Bruins Weirdos

[flyingelvii]

The Bruins got blown out by the 2nd worst team in the entire league last night. Blown out. Anyone care to explain to me how having Savard would've changed a 5-1 outcome?

Jesus Christ, the Bruins merrymen are worse than almost all others. They have an injured guy so it excuses their chronic lack of depth, leadership, and ability to score goals or protect their own net.

The Bruins will likely be in 12th PLACE by Friday. They, and everyone who apologizes for and accepts mediocrity, suck.

Phil Kessel wouldn't have helped either. Something you have never done but I have asked you multiple times:

Without knowing what you know now, how would you have constructed this Bruins team so it fits under the cap?

Edit: My point being that it's more of a players/coaching problem than a FO problem.

I've answered your stupid cap question at least three times.

Phil Kessel would definitely help, since he can do something that nobody else on the team can do. Score goals. Which is, if I'm not mistaken, the point of hockey.

And what would you do to clear the cap space? Also include the corresponding move to replace the players that you think Chia should have jettisoned. You keep giving an incomplete answer.

And at this point, the team's problem goes a lot deeper than scoring goals.

No. I've answered your question three times. Read through the thread if you want the answer.

I'm glad that you are happy with being in 12th place.

You are quite honestly retarded. The logic that took you to that last assertion is mind-bottling.

Now to get more analytical, one of the biggest problems with the team this year is that they are getting absolutely nothing offensively from the back. Chara has been greatly subpar, Wideman...well, he just sucks right now, Hunwick is inconsistent and still isn't providing the same offense as last year, and Morris, while performing well, hasn't done as much as he was expected to do in terms of scoring. The Bruins scoring problems goes far beyond Phil Kessel. But keep trying to think one player has the ability to make a team go from last in scoring (their current position) to first in scoring (their position last year). Kessel would probably net the team about 10 more goals at this point, which might make them 8th instead of 12th but still in a pretty precarious situation.

[bignick33]

By the way, in all fairness, the Bs were playing pretty well until their top 3 centers went down. We were right there with Ottawa in the 4/5 area of the conference. Clearly this team isn't as good as it was last year, but to say that this team is a 12th-place caliber team is disingenuous.

[buconvict]

The Bruins got blown out by the 2nd worst team in the entire league last night. Blown out. Anyone care to explain to me how having Savard would've changed a 5-1 outcome?

Jesus Christ, the Bruins merrymen are worse than almost all others. They have an injured guy so it excuses their chronic lack of depth, leadership, and ability to score goals or protect their own net.

The Bruins will likely be in 12th PLACE by Friday. They, and everyone who apologizes for and accepts mediocrity, suck.

Phil Kessel wouldn't have helped either. Something you have never done but I have asked you multiple times:

Without knowing what you know now, how would you have constructed this Bruins team so it fits under the cap?

Edit: My point being that it's more of a players/coaching problem than a FO problem.

I've answered your stupid cap question at least three times.

Phil Kessel would definitely help, since he can do something that nobody else on the team can do. Score goals. Which is, if I'm not mistaken, the point of hockey.

And what would you do to clear the cap space? Also include the corresponding move to replace the players that you think Chia should have jettisoned. You keep giving an incomplete answer.

And at this point, the team's problem goes a lot deeper than scoring goals.

No. I've answered your question three times. Read through the thread if you want the answer.

I'm glad that you are happy with being in 12th place.

You are quite honestly retarded. The logic that took you to that last assertion is mind-bottling.

Now to get more analytical, one of the biggest problems with the team this year is that they are getting absolutely nothing offensively from the back. Chara has been greatly subpar, Wideman...well, he just sucks right now, Hunwick is inconsistent and still isn't providing the same offense as last year, and Morris, while performing well, hasn't done as much as he was expected to do in terms of scoring. The Bruins scoring problems goes far beyond Phil Kessel. But keep trying to think one player has the ability to make a team go from last in scoring (their current position) to first in scoring (their position last year). Kessel would probably net the team about 10 more goals at this point, which might make them 8th instead of 12th but still in a pretty precarious situation.

