The Old Bruins Fan

Steven Harris is an Idiot

2012-02-03T13:20:00.001-07:00

Yeah, I know the subject line is a bit over the top. I'm usually more restrained than that. But the guy deserves to be called an idiot for writing this article.

In the article Mr. Harris suggests that the Bruins need to trade someone in order to "wake them up." This after a run of mediocre play in mid-season, something every team goes through, even championship teams like the Bruins; and after a single poor game that came on the heels of an impressive come from behind victory.

If there were an award for jumping ship at the first squeak of a tiny mouse in the hold, Mr. Harris would be a sure thing. It's clear that Mr. Harris doesn't give a crap about the team, the players, or even winning. He just needs something to write about.

After all, you can't get something for nothing. There is cap space to consider and how another player would affect the room. Not that Harris gives a crap about any of that.

I also suspect Harris wants to keep the silly rumors going about trading Thomas. This is his underhanded way to do that because that's what he really wants to write about but his editor knows that everyone is tired of the subject.

About Thomas... anybody out there really watch the games? Statistics don't tell the whole story. Fact is Tim Thomas wins games by keeping the Bruins in it until the end. This is something Rask, even though he has played very well, often fails to do. As they say, it's not just allowing goals but when you allow them. If the Bruins want to win another Stanley Cup, that right there could be the difference.

Perhaps its time the Herald woke up and considered trading columnists.

Two Days in January (21/22)

2012-01-23T09:40:00.001-07:00

Two days: two games, 3 points in the standings, 16 goals, 4 fights, 109 penalty minutes, a natural hat trick, and a three game suspension. That about sums it up.

Sundays game vs. Philly was sloppy, but they won anyhow. I expected it to be bad, given the tough game and loss the day before. In fact, I claimed after the Rangers game that if the Bruins beat the Flyers the next day that would be a sign of an elite team.

The main event was Saturday's game vs. the Rangers. I am very much looking forward to the rest of the season series with them. In fact, I wish the Bruins could play the Rangers more. One of the things I don't like about the proposed re-alignment is that the Bruins would only play the Rangers twice per year.

The Rangers are very impressive--easily the best team the Bruins have faced all year. When you compare them to the Canucks, the Canucks don't come off looking very well. The Rangers are everything the Canucks are not: tough and straight ahead. It was a pleasure to lose to them.

I must say that I felt the Bruins were marginally the better team. Although Rask played very well, particularly in OT, both regulation goals against the Bruins were a bit on the soft side. The Rangers didn't have to work for their goals in the same way the Bruins did.

About the Ference suspension... in short I thought he deserved punishment but three games seems too harsh. The way the Bruins used their defensemen in this game was really rather astounding. I can't recall seeing them lead the rush deep into the offensive zone so often before. It wasn't an accident that both goals were scored by defensemen. But I believe that is what lead to the reckless hit. Ference is usually on the other side in that situation (being chased into the corner at high speed in the offensive zone), which is why he should be the first one to recognize that the hit was extremely reckless. After all, that could be him hitting the boards next time. But he also isn't often in this position. Ference was having probably his best game of the year and had scored an important goal. I think he went into the corner trying to play right to the edge and crossed the line. Nevertheless, McDonaugh wasn't even injured, which seems to matter to the league, and Ference is not a repeat offender. So three games seems like throwing the book at him. It would seem to me that one or two games would have made the leagues point just as well.

More on the Marchand Hit

2012-01-10T11:37:00.001-07:00

After sleeping on it I have some more, perhaps less biased, observations about the Marchand hit and its aftermath.

It seems clear to me that the position of Marchand and the Bruins organization that he was simply defending himself is, well, indefensible. Marchand saw an opportunity to throw a hip check at Salo designed to toss him onto the ice in spectacular fashion. But he did so dangerously with what was clearly a clip.

Also, Claude Julien said that, "In my opinion, if guys start protecting themselves the way Marchand did, maybe guys will stop taking runs at other guys because that’s the consequences you end up paying for taking runs at guys, too.”

I hate to agree with Vignault, but this really was a dumb thing to say. It is clear to everyone who has looked carefully at the video that Salo didn't take a run at Marchand. Even if he had, it was still a dumb thing to say.

I must also say that I really like how Shanahan makes these videos explaining the league's decisions when a suspension is handed out. Here is the one about Marchand.

That said, I still think some things about this suspension stink. First off, I don't like the use of the term predatory. It implies the intent to injure. I do not believe that Marchand wanted to injure Salo. I think he wanted to make a spectacular hit, and being smaller than Salo, some sort of hip check was his best option. Others may disagree, but that is in fact my point. We cannot know what his intentions were. Therefore intentions have no place in these disciplinary actions. It follows that it is unfair for the league to label this as a predatory hit.

Second, I don't believe a suspension should depend on whether or not the other player was injured. I am not alone in this. Many others have spoken out about this absurd practice by the league. Punish the infraction, not the result. It is my belief that Marchand and Salo could replay this hit a hundred times and 95 times Salo either bounces off or lands harmlessly on the ice. The way the two players came together Salo landed on his head, which was unfortunate. This is one of the reasons clipping is dangerous and should be penalized. But to not suspend other players for the exact same move simply because nobody got hurt is inconsistent. The result is that the Marchand suspension can legitimately be seen by Bruins fans as too arbitrary.

Lastly, there were some regrettable things that were said in the media yesterday by people connected with the Bruins organization. I think they should take a long hard look at themselves and in the future not be baited into this sort of debate. If you hear yourself saying, "I usually don't like to comment on these things," then for goodness sake stop right there!

Consider what was said when Marchand was suspended last spring for an elbow to the head. Afterward Julien said, "You hope the player learns from it. You have to respect what the league is trying to do and not be hypocritical. We looked at the play with him a few times and made sure he saw what had happened there, so he could understand it. Hopefully he learns from it and is a little more careful in regards to those head hits. We don’t think there’s any need for it in the game, so we all have to be aware of that. If we’re going to clean it up as coaches, you’ve got to be supportive of it and you’ve got to help those players through that as well.”

That was clearly taking the high road. It was taking responsibility for what happened. Why didn't that happen this time? It doesn't excuse what the Bruins said, but I believe that had the Canucks organization simply said, "We don't comment on league discipline matters" things would have been very different. One of the more difficult things to do in life is to remain above it all rather than stoop to the level of your opponent when they have no class. The Bruins failed to do this. The Canucks should have taken the high road and turned their attention to their next game versus the Panthers rather than create a media circus. Who knows, maybe they would have even beaten them. In short, I still think they are a bunch of whiners and their success in bringing the Bruins down to their level only makes it all the worse.

Great Teams Do Their Talking On the Ice

2012-01-09T20:53:00.000-07:00

I recently praised the Vancouver Canucks in this space for playing a solid, tough game against the Bruins. That was on the ice. But recent comments made by various people associated with the Canucks organization have once again proved them to be a bunch of pathetic whiners.

The comments were made prior to the hearing regarding Marchand's hit on Salo in an apparent attempt to influence the results. This, when they won't even be playing the Bruins again this season. So why care so much?

Perhaps the worst comment was made by their coach, Vigneault, who had this to say: "Marchand – and this is just my feeling – but some day he’s going to get it. Some day, someone’s going to say ‘enough is enough’ and they’re going to hurt the kid because he plays to hurt players. And if the league doesn’t care, somebody else will.”

I have watched every game Marchand has ever played in the NHL save one or two. How many games has Vigneault seen him play in? A dozen? How is it that I missed seeing Marchand trying to hurt players? For that matter, how is it that the league has failed to punish him for all these attempts he has made to hurt players in the past? Not only is this nothing more than sad, sour grapes, but it is the worst kind. Vigneault sounds like my 13 year old when he's trying to get his 11 year old brother in trouble. What a class act.

The thing about whiners is that they think the world hasn't given them everything they think they deserve. They make excuses for their failures rather than take responsibility for them. They think the blame always lies with everyone but themselves. They think its Ok to break a window or burn a car just because they didn't get what they wanted. They think... like losers.

And they are.

Finally, a Worthy Opponent

2012-01-08T17:43:00.000-07:00

A lot has already been written about the Bruins vs. Canucks and everyone seems to have a different perspective. This is my spot to share my own, and from what I've been reading I'll probably tick more than a few fellow fans off with it. Oh well.

It was great to see the Bruins face a team they could measure themselves against. As everyone knows, since November 1st the Bruins have been not just beating, but utterly destroying, most opponents. The Bruins have scored six or more goals eleven times. And in the two previous games they outscored their opponents 15-1. The good times have been rolling for some time now, but it is only fun for so long to see games end after the first three minutes. Looking ahead to the games in the new year my attention was drawn to the ones that might actually be close, and the Vancouver game was the first on the list. Sure, the Bruins did lose a couple since November began, but no offense to Dallas et al, this was because the Bruins didn't come to play.

So I got the challenge I wanted. Truth be told, the Vancouver Canucks were the first team the Bruins have played this season that I felt was good enough to truly make the game interesting. The result was determined as much by the officiating as anything else, so I look on it as a sort of tie, or better: the first game in a long series. Vancouver did earn the first win, I can't take that away from them, but the Bruins would hardly be counted out if this was the first of a seven game series. Before Vancouver fans get too excited, they should consider that playing most the game without Looch and losing Marchand late, who was playing very well, was like tying one hand behind their back. That represents the loss of chemistry on two of the Bruins best lines.

My view is that the Bruins are a better team this year than they were last year. But here's the part that's going to ire my fellow fans: I think it's pretty clear that Vancouver is better too. Or if not better, they are at least tougher. Speaking about the Canucks in this article, Dan Shaunessy claimed, "They are posers and floppers, arrogant and cowardly." Then he went on to describe all the fighting and rough play. This comment may make him popular among Bruins fans, but to be perfectly honest it doesn't accurately describe what I saw during the game. What I saw was a Canucks team eager to prove they were tough and, unlike a few other teams that have tried the same in the Garden, they handled themselves quite well. So cudos from me where they are due.

I'm not going to claim that the referees were biased, but it is clear they made a lot of mistakes. I would very much like someone to explain to me how three Canucks can jump on a pair of players who are fighting and that's not being the third man in. When I saw those white jerseys fly-in I thought I was having a flashback to the 70's! That sort of thing simply isn't allowed today, or so I thought. For the officials to send Lucic out of the game instead, something that the league has now admitted was a mistake, was simply confounding. I still don't get it. I know that the situation was difficult for the officials, but this seemed pretty basic.

All this was made much worse by the fact that I was forced to watch the Vancouver broadcast because the NHL network decided to show the game nationwide exclusively. This begs another question: why have I never once seen the NHL network pick up the NESN broadcast? Not once. Is this some sort of contractual thing? It sure doesn't seem fair to this distant Bruins fan. But I digress. The Vancouver coverage appeared at first glance to be professional, better than what I am forced to watch from some of the other markets. But they seemed oddly uninformed. They never told us what the full penalties were in the first period so I just had to wonder if anyone other than Lucic was ejected. And they didn't even get that right, claiming that he'd only been given a 10-minute misconduct. What really amazed me was when they returned for the second period and admitted that they still didn't know what the penalties were. It made me wonder why they didn't just have someone ask the official score keeper. Or for that matter use their phone to look it up on nhl.com for heaven's sake! They also went on and on about a supposedly missed icing call that supposedly led to a Bruins goal. Even their between-periods analysts called them on this, rightly pointing out that the icing was in fact waved off and it was the Canucks turnover that actually led to the goal.

The same thing happened when Marchand was given the five-minute major. Nothing was said at the time about a misconduct. They only mentioned much later that the Bruins were "without Marchand." Their whole broadcast seemed like that: just two stuffy old guys jabbering about whatever came into their heads rather than having actual information to pass on to the viewers.

Anyhow, about the Marchand hit. My feeling is that although he clearly didn't intend to hurt anyone, his reaction was of questionable judgement. It was a borderline dangerous choice. I thought a 5 minute major was pretty much deserved. This was no different from charging or leaving your feet to make a hit. And it did, after all, lose the Bruins the game. But I don't believe the misconduct, much less a possible suspension, are warranted. If you watch the video, note the position of his leg. Marchand was in fact very lucky not to have suffered a severe injury himself. If he had been the one hurt, would they have penalized the other guy? I'm not one to claim the NHL is being wussified. I support the attempts to protect the players from concussions. But there is a point where you have to say that sometimes things just happen. I know some Canucks fans think Marchand is some sort of goon, but they are wrong. He doesn't have a history of reckless hits. Think of all those times that players have been dumped over the boards into the bench over the years. It's always highlight reel stuff. Isn't this pretty much the same thing? Are we going to start handing out penalties for dumping players over the boards too?

Quick Note on Chara's Injury

2011-12-10T23:07:00.001-07:00

For what it's worth, I turned to my son and said, "Something's wrong with Chara, he's skating funny." That was well before the contact that everyone seems to think caused the injury.

Let's just hope it's minor.

On a related note, I've heard people in the media talk seriously about Phil Kessel for the Hart this year. Come on, get real! How many goals has Kessel scored when Chara was on the ice? Or Crosby? Or Ovechkin? Or the Sedins? And people think those guys are the true MVPs? Think about it.

The Ten Streak

2011-11-26T13:06:00.001-07:00

The regular season is a long haul. Typically there is a memorable game here, a blowout there, a few forgettable losses, and on to the next. But something magical happened for the Bruins in November 2011: a memorable ten game stretch with a full season's worth of highlights.

The Bruins began the season looking good, playing sharp, yet losing consistently. In the first ten games of the season they only managed 3 wins. The Cup Champs found themselves in last place in the conference and second to last in the league.

But November brought winds of change. It started in Ottawa with a 5-3 win. Ottawa scored first. Then Shawn Thornton fought Zenon Konopka and after that the Bs picked up their play and dominated the rest of the game. Next up was the Conference leading Maple Leafs, a team the Bruins have owned for some time now. One of their three wins in October had been a 6-2 bashing of the Leafs and the Bruins continued their domination with a 7-0 drubbing and a Tim Thomas shutout. Tyler Seguin got his first career hat trick. The third game was another blowout, this time 6-2 over the Islanders. These two games made for a good confidence builder and Tuuka Rask got his first win of the season. The next two games were also blowouts where the Bruins beat both Edmonton and Buffalo 6-2. It is rare for an Eastern Conference team to go on such a blowout bender. These games were fun to watch. During this time Tyler Seguin reached second place in the league in goal scoring and he was the NHL player of the week.

Next up, Buffalo. This game was memorable for Lucic's hit on goaltender Ryan Miller. Miller came way out to play the puck as Lucic was racing for it. Rather than step aside at the last moment Looch put his shoulder down and Miller went flying. Now I'm an old-timer, so I really didn't get why this was a big deal. In the old days a goaltender gave up his special protection when he left the crease. That's the whole reason the crease is there in the first place. Goaltenders get themselves in vulnerable positions when they are trying to make a save, and it makes sense not to have open season on them. But this wasn't that situation. Miller was out playing the puck watching Lucic come at him. I'm sorry that Miller suffered some sort of whiplash injury, but I don't see why a goaltender in that position should be treated any differently than any other player.

Next the Bruins pitted their five-game winning streak against the visiting New Jersey Devils. This was a memorable game, not because it was a blowout, but because the Devils challenged the Bruins defensively in a way other recent teams hadn't. There would be no 6-goal victory against the Devils. It was tied 1-1 going into the 3rd and both teams kept scoring. It was finally ended by Benoit Pouliot late, giving the Bruins a hard-fought 4-3 victory.

The Columbus Blue Jackets visited the Garden next. This game was surprisingly close, with Blue Jackets bringing an A+ effort against the Cup Champs. It went to a shootout where Rich Peverly scored first and David Krejci won it.

The Bruins took a respite from their tight games with a trip to visit the Islanders, where they returned to their dominant ways, winning 6-0. Timmy got another shutout.

Next the Bruins traveled into hostile territory to play the hated Canadiens for the third time this season. Montreal had won the first two in October, and the Bruins had something to prove. Andrew Ference's first period goal stood and the Bruins won 1-0. Another shutout for Thomas.

Next up was one of the most anticipated games of the season thus far. The Sabres hosted the Bruins for their first meeting since the Lucic hit on Miller. The Sabres were looking to redeem themselves and end the Bruins winning streak at nine. They had done some soul searching after their placid response to the Lucic hit. They were pumped and so were their fans. The Sabres brought their A+ game and the first period ended with the Bruins looking beaten down, hapless, and losing 2-0. The crowd booed Lucic the whole night and the first time he appeared on the ice Paul Gaustad took him on in a fight for the Sabres honor. Lucic clearly won the bout but Gaustad and the Sabres got high marks for stepping up, if a bit late. In a memorable showing of character themselves, the Bruins fought back and tied the game late, sending it to OT. Again it was Pouliot who scored to end it in the shootout, after nine consecutive saves by Thomas and Miller. Tim Thomas stood on his head this game and all agreed he was the number one star.

The streak ended at ten with a shootout loss to the visiting Red Wings on the day after Thanksgiving. The most striking thing about this winning streak was the string of blowouts, but the tough games were memorable too.

During this streak the Bruins scored 47 goals, allowing only 17. Tim Thomas had three shutouts, allowing only 11 goals on 240 shots, for a save "percentage" of 0.954 and a GAA of 1.57. Tyler Seguin scored 8 goals, with Bergeron, Lucic and Marchand each tallying 5. Horton managed 4, and the rest were spread out among the team, including two each for defensemen Chara, Boychuck and Ference.

Some people don't even follow the regular season, tuning in only if their team makes the playoffs. Those people don't know how much hockey they are missing!

Zdeno Chara You've Just Won the Stanley Cup!

2011-11-02T23:41:00.000-06:00

And what are you going to do now? "I'm going to dress up like a giant pink bunny rabbit!"

What happens to professional hockey players who lose 7 out of 10 games.

Coaches can be brutal! Let's hope we don't have to see anything this ugly again for a very long time.

How Deep is the Hole?

2011-11-01T09:03:00.000-06:00

With ten games completed, 72 remain. The Bruins have just 6 points, leaving them second to last in the league standings and dead last in the conference. So how deep is this hole the Bruins have dug for themselves? Have they already blown their chances for the playoffs?

Typically around 96 points are required to make the playoffs. Last season the Bruins posted 103 points in 82 games, or 1.256 points per game. Should they match that effort for the remaining 72 games of the season they will garner 90 points. Add the 6 they already have and they might--just barely--make the playoffs.

