Speculation: Will the Bruins make the playoffs?
- Thread starter smithformeragent
- Start date
They won't make it as currently constructed, they need a whole new coaching staff and 3-4 solid trades that really improve the team, so in other words, better not trade any top picks for band-aid solutions.
I doubt it. This roster is not as bad as it's playing, but it's very flawed all the same. I fully expect it will go on at least a little run or two between now and February, whether that's through a new coach bounce, a useful trade or the simple ups and downs of a long season. But I increasingly can't see them banking enough points consistently to squeeze into a qualifying spot. The threshold for a WC probably isn't going to be that high, which means there's a chance, but I'm not seeing their play improve in any one key area, at all, and time is starting to tick by.
I also have no real interest in another wing and a prayer playoffs one and done. The roster needs some serious change and is desperately in need of an injection of genuine young talent. Only way to get the latter is to scoop a few high draft picks. Looking ahead there is enough there to work with - whatever their current struggles the likes of McAvoy, Pasta and Sway have not permanently forgotten how to play hockey overnight - but they need help and the current core needs a shake up. There is some cause to hope they could pull off a quick bounce down and back up within a year or two if they play their cards right, but regardless I would rather see them at least try that than continue to stagger on as a boring mediocrity still trying to chase the increasingly unobtainable.
I also have no real interest in another wing and a prayer playoffs one and done. The roster needs some serious change and is desperately in need of an injection of genuine young talent. Only way to get the latter is to scoop a few high draft picks. Looking ahead there is enough there to work with - whatever their current struggles the likes of McAvoy, Pasta and Sway have not permanently forgotten how to play hockey overnight - but they need help and the current core needs a shake up. There is some cause to hope they could pull off a quick bounce down and back up within a year or two if they play their cards right, but regardless I would rather see them at least try that than continue to stagger on as a boring mediocrity still trying to chase the increasingly unobtainable.
Last edited:
UncleRico
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 9,350
- 12,182
I said yes mostly due to the division being terrible and I don’t think we are nearly as bad as we’ve shown.
I also think Sweeney is going to shake up the roster a bit. He is on the hot seat and will almost certainly be his last season as GM if they miss the playoffs.
I also think Sweeney is going to shake up the roster a bit. He is on the hot seat and will almost certainly be his last season as GM if they miss the playoffs.
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,431
- 24,536
Is this a playoff team? As of today....
Regulation wins - Tied with four other teams for 26th, but they are the only team of the four who have played 20 games. Of teams with 20 games in, only Pittsburgh and San Jose have less regulation wins than Boston.
Offensively:
GF per game - Officially now 31st, just ahead of "Bruins -West" (I mean Blackhawks) at 2.40. But for the past 15 games, they are at 1.87. In the salary cap era, the only team worst than that number was the 2013-14 Sabres at 1.83. Tied with the 2014-15 Sabres at 1.87. Worse than the 15 win brand new expansion Atlanta Thrasher team of 1999-2000 during the dead puck era. (2.07)
Power Play - Dead last at 32nd place (11.69%).
Shooting % - Officially 27th at 8.9%, but for the past 15 games, they are shooting a paltry 6.9%, a full percentage point behind the 32nd place shooting team.
Defensively:
GAA - 28th
PK - 25th
Most PP goals allowed by a goalie - Jeremy Swayman at 15.
Short-handed goals allowed - Dead last with 4 against.
Frankly I'm tired of listening to how intangible stuff like urgency, compete, attention to details, push-back, etc. etc. are the main issues with this team. If this was a talented team just underachieving, then I can see those things being the main issues.
This is simply an flawed untalented group of players assembled by Mr. Neely, Mr. Sweeney, and the rest of the front office (Bradley, Langenbrunner, Gold, Bonvie, etc.). Heaviest team in the NHL, 3rd in hits, and can't string 3 consecutive passes together or fire a puck past a goalie with any consistency. Absolute abomination defending the rush.