Right, because there is nothing to be said for a player who is fast and skilled making others better, bringing defenders closer to the net and opening shooting lanes for the point etc. Of course, your expert opinion on the Bruins was that "Lucic is hurt and that hurts the powerplay", since we all know that Milan Lucic and his goal-scoring outburts have been missed this year. Lucic, afterall, is a goal scoring machine.

The idea that Kessel would only have ten goals in 40 games is absurd.

I can't have this discussion anymore. You seem to be content with results, content with everyone, and have no blame to assign to anyone. Just blame it all on injuries, which is a fine attitude for a defeatest. I think that teams should simply forfeit when one of their players has a boo-boo, since the Bruins have proven that it is impossible to win a game when someone is injured. But hey, this year's Bruins are, as you said before, identical to last year's Penguins. I'm sure they'll be juuust fine.

[flyingelvii]

No he'd NET 10 goals for the Bruins. Not net as in score but net in the traditional sense. He's only on pace right now for 30-35 over an 82 game season with 1st-line PP time. Given his teammates redefine suck but it's a pretty meh season for a one-sided player.

[ryfarls]

The Bruins got blown out by the 2nd worst team in the entire league last night. Blown out. Anyone care to explain to me how having Savard would've changed a 5-1 outcome?

Jesus Christ, the Bruins merrymen are worse than almost all others. They have an injured guy so it excuses their chronic lack of depth, leadership, and ability to score goals or protect their own net.

The Bruins will likely be in 12th PLACE by Friday. They, and everyone who apologizes for and accepts mediocrity, suck.

Phil Kessel wouldn't have helped either. Something you have never done but I have asked you multiple times:

Without knowing what you know now, how would you have constructed this Bruins team so it fits under the cap?

Edit: My point being that it's more of a players/coaching problem than a FO problem.

I've answered your stupid cap question at least three times.

Phil Kessel would definitely help, since he can do something that nobody else on the team can do. Score goals. Which is, if I'm not mistaken, the point of hockey.

And what would you do to clear the cap space? Also include the corresponding move to replace the players that you think Chia should have jettisoned. You keep giving an incomplete answer.

And at this point, the team's problem goes a lot deeper than scoring goals.

No. I've answered your question three times. Read through the thread if you want the answer.

I'm glad that you are happy with being in 12th place.

You are quite honestly retarded. The logic that took you to that last assertion is mind-bottling.

Now to get more analytical, one of the biggest problems with the team this year is that they are getting absolutely nothing offensively from the back. Chara has been greatly subpar, Wideman...well, he just sucks right now, Hunwick is inconsistent and still isn't providing the same offense as last year, and Morris, while performing well, hasn't done as much as he was expected to do in terms of scoring. The Bruins scoring problems goes far beyond Phil Kessel. But keep trying to think one player has the ability to make a team go from last in scoring (their current position) to first in scoring (their position last year). Kessel would probably net the team about 10 more goals at this point, which might make them 8th instead of 12th but still in a pretty precarious situation.

Right, because there is nothing to be said for a player who is fast and skilled making others better, bringing defenders closer to the net and opening shooting lanes for the point etc. Of course, your expert opinion on the Bruins was that "Lucic is hurt and that hurts the powerplay", since we all know that Milan Lucic and his goal-scoring outburts have been missed this year. Lucic, afterall, is a goal scoring machine.

The idea that Kessel would only have ten goals in 40 games is absurd.