So to answer the question I posed, the hole the Bruins are in is about neck deep. They cannot afford to dig it any deeper!

Bobble-Who?

2011-10-05T16:09:00.004-06:00

My wife was looking at Bruins stuff and she sent me this link, with this picture:

Anybody else see the problem here? Is it just me or is that Andrew Ference's head on Tim Thomas?

Don't believe me? Have a look here.

Hey, NHL merchandising department! That's really lame!

Can't wait until the banner raising tomorrow night!

Brad Marchand

2011-08-31T12:36:00.002-06:00

Many fans seem to be getting worried about the fact that restricted free agent Brad Marchand has yet to be signed. I was reading about this today on another blog and it got me thinking. Some people just want the Bruins to pay him what he wants, but I think that's a bit naive. There is much more at stake than just money.

In the 2009/2010 season Marchand was brought up to the big team. I was impressed enough that when a writer suggested that the Bruins didn't have enough talent I pointed to Marchand as a counter example. I think he was sent back to Providence the very next day, which left me scratching my head and wondering if I had really seen the potential that I thought was there. The fact is that he just wasn't ready. The skill was there but he didn't have the maturity yet.

In this past season he had 21 goals, for a total of 41 points in 77 games. Those aren't the most stellar figures, but they show great promise for a rookie. On the other hand, he had two goals and an assist in game 7 of the Stanley Cup final. The question most people are asking is, which one of these players should the Bruins pay for?

But I think there is a much bigger issue. The genius of Peter Chiarelli is that he has signed players who want to play in Boston to long term contracts. He does this by leveraging the fact that the Bruins have become an organization that players want to play for. His approach is to offer more time for less money per year. The players get security and the chance to be remembered as Bruins greats in exchange for a bit less money than they might get on the free market. Witness the key contracts for Chara, Begeron, Thomas (and Savard).

With that in mind, think about this: if you were Chiarelli, what would your long term goal be with regard to Marchand? The best result would be a long term contract. But young players who have made a big splash in the league don't have the incentive to sign such a deal. Being part of three out of the four goals scored in game 7 of the cup final is making a pretty big splash (regardless of his dubious rapping skills). Players like him are looking for the big payout. So they typically want a short term contract. This puts Chiarelli in a bad position, assuming he wants to keep Marchand long term. The terms of this contract will play a major role in determining if Marchand will end up with the team in the long run and that is, in my view, what is probably holding things up.

I believe there is little need to worry about Marchand's contract this season. Eventually it will get done. But my feeling is that it will be short and in some ways he will end up unhappy. In the long run I think Marchand is going to end up elsewhere, signing long-term as the resident star of a mediocre team, or playing for a succession of teams on short term contracts.

But if somehow Chiarelli pulls off another of his astounding long-term signings with Marchand, either now or at their next opportunity, then there will be something to celebrate. It will mean more than just seeing Marchand for years to come, it will mean that Marchand wishes to become more than just another player who once wore the spoked-B. It will mean he wants the chance to one-day be added to the list of Bruins greats.

Thirty Nine Years

2011-06-14T13:12:00.004-06:00

In the summer of 1971 my family temporarily moved north across the border to Vancouver. Yes, that Vancouver. I had seen a Hockey game before but it was in Vancouver that I was first truly bitten by the bug. It was there I first held a stick and learned to shoot left. And it was there that I discovered NHL hockey.

With a few exceptions I recall Vancouver as dull and lifeless. I remember standing outside in the rain waiting for the school bus in the mornings. It rained almost every morning, yet it never really rained. It just sort of misted a lot. Everything was perpetually wet. Summer lasted a few weeks at best. A lot of the people were like the weather: dreary and whiny. On the whole, I didn't really like it much.

It was thirty nine years ago that I walked into my 7th grade art class. My classmates were rowdy. Our teacher was new and just out of school. He told us he'd forgotten something and that we should all sit down. He went out the door and down the hall, leaving us to our own devices.

Someone started chanting quietly, "Rangers... Rangers... Rangers..." This was quickly met by others chanting, "Bruins... Bruins... Bruins.." Soon the class had split into two groups on opposite sides of the room. I remember sitting on a wide windowsill chanting "Bruins" with about half the class. It was the day of game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final. The Bruins were up 3 games to 2 and going into New York with a chance to win it all. A lot of people all over the continent loved the Bruins back then, mostly due to Bobby Orr. Soon we were chanting ever more loudly and I remember banging something on the windowsill in time with our chant.

The teacher came in and weakly tried to get us to stop, but we all just ignored him. Exasperated and upset he ran back into the hallway. That just made us chant more loudly. The whole school must have been able to hear us by then! After a while the teacher returned with the Principal and he managed to make us stop and sit down. Needless to say the Principal was pretty angry.

Later that night I watched Phil Esposito resume his battle in front the of net with the evil Walt Tkaczuk. Espo didn't score a goal that series, but it wasn't for lack of trying. Bobby Orr put on a clinic as usual, scoring the first goal. In the end it was a dominating win. Cheevers got the shut out and the Bruins won 3-0. Bobby won the Conn Smythe again, of course.

From that day on I have been a die-hard Bruins fan. We've been through a lot over the years. The close calls, the games that were lost that could have been won.

Thirty nine years. My oldest son will start 7th grade next year. He loves the Bruins too, of course. I wonder, what would it mean to him to see Big Z raise that cup on Wednesday?

But win or lose this has been a great ride! Win or lose on Wednesday I will remember this season as one of the best and this team with great fondness. They don't need to win it for me. I'll be back next season no matter what. But I'd sure like to see them win it for each other.

Thirty nine years ago Bobby Orr was my childhood hero. But that was so easy... he was everybody's hero. He dominated the game like no other player has before or since. My "adult" hero is Tim Thomas, and his winning would be much more sweet. After all he's been through and after all the idiots who said again and again that he wasn't good enough, it would make me so happy to see Tim Thomas take home a cup, two Vezinas and the Conn Smythe!

Maybe someday I will take my sons on a pilgrimage to Boston. Maybe, just maybe, we will watch as the number 30 is raised to the rafters to join number 4.

The Jekyll and Hyde Series

2011-06-11T11:53:00.002-06:00

I can't recall a playoff series where the home ice advantage had such an impact. It's not just that the Bruins and the Canucks are winning their home games, but that the games themselves are so completely different.

Last night's game 5 in Vancouver was much like the previous two, a tight-checking low-scoring affair. In these three games the Canucks have outscored the Bruins 5-2, recording two shutouts. The Canucks have won all three but by thin one-goal margins. The games have been close but Vancouver has always had the slight upper hand.

The two games in Boston were completely different. There, Boston completely dominated. The Bruins outscored the Canucks 12-1 and recorded one shutout.

If this pattern continues the Bruins should be favorites to win game 6 at home. But they must, of course, remember to bring their A game from the start.

And should they reach game 7, in order to win the cup the Bruins will have to break out of the previous pattern. There is some hope for that from what we saw in game 2 in Vancouver--a game in which the Bruins led at one time and was won in overtime.

Bruins Bite Back

2011-06-08T23:41:00.001-06:00

Canucks Bullshit

2011-06-08T16:49:00.003-06:00

It's been an experience getting to know our hockey counterparts in Vancouver. They are, after all, from that distant land of the West where Bruins seldom tread in these days of a 30 team league.

But before I start crooning, "Getting to know, you..." let me say that the experience hasn't been very positive. The Canucks organization, players, and many of their fans are Bullshit artists, plain and simple. They seem to think that the taunts, dirty hits, bites, forwards riding Thomas across the crease, not to mention the obvious dives, are simply part of Stanley Cup championship hockey. I disagree.

But they have taken things to a whole new level by not merely defending their suspended teammate Rome's despicable late hit on one the Bruins top goal scorers, landing him in the hospital and out of the playoffs. Rather, they have suggested that this was somehow Horton's own fault and that they, the poor misunderstood Canucks, are actually the victims. They have further added insult to injury (and I mean actual injury!) by their theatrical appeal to the NHL over Tim Thomas' standing up against a forward about to run him over.

Not only has all this meant that I, every Bruins fan alive, and I suspect many others watching, have lost all respect for their total lack of class, but I suspect they may pay the ultimate price for it.

You see, apparently way out west the word never got to them about the Bruins. The number one rule when playing the Bruins is simple.

Do not taunt the Bear!

It's Not Over Yet: Going into Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final

2011-06-06T11:51:00.003-06:00

Obviously tonight's game is huge. The recipe to win is simple. The strategy that worked so well against Tampa in Games 5 and 7 isn't working well enough against the Canucks. Rather than the team that beat Tampa, what we need to see tonight is the team that beat Montreal. They need to come hard tonight, with overwhelming quickness and desperation. Once they get a two goal lead (please God, not three) then they can play the more conservative/opportunistic game.

You boys still want it, right? Then go out and take it!

P.S. I didn't have the chance to say it earlier, but I'd have sat Seguin in game 1. It worked before. And I'd be willing to bet that Thornton would have played balls out. Seemed like a no-lose proposition to me. But now it's too late.

Bruins vs. Canucks

2011-06-01T11:47:00.005-06:00

Who wins this series? I think anyone who claims to know is either delusional or lying. I would not be surprised if the Bruins swept in four. On the other hand, I wouldn't be all that surprised of the Canucks completed the sweep. Six games? Seven? I guess that's why they play the games.

Some people seem to think the Western Conference is much stronger than the East, and therefore the Canucks will win. The Western conference has won three of the last five cups. But these days the two conferences are almost like two different leagues. Not many people follow all 30 teams. Most of us have way more experience with one conference or the other. You can cite stats between the two, but when it comes right down to it the final is between the Bruins and the Canucks, not the two conferences, so I don't think this line of reasoning says all that much.

I think of the Bruins as bigger and better 5 on 5. Most people seem to think the Canucks are more skilled, but this may just be bias. Higher skilled or just more prominent? Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference. I've noticed that various network commentators seem to underestimate the Bruins.

Both teams have been buzzing around the playoffs for several years looking for deeper success and both seem to be just a bit surprised to find themselves in the final. So I doubt there will be a big difference in desire to win.

The people who should know how the teams stack up (such as Chiarelli and various players) all seem to say the same thing: the teams are in fact very similar. So who knows?

The one thing I can say is this: I don't believe the Bruins have given us their best yet. We saw them take their game to another level in game 7 vs. Tampa but I think they can do even better.

A big deal has been made of the Bruins terrible power play and their less than stellar penalty kill in the playoffs. But the past in the playoffs isn't much of a predictor of the future for special teams because it's all about how the teams match up. There is no reason to believe the Bruins won't have a breakout on the power play. Or they could remain just as inept. Over the regular season the Bruins penalty killing was very good, although better at some times than others. So again, the potential is there. We'll just have to see.

A lot has been said about the officiating in these playoffs. Some have complained that Colin Campbell has favored the Bruins because his son plays for the team. That's completely silly of course. The biggest discipline decision regarding the Bruins so far this year was the hit Tampa's Marc-Andre Bergeron made on David Krejci. They chose not to apply rule 48 in that case. And everyone knows Campbell has excused himself from discipline questions regarding the Bruins all season long. At best you could argue that the guy who replaces him isn't entirely consistent with Campbell. Regardless, there is a report today that Campbell has officially stepped down.

Much more important, in my opinion, is how inconsistent the officiating has been. In one game every little thing is called and in the next they call nothing. Sometimes one team seems to get penalized much more than the other. The officials have been all over the map on hooking, holding, interference, and goaltender interference. This is frustrating for players and fans alike. Here's hoping for more consistency.

Bruins Play Perfect Game 7

2011-05-29T11:51:00.004-06:00

As has already been widely reported the Bruins played flawlessly in game 7 of the Conference Final. Their game was perfect in every way. The ice was tilted towards the Tampa end all game long and when the puck came back the other way the Bruins did an amazing job of taking the puck back. And when the Lightening did manage to force their way to the net Tim Thomas and the Bruins defense always came up big. This last part was so very important--because in a game like this where one team dominates but can't score (Roloson was nothing short of amazing) all it takes in one successful rush the other way, maybe with tired forwards caught behind the play, and the game is lost. But the Bruins never allowed that to happen, particularly late in the game.

There were a few players who stood out to me. After a let up in game 6, Patrice Bergeron had a very strong game. Going in I was very concerned that his concussion was coming back to haunt him like we saw with Marc Savard last year. Savvy came back and scored a winning goal only to fade afterwards. Apparently Bergeron's concussion really was very mild, and apparently they were just being very careful when he missed those games earlier in the playoffs. I had feared the opposite.

Two players stood out to me above all the rest. The first was Dwayne Roloson, who was the best player out there. He was the only reason Tampa was still in it late into the 3rd, and had they been able to score a goal at the other end of the ice, Roloson could have been responsible for stealing the game. The other player was Dennis Seidenberg. He seems to get stronger with every playoff game and in this one he was the dominant defensive player. When your defensive partner is up for the Norris trophy and you are the one getting noticed, that's really saying something.

The top line of Horton, Krejci and Lucic was also very solid. But they were solid as a line rather than individually, and this really describes the whole team. Hockey is the ultimate team sport and this was one of the best team efforts I have ever seen from the Bruins. I am sure that there are some Tampa fans who are mad at their team for putting in what probably looked like a poor effort in this game. And sometimes it is difficult to tell if a team is being dominated or simply not trying. To some extent the two go hand in hand because a team that isn't getting any space to play will become disheartened over time. But in this case Tampa fans should not be angry. It was pretty clear that the Bruins took their game up a notch and the Lightening had no immediate response.

Here We Go

2011-05-27T09:30:00.002-06:00

As far as I'm concerned game 7 vs Tampa Bay is the most important game of the year. The last day or so has given me some time to reflect. It was fun going into game 6 with no pressure--knowing that the Bruins couldn't lose the series. And I have to admit to some daydreaming about going to the cup final. When the Bruins lost I was bitterly disappointed. The reality that the series could end with the Bruins going home tonight loomed over me like a cloud of dark volcanic ash. I didn't like that feeling.

I had to remind myself that following my team is supposed to be fun. If I become one of those people who are bitterly disappointed every time my team doesn't win the Stanley Cup then I could end up bitter and angry. I don't want to be bitter and angry. So I'm going into this game hopeful, but I am not going to throw anything at the TV if they lose. I am going to try to let go of the gloom and enjoy the moment.

Not only that, but if the Bruins win this game I will be happy no matter what happens in the cup final. Going to the cup final would be so cool! When I imagined how this season might end I always imagined being in the cup final. Somehow the thought of Chara holding the cup over his head--higher than any other player has ever held it--never even occurred to me until just now. Sure, I'll want them to win the cup, and sure I'll be disappointed if they don't. But that disappointment will wear off quickly. This would still be the greatest season in many, many years!

Anyhow, that's my own personal state of mind as a fan. For players, it's entirely different. Boys--it's time to show the world what you can do! Tonight you are going to score on the power play and the penalty kill is going to be awesome! Just like we have seen before. The momentum in a series see-saws from one game to the next and it's yours now. Go out there and play like it's the last game ever. Make it happen!

Mike Keenan is Wrong

2011-05-20T08:03:00.004-06:00

The hit Marc-Andre Bergeron made on David Krejci at the end of the first period in last night's game was an illegal check to the head. I am appalled at how the majority of fans and pundits view this hit. The comments of Mike Keenen made between periods were particularly outrageous. Don't agree? Then watch the video below and then read the text of rule 48.

NHL Rule 48

48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted.

48.2 Minor Penalty - There is no provision for a minor penalty for this rule.
48.3 Major Penalty - For a violation of this rule, a major penalty shall be assessed (see 48.4).
48.4 Game Misconduct – An automatic game misconduct penalty shall be assessed whenever a major penalty is assessed under this rule.

It is clear from the video that Bergeron's shoulder impacted Krejci's head. Krejci was moving laterally when the hit came. He obviously did not see Bergeron coming. There is no question that this was a lateral hit where the head was the principal point of contact. Anyone who has been watching this topic knows that during the regular season this would have been called and Bergeron would have been suspended. Shame on the NHL for apparently suspending rule 48 during the playoffs. And shame on Mike Keenen for the tired old, "Krejci should have kept his head up," argument. His suggestion that the players aren't being taught well enough to be aware of where everyone is around them is ludicrous.

There are going to be times when a player gets himself into a vulnerable position. In this case it was Bergeron coming off the bench and catching Krejci unawares. A player might get caught looking down at the puck a few feet from the boards with his back to the play. Or maybe he doesn't notice the stanchion ahead when preparing to take a high hit along the glass. The question is, should we blame the player who gets hit and possibly injured, or do we expect the player doing the hitting--the one usually in control of the situation--to back off a bit? I believe this is a critical question and the future of the NHL depends on getting the answer right.

Eric Lindros, Pat LaFontaine, Marc Savard, and Sydney Crosby--all high profile players who have had their careers heavily impacted by concussions. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Looking just at recent Bruins history, not only do we have Savard missing an entire season and may never play again, but Patrice Bergeron also missed a season. He recently missed several playoff games as well. David Krejci was lucky, his teammates gave him a heads up just in time or it could have been much worse. Krejci too has a history of concussions, having missed seven games to it.

According to neuropsychologist Dr. Paul Comper, the NHL averages about 75 concussions per season. “In my opinion, really what you should do is get rid of all targeted head hits," Comper has said.

Ex NHL referee Kerry Fraser has also said that banning hits to the head was necessary, saying, “The N.H.L. must outlaw head hits.”

Here's how I see it. The speed of the game increased after the lockout in 2005. Players have less time to react and hits come with greater impact. As a result concussions have become more common. As the careers of more and more high profile players are threatened this is going to force the NHL to come to a decision: either slow the game down by bringing back the clutching and grabbing, or put a stop to the hits to the head.

I remember all too well how boring the old clutch and grab game was. I would hate to see it come back. So in my view the NHL must stop the hits to the head. Rule 48 is a good start, but it needs to be expanded. Any hit to the head is dangerous, regardless of whether it is from the blind side or laterally. I suspect the reason some don't see this most recent example as a violation of the rule comes down to whether or not it was a "lateral" hit. I believe it was, but others may disagree. The thing is--this is a technicality that should not matter, nor should it matter if the player had his head down.