This goes beyond coaching (although clearly there are issues there as well). This is a team not built for today's NHL, built for a bygone era. You don't put up the numbers above solely because of intangible stuff and what the coaches are doing. The vision for this franchise is flawed, and until you change the vision from above, success will not be in their future. The fact that the same front office also acquired many of the players on the 32nd placed offensive team right now, speaks volumes. Literally half the Blackhawks forward group was once acquired by the Bruins front office. And the fact is, the two best offensive players here still pre-date the current administration, and they've been at the helm here now for a decade. I cringed yesterday when I read they are chasing a "scoring power forward" as if somehow, the lack of heaviness is the issue. I guess we shouldn't be surprised, the ultimate power forward (Neely) just wants more power forwards. I too wanted a team of all power forwards once upon a time, except that time was in the mid-1990s playing NHL 95 on my Super Nintendo.
Without a drastic course altering decision like turfing the entire front office, like right now, feels like some dark days ahead. Feels a lot like we are back to the Bruins of the pre-salary cap era in terms of mentality of the front office when it comes to what players to acquire, but with a salary cap (and a pile of albatross contracts) tying their hands. When I saw Jeffrey Viel last night, I got flashbacks of Doug Doull and Dan Lacouture. There is no golden parachute to get them to safety like they had in 2005-06. They don't have two future No.1 centers in their system, or the cap space to make major changes or chase a game-changing UFA like a Zdeno Chara. I'm not sure what else there is to say. I think the Boston Bruins are up S&^% creek without a paddle.
Regulation wins - Tied with four other teams for 26th, but they are the only team of the four who have played 20 games. Of teams with 20 games in, only Pittsburgh and San Jose have less regulation wins than Boston.
Offensively:
GF per game - Officially now 31st, just ahead of "Bruins -West" (I mean Blackhawks) at 2.40. But for the past 15 games, they are at 1.87. In the salary cap era, the only team worst than that number was the 2013-14 Sabres at 1.83. Tied with the 2014-15 Sabres at 1.87. Worse than the 15 win brand new expansion Atlanta Thrasher team of 1999-2000 during the dead puck era. (2.07)
Power Play - Dead last at 32nd place (11.69%).
Shooting % - Officially 27th at 8.9%, but for the past 15 games, they are shooting a paltry 6.9%, a full percentage point behind the 32nd place shooting team.
Defensively:
GAA - 28th
PK - 25th
Most PP goals allowed by a goalie - Jeremy Swayman at 15.
Short-handed goals allowed - Dead last with 4 against.
Frankly I'm tired of listening to how intangible stuff like urgency, compete, attention to details, push-back, etc. etc. are the main issues with this team. If this was a talented team just underachieving, then I can see those things being the main issues.
This is simply an flawed untalented group of players assembled by Mr. Neely, Mr. Sweeney, and the rest of the front office (Bradley, Langenbrunner, Gold, Bonvie, etc.). Heaviest team in the NHL, 3rd in hits, and can't string 3 consecutive passes together or fire a puck past a goalie with any consistency. Absolute abomination defending the rush.
This goes beyond coaching (although clearly there are issues there as well). This is a team not built for today's NHL, built for a bygone era. You don't put up the numbers above solely because of intangible stuff and what the coaches are doing. The vision for this franchise is flawed, and until you change the vision from above, success will not be in their future. The fact that the same front office also acquired many of the players on the 32nd placed offensive team right now, speaks volumes. Literally half the Blackhawks forward group was once acquired by the Bruins front office. And the fact is, the two best offensive players here still pre-date the current administration, and they've been at the helm here now for a decade. I cringed yesterday when I read they are chasing a "scoring power forward" as if somehow, the lack of heaviness is the issue. I guess we shouldn't be surprised, the ultimate power forward (Neely) just wants more power forwards. I too wanted a team of all power forwards once upon a time, except that time was in the mid-1990s playing NHL 95 on my Super Nintendo.
Without a drastic course altering decision like turfing the entire front office, like right now, feels like some dark days ahead. Feels a lot like we are back to the Bruins of the pre-salary cap era in terms of mentality of the front office when it comes to what players to acquire, but with a salary cap (and a pile of albatross contracts) tying their hands. When I saw Jeffrey Viel last night, I got flashbacks of Doug Doull and Dan Lacouture. There is no golden parachute to get them to safety like they had in 2005-06. They don't have two future No.1 centers in their system, or the cap space to make major changes or chase a game-changing UFA like a Zdeno Chara. I'm not sure what else there is to say. I think the Boston Bruins are up S&^% creek without a paddle.