I can't have this discussion anymore. You seem to be content with results, content with everyone, and have no blame to assign to anyone. Just blame it all on injuries, which is a fine attitude for a defeatest. I think that teams should simply forfeit when one of their players has a boo-boo, since the Bruins have proven that it is impossible to win a game when someone is injured. But hey, this year's Bruins are, as you said before, identical to last year's Penguins. I'm sure they'll be juuust fine.

you do realize that the threat of someone on the halfwall like savard who can put a pass anywhere he wants and then keeps the d honest by taking solid shots on net gives his defensemen the ability to move up in the zone and get closer to the net and better shooting lanes. we saw this happen a lot last year when savard would come off the wall and curl towards net and sometimes take a shot and other times chara would go behind the defense and end up getting a tape to tape pass at the far post on his stick to put in the back of the net. this is what kept defenses honest and closer to the net which created lanes to shoot from the point and screens. kessel had nothing to do with that. having your number 1 center and playmaker out of the lineup for an extended period of time is what throws the whole team off, and theres nothing the front office can do about it because you cant assemble 4 or 5 quality centers on your roster because of the salary cap.

its idiotic to think that kessel makes this significantly better this year. yes he can score goals on his own, but they come in bunches. last year he went through a stretch of 14 games and had 14 goals, then the next 25 games he had a grand total of 4. and as of right now hes in a stretch of 19 games and 2 goals.

[flyingelvii]

Rereading your awesome post again and a couple of more points:
-Lucic wouldn't help on the PP since he doesn't, nor has ever, regularly played on the PP. I pointed that out. You blatantly missed that point. He creates space for other forwards in 5-on-5 because of his physical presence, just ask Komisarek. And he has sucked since he's come back. Less physical and his play along the boards is abysmal.

-I didn't say the B's were identical to the Pens. Again you and half-understanding a point and going off on it with hyperbole. It was a comparable because the Pens sucked at the beginning of last year, were out of the race for a bit, and then caught fire when they got healthy. I think I even qualified it by saying it's not an exact analogy. But, hey, why let words and phrases get in the way of you claiming what other people said? BTW, here's exactly what I wrote about the Penguins-
"The Penguins went through similar things last year, barely staying afloat for a little bit and then taking off. I'm not saying that they're the Pens but this whole "This season is over after 10 games" BS is stupid."
Again, your attempts at reading comprehension and logic are once again laughable.

-I don't know why it's a defeatist attitude to think that injuries adversely affect teams. At this point, that excuse is wearing a little thin but earlier in the year if you said that injuries had little to no bearing as to the results, you'd be on something. Again, a couple weeks ago they fielded Recchi, Begin, Sobotka, and Whitfield as their centers. Injuries have adversely affected this team. I've never understood the angst against the injury argument here. They didn't have anywhere close to their real team and treaded water. Now they are falling apart with close to their real time. It's confusing.

[twballgame9]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

[flyingelvii]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

Or a bunch of guys had career years and are coming down. But hey, I'd love to believe in some made up thing was the root cause of their successes last year.

[buconvict]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

Or a bunch of guys had career years and are coming down. But hey, I'd love to believe in some made up thing was the root cause of their successes last year.

Elvii,

Please tell me what you think is the problem with the team and how to fix it. You obviously have all the right answers. Explain to me why the Bruins are one of the 7 or 8 worst teams in the NHL right now, and what they can do to improve. If your answer could go beyond the tired "Injuries, forechecking, bleep bloop, trade for Kovalchuk, blorp, trade for Phaneuf, draft Tyler Hall, blorp", that'd be fantastic.

Thanks.

Your friend,

BUConvict

[flyingelvii]

So a shitty forecheck can't be a reason they suck? Because it does suck. I'd think that'd be your chief concern, seeing how you are greatly concerned with scoring.

I don't know why the team is struggling so much, as I've stated before. I'm praying that a bunch of guys are playing through injuries because a lot look like hell (Chara, Wides, Thomas, etc.). Since they essentially have the same roster as last year, which is a pretty good amassing of talent, my inclination is to put blame on Julien. His systems just seem ineffective, such as the inability to breakout when two forecheckers attack the dmen and their lack of movement on the PP as seen by the lack of backdoor goals Z has scored this year, and my guess is that they've been cracked. He's also seemed to lost the locker room, as evidenced by their displeasure with his comments on Wides. Obviously this isn't all the problem but don't give me the "the roster sucks" argument when a quarter of the team will be in Vancouver for two weeks.