Later in the same game Marchand was knocked to the ice. As he fell his stick rode up and hit another player in the face. A penalty was called and the commentator agreed, claiming that, "you must always have control of your stick." Nobody tried to blame the other player for not protecting himself. So why the double standard? When a player's back is to you along the boards you don't hit him on the numbers sending his head into the boards. You don't leave your feet to drive your shoulder into someone's head. And when a player's head is down you don't drill it. That's not really so difficult is it? Considering the alternatives, this would seem a small price to pay to keep the game we love healthy.

Bruins vs. Bolts Game 2 Odds and Ends

2011-05-18T08:54:00.005-06:00

With all that's being said and written about the playoffs it is difficult to have something to say that hasn't already been beaten to death. But here goes.

Tyler Seguin: I think sitting upstairs watching the games helped him in two ways. Obviously as a competitor it brought out the desire to make a difference. But less obviously I think he saw what many of us watching have seen: the Bruins have been a little too tentative, a little too slow to enter the zone and too unwilling to carry the puck to the front of the net. Tyler's game was speedy, straight-up north and south, and it reaped him big rewards. This was never so obvious as when one of the Bruins (I didn't catch who) approached the offensive blue line. As he did he slowed and looked around. The puck was poked away and it fell on Seguin's stick. The moment the puck touched his stick Seguin rocketed into the zone at full speed, forcing the Bolts defense to backpedal or get bypassed. We also saw this same straight ahead style of play from Lucic, who was a monster out there. It didn't always work. Sometime he turned the puck over at the blue line, but the Bolts defense had to respect his speed and strength and started backing off. After that it really paid dividends.

Tim Thomas: I think people are being a bit harsh in describing some of the goals as "soft." But if you are the best goaltender in the game you are going to be held to a higher standard. Yes, he got beat by a great shot. But it is easy for Bruins fans to forget, because our goaltending has been so good for so long, but a player with a great shot is going to be even the best goaltender cleanly once in a while. And that five-hole goal: I think it hit a stick and dipped. Versus needs to buy their guys in the booth bigger HD monitors. There were several times last night that they didn't seem to be watching the same replays I was watching. At one point Olczyk claimed the puck had gone over the goal line when the overhead shot had clearly shown that it hadn't gotten anywhere close to being completely over it. I doubt that he doesn't know that the puck has to be completely over the line so I have to assume he didn't have a good view of the replay. And all the while this was going on, I had seen the puck go off Tim Thomas' face with his mask off and it took them several minutes to realize it!

And what a great story that's going to make for the grandkids. (Old codger's voice) "It was the conference finals and we were playin' the old Litnin' team. There was a wild scramble in front of the net. I'm sprawled on the ice with a defenseman on top of me and I see the puck first hit one post, travel down the goal line, and then hit the other. I'm scrambling to get up and my mask comes off. The next thing I know a high shot comes from beside the goal and hits me just over the eye! Just like the olden days before goalies had masks. You didn't know that did ya? Yep, they once played without any face protection at all! And kids, wouldn't ya know it bounced off my forehead and into the net! I shook it off and put my mask back on and we finished the game. We went on ta win that series and the Stanley Cup."

Tomas Kaberle: Keven Paul Dupont recently called Kaberle a "joke" after his mistake behind the net that lead to a goal on game one. He also stopped just short of calling Chiarelli an idiot for trading for him. But as usual, KPD is more about being obnoxious than writing something worthwhile. Sure, his article likely struck a chord with the fans who were angry about the loss and Kaberle made a great scapegoat. But how cheap is it that? Any blogger could have done that.

The truth is that after a terrible start against Montreal, Kaberle has actually played pretty well. Yes, he didn't have his strongest game in game one against the Bolts. But anyone can make a mistake. How many times has KPD been wrong about the Bruins, for instance? More than I can count... Should he be roasted for it? I wonder sometimes if this guy has even laced up a pair of skates? I see little evidence of it in his commentary. Anyhow, Kaberle said he could play better and last night he did. He brought something the Bruins lack: a bit of cleverness and trickery. Credit where credit is due: there were many times Kaberle was the key to the Bruins gaining entry to the zone and without that you can't score.

Shame on Versus: I've said it here before. Shame on any network for telling us about how the crowd was pumped up by the national anthem rather than showing us. The anthem is part of the game. Show it dammit!

Shame on the Officiating: is it just me or has the officiating been terrible this playoffs? Inconsistent calls. Refs out of position and missing obvious penalties. Head scratchers where you watch the replay again and again and wonder what the ref could possibly have seen. For once the calls seemed to go the Bruins way last night, but that doesn't make it any less frustrating.

Marc Savard: it was so great to see him in the building!

Bruins vs. Bolts: Going Into Game 2

2011-05-15T20:56:00.003-06:00

There was much talk about the typical defensive posture of the Bolts during the long wait for the series to begin, much of which came from the Bruins coaching staff. It looks to me like the Bolts coaches took advantage of that by changing things up big time. Everyone expected a defensive struggle but this game was wild, going end to end for much of the first period. The Bruins did a pretty good job of skating with them, but you got the feeling this was not the game they had prepared to play. To the Bolts coaching staff I say: nicely done.

So what have we learned from game one? For starters, the Bolts are very well coached and playing near their potential. The frustrating thing about that is how clear it seems that the Bruins have not played up to their true potential, even though they have won two series. On paper the Bruins are the much better team, with better goaltending, better defensive play, greater depth, and more lines that can score. But as we saw last night none of that means anything if they don't put it all together and play with focus.

I believe the Bruins have the depth to win this series, but there is no question how important Bergeron is to this team. The thing about Bergeron is that his role isn't obvious. Serious hockey fans who follow the Bruins all season know full well how important he is, winning faceoffs, killing penalties, scoring, and winning the battles along the boards. He's also the best guy out there when they are sitting on a lead as the last seconds on the clock wind down. But the most striking thing about Bergeron comes when you watch a replay of his line scoring. If Bergeron is out on the ice and a goal is scored you can almost always trace it back to a play he made that set it up in the first place.

Perhaps the most worrisome thing I learned from game one was how potent the Bolts power play is. This is one area where missing Bergeron hurts badly, but even then it seems that the Bolts PP matches up a bit too well against the Bruins PK. It would really help for the Bruins to get their own power play rolling.

About that-- I'm not one to second guess the coaches. After all, they know more than I do about the game and the players. Of that there is no doubt. But it has become painfully obvious to me what the root problem is. Long time Bruins fans know that Brick talks about how much he likes it when a forward comes off the half wall. The Bruins haven't done that at all this season. Well, actually, there was one exception. In the series against Philly someone, I think it was Krejci, had the puck poked away along the half wall. He was forced to chase it out in front of the net. And guess what? It lead to their first power play goal of the playoffs!

It looks to me like this: it has become increasingly difficult to gain entry into the zone to set up the power play for every team, and particularly for the Bruins. So the Bruins have adopted a conservative puck control approach where the emphasis is on keeping control of the puck. That means that they don't allow themselves to come close to a defender. So carrying the puck into the "danger zone" in front of the net is considered a bad idea. The end result is that everything stays outside to the point where the passes get longer and more dangerous and... you guessed it--they turn it over. If I were the coach (and thank God I'm not) I would scrap all that and tell them to attack the damned net every chance they get.

One last observation. Some "fans" and sports personalities have a lot of nerve. The very idea of tuning into a team only after they have reached the conference finals and then complaining bitterly because they lost the first game of the series... how utterly obnoxious.

Difficult Days

2011-05-09T09:07:00.001-06:00

These days between the end of one series and the start of the next--these are the difficult days. Despite the daily stories in the sports sections, blogs, etc, all we can really do is wait. Waiting is not a lot of fun under normal circumstances, but when Patrice Bergeron went down that tunnel in the last game against the Flyers, it became downright painful.

Forget for a moment how important Bergeron is to the team, as a leader and perhaps the best all around player in the game today. We remember him lying there on the ice after hitting the boards that awful day in 2007, and the long road to recovery after. Some people have forgotten: he could have died. The bones in his nose were almost driven into his brain. But he was "lucky." He only had a concussion. For those paying close attention, we knew that from that day on it was only a matter of time before his career would be ended by it. And what about his future afterward? What will be the long term result of that hit? These aren't fun things to think about.

I've been reading that some fans think Bergeron may return to the playoffs. Really? After what happened with Savvy last year? Recall that he rushed back from a concussion for the playoffs and even scored the winning goal his first game back. And what is he doing now? He's not even up to coming to the games to watch for God's sake. A "mild" concussion for another player might be something to get over quickly and return, but not Bergeron. Not with his history. It would be a huge mistake for him to come back this year. Period.

Impressive Win over Flyers in Game 3

2011-05-05T08:57:00.002-06:00

I have been waiting since the start of the playoffs for a truly impressive effort by the Bruins and this one finally qualifies. The Bruins scored twice in just over a minute and never looked back. The Flyers, who desperately needed this win, were never in it.

I would usually never dream of calling this a series before the fat lady sang, but this one is over. After what happened last year there is no way the Bruins are going to lose this series. The Flyers may take one or maybe even two games before they head for the golf course, but they will not win this series.

It amazes me how the playoffs in the eastern conference have progressed thus far. To be perfectly honest, I don't think either the Caps or the Flyers deserved to pass the first round--at least not in any normal season. The Caps fortunes rested too much on Ovechkin. Shut him down and they are just a good team. They also didn't have the goaltending for the long haul, which seems to be a theme this year.

The Flyers have looked completely outclassed in the second round, making one wonder how they ever got past the first. I think it says more about how unready Buffalo was for the playoffs than how good the Flyers are. The Flyers too lack the goaltending to go any further.

It's possible that when this is all over the marquee match-up in the east will be seen as the Bruins and Canadiens. On the other hand, watching the way the Lightening utterly dominated the Caps makes me think that Tampa may be the real deal. With a conference final between the Bruins and the Lightening all but assured, I am already looking forward with great anticipation to the start of the series. Is Tampa as good as they appear to be? Or did weak opponents make them look better than they are? And will the Bruins--having met their stated goal for the season of reaching the conference final--just resign themselves to the golf course once again?

Some Thoughts Going Into Game 2 vs. the Flyers

2011-05-01T13:41:00.002-06:00

Ok, I don't say this sort of thing very often, and to be honest it makes me very uncomfortable. I am squirming in my seat as a type. But here goes: deep breath... the Montreal Canadiens are a very good hockey team.

The B's win in the first round was less than impressive. Many of the games were close and could have gone either way, including the game 7 OT. Yet... the Habs had been successful against them all year; they knew exactly how to beat them. And the Bs spotted them game 1 by turning in a lackluster effort. Yet somehow they still won the series. That's impressive, if not very pretty.

The Flyers are a step down in comparison, as are Washington and Tampa. None of those teams have the complete package to win a cup, and none of them match up against the Bs the way the Habs did.

That said, I think the Bruins are fully capable of losing in the second round again. After all, they were the better team last year too--and look what happened.

I keep thinking about this game a few seasons back. As I remember it the Bruins were fighting for a playoff berth at the end of the season. They had to win the game in regulation in order to keep their chances alive. The score was even with the seconds ticking off in the 3rd period. The Bruins had a power play going and Marc Savard yelled at the coach to put him in. He jumped over the boards and arced across the zone yelling and banging his stick on the ice. He got the pass and buried the puck in the back of net with just seconds remaining. That's what it takes to go deep in the playoffs.

I miss Savvy and I wish he could be a part of this run. But we have seen signs of this kind of competitiveness--the desire to be the guy who goes out there and wins the game--in this year's squad. I see it in Horton. It shows up in Bergeron from time to time. Kelly may have it. I've even seen it in Chara, although he hasn't made good on it so far--but the desire is there. I saw it in Lucic last year. But is it enough? Will they all step up?

The way to the cup final is clear Boys. Are you gonna go for it?

Going Into Game 6

2011-04-26T08:41:00.002-06:00

The Bruins went into Montreal and won two games. That was impressive! They won game 5 too, the first home win for a team in this series. For those following in the media this may sound like the Bruins are now dominant in the series and the favorites to win.

Not so fast. Game 5 was one of those low scoring see-saw affairs that went to overtime and somebody had to win. Montreal sat back for most of the game playing defensively and waiting for the an opportune moment to strike. It almost worked.

I expect game 6 to be different. I think it will be more end to end and I expect a higher score--maybe 4-3. The Bruins may well come out the winners. On the other hand if Montreal gets a two-goal lead it could go the way of game one, where the Habs played shutdown all the way to the end.

A solid road victory for the Bruins over a very good and desperate team would be very impressive.

On the other hand, I feel I've seen this movie before. The desperate Habs win game six. Game seven goes to overtime and is won on a fluke bounce of the puck. Speaking for Bruins fans, I think we can agree that we'd prefer them to win tonight.

Versus Anything Else, I'd Take Anything Else

2011-04-19T12:45:00.004-06:00

Playing in Montreal has proven to be a good thing. Not only did the Bruins win, but Versus didn't carry the game. That meant that I could finally watch the playoffs with the sort of grin only crazy Jack Edwards can bring.

The first two games in Boston were exclusively carried on Versus, at least for those of us not in New England. Now... I've never had anything against Versus.

Until now.

I knew I was in trouble before the drop of the puck in game one. The Versus crew did the usual pregame goaltender meet and greet. They started off with Price, telling us how how amazing he was, never mind the mediocre stats they were displaying. I just found it amusing. When they finally stopped gushing about Price they turned to Thomas, almost as an afterthought, and said something to the effect that, "he's pretty good too." But they didn't say that like you might have expected them to, it was more in a begrudging way. At first I thought I was imagining things. Then they showed Thomas' stats and never mentioned that they lead the league or that the save percentage was an all-time single season record. I would have thought that would be of interest! And when it was mentioned that Timmy might win the Vezina, the other guy quickly jumped right in and said that Price was a legit Vezina contender too. Really? It was just plain ugly. I'd be willing to bet that the French broadcast showed more respect. Seriously. I would take that bet.

It was just weird. I mean, Versus is a US network--I can't think of any reason they'd expect Habs fans to be watching in larger numbers. And hey--I watch other market broadcasts from time to time so I'm no stranger to the usual bias. It doesn't often bug me that much.

But that was just the start. Every time they would talk about the Habs their comments would enthusiastically celebrate them, but when they talked about the Bruins they sounded... unhappy, forced.

But even that wasn't all of it. The broadcast team also seemed really unprepared. When they talked about the Bruins everything was a little off the mark. For instance they made a big deal about Julien choosing to play Thornton over Seguin. Huh?

That's only one example of the commentary being a bit "off." It just went on and on like that.

Imagine you are at a large party at your Mother-in-law's. Imagine too that you just had a recent success at work, where you do something highly technical. You may not have to imagine this next part: your Mother-in-law loathes you.

So she starts telling everyone how wonderful you are, in a disingenuous way, and inaccurately describes the nature of your success at work.

Watching Versus (or is it really NBC now?) cover this series was just like that. I was infuriated before they even dropped the puck! I mean, I wanted to hit something! Not fun. Not fun at all.

And shame of all shames... they showed commercials rather than the national anthems! It's the playoffs for god's sake!

But I did find a solution to the Versus problem during the first period of game 2. I tuned in to the Bruins radio broadcast on the web and listened to it with the TV muted. In the two minutes it took to hook it all up it was already 2-0 Habs. But even then the tension eased. And though the Bruins lost that game I was no longer irritated to the point of chewing nails!

P.S. It occurs to me that a clarification may be in order. I have no problem at all with local broadcasts being biased. Like most Bruins fans I want Jack Edwards to be biased! But Versus takes away my ability to watch the local broadcast via their exclusivity agreement. They are a national broadcast and must celebrate both teams equally.

P.P.S. I just read that Versus signed a new contract with the NHL that gives them and NBC exclusive rights to all the playoff games starting in the second round. God help us.

Time to Make Some History

2011-04-18T08:30:00.002-06:00

The Bruins are now down 2-0 in the series and will play the next two games in Montreal. Here are some interesting statistics to ponder.

Times the Bruins won in Montreal this season: 0

Times the Bruins have been down 2-0 in a playoff series: 26

Times they have come back to win from 2-0: 0

So it's either time to make some history or time to fold like a cheap pair of figure skates again.

So what's it gonna be boys?

Bruins vs. Habs: Game 1

2011-04-15T15:30:00.002-06:00

As a Bruins fan I'm not sure what's more upsetting about this game: the idea that the Montreal coach already knows exactly how to beat Julien's squaud, or the way the Bruins came out in the 3rd period--looking beaten even though they had 20 minutes and were only down by a single goal.

Actually, I do know the answer to that question. The Habs appear to know exactly how to beat the Bruins--just go back and look at how Pilly beat them last year and how Carolina did it the year before. It was exactly like what we saw last night: a tight defensive game where no Bruin is given more than a fraction of a second to make a decision. I tuned into the OT between the Sharks and Kings last night and it was like watching another sport. The ice looked bigger and everyone seemed to have more room.

Ok, so Julien needs to adjust. Maybe he can and maybe he can't. Maybe the players will listen and maybe they won't. That's not what upsets me.

What I can't forgive is the way they came out flat at the start of the 3rd. The Bruins should all be ashamed of themselves. Giving up when they were only down by a goal? With 20 minutes to play no championship team gives up even when they are down by three goals. I get that it must have been frustrating given how they took it to them for the entire second period and couldn't score. But you don't give up!

You find a way to win.

Into the 2011 Playoffs; A Look Back at Recent Bruins History

2011-04-14T09:15:00.003-06:00

The 2011 playoffs start tonight against the Montreal Canadiens. I thought it would be interesting to have a look back at how the Bruins got here and how this year's team compares to teams of the recent past.

The current Bruins era began in the summer of 2006 with the hiring of Peter Chiarelli as the new GM. Even before he began his official duties he put the foundation of his Bruins in place with the acquisition of Zdeno Chara and Marc Savard. The Bruins were a clean sheet at that time. Owner Jeremy Jacob's referred to his team as being manned by "AHL Players." Chiarelli held on to a few core players, including Glen Murray, Patrice Bergeron, Marco Sturm, Mark Stuart, and P.J. Axellson. The former GM had left Chiarelli a present, although few realized its significance at the time, with one of his last official acts: the signing of Tim Thomas to an NHL contract. Chiarelli's choice for Head Coach was Claude Julien but he wasn't available. So Chiarelli hired Dave Lewis, the closest thing to Julien he could find at the time. There was a lot of young talent on the way up: goaltending phenom Tuukka Rask, Brad Boyes, Milan Jurcina, Phil Kessel and David Krejci. Some were still in the pipeline and others were debuting with the big club.

