If it' strictly a good investment then things will probably continue as they have. If he did it to be an owner of a championship professional team then who knows what will happen.

 

[glenngineer]

Right, we don't really know what he got into it for. If it' strictly a good investment then things will probably continue as they have. If he did it to be an owner of a championship professional team then who knows what will happen.

As I'm watching my Cowboys play I hope he wants a championship but doesn't turn into Jerry Jones.

 

[Scoresberg]

Nice jinx thread, man..

 

[Armourboy]

As I'm watching my Cowboys play I hope he wants a championship but doesn't turn into Jerry Jones.

Honestly if you could get Jerry but just get him to stay out of being the GM you would have a great owner.

There is an SEC documentary about him, Jimmy Johnson, and Arkansas. In it he makes the statement to Jimmy in college to let him worry about making money, he just needed to worry about football. I just had to laugh considering how things went.

 

[glenngineer]

Honestly if you could get Jerry but just get him to stay out of being the GM you would have a great owner.

There is an SEC documentary about him, Jimmy Johnson, and Arkansas. In it he makes the statement to Jimmy in college to let him worry about making money, he just needed to worry about football. I just had to laugh considering how things went.

And that's what I was meaning to say, Jerry is the money and the drive to win, let the hockey people do the building. They had the most bizarre relationship and if Jerry's ego didn't get in his way, they would've had 4 SB's in a row and possibly more. Once he let his best talent evaluator get away, the team hasn't been the same since.

 

[jumb0]

And that's what I was meaning to say, Jerry is the money and the drive to win, let the hockey people do the building. They had the most bizarre relationship and if Jerry's ego didn't get in his way, they would've had 4 SB's in a row and possibly more. Once he let his best talent evaluator get away, the team hasn't been the same since.

The Cowboys will never have success as long as Jerry is around.
He would never in a million years give up the GM role and be just an owner.

He wants all of the credit for anything that the Cowboys do good and zero of the blame when it all %^&#s up.

 

[glenngineer]

The Cowboys will never have success as long as Jerry is around.
He would never in a million years give up the GM role and be just an owner.

He wants all of the credit for anything that the Cowboys do good and zero of the blame when it all %^&#s up.

Fully agree. The team is a train wreck. Ego in sports can be good or bad depending on who has it and how it's used.

I like Trotz. He's a genuine person or at least appears to be. I get he wants to shape the team. I get he wants to bring a Cup to Nashville. He's won a Cup so he knows the recipe. He's also been around Poile the bulk of his career, which can be good and bad.

I think he was looking to go all in and see if he could win with the core he had from last year by adding a couple of other pieces. I admire that.

At the same time, he's trying to build for the future and have the kids learn from the vets. While that's all fine and good, the way they learn is by being around them at all points of the journey, and that includes being on the ice during games, it's the only way you complete the cycle. I get Tomasino and Parssinen need to earn their time. I also think they are held to a higher standard and that's the frustration.

I know I bash on the 4th line A LOT but they had a good game the other night, especially ZLH. The Carrier goal doesn't happen without his hustle. All that to say, it took 8 games for that line to have a good game. That's not enough from them. They've made egregious mistakes and it sets a terrible example to the kids. Vets can make mistake after mistake and get playing time and they miss an assignment and they sit the rest of the game and then are benched the next game.

The staff needs to put the youth in positions to succeed and when they don't succeed, put them out anyway because they do it for the vets. You can't have two different sets of expectations for players. I'm pretty sure this used to drive me crazy when Trotz was the coach.

 

[Predsanddead24]

I know I bash on the 4th line A LOT but they had a good game the other night, especially ZLH. The Carrier goal doesn't happen without his hustle. All that to say, it took 8 games for that line to have a good game. That's not enough from them. They've made egregious mistakes and it sets a terrible example to the kids. Vets can make mistake after mistake and get playing time and they miss an assignment and they sit the rest of the game and then are benched the next game.

I think this is what gets me the most. We have patience for the tweener vet types but not for our young players.

 

[101st_fan]

I think this is what gets me the most. We have patience for the tweener vet types but not for our young players.

How much leash did Parssinen earn being on the ice for four goals in five minutes?

The one place where an argument exists is to sit Jankowski and put Tomasino on the 3rd line. Tomasino didn’t click on the 4th line in the two games he started alongside McCarron and Smith … the line with no SOG, no goals for while on ice, one goal allowed. Jankowski hasn’t meshed on the 3rd or 4th line.