[buconvict]

It isn't that the roster "sucks", it's that the roster "lacks anything resembling a goal-scoring threat". The elite teams of the league have multiple players who fall into that category.

[twballgame9]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

Or a bunch of guys had career years and are coming down. But hey, I'd love to believe in some made up thing was the root cause of their successes last year.

I forgot that this was the Moneyball board. So chemistry is made up now? Teams can't just "click" because it is not statistically provable? Sports history is rife with overachieving teams that clicked for an entire season due to imaginary things like "chemistry" and "personality". With the handle "flyingelvii," and presuming you are old enough to remember JR Redmond, I would expect more of you. And if you are a Red Sox fan, you should recall 2004.

That said, chemistry and personality don't win championships. The Patriots and Red Sox had talent, and that was why they won, but chemistry and personality didn't hurt. My contention is that the Broons were actually mediocre last season, and did well because they thrived on that "beat the shit out of the other guy" mentality around which they rallied. Hence, when the chips were down, the lack of talent killed them in the playoffs and they folded like a tent, chemistry notwithstanding.

And then they traded a lot of the talent.

[flyingelvii]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

Or a bunch of guys had career years and are coming down. But hey, I'd love to believe in some made up thing was the root cause of their successes last year.

I forgot that this was the Moneyball board. So chemistry is made up now? Teams can't just "click" because it is not statistically provable? Sports history is rife with overachieving teams that clicked for an entire season due to imaginary things like "chemistry" and "personality". With the handle "flyingelvii," and presuming you are old enough to remember JR Redmond, I would expect more of you. And if you are a Red Sox fan, you should recall 2004.

That said, chemistry and personality don't win championships. The Patriots and Red Sox had talent, and that was why they won, but chemistry and personality didn't hurt. My contention is that the Broons were actually mediocre last season, and did well because they thrived on that "beat the shit out of the other guy" mentality around which they rallied. Hence, when the chips were down, the lack of talent killed them in the playoffs and they folded like a tent, chemistry notwithstanding.

And then they traded a lot of the talent.

No. Chemistry in hockey is actually important. Your reasoning, however, was complete and utter bullshit. In hockey it is good for players, especially forwards, to develop something with their linemates. Not entirely vital, but it certainly doesn't hurt. What I take offense to is your description of the roster. Again, 25% of the active roster will be representing their countries in Vancouver and for top countries aside from Germany. So in other words, 20% of the roster has a good chance at winning a medal. There's talent there. Now if you want to argue that they too much mid-level talent that's overpaid (Ryder, Sturm, formerly Kobasew, etc.) be my guest. I'll probably agree with you. But to claim the roster is void of talent when you have a top 5-10 goalie, a top 10 defenseman, a top 5-10 center, and arguably the top defensive forward in the league on the roster is horribly wrong. Again, they had a bunch of guys have career years and they were placed in the right system to have career years. They still have the same roster minus 4 players (Hnidy, Ward, Kobasew, and Kessel) and they upgraded on the first two and arguably so on the third so I'm not sure where you're getting the trading away talent.

And the Red Sox won because of great pitching and timely hitting. Keith Foulke's performance was not driven by the shot of Jack they took pregame, some retarded catchphrase, or the centerfielders CRAZY beard. It was because he was a fucking great pitcher that year.

[bignick33]

In terms of importance of chemistry:

1) Basketball
2) Hockey
3) Football
4) Baseball

It should be no surprise that baseball has the most evolved ways of measuring a player's impact on a game of these four sports, and basketball has the least.

[twballgame9]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

Or a bunch of guys had career years and are coming down. But hey, I'd love to believe in some made up thing was the root cause of their successes last year.