Last edited:
- Jan 29, 2003
- 26,442
- 23,182
They aren't this bad and they aren't as good as last year, although on paper they should be.
I can't help but think it's a system/coaching/approach issue.
The only way to find out for sure is to allow a new coach to come in and implement a new system/approach.
If that happens and a month later that coach is sub-.500 or hovering at .500, then I'll be the first one to suggest they sell.
I can't help but think it's a system/coaching/approach issue.
The only way to find out for sure is to allow a new coach to come in and implement a new system/approach.
If that happens and a month later that coach is sub-.500 or hovering at .500, then I'll be the first one to suggest they sell.
goldenblack
Registered User
- Apr 15, 2024
- 1,110
- 2,644
I hope not, which is a weird thing to say.
With the roster flexibility coming up over the next two years, we have a nice window for a bit of a reset here. We're all going to be Bruins fans for a long time.
I don't really want them to bink the second wild card on the last day, to get swept by Florida. Not this year. Most years I'd be fine with it.
Missing the playoffs means some very key change (probably coach, probably elsewhere). I think it's time. I also think this leadership needs to feel that adversity to build on to other seasons.
Now if they go on some heater and win 27 of the last 32 games or something, obviously I'm in.
With the roster flexibility coming up over the next two years, we have a nice window for a bit of a reset here. We're all going to be Bruins fans for a long time.
I don't really want them to bink the second wild card on the last day, to get swept by Florida. Not this year. Most years I'd be fine with it.
Missing the playoffs means some very key change (probably coach, probably elsewhere). I think it's time. I also think this leadership needs to feel that adversity to build on to other seasons.
Now if they go on some heater and win 27 of the last 32 games or something, obviously I'm in.
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,431
- 24,536
You don't go 1.87 Goals per game and shoot 6.9% over 15 games because of systems/coaches/approaches/narratives.
This is on the players. They are trying hard for the most part. It's just a shitty team that is completely overmatched most nights.
- Jan 29, 2003
- 26,442
- 23,182
IDK, all I see is guys scrambling almost all the time ---- passes being missed, guys out of position, passes behind a guy. There is no cohesion at all.
Maybe it is because they all suck at hockey --- IDK.
But --- I can't believe that all of a sudden, Zacha, Marchand, Pasta, etc. simply forgot how to carry the puck or make a pass --- something just seems to be off --- and there are a lot of new faces, which makes me wonder if what they are trying to do matches the guys they are asking to do it.
Make no mistake, I'm not saying there is a cup contender waiting to be unleashed by the next guy who stands behind the bench -- but how many guys can go from being great last year to mediocre this year --- how many guys can go from being good last year to lousy this year, simply because they're suddenly that caliber of player?
Something is amiss -- and I don't think it's all on the "talent".
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,431
- 24,536
A coach can't make a player execute. There is only so much a coach can do when it comes to confidence, players feeling good about their game. Confidence is half the battle in this sport. These players aren't confident in themselves, but they are also not confident of those around them. Players know deep down when their team isn't very good. Frustration mounts, pressure mounts, and it starts to snowball.
I mentioned this in the GDT last night. 3rd period on the PP, Geekie puts a pass onto Lohrei's backhand in his feet, he bobbles the pass, and you know the rest. Ultimately that comes down to player execution, putting that pass on Lohrei's forehand is the basic of the basic. Monty didn't cause Geekie to execute poorly on that basic pass. That's on the player.
Coyle's execution defending the rush on the 2nd goal was absolutely gross. Non-contact beer league level stuff. Is that on the coaching staff?
- Jan 29, 2003
- 26,442
- 23,182
Agreed.
There are a billion specific examples of the players not executing --- I just keep coming back to the fact that the guys who have executed consistently for several years in some cases, simply aren't all of a sudden.
I don't know if it's just bad luck that everyone is having a down year at the same time or there's something else.
In the end, as we all know, coaches have a shelf-life -- and maybe we're just there with Monty.
One thing I do know -- if they bring another guy in (not a current member of the staff either) and the results are the same, we'll find out the answer.
I voted yes . Just feel they are a better team, than the team we have seen on the ice ,this season
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Recalled/Assigned: RHP Sent to Laval for a Conditioning Stint- Latest: The Nightman