In that first season the new Bruins struggled. They failed to make the playoffs, finishing 13th in the conference with 76 points. They were 13th in goals for and 14th in goals against, with the second worst goal differential in the league (-70). The team had a horrible habit of coming our flat in the second period.

Tim Thomas won the 7th player award.

In my post mortem that season I said, "The biggest highlight for the 2006-2007 Boston Bruins was the shootout. Savard loosened things up with his rally caps. Sturm showed that he really had a scoring touch. Kessel shined, becoming the closer. And Tim Thomas, free of his teammates to go one-on-one with the best goal scorers in the league proved that he had the competitiveness to beat them again and again."

Things improved in Chiarelli's second season (2007-2008). In the summer coach Claude Julien became available and Chiarelli wasted no time replacing Dave Lewis with him. The other big move was to pick up Manny Fenandez, who most expected to become the Bruins No. 1 goaltender, although some of us knew better. In February Chiarelli traded Brad Boyes for Dennis Wideman. Other new names to appear on the roster were Milan Lucic, Shawn Thornton, Jeremy Reich, Vladimir Sobotka, and walk-on Glen Metropolit.

That season the Bruins made the playoffs, finishing 8th with 94 points. Once again they were 13th in the conference in goals for, but they had become a respectable defensive team, finishing 5th in goals against. Tim Thomas beat out Fernandez as the starting goaltender. He and Chara were selected for the All-star game in February. The Bruins were the last team in the league to lose back to back games.

Tim Thomas won the 7th player award for the second year in a row.

The Bruins faced Montreal in the first round of the playoffs. They stumbled badly in game one in Montreal, often appearing overwhelmed. I recall Dennis Wideman in particular playing like he'd forgotten how to lace his skates, much less start a breakout. In the end the Bruins took it to game seven but lost 5-0.

Afterward I wrote, "I can't recall the last time I was absolutely certain that this team played all the way to its potential, leaving nothing on the ice. Everyone associated with the Bruins should be very proud."

This was Glenn Murray's last season. It ended with an ugly buyout of his contract. Over the summer Julien claimed that the team, which was now sound defensively, would need to improve on offense.

Chiarelli's third season (2008-2009) saw more improvement. They finished on top of the eastern conference and second in the league overall with 116 points. Their offense exploded with a conference leading 274 goals and their defense remained solid, leading the conference in goals allowed. Their goal differential was +78.

Thomas and Chara were selected as all stars again. Thomas won the Vezina as best goaltender, Chara won the Norris as best defenseman, and Julien won the Adams as best coach.

This was also the year Lucic won the hearts of Bruins fans by fighting every tough guy in the NHL, and ultimately winning the 7th player award.

The Bruins faced Montreal again in the first round but swept to an easy victory in four games. In the second round they faced Carolina. During this series Milan Lucic emerged as a game changer. Carolina was a good defensive team with playoff experience. They shut the Bruins rolling offense down and the Bruins didn't seem to know how to respond to it. The Bruins lost in overtime in game 7 on a fluke bounce of the puck.

Afterward I wrote, "So who do we blame for this loss? Timmy? The D-man who let Walker in front of the net? I say, nobody. The Bruins played their best, but in todays NHL it's not like the 70's and 80's. No team can dominate to the point where they can expect to win it all, no matter how good they are. It takes talent, hard play, great coaching, and yes--luck, to win a cup. It was the Hockey Gods who decided this one, and I am good with that."

Over the summer Phil Kessell was traded to Toronto.

Chiarelli's fourth season (2009-2010) brought great expectations based on their previous success. But they got off to a terrible start, playing as if the games didn't really matter. Tuukka Rask replaced Fernandez as the backup goaltender. Both goaltenders suffered from the poor play of the team early on and neither played all that well. But it was Thomas who seemed to get the brunt of it.

One bright spot was beating Philadelphia in the Winter classic. Marco Sturm scored the winner in OT. Thomas made the U.S. Olympic team but was not playing well enough to be the starter.

The team had started to play better but unknown to the outside world Thomas suffered an injury. Rask emerged as the starter after that and played quite well. After a pretty dismal season a strong playoff push won them 6th overall with 91 points and another playoff berth. Somehow they had sunk to 2nd to last in the league in goals for, but they were still near the top in goals against. Their goal differential shrank to +6.

Late in the season Marc Savard was elbowed from behind in a vicious hit to the head by Matt Cooke of the Penguins. He was unable to return until late in the playoffs and he was not himself.

The Bruins faced Buffalo in the first round of the playoffs, beating them in 6 games.

In the second round they faced the Flyers. They won the first three games and seemed poised to win the series. But after that they seemed to lose their heart. Even though they both played, injuries to Savard and Lucic took their toll. Their rookie goaltender Rask played well, but lost his edge as the playoffs went on. In the end the Flyers made a historic comeback to win four straight and move on to the conference final. This was seen as a collapse of historic proportions by Bruins fans.

Chiarelli's fifth season (2010-2011) was solid. Savard tried to come back but his concussion sidelined him for the rest of the season and playoffs. Many new faces were added to the lineup, including Nathan Horton, Chris Kelly, Thomas Kaberle, and Rich Peverly. Rookie Brad Marchand made his mark on the team and won the affection of the fans by playing with heart and grit, winning the 7th player award. Tyler Sequin, the 2nd pick overall, showed signs of becoming a great player, but was not yet fully ready for the NHL.

After off-season surgery Tim Thomas returned to Vezina form and set the all-time record for save percentage in a season.

The Bruins finished 3rd overall in the conference with 103 points, 3rd in goals for and 1st in goals against.

Going into the playoffs this year, this is clearly Chiarelli's best team yet. It has the goaltending necessary to win a cup and it has finally achieved a good balance between offense and defense. Except for Savard they are healthy. Chara and Lucic will lead the team, playing with both hunger and heart. It looks like Horton, in his first playoff series, will as well. Expect solid play from Bergeron and skilled puck movement from Krejki. Being healthy has given coach Julien a means to build a fire under his underachievers, Ryder and Paille. And finally, a cup run usually depends on the lesser stars to step up. Marchand, Thornton and Campbell look ready to fill this role.

In short, only heart, desire to win, and perseverance stand between this team and the cup. That, and the Montreal Canadiens.

Bring it on!

In the Meantime

2011-04-11T17:06:00.003-06:00

The playoffs are finally here! Well, actually we have to wait til Thursday. It's too soon in my book to start talking about game one. So in the meantime I'm going to squeeze this in.

Dear NHL Scheduler:

Seriously?

Out west the Hawks' season ended with a home and home vs. Detroit. That must have been something to watch with the playoffs on the line for Chicago.

But the Bruins get New Jersey.

In fact, the last four games on the B's schedule were against the Rangers, Islanders, Ottawa, and Jersey. Only one of these teams is a long time rival and only one is even in the same division. None of these teams were recent playoff opponents. And last season both the Rangers and Islanders missed the playoffs altogether.

This is an exciting schedule to end the season on? Seriously?

For goodness sakes, after the way the playoffs ended last year for the Bruins Philly should have been in there. Pittsburgh would have been a good choice. Montreal of course. Buffalo even.

And what about the other playoff teams in the east? Philly ended the season against the Rangers, Ottawa, Buffalo, and the Islanders.

Seriously?

Montreal ended against New Jersey, Chicago, Ottawa, and that powerhouse in Toronto.

Seriously?

Pittsburgh ended against Florida, New Jersey, the Islanders and that powerhouse in Atlanta.

Hit the snooze button already!

Bruins Choke (again)

2011-04-05T08:14:00.003-06:00

Despite all the changes in the lineup, last night the Bruins looked exactly like the team that gave up four straight against the Flyers in the second round last year. This game was a microcosm of last year's playoffs: the Bruins came out so dominating that everyone wrote the other team off. But they got a little sloppy and the other team began to build momentum. And then they collapsed like a cheap pair of figure skates.

I don't blame Horton. The Bruins were defending a one-goal lead when Horton fought Callahan for the puck along the boards in his own zone. Both Krejcki and Lucic were skating up the ice looking to break out when Horton lost that battle. With Dubinsky in front of the net undefended it was a simple matter to score. Lucic could have played deeper, picking up Dubinsky. But it was Krejcki who made the mistake. Prior to the goal he floated around the slot ineffectively. Then he failed to finish a check along the boards. And finally, he made the mistake of moving toward Horton, leaving the man open in front of the net. This begs the question--can this young inexperienced kid really lead the Bruins top line, and along with it the rest of the team, very far into the playoffs? Or in the end will we come to the bitter conclusion that Marc Savard matters after all?

Could the Bruins Win the Conference?

2011-04-03T13:16:00.003-06:00

With four games remaining the Bruins find themselves four points behind the conference leading Flyers and Capitals.

The Bruins have four games remaining against the Rangers, Islanders, Senators, and Devils.

The Caps only have three games left in their schedule. Unfortunately they are against weak teams: two games vs. the Panthers and one against the Leafs.

The Caps should win all three games, but I would not be surprised if the Panthers didn't steal one. That would leave them with 107 points. It is not impossible that the Leafs might steal one too. We will have to see.

The Flyers also have three games remaining against the Senators, Sabers and Islanders. The Sabers are clinging tenuously to a playoff spot so this could be a tough game for Philly. But after watching the Sabers play the Caps yesterday I don't know... who plays defense so badly that with time ticking away they let Ovechkin have half the defensive zone to himself and allow him to repeatedly crash the net? Buffalo that's who.

The Bruins should win against the Islanders, Senators and Devils, which would give them 105 points. If things play out this way the game against the Rangers on Monday is the key. If the Bruins win they could end up with 107 points and a tie for the conference title and have a good chance at second place overall. But for that to happen the Bruins have to run the table and either the Flyers or the Caps must stumble. One other thing: if Philly stumbles the Penguins are right on their heels and they could switch places with them. So the Penguins are still in the mix too.

I am hoping the Bruins end up at least in second place. This would be a very good thing in my opinion because I really don't want to see the Bruins play Montreal in the first round. Montreal seems destined for sixth place so they would match up against the team in 3rd. Currently that's the Bruins.

The Habs would be perfectly happy to play the spoiler and then get swept in the second round. If Montreal is indeed good enough, then I would very much like to see them in a higher round--particularly in the Conference final. Just not in the first round.

One way or another the next week is going to be interesting!

Chara's Hit Reckless

2011-03-09T15:30:00.002-07:00

First off, when I said a while back that the B's would own the Habs for the rest of this season I was wrong. Very wrong. As others have said the Habs are a tough team and they know how to beat the Bruins. The Bruins are either going to have to be very lucky in the post season or they are going to have to figure out how to beat this team (more than once).

Second, I was (unfortunately) right about the Bruins play heading for a downhill slide. The good news is that they have reverted to their earlier defensive style. The bad news is that once again they can no longer score. Since when is it ok to just dump the puck out of the defensive zone and let the other team attack again? And worse yet--they aren't playing all that well defensively. Once again, the main issue with this team is consistency. May Claude Julien and the Gods of Hockey brings some balance to this team.

Now for Chara. I'm nothing if not consistent in my views on this. Chara didn't intend to hurt anyone. But that's what Randy Jones said. It's what Matt Cooke keeps saying. The bottom line is that the players have to be alert enough not to make the reckless and dangerous play--unless we are willing to sit back and watch the game's best skill players go down one by one, possibly forever.

I'd write more but this guy already said exactly what I was thinking:
Chara avoids suspension for Pacioretty hit

Surging Bruins Win Ugly Against Lightning

2011-03-04T14:05:00.003-07:00

Ok, I admit it. I didn't really enjoy last night's game against Tampa very much. I'm not entirely certain why. Maybe it was being forced to watch the game on the NHL network, which always seems to run the other team's broadcast. I really missed Jack's fun-filled insanity! Maybe it was how tightly the game was played.

But perhaps it was something more. For starters, I thought the Bruins were terrible. They seemed off in just about every way: even the shortest passes often didn't connect. Timmy looked rusty and was more lucky than good in the first period. And they kept dumping the puck out of their own zone giving up possession, which drove me crazy. They looked like a team that was losing their edge, like a team on a long winning streak that was almost out of gas (and magic). But of course the other way to look at it is that they still won the game even though they had trouble executing. I guess the next few games will tell which way this team is headed.

The Lucic line has become a dominant force to be reckoned with. I watched "Looch" and "Horty" on the bench and those two are developing real chemistry. They clearly share a strong desire to win and it shows on the ice. Unlike previous years, when somebody needs to step up and score these guys are going to find a way. Just look at how that winning goal came about!

But I was also troubled that they played just a bit dirty. That vague line between playing hard and tough and taking cheap shots may have been crossed just a bit and that's not something I want to see more of. Unlike a lot of pundits I get why Looch went after the guy who drew the tripping penalty. It was a dive! But the cross check to the face that came in the scrum later was over the top. There were also a couple of reckless knee-on-knee hits.

Maybe these guys are going to have a let down, or maybe they will fight through it. We'll just have to see. One thing I know is this: as long as they don't lose any key players to injury this team has more than enough Stanley Cup magic in it.

New Look Bruins

2011-02-18T12:51:00.004-07:00

Word is coming down that today has been a big trading day for the Bruins.

Outgoing: Blake Wheeler, Mark Stuart, Joe Colborne, the B’s first-rounder in 2011, and a conditional pick*

Incoming: Tomas Kaberle, Boris Valabik and Rich Peverley

Outgoing NHL stats:
Wheeler in 58 games: 27 points, 11 goals, 16 assists, +8, 32 penalty minutes
Mark Stuart: 31 games, 5 points. 1 goal, 4 assists, +8, 23 penalty minutes

Incoming NHL stats:
Kaberle (D) in 58 games: 38 points, 3 goals, 35 assists, -2, 16 penalty minutes
Peverley (C) in 59 games: 34 points, 14 goals, 20 assists, -16, 35 penalty minutes
Valabik (D) in 23 games: 3 points, 0 goals, 3 assists, +3, 36 penalty minutes

The Bruins also recently acquired:
Chris Kelly (C) in 57 games, 23 points, 12 goals, 11 assists, -12, 27 penalty minutes

*Toronto will receive a 2012 second-rounder if Boston advances to the Stanley Cup final this season or if Kaberle re-signs with the Bruins.

Valabik seems likely to play in Providence.

Quick analysis: Chiarelli's penchant for obtaining centers over wingers continues. The stats alone suggest that the Bruins will have the potential score a lot more points, but the main incoming players have negative plus/minuses with their other teams. How these guys fit into the room and Julien's system will make all the difference.

EDIT: I originally misread the first round pick sent to Toronto as being Toronto's first round pick (which the B's currently hold). Given this I no longer think they overpaid for Kaberle. These deals appear to me to be more excellent work from Peter Chiarelli. I don't write about it much, but Chiarelli seems to be a force to be reckoned with among GMs. One way or another it seems only a matter of time before the Cup comes back to Boston.

Trouble Bruin

2011-02-16T15:23:00.002-07:00

How quickly things can go downhill. As it stands now the Bruins have some big problems; problems that I think may be bigger than similar ones they have faced in recent years.

For starters, they need to get the defense back. While we were all celebrating the wild win against the Habs I had this nagging worry at the back of my mind: sure they won the game, but they let the Habs score 6 goals. Beginning that night the Bruins--arguably one of the best defensive teams in the NHL--have allowed an average of 5 goals per game. Claude Julien needs to get the players thinking defense again and fast. I get the impression that they changed up their game some--forwards now work to open up space and use their speed as an offensive weapon, but it is working both ways. They are scoring more goals, but giving up even more. There are too many odd man rushes with speed; too many turnovers at both blue lines; and they aren't clogging up the neutral zone. Playing like the Oilers of old may be great fun, but it's not getting the job done.

Another problem that needs to be addressed is their power play. It has struggled all season and Claude needs to find the time to get it on track while they still can. If Chiarelli can land the right player to QB the PP before the deadline that could help a lot.

But the biggest problem is more difficult. The Bruins played near the top of their game against Detroit and San Jose and came up losers. This wasn't a lack of effort or a poor performance, the Bruins simply weren't they better team. The Western Conference is so competitive this year that I fear whatever team wins the Eastern Conference final is going to get crushed, the Bruins included. There is only one solution to this one: the whole team has to work harder to get better between now and then.

The Beat Goes On

2011-02-10T11:03:00.003-07:00

Some random thoughts about last night's game against the Habs and the Bruins this season in general:

I hope somebody got a really good picture of the six Bruins in the penalty box. I would love to have it as a poster or desktop wallpaper. Hell, they should put it on a billboard come the playoffs.

I recently posted that the Bruins players didn't really seem to get the rivalry with the Habs. I think it's safe to say they do now!

What was up with that TSN Bruins love fest carried on Versus? Strange broadcast.

Somebody should ask Cherry and Milbury about their claim that the remarks made by Ference with regard to the Paille hit were going to be poison for the room.

It was very entertaining to read the Montreal paper's version of last night's game. The Montreal press draws a picture of a wild high scoring affair that the Habs were in until the very end that also had a few "brawls" in it. No mention is made of what those who watched the game saw: a serious beatdown by the Bruins.

If you want to win against the Bruins the last thing you want to do is to go into their own building and try to push them around. As the Avs have discovered twice now (slow learners) and the Habs found out last night, the Bruins will beat the crap out of you AND you will lose the game.

Espo told a story in his book about his first shift in the NHL. He lined up against his childhood idol Gordie Howe. At the drop of the puck Howe smacks Espo in the face, splitting his lip. Espo asked him later what that was all about and Howe said something to the effect that had Espo not stood up to him Howe would have owned Espo for the rest of his career. While it can't be said that the Habs backed down last night they did come out on the losing end in most every way. I feel confident that should these two teams meet come playoff time the B's will own them.

That mental aspect of the game is so important. A team can win by reputation alone before the game even starts. I'd put the recent B's game against the Sharks in that category. I swear the way they played the Bruins made the Sharks look BIGGER. And I swear the Sharks have something going on with those white jerseys that just make them look big. Another team the B's seemed a little awed by was the Kings. Should fate bring the B's against either of these teams in the Cup Final it could be interesting. Maybe too interesting.