I forgot that this was the Moneyball board. So chemistry is made up now? Teams can't just "click" because it is not statistically provable? Sports history is rife with overachieving teams that clicked for an entire season due to imaginary things like "chemistry" and "personality". With the handle "flyingelvii," and presuming you are old enough to remember JR Redmond, I would expect more of you. And if you are a Red Sox fan, you should recall 2004.

That said, chemistry and personality don't win championships. The Patriots and Red Sox had talent, and that was why they won, but chemistry and personality didn't hurt. My contention is that the Broons were actually mediocre last season, and did well because they thrived on that "beat the shit out of the other guy" mentality around which they rallied. Hence, when the chips were down, the lack of talent killed them in the playoffs and they folded like a tent, chemistry notwithstanding.

And then they traded a lot of the talent.

No. Chemistry in hockey is actually important. Your reasoning, however, was complete and utter bullshit. In hockey it is good for players, especially forwards, to develop something with their linemates. Not entirely vital, but it certainly doesn't hurt. What I take offense to is your description of the roster. Again, 25% of the active roster will be representing their countries in Vancouver and for top countries aside from Germany. So in other words, 20% of the roster has a good chance at winning a medal. There's talent there. Now if you want to argue that they too much mid-level talent that's overpaid (Ryder, Sturm, formerly Kobasew, etc.) be my guest. I'll probably agree with you. But to claim the roster is void of talent when you have a top 5-10 goalie, a top 10 defenseman, a top 5-10 center, and arguably the top defensive forward in the league on the roster is horribly wrong. Again, they had a bunch of guys have career years and they were placed in the right system to have career years. They still have the same roster minus 4 players (Hnidy, Ward, Kobasew, and Kessel) and they upgraded on the first two and arguably so on the third so I'm not sure where you're getting the trading away talent.

And the Red Sox won because of great pitching and timely hitting. Keith Foulke's performance was not driven by the shot of Jack they took pregame, some retarded catchphrase, or the centerfielders CRAZY beard. It was because he was a fucking great pitcher that year.

Timely hitting huh? Sure that's not some made up concept? Theo Epstein thinks so.

And the Broons lineup is TEH AWESOME for a 12th place team. It is terrible and it was fucking mediocre last season.

[flyingelvii]

It doesn't take me 10 pages of debate to realize that the Broons are terrible. The injuries haven't helped, but that roster is god awful. They were a mediocre team that won with chemistry borne from kicking the shit out of teams last year. This year, they lost goal scoring in a dumb move, and lost personality to the DL. But this team would be pretty bad even healthy.

Or a bunch of guys had career years and are coming down. But hey, I'd love to believe in some made up thing was the root cause of their successes last year.

I forgot that this was the Moneyball board. So chemistry is made up now? Teams can't just "click" because it is not statistically provable? Sports history is rife with overachieving teams that clicked for an entire season due to imaginary things like "chemistry" and "personality". With the handle "flyingelvii," and presuming you are old enough to remember JR Redmond, I would expect more of you. And if you are a Red Sox fan, you should recall 2004.

That said, chemistry and personality don't win championships. The Patriots and Red Sox had talent, and that was why they won, but chemistry and personality didn't hurt. My contention is that the Broons were actually mediocre last season, and did well because they thrived on that "beat the shit out of the other guy" mentality around which they rallied. Hence, when the chips were down, the lack of talent killed them in the playoffs and they folded like a tent, chemistry notwithstanding.

And then they traded a lot of the talent.