 

[Predsanddead24]

How much leash did Parssinen earn being on the ice for four goals in five minutes?

McCarron and Sissons were also on the ice for the same goals yet stayed in the lineup, which is my point.

 

[Armourboy]

We've seen this rodeo before, frankly I think the only thing that stops it is if Haslam steps in and fires them all, and I think that's a long shot. We are stuck with a coach and GM that will always overlook Vets flaws and kill young players for the same thing.

We watched Trotz do it for years, and I think he is trying so hard to stay out of Brunette's way he wouldn't stop it even if he wanted too.

 

[101st_fan]

McCarron and Sissons were also on the ice for the same goals yet stayed in the lineup, which is my point.

What was the one roster change for that game against the Kraken? Pärssinen. He was the variable. For whatever reason he, McCarron, and either Sissons or Smith on the other side just didn't work that night (as kind as I can put it) resulting in Parssinen on the ice for four goals against on just eleven shifts .... something that hasn't happened in the other seven games this season. That experiment had glaring issues. So Jusso sat and Tomasino reentered the lineup until the decision to insert l'Heureux got made .... the youngest of the youngsters sticking for three consecutive games so far, a +1 with 1a and three wins.

For all of the focus HF has on the 4th line at some point people are going to have to recognize it is working now that L'Heureux is there ... that all three members of the current line have 5on5 points, two of them with goals. After recognizing that obvious point, HF and the staff should notice the hole that is the middle six outside of Novak and see that both Jankowski and Sissons are candidates to sit (Jankowski on ice for 2gf, 4ga at ES, 0g, 1a ... Sissons with no points across all situations, on ice for 1gf, 11ga at ES) which opens a potential spot for the return of Tomasino in more of a role that better fits what he is supposed to be ... and where he started the season in the middle six.

 

[LeighDx59]

I think with the new players, Bruno will have a longer leash than we think.

Last year it took a while for players to buy in and play within his system, but when they did, wins started piling up with a lesser roster than we have this year. I feel like once Stamkos/Marchy/Skjei get comfortable and mesh better with the rest of the team, the wins and scoring will pickup.

 

[Predsanddead24]

What was the one roster change for that game against the Kraken? Pärssinen. He was the variable. For whatever reason he, McCarron, and either Sissons or Smith on the other side just didn't work that night (as kind as I can put it) resulting in Parssinen on the ice for four goals against on just eleven shifts .... something that hasn't happened in the other seven games this season. That experiment had glaring issues. So Jusso sat and Tomasino reentered the lineup until the decision to insert l'Heureux got made .... the youngest of the youngsters sticking for three consecutive games so far, a +1 with 1a and three wins.

For all of the focus HF has on the 4th line at some point people are going to have to recognize it is working now that L'Heureux is there ... that all three members of the current line have 5on5 points, two of them with goals. After recognizing that obvious point, HF and the staff should notice the hole that is the middle six outside of Novak and see that both Jankowski and Sissons are candidates to sit (Jankowski on ice for 2gf, 4ga at ES, 0g, 1a ... Sissons with no points across all situations, on ice for 1gf, 11ga at ES) which opens a potential spot for the return of Tomasino in more of a role that better fits what he is supposed to be ... and where he started the season in the middle six.

Except that Sissons, McCarron, and Smith had all been bad leading up to the Kraken game as well. I don’t get how the conclusion from the first few games of the season should somehow be that Parsinnen was the cause of our fourth line bleeding goals. He certainly didn’t help in the short chance he got but the other guys were bad over much larger sample sizes. Which drives home my point they get a much longer leash to prove themselves than the likes of Parsinnen.

 

[Armourboy]

Parsinnen got no leash, he didn't even really get a chance in the game he did get in. If 5 minutes in one game tells you all you need to know about Parssinen then we should have traded him in the offseason and been done with it.

Parssinen is in his position because Brunette refuses to sit one of McCarron, Smith or Jankowski. That means Sissons has to play further up the line up, and all of this means the spots you should have for Parssinen and Tomasino do not exist.

All of this started last season when they felt it was more important to win games and get bumped in the first round rather than clear up what some of the future looked like. You play these guys last season where they should have been and you already have your answer if they can do it or not. Instead we are going to go through yet another season and get to the end of it and still not know if they can do it or not simply because the coach has a love affair with tweeners and 4th liners.