Andrew Ference is a Stand Up Guy

2011-02-07T10:10:00.002-07:00

Andrew Ference simply told the truth about Daniel Paille's hit on Raymond Sawada. He said nothing that should have been considered criticism of his teammate. Essentially I agree with this post. Paille made a mistake in judgment that got someone hurt. So what? Nobody is accusing him of intentionally trying to hurt anyone.

Don Cherry and Mike Milbury, who criticized Ference for speaking the truth, are paid very well to make hyperbolic statements. The more ruckus they raise the more attention they get and the attention brings higher advertising revenue. They aren't paid to speak the truth. If you watch Milbury closely it appears that he knows full well that he is only doing what is expected of him. He's playing a role. But I think Cherry may have been playing this role for so long that he can't tell the difference between the entertaining nonsense he sputters and what's real anymore.

Anyhow, what I'm wondering is where is Dan Paille in all this? Shouldn't he have been the one saying what Ference said? Why didn't he stand up and tell the truth? The few quotes I have read from Paille seem to indicate that he disagrees with what Ference said. If so, then he needs a reality check. Either he is being baited by the press, who often misrepresent what others have said in order to get a "rise" out of the person they are interviewing, or his character is something less than stellar. If there is any resentment in the room from Paille then I think he needs to man up.

Andrew Ference stands up for what he believes in. He also stands up for his teammates on the ice where it matters most. Ference is one of the most underrated defensemen in the NHL and I think an underrated player by Bruins fans. He is currently +19, trailing only Chara (+23) among B's defensemen. I for one am glad he's a Bruin.

The All Star Game is Fun

2011-02-04T12:18:00.004-07:00

Stephen Harris wrote this article about the all star game. I've been meaning to comment on it but only now have the chance. In this article Harris says that, "...certainly people who have any fondness or respect for the NHL, should look upon the All-Star Game with nothing but contempt." How dare he say this. It's one thing to voice your opinion, but to suggest that everyone must agree with it is rather narcissistic. Worse than that, he implies that anyone who does not look upon the game with contempt isn't a fan of "true" hockey.

Harris also makes a case for the all star game causing harm because, "The things that really matter in the NHL has (sic) nothing to do with what takes place in this game."

I could not disagree more. The All-star game is fun. So what if it isn't about real hockey? Call me an idiot if you must but I enjoyed much of it this year. I enjoyed seeing the players have fun during the team selection. I nearly fell off my chair laughing at Ovechkin taking a picture with his phone of Kessel sitting all alone--the last player chosen. The devilish look on his face was hilarious!

There were also a few highlights during the skill competition that made it worth watching. And the game itself... that was actually pretty special. Sure, the first period was like watching paint dry and the second wasn't much better. But I had a feeling that with this new team structure that if the game was close near the end we might see the play pick up. Sure, there was no hitting, yet the final minutes had some real intensity to them. Not a cup final, of course, but far more intensity than I have seen in previous games. It was fun!

I don't know where Harris gets this idea that the all-star game is primarily designed to bring new fans to the sport. I think those days are long over. The Winter Classic is the better forum for that. Give people--even non Hockey fans--some credit. They know that an all-star game isn't a true representation of the sport. It's a chance for people (kids above all!) to see their favorite players have some fun. The NHL expanded in the 1980's not because of the all-star game but because of Wayne Gretzky and a fledgling ESPN that brought the sport to a wider audience of sports fans. Growing the game today is more about bringing great players and championships to non-traditional hockey markets like Dallas, Tampa, or Raleigh.

That doesn't mean that the all-star game can't be better. Personally I think the fan balloting is a joke and I'd like to see it go away. It's really just a marketing ploy to harvest names and addresses for the NHL to send out NHL.com catalogs to. What I'd like to see is for the selection to be a real honor rather than an online popularity poll. For that to happen it has to be about the players, not the fans. I'd like to see the players choose the all stars. Let each team nominate three players via a player secret ballot. Then let all the players in each conference vote on the 45 players nominated and take the top 9 forwards, top 6 defensemen and top 3 goaltenders for an 18-man talent pool. Finally, use this year's system for picking teams.

Intent to Injure

2011-02-04T10:55:00.003-07:00

In a wild game last night against the Dallas Stars Daniel Paille was penalized under NHL rule 48 (Illegal Check to the Head). He was also given a match penalty at the discretion of the referee. This morning the NHL announced a 4 game suspension of Paille and a fine of $23,118.28.

The Stars' Raymond Sawada is reported to have suffered a broken nose and a separated shoulder.

Here is the main part of rule 48:

48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted.

I agree completely that this was an illegal hit to the head under this new rule and agree with the four game suspension. But something is not completely right here. Section 5 of rule 48 reads:

48.5 Match Penalty - The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent with an illegal check to the head.

This part I am having trouble with. I have heard the pundits weigh in on this one and too many, in my opinion, are comparing this hit to the Matt Cooke hit on Mark Savard last year. When it comes to this last part--"intent to injure" I couldn't disagree more. These hits are completely different.

Watching the play develop last night I saw a resurgent Dallas team get a couple of good bounces of the puck to get behind most of the Bruins defense. When Paille made that hit he was making a good defensive play as Sawada was driving to the net in control of the puck. Sawada had is head down and Paille used poor judgment when he unloaded on him from the side. But how did the referee determine that he "deliberately injured his opponent?" Did he call in a mind reader? Shame on him for assuming this was anything more than poor judgment on a back check.

If you compare this hit to the Cooke incident there are several major differences. The first is that the hit came behind the play. Savard did not have possession of the puck. Second, the hit was a blindside from behind. Third, Cooke was seen to have intentionally raised his elbow for the blow to the head as he skated by. Even in this case we can't know what was going through Cooke's mind. He may have simply been careless--misjudging his speed and the effect of the impact of his elbow on Savard's head. How will we ever know? Intent to injure or not, it seems to me that the Cooke hit was much more reckless. Unlike the Paille hit this was not a part of the play. When it comes to being behind the play, as far as I'm concerned Cooke might just as well have mugged Savard with a tire iron in the parking lot after after the game.

Rule 48 didn't exist at the time of the hit on Savard and famously Cooke didn't even receive a penalty. I wonder what the NHL would do if that same hit happened today? Give him a six game suspension? I think there needs to be a distinction drawn between these sorts of hits when it comes to the sentence handed down. It also should not be based on "intent" which is impossible to know. Intent was a mistake. I think recklessness is a better way to discriminate one from the other and the situation should matter. It is far more reckless to hit someone from behind who is going to tag a puck for icing, or behind the play without the puck, than when making a split second decision on a defensive play in front of the net.

Bruins Find Another Gear (Return of the Curse? part 2)

2011-01-11T10:14:00.004-07:00

After the "collapse" against the Habs the Bruins moved on to Pittsburgh. Late in the second period of that game I was struck by how similar it was to the Habs game, only this time the Bruins were the ones down by two. It wasn't just the score, but the way the game was playing out. It was another tight checking affair with relatively few good scoring opportunities. For a fleeting moment I wondered if this game would end the same way--with the Bruins the ones making the comeback victory. As quickly as the grin came with that thought it faded. After all, the Bruins have not shown much of an ability this season to turn up the heat, to find that extra gear, when they need it. But in the end this was exactly what they did.

Just as the Habs had done two nights before the Bruins got two late goals to tie the game. But this comeback was very different. The Habs had scored two fluky goals to tie and won it later in OT. But the Bruins victory over the Pens was much cleaner. The B's suddenly began to dominate the play, to really take it to them. A goal seemed likely, if not inevitable. When it came everyone knew the Pens were in deep trouble. People have claimed that the Bruins collapsed against the Habs. Maybe so, maybe not. It depends on how you look at it. The Pens game was much more clear: the B's took it to them and they wilted under the pressure. Of that there is no question.

So my confidence is thus restored in the Bruins. Some fans have been complaining a lot lately, calling for dumping players like Savard (give me a break) or for the coach to be let go (who would replace him?). To them I point to last season. It was in fact a lot worse than this. The Bruins have been inconsistent this year but they have shown us glimpses of greatness as they did last night. Last year we had none of that. All we had at this point last year was faith the Bruins could put it all together come the playoffs.

Now about last years playoffs: it's easy to forget everything except that embarrassing four-game collapse in the second round. But think back now to the games that came before that. The Bruins looked unstoppable. They could switch into that extra gear we saw last night at will and pretty much score any time they needed to. I see no reason to believe that same team isn't still there waiting to come to life again in the playoffs. We saw a peek of it last night. If they somehow manage to stay healthy this time around they could go far. With with a little luck--all the way.

Return of The Curse?

2011-01-10T08:15:00.002-07:00

Near the end of the game against Montreal things got so boring I started writing this blog in my head. It was boring because the B's were leading by two and had the habs completely shut down. Here is what I had been working on:

Although not their best game of the year this was the Bruin's strongest and most consistent effort so far.

Soon afterward the habs scored two goals to tie the game and went on to win it in overtime. Many are claiming this was another monumental collapse and to a certain extent they are right. But look at the two goals that tied it up. They were both tough goals that the habs couldn't repeat if you gave them ten games to try. The first was a weak shot from the boards that went off a skate and then made a fluke jump over Tim Thomas' stick. The second was the result of two players sliding into Thomas. A skate just barely dislodged the puck from Thomas' leg and it dribbled in. All the while the Bruins were keeping play to the outside forcing low percentage shots just as they were supposed to. When they had the chance they took it to the other zone rather than just sitting back. It's difficult for me to fault them for their play, if not the result.

The overtime was a different story however. The crowd, who had been booing their team earlier on, was now fully pumped and loud. The momentum was all on the habs side. For the Bruins to pull off an OT win under these conditions would have been a major victory. It would have been one of those spunky "oh yeah?" "in-your-face" moments that great teams are made of. But they didn't. What worries me most about the character of this team this season is that they never do.

Ive said for a couple of years now that the players on this B's team don't always seem to get the rivalry with the habs, not in the same way that long time fans do. Maybe its the huge turnover in the faces suiting up in Montreal. Regardless, there have been too many lackluster efforts (like the previous game this season in Montreal) as if somehow the habs are just another team in their division. They should have big red circles on the schedule around every game with the habs knowing that the fans expect these to be the biggest games of the regular season. The hard truth is that historically the habs have owned the Bruins. What happened in this game has happened before too many times. It is the Bruins curse. It has happened in the playoffs. It has happened to great Bruins teams that should have won a cup but ran into the rouge et blanc on the way. Speaking for long time Bruins fans, we're all pretty sick of it. My only solace from this loss is the (weak) hope that the players will play the habs with a chip on their shoulder the rest of the season and perhaps into the playoffs.

Game 23: Where The Bruins Stand

2010-12-02T11:47:00.003-07:00

I've been waiting for a moment to sum up the season so far when I had both something to say and the time to say it. So here we are after game 23. Where do the Bruins stand?

The word today is that Marco Sturm has been traded to LA. Hunwick was traded last week to clear cap space for Savard. So when it comes to the roster it looks like things are pretty much set--at least until the trade deadline should Chiarelli need to shake things up or add a rental for the playoff push.

So far the team play has been a roller coaster. Two years ago at this time they were building momentum toward an incredible run that would end at the top of the Conference, only to lose in the second round of the playoffs. Last year they started out as if they thought the regular season wasn't worth their effort. Injuries mounted. They came on strong at the end but lost again in the second round. It looks like this time around we are going to get a season of highs and lows, with streaks of both the winning and losing variety.

I've heard it said that a team that doesn't play hard every game is more prone to injuries than one that's on a roll. That seemed to be the case for the Bruins last year. I suppose it makes sense: it is better to be the one making the hits than receiving them. Nobody wants to make excuses, but there were so many key injuries that one can only wonder what would have happened had the Bs been even just a bit less banged up in the playoffs. The way I see it to go deeper in the playoffs the Bruins will need the following core players to be healthy: Chara, Savard, Thomas, Bergeron, Lucic and Krejci. Of these Chara and Lucic are absolutely key. Without both of them near 100% come playoff time there will be no cup. Their physical play is crucial not only as a direct impact but in a leadership role. Witness Lucic last summer against Philly: the Bruins lost four games straight only after he was no longer able to play with that dominant physical style he brings at crucial moments.

Some of the highlights so far this season: Chara storming the offensive zone, going on the forecheck behind the net and tossing defenseman aside like ragdolls, resulting in an important goal. Tyler Seguin scoring off the give and go with a huge drive toward the net early in the season. Tim Thomas with a perfect record on the road, six shutouts, and that big grin getting wider with each passing game.

What are their chances in the post season given what we have seen so far? I think they should at the very least make the Conference Final and if things go their way this team is fully capable of winning the Cup.

My concerns so far? Lack of depth at defense--if Ference or Seidenberg aren't available for the playoffs it may mean another second round exit. Lack of big bruising forwards--Lucic is crucial in this regard come playoff time, but he can't do it alone. This team is at its best when they turn up the heat and overpower other teams physically. Lack of speed may hurt them in the regular season but their playoff chances depend on physical domination. Wheeler needs to become a heavy hitter. The rest of the wingers need to be ready to throw their bodies around--with purpose--when the time comes.

Why We Watch

2010-11-03T12:48:00.003-06:00

Years ago I knew a real jerk. He was my boss. He had discovered that since he could fire those working for him that he could get away with being abusive and intimidating. One day the Olympics were starting and he walked into the lunch room and loudly and disdainfully announced that he didn't get why anyone cared about the Olympics. For once I had an answer for him. I told him that people watched the Olympics because even though the athletes were put under enormous pressure the champions responded by digging deep down and somehow doing their very best; to witness this triumph of the human spirit was why we watched. I was thankful when a co-worker backed me up by saying, "that's something that needs to be said," because it was such a cliche. Taken aback, he slinked out of the room.

So the question I am posing is, why watch hockey? Why be a fan? For me the answer is the same as for the Olympics. I enjoy seeing the team as a whole and the players individually overcome adversity. There's nothing sweeter than seeing someone triumph even though the whole world seemed to think they couldn't cut it.

When a hockey player dons that storied and sacred spoked-B and earns our respect both on and off the ice by doing his very best he earns my loyalty. Tim Thomas is one of those players. He earned my loyalty years ago when fans kept saying he wasn't a true No. 1 yet he played better than any goaltender I had seen in years. He proved worthy of my loyalty when the media and many fans smugly claimed that he'd been replaced by Manny Fernendez--a proven No 1. goaltender--yet went on to not only win the starting job but the Vezina too.

So it was painful to me to see people wearing "It's Tukka Time" T-shirts at Bruins games last season and lauding Rask as if he was somehow born into the starting goaltender position, like royalty. And it was painful to me to read about fans wanting to trade Thomas for cap space over the summer. Hell, some still are. Even with the best start for a Bruins goaltender in 73 years some fans claim he's being played just so the front office can show him off to set up a trade. These people know no shame and even less about loyalty.

So lets get some things straight. Rask has not yet earned either the starting job or our loyalty--not in the way Tim Thomas has. The truth is that the team played so inconsistently for the first half of last season they made both goaltenders look bad. When they finally got their act together Timmy responded with a shutout. But his next game ended with his being pulled off the ice and after that Rask played the bulk of the season. The media anointed Rask as having stolen the starting job from Thomas. But we now know what really happened. Timmy was injured in that game and that injury required surgery over the summer before he could recover. Rask didn't steal the starting job--he defaulted into it. And sure, Rask played well right up to the middle of the second round of the playoffs. But make no mistake: he was seldom "great."

Over the last fifteen years we have seen so many goaltenders come and go. Some were hailed as the next great goalie who would lead us to a cup yet fell flat on their faces. Many people believed that the Bruins lacked the necessary goaltending to go far into the playoffs. Bill Ranford didn't have what it took and only lasted two seasons. Byron Dafoe looked like a future great but never really left his mark, either in the playoffs or the record books. Does anyone even remember Jeff Hackett? And what about the chosen one--Andrew Raycroft--the celebrated goaltender of the future who won the Calder as the best rookie in the NHL? After the lockout he was never able to get back into form. Now he bounces around the league as a journeyman backup. So forgive me if I expect Rask to actually earn his lauded position as the Bruins "goaltender of the future."

Even going back further in time the Bruins have had few great goaltenders. In truth even Gerry Cheevers, one of my all-time favorite Bruins, wasn't the greatest goaltender in his time. He had a hell of a team in front of him and don't let anyone tell you that doesn't matter.

The Vezina trophy is awarded to the best goaltender in the NHL. Tim Thomas won it for the '08/'09 season. You have to go back to Pete Peeters in '82/'83 to find the last time a Bruin won it and Peeters, like Timmy, was the real deal. Before that you have to go all the way back to the greatest Bruins goaltender, Frank Brimsek, in '38/'39.

Stats are even more telling. No Bruins goaltender has led the league in save percentage since they started keeping the statistic in the 1950's--except for Tim Thomas.

Tim Thomas is the real deal people. It's not Tukka Time yet and history tells us that day may never come. Once again the Thomas-doubters have written him off and once again Timmy has risen to the occasion. This is Timmy Time and we should enjoy it because this is as special as it gets. This is why we watch.

Fantastic Article by Jack Edwards

2010-09-11T09:14:00.004-06:00

If Jack Edwards ever has to give up play-by-play he'd make a great print journalist; much better than those hacks they have writing for the Boston papers. Jack utterly destroys this summer's persistent Savard trade rumors in

Marc Savard's Merit, Peter Chiarelli's Plans Quash Anonymous Trade Rumors

Enjoy.

The Contract Loophole

2010-08-12T12:13:00.003-06:00

Many hockey bloggers seem more interested in the running of the hockey business than the game itself. I usually stick to the hockey, and Bruins hockey at that. But from time to time there are some "business" issues that affect the game itself.

I am sure most fans have heard about the recent rejection of Ilya Kovalchuk’s 17-year, $102 million contract with New Jersey. I have read numerous stories on the subject. Most look at the mechanics of the so-called "loophole" used by New Jersey or at owners vs. players association politics. Many look at the possible consequences for similar contracts. But nobody seems interested in the larger picture. The question I would pose is this: are these "loophole" contracts good or bad for the NHL from the fans perspective.

First let's understand the issue. As I understand it some elite players are being offered unusually long term contracts where the salary drops to near league minimum for the years near the end, usually around the time the player has turned 40. The rules set out in the CBA compute the team's salary cap hit as a yearly average for these contracts. By extending them into "old age" at a lower pay the yearly cap hit goes down, allowing the team to supposedly circumvent the salary cap. This has almost universally been called a loophole.