No. Chemistry in hockey is actually important. Your reasoning, however, was complete and utter bullshit. In hockey it is good for players, especially forwards, to develop something with their linemates. Not entirely vital, but it certainly doesn't hurt. What I take offense to is your description of the roster. Again, 25% of the active roster will be representing their countries in Vancouver and for top countries aside from Germany. So in other words, 20% of the roster has a good chance at winning a medal. There's talent there. Now if you want to argue that they too much mid-level talent that's overpaid (Ryder, Sturm, formerly Kobasew, etc.) be my guest. I'll probably agree with you. But to claim the roster is void of talent when you have a top 5-10 goalie, a top 10 defenseman, a top 5-10 center, and arguably the top defensive forward in the league on the roster is horribly wrong. Again, they had a bunch of guys have career years and they were placed in the right system to have career years. They still have the same roster minus 4 players (Hnidy, Ward, Kobasew, and Kessel) and they upgraded on the first two and arguably so on the third so I'm not sure where you're getting the trading away talent.

And the Red Sox won because of great pitching and timely hitting. Keith Foulke's performance was not driven by the shot of Jack they took pregame, some retarded catchphrase, or the centerfielders CRAZY beard. It was because he was a fucking great pitcher that year.

Timely hitting huh? Sure that's not some made up concept? Theo Epstein thinks so.

And the Broons lineup is TEH AWESOME for a 12th place team. It is terrible and it was fucking mediocre last season.

I hate to do it but I seriously question how closely you watched last season and were still able to come up with that opinion. Maybe if you backed it up with something substantial as to why they sucked (i.e. not the chemistry argument), I'd ponder your point of view. Look at the lineup from 2007-2008. That was a 12th place team that made the playoffs as an 8. When healthy, they consistently rolled out Pettri Nokelinen, Peter Schaefer, Nate Thronton, and Jeremy Reich. There is no way in hell you can make a rational argument that that team is better than the current incarnation.

[eepstein0]

I spend more time around the NHL (scouts, press box, in the locker room, etc.) than your average person. I'm not trying to say that my opinion is correct or anything like that, but every time I hear the Bruins come up, nobody says that the team was poorly constructed or that trading Phil Kessel is the reason this team is so bad right now. The problems:

(1) Injuries, tons of them
(2) Regression by Krecji, Wideman, Chara, etc.
(3) Depth issues

This team has had a zillion injuries. Krecji and some of the guys we couldn't on last season simply haven't played very well and this team did not have enough depth to withstand those injury issues.

The first two are what they are, the 3rd you can play on Management. Would quite quit on the B's yet, they need to get healthy (completely healthy) post-Olympic break. Make the playoffs and they'll have to win some road games, which they're designed to do with their defensive style.

[Unchesco]

I spend more time around the NHL (scouts, press box, in the locker room, etc.) than your average person. I'm not trying to say that my opinion is correct or anything like that, but every time I hear the Bruins come up, nobody says that the team was poorly constructed or that trading Phil Kessel is the reason this team is so bad right now. The problems:

(1) Injuries, tons of them
(2) Regression by Krecji, Wideman, Chara, etc.
(3) Depth issues

This team has had a zillion injuries. Krecji and some of the guys we couldn't on last season simply haven't played very well and this team did not have enough depth to withstand those injury issues.

The first two are what they are, the 3rd you can play on Management. Would quite quit on the B's yet, they need to get healthy (completely healthy) post-Olympic break. Make the playoffs and they'll have to win some road games, which they're designed to do with their defensive style.

Well said.

[flyingelvii]

I spend more time around the NHL (scouts, press box, in the locker room, etc.) than your average person. I'm not trying to say that my opinion is correct or anything like that, but every time I hear the Bruins come up, nobody says that the team was poorly constructed or that trading Phil Kessel is the reason this team is so bad right now. The problems:

(1) Injuries, tons of them
(2) Regression by Krecji, Wideman, Chara, etc.
(3) Depth issues

This team has had a zillion injuries. Krecji and some of the guys we couldn't on last season simply haven't played very well and this team did not have enough depth to withstand those injury issues.

The first two are what they are, the 3rd you can play on Management. Would quite quit on the B's yet, they need to get healthy (completely healthy) post-Olympic break. Make the playoffs and they'll have to win some road games, which they're designed to do with their defensive style.

