PerreaultForever

Well we rushed him and cocked up his development didn't we? If we'd brought him along properly............... Now wait for the Risto hit highlight reels.

Ya, pretty sure he just strung KA along for leverage. KA tried hard to sign him. It was a fail.

I'm not going to pick the trophies. Overall I think it'll be as expected, McDavid and so on. The teams in the playoffs will be pretty much like last year. A few things I'm interested in seeing though: 1) Florida. Will Reinhart show what he has there or will he just be the same. Will what they have take them up a level and maybe beat Tampa? Will they even make the playoffs? I'm curious to see how that plays out. 2) Will the Kraken way be any good? 3) Will the Laughs crap out in the playoffs again so I can watch the Toronto media go insane? 4) Will Wilson and Reaves actually have the fight of the century? 5) Will Eichel get traded anywhere? 6) Will the Islanders be able to go the extra level and win it? 7) Will Risto be good in Philly and become a fan favourite there? and lastly, will anyone be close to as bad as the Sabres?

That's a pretty good question. And I suppose if he plays well in the regular season Bruins won't be trading him away so he has to be bad for us to get him so I guess no, we will be lucky to have not signed him long term. I have read that he's had adjustment issues and communication problems in Boston and that will come in time. Their D apparently box out players differently than he's used to and well, I guess he's just not used to a D that actually knows how to play hockey. Once they learn each other's tendencies maybe he will shine. Don't know.

Well that's true, and I agree with the assessment, but from an organizational point of view it's a mixed message. On the one hand they are saying none of the kids are ready while at the same time all the marketing and press releases etc are things like Mitts ready to assume #1 role, and Cozens shows his leadership etc etc. you've all seen and heard it. We know that stuff is marketing BS, but not having 1 younger guy given a role to step up into is imo an admission that this team is really really bad.

If there's no C don't teams usually go with 3 A's?

Geekie really impressed me. We need a few guys like that. and I know he's a bit of a one dimensional player but why didn't we sign Donato?

Ya, that was a kick imo, but it's a pretty exciting game aside from the refs . High tempo, high effort.

Definitely never heard about anything like that. Lazar isn't that kind of player either, and he knows not to burn bridges as a fringe player even if he thought it.

Suppose it is kind of obvious. I was away for about a month and a half though so haven't exactly kept up on things, until recently.

Well so far that hasn't held up but maybe this year. Part of it I think stems from constant coaching changes and style changes with those coaches (and thus differing leanings for or against certain players). The team hasn't established a firm identity (other than losing) for years so until you do that and get some stability you keep changing to fit the style of the moment. Granato talks about an identity, but so did Housley and so did Kreuger. remains to be seen.

well that would be too funny, but I think Hall got a no move clause in his deal. DeBrusk maybe, and picks and whatever is needed for cap issues.

I just had an amusing (bemusing?) thought. Rask comes back and the we still have Eichel mid season so Bruins trade us Ullmark plus Lazar and ? ? ? for Eichel.

You don't think he could have swung a deal for Dreidger? Vanecek even would probably be an upgrade from what we have, with upside. Those are two obvious ones that were available, and then the Columbus goalies for a (probable) higher price tag. I think there were better options. imo KA let Ullmark play him no more no less. If Rask comes back, maybe the Bruins will trade him back 🙂

Hey don't let my pessimistic realism get in your way. At the moment they're undefeated.

I hear what you're saying, but isn't getting rid of your top players and veterans and relying on prospects the definition of tearing it down to the studs? Aren't the prospects the "studs"? Also, you have a lot of faith in middling players like Thompson becoming leaders from some sort of grooming. imo you need veteran leaders balanced with prospects. Players to lead them and show them the right way. Coaches are only one aspect of that process.

Yes, but that doesn't really help us since everyone else plays those teams too. Technically we might have more points, but we won't be higher in the standings. Besides that, is anyone actually weaker?

The deal will involve conditional picks that seems to be the possible answer. When that happens it'll be weird to be rooting for his full recovery and success so that we can get more. I also suspect it'll be nothing but picks. Maybe one current high end prospect, but really nothing but picks unless a cap dump is needed.

well he's still a Bruins fan and that'd be his wish, but don't see any possible way that would happen for him.

lol, okay fair enough, then Barre-Boulet would have been an improvement.

I think Bjork is being highly over rated by both the Sabres and this board. I think it likely Barre-Boulet will be better than about half our roster.

How so? Lightning, Panthers, Bruins, Laughs, and even Montreal as they were the Stanley Cup finalist (even though they will probably drop off a lot this year). Senators will even be difficult for us. We had Jersey, now we have the Dead Things. Don't see us any better off at all.

5 Kraken in covid protocols and the whole team is supposed to be vaccinated. This season might not run as smoothly as we hope it will.

Don't think you'd need to. He's better than many players on this roster imo.

So we bring in this guy, then let this guy go, and meanwhile pass on Barre-Boulet. I'd love to hear Adams press conference spin on this logic. Maybe there is no master tank plan after all. Maybe it truly is just incompetence.