In truth the NHL has little to hang their claim on that this is a circumvention of the salary cap. If the case were to go to a court of law (which it will not) I doubt the NHL would win. The GMs are simply playing by the rules of the game as set out in the CBA. If the NHL does not like it they should change the rules rather than reject contracts on what is clearly a highly subjective basis. After all, where do you draw the line? Kovalchuk’s contract is merely the most extreme example. Under the current rules there is no clear line for the GMs not to cross; there is no cut and dried way to determine which contracts circumvent the CBA and which don't. There has been a lot of talk about Savard's contract, but even Tim Thomas' contract could be viewed as a less in-the-face version of the same loophole. In my opinion the NHL has opened a can of worms. League officials have to look at each contract and decide, rather subjectively, which ones are to be rejected. Throw in the fact that some of these contracts are being looked at retrospectively and you have a highly ridiculous situation that is sure to make some teams and fans feel that they have been unreasonably singled out. This is bound to lead to acrimony and further embarrassment for the league.

But back to my question. Forget about all the politics and claims of subverting the idea behind the salary cap. What are the pros and cons of this type of contract from the perspective of the fans?

One thing the salary cap has done is to force teams to use more young (read cheap) talent on their teams. This has made it easier for young players to break into the NHL and to break into the league earlier than before. On the other hand it has made it more difficult for established "stars" to find large salaries in free agency. Typically each team now has 1-4 highly paid players. The rest of the team's salary is divided among mid-level and entry-level contracts. This puts pressure on GMs to "dump salary" by trading or walking away from their star players to make room for the inexpensive up and comers. The end result from the players point of view is likely to be shorter careers, particularly for the more lucrative period. That and they will likely end up playing for many different teams. We have seen a phenomenon of "revolving stars" and more long term "rental players" in recent years. Just look at the Montreal roster. It's dominated by a bunch of hired guns. Where is their storied history now? Is this really good for the game?

For the fans the salary cap means that their stars--their so-called franchise players--are more likely to be traded away or not re-signed than in previous generations. That is, except for these "loophole" contracts. The players sign these contracts because it guarantees them some measure of job security as they age and the possibility of being one day remembered as one of the teams "greats" because they played most of their career for the same team. For this same reason I too see these contracts as a good thing. I don't want my Bruins to end up like Montreal with a bunch of free agents with no ties to the organization and who are likely to be gone in a year or two. I wrote about that in my last blog. As a fan of the team for almost forty years, rather than a Bostonian who just wants to party over a cup win, I would find a cup victory like last year's in Chicago to be empty.

For these reasons I hope the NHL resolves the issue of this "loophole" in way that continues to allow star players to sign contracts that will keep them with their teams into their declining years. Otherwise in a decade we may wonder why numbers are no longer lifted to the rafters.

That's Not the Way I Want It

2010-07-01T10:21:00.006-06:00

It was only three weeks ago that the Chicago Black Hawks won the Stanley Cup. In the short time since they have traded away Dustin Byfuglien, Brent Sopel, Ben Eager and Kris Versteeg. All of them played important roles in their cup win. If I were a Hawks fan I'd be just a bit heartbroken.

Player movement is inevitable, particularly with a salary cap in place. But is all this turnover really good for the game? Sure, if the Bruins win a Cup the "sports fans" in the region will suddenly rediscover hockey and jump on the band wagon, buying merchandise and maybe even going to a game or two next season. The front office will be thrilled. But those guys don't fill the season seats. They don't follow the team when it has a losing season. Once the team stumbles they will all go back to their whining and complaining. In the end they aren't true hockey fans. They just want to puff out their chests and join the celebration when the team that happens to play in their city wins it all.

I look back over the last 40 years of Bruins hockey and what stands out are the great players. Whether it be Borque, Neely, Cheevers, Espo, Chief, or Bobby. The cups were great, but it is the unbroken line of Bruins players going all the way back to 1924 that makes Bruins hockey what it is. It's not just the league-wide stars like Orr, but the role players as well.

The pre-lockout B's were a mess. I used to wonder which of those guys would have their jersey raised to the rafters. Thornton seemed a lock. But who else? Muzz? Samsonov? No way. To me, those teams were the low point for the Bruins going back to when I was a kid.

A cup would be terrific and great teams need to prove their greatness by winning a championship. But in the end it is only a vehicle for the next generation of Bruins greats. It is those greats that true hockey fans celebrate. Who are we going to celebrate tomorrow? What number is going to sent to the rafters next? I know the Boston "sports fans" will scoff at this. But that just proves that we don't have the same interest in the team.

If in the end we win the Cup only to see our "rentals" move on, then what will we have to remember? Who will we celebrate in a decade? I look over the current roster and see a few potential candidates for the rafters. I really do. Chara. Savard. Lucic. Thomas. Maybe Bergeron. Yet I read the paper and two of those names are reportedly on the trade block. Yeah, I know that Tim Thomas is in a tough spot with a young (read inexpensive) kid apparently playing just as well. But Savard?

In my opinion this is where it all starts to fall apart. When the dust from the lockout had settled and Peter Chiarelli established himself as the architect of the team the cornerstones were Chara and Savard. In my opinion if he has backed himself into a corner that requires that he trade one of those two then it all unravels. It's not just a matter of another expendable center or a shrewd disposal of a player who may have his best years behind him. Savard is a cup final away from the rafters. That may be difficult for some to see when caught up in the moment, I know. Worse yet, it would be a sign of failure. In hindsight the last two seasons could be remembered as the "glory years" as the team rebuilds again. I've been following this team's ups and downs for almost 40 years now, and that's what I think. This is a pivotal moment. Does Savvy stay or does he go?

Wideman Shipped to Florida

2010-06-22T14:37:00.002-06:00

If history is any example, Dennis Wideman should be celebrating his trade to the Florida Panthers. Wideman is the latest in a string of Bruins defenseman who have been much maligned by fans during their time in Boston. Hal Gill (1997-2006) was considered slow and absolutely detested by many. So too was Nick Boynton (1999-2006). Boynton just won the Stanley Cup. Gill won it last year.

I'm just sayin'.

The Stanley Cup Final is Ridiculous

2010-06-08T13:05:00.003-06:00

Yeah--I said it. Why? Because having the cup final in June is idiotic. Schools are out. People are going on vacations. The overriding theme is warm summer fun, not anything to do with ice or hockey. Hockey means next to nothing in June! I've been a hockey fan long enough to recall when the cup final was in April. Then May. Now June. Where does it stop? August? Are we headed for a year-round season?

Something that's equally ridiculous is the 82-game schedule. It's bad enough that the regular season has become a sort of meaningless pre-season, but to have it drag on for 82 games is just too much. I know the franchises make money on every game, but I find it hard to believe that there is no downside to spreading the season so thin. There are exceptions, but most NHL arenas are not filled to capacity for every game. I'd bet that if they played fewer games most of the lost revenue would be made up by higher per-game attendance.

I think the cup final should be played no later than April. To accomplish this, I'd remove at least 10-12 games from the schedule and start the season earlier. Hockey in September makes way more sense than hockey in June. If nobody cares about hockey in September, fine. That's way better than nobody caring during the cup final.

No Deep Analysis Required

2010-05-15T15:25:00.002-06:00

In the end the Bruins did play with heart in game 7 of their series with Philly. But like the series itself, they were unable to sustain it. Many will claim the team doesn't have enough talent. Some will make the excuse that Krejci, Sturm and Seidenberg were out with injuries. Others will suggest the Flyers were the better team. But I believe the bottom line is much like last year. The series against Carolina was really lost not in game 7, but when they failed to show up for game 1. This year the series was lost when the Bruins failed to put the Flyers away in games 4 or 5, as a great team would have done.

Like a cat toying with a mouse, if he doesn't kill his prey when he has the chance sooner or later it will escape.

It's All About Heart

2010-05-13T10:56:00.002-06:00

I've read a lot about the Bruins/Flyers series but I haven't read much that matches my point of view, so here it is. In the first three games the Bruins totally dominated the Flyers. Now, I know a lot of people looked at the score and said otherwise (particularly Flyers fans) but it's true. This is one of those cases where the scoreboard and the stats don't really tell the whole story. In game 1 the B's came out and heavily dominated the play until they took a two-goal lead. Then, like a cat toying with a mouse, they sat back. When the Flyers responded with a goal the Bruins turned it up again until they got their lead back. This continued on through the second game. In game three the Bruins actually improved their game. This time once they got the lead they played much better defensively and for the most part avoided the cat-and-mouse . But the bottom line of the first three games was simple: when the Bruins needed the lead they were always able to turn up the heat to get it.

But that's when it all fell apart. With a 3-0 series lead I saw an interview with Looch and I knew from the grin he was trying to hide that the team was in trouble; he clearly thought they had already won the series. In game four they dropped the dominating offensive play and it didn't resurface until there was only 2 minutes left in game 6. Even though they scored, there wasn't enough time to overcome a two-goal Flyers lead.

Now we find ourselves going to game 7 and the big question on everyone's mind should be whether or not the Bruins are going to bring it like they did in game 1. If they don't this season is going to end like the last one.

Some Thoughts Going Into the Second Round

2010-04-27T08:20:00.002-06:00

What I have wanted to believe all season is that what the B's took away from the previous year is this: the regular season doesn't matter as long as you make it to the playoffs in the end. But that takes a lot of faith, doesn't it? I like to see some hard evidence. To me the B's strong play in the first round is just that. Suddenly things get changed up here and there and everything improves across the board, including their struggling power play. Coincidence? I think not. I think this team has been laying in wait all season. They have their sights on the Conference Final.

Why is everybody taking Rask being snubbed for the Calder lying down? I saw some guy on the NHL network say that Rask had to play "one, maybe two more games" to be considered. Seriously? Just what is the magic number of games a goaltender has to play to be considered for the Calder? Is it written down somewhere? This kid not only ended the season with the best stats in the NHL, but the only reason he didn't play more games is that he had to beat out the Vezina winner for the job. Shouldn't that count for something?

It seems to me that when it comes to goaltenders, how good they are believed to be is incredibly subjective. We have seen this with all the Thomas hate over the years. If they win its because the team plays good defense. If they lose it's because he stinks. Nobody keeps tracks of wins/losses for any other position. Goaltending is important, but is it really that important? What people seem to be left with is the perception they had going in about the guy. Just look at all the Ryan Miller hype. He played well in the Olympics for sure, but not that well. You'd think he single handedly won the gold they way the US media fawns over him. Weird. And it seems to me that a lot of people are assuming that the only reason the Sabres did well this year was Miller. Now that they have lost its because Miller just couldn't do it alone. Personally I think the Sabres are pretty talented all around. It seems that people either blame or ignore the rest of the team when it is convenient to their preconceptions.

One last thought. The way I understand it the B's will either play Pittsburgh or Philly in the second round. I think they can take either team, but would prefer they play Pittsburgh based on how they match up. The Bruins could be the Pens worst nightmare. A Bruins/Flyers series could be a nightmare for everybody, with the winner winding up too wounded to go any further.

It is what it is... but what is it?

2010-04-11T13:55:00.002-06:00

Two years ago the Boston Bruins entered the playoffs with a "young" team that had bought into coach Claude Juliens's defensive scheme but had great difficulty scoring goals. Most every game was won or lost by a single point. I remember the first shift by Dennis Wideman against Montreal. He was shaky and tentative. To tell the truth the whole team was like that. They lost that first game and the series, but only after coming back and forcing game 7. In the end that team had heart. They knew how to stick in there to win a close one.

Over the summer that followed Julien stated that they were now going to turn their attention to offense. Many people wondered just how they were going to do that, myself included. There was the usual nonsense about signing that mythical high-scoring free agent that changes the whole team, but GM Peter Chiarelli thought the team already had that kind of talent. He was right. Somehow the team that couldn't buy a goal grew into a goal scoring monster the next season. They finished with the best record in the East and only one other team in the league had more goals. To tell you the truth I still don't understand how they did it, although I think it had to do with speed on the breakout. In that regard Phil Kessel was an important ingredient. But he was only out there on one line, so it is difficult to explain how every line last year was so successful on the breakout. Unfortunately, that team was almost too good. They peaked early in most games and cruised to easy wins. And they peaked early in the season and cruised to the playoffs. My big concern going into the playoffs last year was what would happen when they met a good defensive team that knew how to play playoff hockey. To make matters worse they cruised past a Montreal team in the first round that couldn't keep up with them. But they met their match in Carolina, a team that for the first time shut that fast-break offense down. Having forgotten their ability to win a close battle the Bruins stumbled and ended up losing in OT in game 7. I'm pretty sure today that had the Bruins won that series they would have gone on to win the cup because the remaining teams couldn't bring what Carlina had brought to the ice.

After their relative success Chiarelli worked to re-sign the core talent that had made it happen. Unfortunately the very act of keeping that talent may have been what hurt the team this year via complacency.

As the 2009/2010 season opened I made a wish: "In my mind the perfect season for the B's would have more struggle to it, perhaps even finishing 3rd or 4th in the conference. Or maybe fighting their way up through the pack at the end. I'd like to see fewer goals and closer games." Well, I got my wish. The Bruins finished the season near the top in defense and dead last in scoring.

All season long we waited for the Bruins to pick it up. But they seemed to be just getting by. I titled my last post here "The Bruins are Toast" out of frustration. I thought maybe they would pick it up after the Olympics. But no, they didn't. I thought as the season was nearing a close and all the attention was on them in that big game against Pittsburgh that they would finally show some heart. But they didn't. It was hard not to give up on them. Yet somehow, just as we thought it would never happen, as it came down to the final stretch the B's finally came alive. Their run to make the playoffs at the end of this season was nothing short of impressive, particularly as the injuries mounted. Not only did they hang on to make the playoffs as other teams fell by the side, but they ended up in the sixth seed.

So where does that leave us going into the playoffs? The good news is that, unlike last year's team, this one is made for playoff hockey. They know how to win a tough close game. They know how to keep grinding away when things don't go in their favor. And they look like a team again--like it doesn't matter who you put in the uniform, you know you are going to get the same type of play and the same effort. That could be important, because the bad news is that they are really banged up. The B's are going to really miss Marc Savard, particularly on the power play, which has proven to be terrible without him. And just when the defense has started to roll--punishing and frustrating opponents and getting into the scoring--key defenseman Marc Stuart, Andrew Ference, and Dennis Siedenberg are all hurt. Siedenberg likely will miss the entire playoffs.

So, again I ask, where does that leave us going into the playoffs? I don't really know. I believe this team has the talent to win a cup. But I worry that too much of that talent is watching from the stands. I guess this is why they play the games. At the very least I expect the B's to play the role that Carolina played against them last year, spoiling the playoffs for a high-rolling team that won't know what hit them.

The Bruins are Toast

2010-03-19T09:10:00.002-06:00

People are pointing to the 1971 cup team that was out on the ice last night and remembering the good old days when the Bruins played with passion and heart and didn't let other teams come into their building and push them around. It may come as a surprise to those fans that tuned in just for the carnage last night, but you don't have to look back that far for these things.

As the 2007/2008 season opened the B's were on one of their long road trips out west. They started in Dallas and passed through Phoenix on their way to Anaheim, where they would face the Ducks. The Ducks had just mugged their way to a Stanley Cup just months before. The Bruins came in all charged up and determined to prove themselves. They finished every check, laying out bodies right and left. Every man threw is body around, not just a few designated hitters. In the end the Bruins won. Just like the Ducks in the playoffs, they wanted it more and were willing to play physically to get it done. I have always thought of that game against the Ducks as the game that started it all.

In the 2008/2009 season we all remember the night the Dallas Stars came into town and tried to intimidate the Bruins. Steve Ott and Shawn Avery turned the game into a cheap shot circus. But the B's rose to their challenge and destroyed them, pummeling them in every sense of the word. As the game ended even Mark Savard was throwing punches. The Bruins won that game too and the Stars went home to Dallas in search of who they were. That was the game that made the Bruins the monster team they were last season.

It's hard to believe, but this is still much the same team. With success and the fat contracts that followed came complacency. This season they wanted hockey to be all about being in position and making the first pass. Sure, those things are important, but that's not what hockey is really all about. It's wanting it more, finishing all of your checks, and punishing the other team into submission. It's about passion. It's about heart. Two things the Bruins no longer have.

I don't give a crap about the fights in last night's game against the Penguins. Individually Thornton and Chara did their jobs last night. But it all meant nothing when the team failed to rise to the occasion. Just as the games against the Ducks and the Stars defined those previous seasons this game against the Penguins defines this one. They didn't need to win that game, but they did need to show some heart, and they didn't. Like Dallas last year, the Bruins must now hang their heads in disgrace and try to figure out who they are.

Grape said it all last week: "If he (coach Julien) can't get them to hit..." then he isn't getting the job done.

I'm angry and I'm not alone.

No Place For It in the NHL

2010-03-13T14:01:00.004-07:00

It seems that Marc Savard may be out for the rest of the season after the concussion he sustained after a cheap shot to the head by the goon Matt Cooke. Lets just hope his career isn't over along with the season. If you haven't already seen the video below then you should.

Forget what anybody says about this and the other hits by Cooke. Forget that his own teammate basically called him out on it. The video speaks for itself. Two things are abundantly clear: (1) these hits by Cooke are no accident, and (2) the striking similarity between the Savard hit and the two previous hits, for which Cooke was suspended, make the decision by Campbell not to suspend Cooke again indefensible, at least on its face.

Either Campbell is a complete idiot, as a lot of people are assuming, or he is playing politics. A new rule against hits to the head by the shoulder is not a forgone conclusion. It has to be okay'd by the nebulous competition committee which apparently only meets in the summer, when much of this will be forgotten. It may well be that Campbell, in stating that he would not suspend Cooke because there was no clear rule against the hit, is using this as a means to pressure the committee into surely adopting a new rule. If so, this could be a good thing in the long run.