Lost in all this "They suck" discussion is the fact that they are, at least as of last week, still in the top 5 in Goals Against. So Juien's defensive system is still working great and it really is more on the team to produce more offensively.

[bignick33]

TW, haven't you said in the past that you don't really follow the Bruins?

[bignick33]

TW, haven't you said in the past that you don't really follow the Bruins?

are you going to be his bruins stalker, commaveJ-E-T-Sbaldwin'sgarage

Come to think of it...

[twballgame9]

I watch the Broons from time to time, just not religiously. Don't like pro hockey on TV - love going to the games. That said, the only thing that stands out to me when I watch is the lack of talent. Last year seemed better, but you knew that team wasn't going to make much noise in the playoffs.

Plus, most of the people I know played college hockey and are hockey nerds, so I listen to them for the first few minutes (before I fall asleep) when they have good Broons talk.

[flyingelvii]

I watch the Broons from time to time, just not religiously. Don't like pro hockey on TV - love going to the games. That said, the only thing that stands out to me when I watch is the lack of talent. Last year seemed better, but you knew that team wasn't going to make much noise in the playoffs.

Plus, most of the people I know played college hockey and are hockey nerds, so I listen to them for the first few minutes (before I fall asleep) when they have good Broons talk.

They led the East in Goals For and the league in Goals Against and had the top goalie and defenseman in the league. I was skeptical because I have never viewed Thomas as a goalie that could win games for his team (see: Scott Walker's goal in Game 7) but I just can't buy the argument that nobody thought the team would do anything in the playoffs.

[twballgame9]

I watch the Broons from time to time, just not religiously. Don't like pro hockey on TV - love going to the games. That said, the only thing that stands out to me when I watch is the lack of talent. Last year seemed better, but you knew that team wasn't going to make much noise in the playoffs.

Plus, most of the people I know played college hockey and are hockey nerds, so I listen to them for the first few minutes (before I fall asleep) when they have good Broons talk.

They led the East in Goals For and the league in Goals Against and had the top goalie and defenseman in the league. I was skeptical because I have never viewed Thomas as a goalie that could win games for his team (see: Scott Walker's goal in Game 7) but I just can't buy the argument that nobody thought the team would do anything in the playoffs.

What number does GAA wear?

Last year's Broons reminded me of the year the Mariners won 125 games and had zero chance to win the World Series. Maybe you could equate Thomas to starting pitching - looks good but something doesn't feel quite right.

Either way, I would have bet the house on "Broons don't make Stanley Cup" last year.

[Endless Mike]

:clownshoes

[bignick33]

:clownshoes

Where is IG?

[flyingelvii]

Well the Leafs will probably be as bad, if not worse, than the Bruins in scoring goals now. So goes the quest for Taylor Hall.

[buconvict]

Well the Leafs will probably be as bad, if not worse, than the Bruins in scoring goals now. So goes the quest for Taylor Hall.

The Leafs have a pretty decent shot of finishing ahead of the Bruins now. It's funny, watching a team make trades to improve. What a novel concept.

[bignick33]

Well the Leafs will probably be as bad, if not worse, than the Bruins in scoring goals now. So goes the quest for Taylor Hall.

The Leafs have a pretty decent shot of finishing ahead of the Bruins now.

The Leafs traded 3 good offensive players for a very good defenseman and an over-the-hill goalie. You would have thought they would have realized after they dumped Tuuka Rask for a washed-up Andrew Raycroft that they should stop trading for mediocre, past-their-prime goalies. Since then, they have fielded had one atrocious goalie after the next. They have good defenseman. That's it. They have no one capable of scoring goals or stopping pucks. This trade does not make them better, at least not right now.

I can't believe I just responded to the idiotic suggestion that the Leafs are well-run. They are laughably incompetent, and it will the Bruins' massive, massive gain if they can avoid drafting people like Matt Lashoff with the bounty of picks they will be receiving.

Wanna bet about who finishes ahead of whom?

[Endless Mike]

:clownshoes

Where is IG?

What?