Now as for Cooke, I keep hearing the same phrase over and over from players and management alike. They all say, "there is no place for that in the NHL." People are blaming the NHL for not enacting a rule against this sort of hit sooner. They are blaming Campbell for not suspending Cooke. But I think both are off the mark. The bulk of the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the Pittsburgh Penguins management. As GM's around the league fear that their own scoring superstar may be the next target of such a hit, who has the most at stake? The Pittsburgh Penguins and Sydney Crosby. So why does it take a suspension from the NHL to stop this guy? Hell, after all he's been suspended for this same thing before and he keeps right on doing it. Why should the Pittsburgh management be allowed to pretend they have no control over their own players? If there is no place for this in the NHL, then there is no place in the NHL for Matt Cooke. It's time the people who are really in charge--the Pittsburgh management--took the responsibility to do something about it.

Dennis Seidenberg Leads Bruins to Win with Big Hit From Behind

2010-03-12T09:44:00.002-07:00

In a season of twists and turns, if the Bruins end up going much deeper into the playoffs than most people expect the sages will point to this game as the beginning of it all. For the first time this season they played like last year's team; they played hard and tough, overwhelming the Flyers. With each goal they seemed to hunger for more, which was once the mark of this team.

But the game itself had some twists and turns. They story of this game starts two games before, on March 7th in Pittsburgh. A goon by the name of Matt Cooke blindsides the Bruin's Mark Savard with an intentional hit to the head with his shoulder. Savard falls to the ice like a rag doll and is taken off on a backbaord. It turns out that he has a level 2 concussion and will be out indefinitely. Patrice Bergeron, who was himself the victim of a cheap shot to the head that lost him an entire season, stands there next to Sydney Crosby and they both shake their heads. Begeron has become a voice of reason among players to stop dangerous hits to the head.

The hit happened away from the play and no replay is shown in the arena. Cooke receives no penalty on the play, but never returns to the ice. At that moment the Bruins were down a goal late in the game and they want to win it. There is no retaliation and the Bruins end up losing. Most people, the players included, expect a suspension for Cooke. In the days that follow fans are outraged at their lack of retaliation. Even the GM expresses his disappointment. Media attention focuses on the NHL meeting about stopping this exact type of hit. To literally add insult to injury Cooke is not suspended after all. This announcement is made the day the Bruins play the Flyers--a team known for its rough play.

The game starts with the Bruins playing hard and sharp. They get a one goal lead. Mark Stuart steps up and has a good fight against Daniel Carcillo. Only 40 seconds into the second period, it happens. Dennis Seidenberg, the newest Bruin, finishes a hit smack on the numbers on the back of a Philly player, sending him violently head first into the boards. His head bounces off the glass and he falls to the ice. Fortunately his helmet took the blow, rather than his face, and the glass is more forgiving than the boards. But had he laid there hurt Seidenberg would have been looking at a suspension for sure. I was shocked. But he got up and Seidenberg only got 2 minutes for boarding. On the penalty kill the B's took to the ice completely deflated. I wonder if they were thinking what I was thinking: "Who is this Seidenberg guy? Is he the kind of player who takes cheap shots to the head?" It took the Flyers all of 4 seconds to score.

For the first few shifts after that the Bruins looked like deer in headlights. But then something happened. Man, I would have loved to have been a fly on the glass near the bench. Somebody said something. I don't know if it was Bergeron, Siedenberg, or a coach. But somebody must have said something, because after that the Bruins were an unstoppable force. Stuart won another fight. Rask made some huge Thomas-like saves, the kid Marchand played with fire in his eyes, and they scored 4 unanswered goals.

The Bruins are finally Big, Bad and Back. At least for now.

Gimme Three Goals!

2010-03-09T10:24:00.004-07:00

We all know the Bruins have trouble scoring, but let's look at the actual numbers. Since the start of the year the Bruins have played 25 games. Their record is 4 regulation wins, 12 regulation losses, 5 OT/SO wins, and 4 OT/SO losses. They have managed a total of a mere 18 points, while allowing opposing teams 37. As you can see, if they go to overtime they win 56% of the time (almost always in a shootout). That part is ok, but itisn't good enough.

During this time the Bruins have managed just 49 goals (1.96 goals per game) while they gave up 67 (2.68 goals per game).

They played 10 games where they scored only one goal in regulation, 9 where they managed 2 goals, and only 6 where they managed 3 or more. When scoring 3 or more goals they have a record of 4-1-1. When scoring less that three goals their record is 0-14-5. Ahem.

The math here is quite simple: the Bruins need to score three or more goals in regulation to win.

By the way, last season the Bruins led the league by giving up a mere 2.32 goals per game. They are off from that this year, but that can be blamed on the higher number of blowouts and in losing in general. When you are behind late in the game you tend to take chances and that gets you scored on. So I would argue that defensively the B's are almost as good as last year. Almost.

The big difference won't come as any surprise: last year they managed a whopping 3.29 goals per game, 2nd overall. Again, it is clear that if they can score three, just one goal per period, they can not only make the playoffs but win most of their remaining games.

Ah, but can the Bruins be expected to score three goals per game with the talent they have this season? To answer that question I computed the goals/per game from last season for the Bruins who are still on the team (i.e. no Kessel). For some players, such as Sturm, Bergeron, and Paille I used their numbers from this season. The predicted number of goals per game for the current Bruins worked out to: 3.04. So yes, the Bruins have the talent to score 3 goals per game. Let's hope Savvy comes back soon. In the meantime the rest of the players have to step up. But yes--it's not asking the impossible to score 3.

So gimme three goals!

Circular Salary Logic & the Blame Game

2010-03-05T09:49:00.004-07:00

When things go wrong for any organization and it doesn't meet expectations the blame game will surely follow. In hockey the major players in the blame game are: the GM, the coach, and the players themselves.

It's easy to blame the players. They are the ones playing the game after all. If you pay a top forward $4 million per year and he only scores you 6 goals then he is clearly to blame, right? Toss the bum on his butt (or if he's a Canadian toss the butthead on his bum). Ah, but what if all the forwards are failing to score? Can you really reasonably blame all of them individually? No, that would suggest a systemic problem: either the GM hasn't put the best team on the ice for the money spent or the coach hasn't properly prepared/motivated them.

The current thinking from the majority of the wannabe Bruins GMs of the world is that the problem with the Bruins is the GMs fault. The reasoning goes something like this: the Bruins GM rewarded the good play of many players last season with fat contracts. This season those players are under-performing. Therefore they are not really worth what they were paid; the GM overpaid for them. In overpaying these players the GM had his hands tied by the salary cap when it came time to upgrade. Thus, the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the GM.

But I believe there is a major logical fault in that argument, and it goes back to the point I was trying to make in my last post. My counter argument goes like this: every player has a potential. When a player excels he reaches that potential. When he fails to excel he falls short of that potential. So how do you value a player? By his last game, which may have been a poor effort, or by his potential? I claim that the only reasonable answer is to value a player by his potential, at least when it comes to his contract. After all, when we look longingly at some superstar who plays for another team, and imagine him coming to Boston, it his potential we value. Put him with our guys, in our system, and he might not live up to it.

This leads us to the last player in the blame game, the head coach. The coach is responsible for preparing the players both mentally and physically. If one player fails to live up to his potential we can blame the player. But if the whole team fails to do so then perhaps we need to look at the coach instead. The job of the GM is to get the best bang for the buck in terms of player potential, based on previous performance (and in some cases expected performance growth). The job of the coach is to bring the level of play up to the potential that has been purchased by the GM.

If you look at last season we can see the potential of these players. Thomas was only the second Bruins goaltender to win the Vezina in over 60 years. Ryder scored 27 goals. Savvy, Recchi, Krejci and Wheeler each had more than 20. This season not one of these players is on track to score more than 20. Chara, Lucic and Wideman each had more than ten. This season the three of them together are only on track for 17 total.

People claim that Savvy needs a goal scorer to dish the puck to, with the implication that the GM failed to provide one. But wait a minute: that should be Ryder's job. After all he did score 27 last season. Or Sturm's-- the only Bruin currently pushing 20 goals. Hell, last year Savvy spent half the season with PJ Axellson on his wing! No, that argument just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Come on, we all know what's wrong with this team: inconsistent play, such as not showing up for every shift or even every period. Not playing physically enough. Can you imagine a Bruins/Habs game without a fight? We don't have to... A severely broken breakout that has not been improved--or even changed--since the start of the season. Failure to finish. Two consistently poorly performing power play units.

The players are not performing to their potential the GM is paying for. If you want to play the blame game, then there it is.

Trade Deadline Idiocy

2010-03-03T08:28:00.004-07:00

I see a lot of irrational ideas when it comes to the Bruins and there is nothing like a poorly performing team married with the trade deadline to bring them to fever pitch. One particular theory keeps coming back again and again that really irks me. After having a fantastic season a team comes back the next year and plays poorly. The bizarre explanation by some is that the team never really was that good in the first place; they somehow "overachieved." The previous year was a fluke. In fact, the team has little or no talent. If you buy into this idea then the solution to the problem is to go out and get more talent.

A team can be more than the sum of its parts. A team can come together in such a way as to reach its full potential. This intangible unity is what makes a championship team. But it is nonsense that a team can somehow reach beyond their full potential, particularly for an extended period of time such as an entire season. Logically, your best is your best; there is nothing better. This idea of "overachieving" is a myth.

Yet I have seen and read again and again the view that the Bruins overachieved last season. In this view the entire season was a fluke. The "real" Bruins is the team we see now. The B's don't have enough talent, so the obvious solution is to bring on more talent at the trade deadline. Or at least it seems obvious to the people I see commenting, such as in this article by the Hockey Genius Eric Wilbur.

Yet on its face the argument makes no sense. The Bruins are essentially the same. Their skill level remains close to what it was last year, even without Kessel. What has happened is that they are no longer playing up to their potential. In a word, they are underachieving. Sure, getting the right guy into the locker room might inspire the rest of the team to get out of their funk, but that's a gamble at best. No, we usually blame someone else when a team consistently underachieves. I'll go ahead and come right out and say it: if the underachieving continues the rational solution is to replace the coaching staff, not the players.

Why People Who Should Know Better are Complaining about Tim Thomas

2010-02-12T14:10:00.009-07:00

Why? Because they don't know any better. I just watched this video and it would be funny if it weren't so wrong headed:

Was Tim Thomas's Contract a Mistake?

I make no secret of the fact that I'm a fan of Tim Thomas, and some people will no doubt assume that I'm biased by that. But that's not it. What I can't stand is when people are biased against Thomas, unfairly pointing out every soft goal yet only grudgingly giving him credit when he does well. You see that in the video when the guy on the left claims that Thomas is no Brodeur. That's what he thinks and nothing Timmy can do--even winning the Vezina--will change his opinion. The Vezina? That was merely Julien's defense-first approach at work. I mean, last year that guy could have suited up and won the Vezina! Yet of course this year the poor play of the team has absolutely nothing to do with it. Yeah, right. I have never seen a successful player so unreasonably maligned by the so-called "experts" in any sport (more on that in another post).

To put the idea to rest that I'm just as biased let me state unequivocally that Tim Thomas has not played well enough since the January 14th game against the Sharks. That's eight games that they lost--eight games that he was not able to steal. This was a period where the Bruins gave up 22 goals (2.75 goals per game). During that same period the Bruins managed only nine goals (1.13 goals per game). There should be no doubt that the low scoring was the real problem, but it is just as true that a Vezina-winning goalie should have been able to stand on his head and steal a few of them. Unlike earlier this year that didn't happen.

In the last five starts Rask has had one great game and four mediocre-to-good ones. He has allowed 12 goals (2.4 goals per game). In that same period the Bruins have scored 15 goals (3.0 goals per game). It's true that Rask had a terrific game against Montreal on February 2. But the same could be said about Thomas having helped steal the game against the Sharks. The main reason the Bruins are winning now is that they are scoring again. Had they scored 3 goals per game during Thomas's losing streak they would have won most of them.

So why are people claiming that Thomas is finished? It's simple. They don't actually watch the games. They just see some highlights from time to time and primarily look at the stats. Right now Thomas is 13-15-7 with a 2.52 GAA and a save percentage* of 0.915. Rask is 13-7-4 with a 2.09 GAA and a whopping 0.928 save percentage. Clearly Rask is by far the better of the two, right? By-the-way, in the 2005/2006 season Brodeur's GAA was 2.57 and his save percentage was 0.911. Does that mean he was no longer Martin Brodeur? Should the Devils have dumped him and his big contract?

But here's the thing: stats can lie. Take the last game against Tampa Bay--statistically Rask had a poor night, allowing 4 goals on 35 shots (a horrible 0.886 save percentage). So he stank right? No! In fact, watching the game we know that he was very sharp and didn't allow any soft goals. In a game where one team runs away with it early it is typical for the team to let down and allow some goals. But they did get the win and that's what counts. So here is a perfect example of how the stats alone lie. You have to watch the games. Those "sports guys" in the video have many other sports to be watching. There is just no way they watch every game. Having watched all but three games this season I can say that Tim Thomas has in fact played very well, often under extremely difficult circumstances. The stats alone don't begin to tell the story.

Look--all goaltenders have difficult periods. All of them. But it happens to Thomas and some small-minded fickle people are willing to give up on a good thing to satisfy their preconceived notions. Hey, if I'm just biased in favor of Thomas, then why have I won this same argument about how good Timmy is every single time since 2006? The fact is he has never let me down. As always, Timmy will be back and his detractors will shut their mouths, biding their time until they can once again show their unfounded disdain.

As for Timmy's contract, see my comments from the last post. Here are a few additional points to consider:

Goaltenders have longer careers than players at other positions
Not everyone hates Thomas--he could have signed for much more money as a free agent last summer. Some fans seem to have forgotten that goaltending is the foundation of a team.
Thomas took a discount because he wanted to play for the B's and because they offered him the long-term contract.
Thomas's cap-hit in his fifth year is very small.
Five million per year for solid goaltending is a steal for a Vezina winning goaltender.

*Sports people are awful at math! A percentage, by definition, is where 100 is the maximum. The so-called "save percentage" isn't a percentage at all. It's a simple ratio. To make it a percentage you would need to multiply the number by 100. E.g. 0.915 becomes 91.5%. So for God's sake people, either multiply by 100 or stop calling it a percentage.

Trading Tim Thomas

2010-02-08T17:29:00.005-07:00

The Bruins finally won a game. I don't have to tell Bruins fans how painful and upsetting the last few weeks have been as the Bruins went on a ten game "not winning" streak. It turns out that they did pick up four points in OT losses (regulation ties) so it isn't exactly correct to claim it was a losing streak. But it sure felt like a losing streak so it might as well be called one.

I have been saying all along that what they needed was to score three goals. It's ironic that when they finally scored three their goaltender also got a shutout. Turns out all they needed was one goal. But nevertheless three bodes well for the future. If they score three in just about any of the recent games they likely win.

Oddly, despite all this the Bruins are still in the thick of the playoffs. The question now isn't if they can make the playoffs so much as if they can be expected to win a series if they did. They certainly have the talent to go far, of that I am certain. This idea you see in the press that the Bs played over their potential last year is idiotic. A team can be more than the sum of its parts but it can never be better than its potential. Last year was no fluke. We know how good this team can be.

Rumors are swirling about Tim Thomas being shopped around. Even if true I doubt it means more than the GM taking stock of market value. After all, Thomas has a no trade clause. It seems unlikely he'd suddenly decide he didn't like the weather in New England. But more importantly, the Bruins have a sweet deal in their goaltending, arguably the best in the league. The tandem of the veteran Thomas and the up and coming Rask is a GMs dream--particularly when you consider their cap hit taken together is only $6.5 million, which is good through the 2011/2012 season. For comparison, Khabibulin alone has the same figure, as does Luongo. Giguere has a hit of $6 million, Kiprusoff $5.8 million. And those teams have to pay for a backup as well, because no goalie can play every game. Which would you rather have? Luongo or the Thomas/Rask tandem? Rask is unproven (Raycroft anyone) but with great potential and despite the Thomas doubters Timmy has always overcome any adversity sent his way, which has been considerable. If one needs to come up for air, the other can always take over. This is as close as it gets to a sure thing in the playoffs. All they need is a team that can play in front of them.

The bottom line is that no GM in his right mind would trade either of them right now. That is, unless he is forced to--and that's the great worry. There are only a few reasonable places to look for enough cap room to bring in a difference maker up front, and Thomas is the prime one. It may be tempting to move him to clear the space, but that would be staking the future of the team on a kid goaltender, which would be a big gamble. As I said before, he'd be crazy to do it.

Unless he was forced to.

Is This How it Ends?

2010-01-25T09:16:00.004-07:00

What can you say about the 8 losses in the last 9 games? The Bruins actually played pretty well until very recently. They adopted a scrappier, faster game that created a lot more space and scoring chances. But most the time the puck still refused to go into the net--and lately every good scoring chance at the other end of the ice seems to result in a rush the other way and a goal. The fact is that if you can't consistently score more than two goals per game you aren't going to win a lot of them, particularly when your defense is stepping up in an effort to help. The last game against Carolina (on January 24th) was the final straw. Jack Edwards wanted to see some passion--and so did I-- but it didn't happen. They could have at least gone down fighting!

I had believed that after the Winter Classic the Bruins would go .500 until the Olympics. They have played like a team that was just getting by until the playoffs all year and I expected that to continue until all of the distractions were over. But this latest slide... it is starting to look like the end of this team as we know it.

So who's to blame? The GM for trading Kessel? The coaching staff? Too much success last season too soon? Is there someone poisoning the room?

The Thomas haters haven't wasted any time showing their hate again, claiming irrationally that the coach hasn't played Rask enough. What's wrong with those people anyhow? What ugly broken excuses for human beings they are. Anybody who isn't blinded by hate can see that Rask hasn't fared any better. One thing about Tim Thomas--if the team gives up in front of him he'll hang in there with the big saves in a game for only so long. After a while he gets "uninspired" by the play of the rest of the team and quits too. Some may fault him for that, but I say, "So what?" He's not the root cause of the problem.

We've got nine games to go before the Olympic break. They face the Caps, Canucks, Kings, Lightning and Panthers. They play the Sabers and Canadiens twice. The simple fact is that if they don't get a winning streak going before the break the season will be over. If that happens it's going to get really ugly. Julien may have to go, which would be a shame. And if you are thinking trade then think again--the only players who are truly trade able are the ones who are still playing their hearts out or have spent most the season injured, like Bergeron, Thomas, Rask, Chara, Stuart, Ference, or Savard. In other words, good luck trading Wideman (-12) or Wheeler (-8) for a good return!

I have watched nearly every game starting from the 2005/2006 season. That's almost 400 games. I have seen this team struggle. I have seen the rookies make mistakes and slowly come into their own. I have watched this team break out, and seen it run off the tracks in last year's playoffs. Throughout they have always improved. But now this season comes. Is this how it ends?

The next few weeks are going to determine if the Boston Bruins as we know them will survive intact.

The Stick Salute

2010-01-05T11:00:00.003-07:00

For several years now some NHL teams have borrowed a tradition from European Hockey: the stick salute. After a win the team skates out onto the ice and salutes the crowd by raising their sticks. I'm not sure how many teams have adopted this, but the Anaheim Ducks do it and so do the New York Rangers.

I think this is a classy thing to do. It shows a degree of humility and recognizes how the fans can make a difference in the game as they cheer their team on. I have wondered for some time if the stick salute would spread eventually even to the Bruins. After the overtime win in the Winter Classic I was struck by what I believe to be the very first Bruins stick salute. I wonder: was it planned ahead of time? Or did it happen spontaneously? Will it happen again?

Even though I like the salute, I do have to wonder if a team with so much tradition--one that has been around since 1924--needs to be adopting it, like some trendy new fad. Should the Bruins follow the lead of the New York Rangers? No! That leaves me somewhat on the fence.

I'd be interested in hearing what others think about the stick salute.

Magical Winter Classic

2010-01-02T14:34:00.002-07:00

On New Year's day I spent the morning playing hockey outdoors with my kids. How cool is that? Afterward we settled in to watch the Bruins play in the Winter Classic. It was a fantastic, wonderful, and memorable day. As most people know the Bruins came from behind to tie in the final minutes and win in overtime. Seeing Tim Thomas selected to the US Olympic team afterward was very special to us. I only wish we could be in Boston for all of the festivities, but even so it was a very special and memorable day.

Shame on NESN

2009-12-15T08:24:00.005-07:00

Call me old fashioned (or worse) if you must, but for me nothing sets up the anticipation for the drop of the puck more than the national anthem. The anthem establishes a connection between me on my couch and the arena filled with people. When the last note rings and the crowd roars I am pumped up and ready to go. To be honest, I also just plain enjoy the performances.

Last year NESN decided to drop the anthem for away games, substituting the commentary by Milbury from the studio instead. Rather than seeing the crowd and a performance we got, "What do the Bruins need to do to win tonight, Mike?" "Well, they need to play hard in the first period and get the lead quickly." B O R I N G.

Now it seems that NESN has stopped showing the anthems for the home games as well. I think this is shameless. They are bringing us an event and the anthem is part of it. The anthem gives us that connection between our distant locale and the arena, something that seems more and more lacking in NESN coverage. I know they pay people like Milbury a lot of money to talk but they get plenty of time to do so, including a pre-game show, for God's sake.

If you too want to see NESN broadcast the anthems please take a moment and send them a comment at sports@nesn.com.

Postscript Friday January 8: I am very pleased that the anthem appears to be back on NESN. I doubt this little blog had anything to do with it... perhaps enough people complained, or maybe NESN never intended to stop showing the anthem for rest of the season. Regardless, I am happy!

The Parade of Heroes

2009-11-24T13:48:00.006-07:00

I was hoping that the early adversity would bring some good things to the Bruins and I think this has finally happened. With Savvy and Looch out Bergeron has escalated his game to an elite level. Through sheer will he has become a force to be reckoned with, making an impact on every shift. And with the injury to Thomas, Rask has been able to put enough games together to become confident in the net, bringing him another step closer to being a No. 1 goaltender.

So let's take stock, shall we? Last season Looch proved himself in the playoffs, elevating his game with timely hits and scoring opportunities until the very last moment. Thomas too proved himself an elite goaltender last season. Not just because he played consistently well enough to win the Vezina, but because of his strong play at critical times--something he has continued to do this season. Likewise Savvy has proven to be the rare player with passion, skill, and a magic touch with the puck.

So let's imagine for a moment: imagine if... Bergeron were to continue his hard play, his recklessness with a purpose, into the playoffs. Imagine if Chara were to not hold back, but to crush forwards every time they ventured into his zone (as we know he can). And imagine if he started to pick the corner of the net as well as putting the puck in the pads for a rebound and thus scored more goals (as we know he can). Imagine if the talented Dennis Wideman played every single shift with the same intense focus. Imagine if David Krejci were to play with the confidence he showed last season, which leads to nothing short of magic when the puck is on his stick. Imagine if Thornton and Begin played every shift with the intensity they brought early this season. If you imagine these things all happening at the same time, in every playoff game... it is not hard to imagine the Bruins being unstoppable; it is not hard to imagine a four game sweep to win the Cup.

For too long the B's have had a parade of heroes. Bergeron today. Thomas last week. Savvy the month before. In my opinion, the only thing holding them back from a Cup is to bring it all together at the same time; to become a team of heroes.

Getting Ugly

2009-11-17T13:26:00.002-07:00

It's getting pretty ugly out there in Bruins land. Whether it be fans railing against Timmy for not playing defense as well as goaltender in front of his net in OT, or coach Julien telling the media, "I don’t think I should have to answer the question they (the players) should answer," when asked why they came out flat against the Islanders.

As far as the team's play goes, I think the recent Pittsburgh game pretty much summed it up. From a Hockey fans perspective this was a fun game. The B's were in it almost to the finish. Almost. They even managed a game-winning goal with two minutes left, taking the lead for the first time only when it really counted. How cool was that? But a broken stick here, and a loss of concentration there, and somehow they still didn't come out of it with two points.

Hey--here's the thing: unlike many fans this is actually what I wished for at the start of the season. I wanted them to see adversity and to learn from it so they would be stronger come playoff time. But that doesn't make it any less ugly, and the looming prospect of a total team meltdown from which they cannot recover is frightening.

That said, I still believe these guys have what it takes, from the GM on down. Just hang in there B's fans!

Bruins Cup is Half Full

2009-10-30T10:53:00.005-06:00

It's actually pretty hilarious. The B's get off to a slow start to the 2009/2010 season and all of a sudden it's 2007 again. Ah, yes, the spring of 2007. The Bruins had no talent. According to many hockey pundits Chara had proven to be a waste of money. Savard was was a good setup man with nobody to set up and a lousy back checker to boot. Tim Thomas was a minor league journeyman goaltender who wasn't good enough technically to start in the NHL for a real team. Taken together, the team lacked the talent to score more than two goals per game. And so on. Of course, last season Chara won the Norris, Savard was in the top tier in points and developed a reputation for good back checking (+25), Thomas won the Vezina, and as a team they scored 270 goals and were second overall in the standings. Yet only a few months later I'm suddenly reading all the same things from 2007 again as if all of that was some sort of summer daydream.

Wow. Apparently Phil Kessel and Chuck Kobasew were the only reason the B's scored that many goals, and their superior defensive play made Timmy look way better than he really is. I say again, wow. Ok, so there is always some Boston "sports" fan who tunes in for the playoffs and two or three games each year who is going to comment on how the Bruins have no talent after a loss. And there is always the odd Habs fan in there too. But what really got me annoyed was this little video made after only seven games. I have no idea who Charlie Pierce is, but he's full of it. He claims that, "I watched them beat Detroit last year simply by outworking them and now they can work as hard as they can... they don't have any talent on this team." That doesn't even make consistent logical sense, much less reflect reality.

The Bruins have plenty of talent, even without Savard (injured), Kessel, and Kobasew. Their problem through game ten had been inconsistent effort. They failed to outwork other teams and failed to play physically. Last season, even with Savard and Lucic in the lineup, if the rest of the team failed to work hard and play physically they ended up losing. Hockey is after all the ultimate team sport. Compared to earlier on, I thought last night's game against New Jersey was a huge improvement. If they are going to lose a game, then that's the way to lose it. The team played hard all night long, won battle after battle along the boards, finished their checks, got up ice quickly, passed well, and made few mistakes. It's a shame they lost, but they could have just as easily come out the winner. Had the puck bounced the other way this nonsense I have been reading about how they don't have enough talent and how Thomas gave up soft goals would have likely been replaced by equally over-the-top praise. I also think the recent come from behind victories are good for the team. By the time the playoffs came along last year they had forgotten how to do that. Although they should not be digging these sorts of holes in the first place, learning to dig themselves out may come in very handy during the playoffs.

Now back to the Kobasew trade. It took a while, and I admit to being shocked by the move, but I finally got it. Not being privileged, I didn't realize how well Marchand had done in training camp. All I knew was that he was still playing with a spoked-P and I didn't give him much thought. But I see now that Chiarelli was sort of keeping Marchand in his back pocket. By moving Kobasew he was clearing space among the veterans to allow Marchand to come up. At the same time he was able to pick up Paille who at best has untapped potential, and at worst brings some grit to your third line. Far from pressing the panic button, this was a shrewd move on Chiarelli's part. I don't know how anyone could watch Marchand's play and claim he has no talent.

So am I worried about the Bruins? In a word: no.

Pressing the Panic Button

2009-10-21T13:20:00.009-06:00

I wasn't that surprised about the B's start this season. They play like a team that spent the summer reading their own press releases. They seem to have their sights on the playoffs, something that is clearly a bit premature in October. A great game here, a great period there, a solid shift from time to time. But not much in between. But as I said I sort of expected it. They'd either get their acts together or they wouldn't, and if they didn't it would likely be at the cost of the coach's job.

What I didn't expect is what happened on Sunday with the Kobasew trade. I mean, WTF? Kobasew is a solid 20 goal scorer who plays strong in the corners. We were, after all, led to conclude that the main reason that Kessel was let go was so that we could keep guys like Chuck on the roster. I was at the game in Phoenix on Saturday and it seemed to me that Kobasew was playing hard. Sure, his line with Bergeron and Rechhi is snake bit in the scoring department, but I figured they would work through it. I have now read something like five articles claiming that Chiarelli pulled the trigger on this trade to shake the B's up. Yet when somebody actually asked him about it he said that wasn't why he did it. In fact, he said that this was a trade that had been in the making for some time. So I say again, WTF? Chiarelli has replaced a proven 20-goal scorer in Kobasew with a big under acheving kid named Daniel Paille. This guy only managed 12 goals last season and he was basically given away for a song by Buffalo. Either Chiarelli is a genius, he knows something we don't, or he's completely lost it.

We're just seven games into the season. Going into the game tonight against the Preds I don't know who this team is anymore. Savy and Looch are injured--likely for a while. I miss PJ on the PK. Dennis Wideman is still out on defense. Bergeron works so hard in the corners, yet often gets double teamed off the puck because he gets no support (maybe that will change). Both goaltenders are playing "ok" when we need them to stand on their heads. Blake Wheeler is so slow that when he breaks into open ice with the puck he usually gets caught from behind before he can get a shot off. Krejci starts his nifty moves only to have the puck poke checked away. The PK is just plain pathetic and the PP is almost as bad. Worst of all--half the time nobody seems to remember how to check. Big and Bad my ass!

The Good and the Bad of Losing 6 to 1

2009-10-09T09:28:00.002-06:00

Losing to the Ducks 6-1 at home was just plain ugly. But as an early-season game I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand I think it underscores the teams greatest weakness, yet I am also left with the hope that this loss will begin the process of building a better team.

The Bad: this was a textbook example of how to beat these Bruins. In this loss I see the same Achilles heel that Carolina used to eliminate the B's in the playoffs just a few months ago. The recipe for beating the Bruins is to hold on for the first period. Keep the B's from scoring more than one goal, two at the most. This will frustrate them because they come out hard in the first and are used to getting a good lead. A hot goaltender can be a real asset against them. Just bide your time and stave off the attack until the second period. The B's have a bad habit of coming out flat in the second, and staying that way if you find success against them. This tendency can be traced way back to the Dave Lewis days. If they have a big enough lead going into the second then it's hard to spot, but if they fall behind they will always fall flat. So take it to them in the second and get the lead. By the third period (if not sooner) the B's will be in panic mode. Just be opportunistic. Wait for the turnovers and odd-man rushes (they will come) and extend your lead.

The Good: I find myself almost welcoming this loss, and the ones like it that will surely follow. Because if the B's are to go far into the playoffs they will need to overcome their weakness; they will need to learn to play hard in the second period and learn how to come back from behind without giving the game away in the process.

This may be a long fall. But my fingers are crossed that it will only make them stronger.

New Season Brings Change

2009-09-15T12:58:00.002-06:00

Every season brings change. We say goodbye to old friends, find new ones, and face different expectations. So I hereby present my top four changes to the Boston Bruins to start the 2009-2010 season:

No. 4 -- we say goodbye to PJ Axellson. PJ was one of the last reminders of the Joe Thornton / Mike O'Connell era. Number 11 played 11 years for the Bruins, his only NHL team. In that time he impressed me, as well as many head coaches, with his defensive play and versatility. When team Sweden won the Gold in the Olympics it was PJ out on the ice as the clock ticked down with a lead. I had always hoped that he'd see a similar role one day in a Bruins cup win. I am a huge fan. He was the unsung hero and the guy who the more ignorant and fickle Bruins fans loved to pick on. You know the type--the ones who would trade away the entire team for Dany Heatly or whomever the hot goaltender is this year. Like that alone would make the B's Cup winners. PJ was a player for the thinking hockey fan to appreciate. He didn't score a lot of goals, but man could he make a difference in the outcome of a game. This was no more apparent than when he played on the No. 1 PK unit. He usually played the high position in the slot. How many times did he craftily tip a pass out of the zone last season alone? The B's are going to miss him on the PK, that's for sure. But in the current era there simply wasn't a place in the lineup for a shutdown defenseman, and his departure was inevitable. The good news is that other players, particularly Bergeron, have stepped up and can fill much of his role on the PK. So in the end, although I will miss him, I don't think his departure will have a big impact on the team.

No. 3 -- we say goodbye to Aaron Ward. Wardo was a grizzled leader who played hard, tough and smart. He brought the perspective of a veteran player who had won a cup or two. He was an example of winning by giving your all, and then some. But the aging Ward wasn't the most skilled Bruin on the blue line. Hopefully the lessons he had to teach the younger players will remain after his departure. And what a departure! The respect that Chiarelli showed by sending him back to Carolina to finish his career was astounding. That's what was missing in the O'Connell era. To be successful today players must want to play for your team and you must treat them with respect for that to happen.

No. 2 -- the apparent departure of Phil Kessel. I think Kessel has a bright future ahead of him. I have watched him grow from a timid kid who looked like he was scared he'd get hit to a fearless player who is strong on the puck. And I am convinced that he still has a long way to go. He will never be Cam Neely, but you can't win a cup with an entire team of Neely's. You need a good mix of talent. And Kessel is no Samsonov either; he's not a one trick pony with speed and single curl move. Should Kessel stay in Boston I believe he will become one of the top players in the league. But to stay the Bruins would have to give up at least two other players (like Sturm and Kobasew) to stay under the cap. That would likely be a greater loss than losing Kessel alone, particularly come playoff time. Unfortunately I suspect that Kessel will never become the great player he was destined to be with another team, where the expectations will be to simply score. And the Bruins will miss his speed! Kessel gave them a second way to enter the zone against teams that were able to shut them out. That is going to hurt them, and without Kessel I see fewer goals in the B's future. But that may not be a bad thing, come playoff time. The fast, high-flying goal scorers don't usually win you a Cup. In one of the great ironies of the game, it is the third and fourth line guys who usually make the difference in the end.

No. 1 -- raised expectations. Some Bruins fans--particularly those riding the bandwagon late--forecast a cup win for the B's last season. But as last season opened most felt the B's would make it to the second round. Others suggested they would't even make the playoffs. This season the pressure is really on, for there is talk all across the hockey world of a cup run.

I caught a replay of game one against Carolina recently, and the reasons the B's lost that series all came flooding back. In my opinion, the Bruins lost to Carolina because they had become too accustomed to rolling over opponents with high scoring wins. The B's breezed to victories all season long, often running away with the score before the 3rd period, and they started the playoffs with five wins in a row. They were ripe to be thrown off their game by a strong defensive showing, and that's what happened in game 2. If not for a fluke they might have won game 7 in overtime, and I think they would have taken the Penguins. But it was not to be. In the end, the B's let that series get away from them by getting frustrated after game 1 and paid the price for it. They were learning on the job how to face a tough opponent, something they would have been better off knowing well before the playoffs began.

In my mind the perfect season for the B's would have more struggle to it, perhaps even finishing 3rd or 4th in the conference. Or maybe fighting their way up through the pack at the end. I'd like to see fewer goals and closer games. They have the goaltending. They have the coaching and system. They can play defense well, and move the puck up the ice. They can score. If it all comes together right, this really could be the year!

Ward Traded, Chiarelli Tips his Hand

2009-07-24T16:57:00.003-06:00

When the deal to trade Kessel blew up very publicly at the NHL draft, I was left scratching my head. With everyone talking about how Kessel might want $4 million or more, the word on the street was that Chiarelli needed to unload Kessel's salary primarily because he couldn't afford him. Yet Chiarelli attempted to trade Kessel for a defenseman who was under contract for about the same amount of money. That in itself left me scratching my head, let alone why the pundits didn't make much of it. But now that Ward has been traded we know what Chiarelli was thinking, and that means we know what he has been thinking all along.

It seems clear now that Chiarelli's plan has been to trade Kessel for an impact defenseman, dumping Ward's salary to cover the added cost. Now it's just a matter of the right deal for a defenseman coming along, whether it be next week or sometime during the season.

Tim Thomas is an Elite Goaltender

2009-06-21T13:24:00.003-06:00

I started this blog a couple of years ago basically for one reason: I kept reading ignorant comments from a bunch of juveniles on various forums and blogs who knew nothing about the Bruins and even less about Hockey. I wanted to provide a more grown up perspective. That's why I chose "The Old Bruins Fan" for the name. And at the time, most of the nonsense I was reading had to do with one person: Tim Thomas.

Here are some of the things that were written over the last few years:

"Tim Thomas is not a true No. 1 goaltender." (repeated often by many)

There's no way, shape, or form TT's as good as a Giguere. Not a chance in hell. Toskala, perhaps, since he's still not a proven entity. Fernandez is an upgrade, but to what level is in question.

No, I'm simply providing proven, factual stats to back up my argument that TT is not a #1 goaltender.

I believe Thomas's # 1 problem is He's overweight. I think the Goalie pair is strong now. Unfortunately Thomas as backup.

Can we please stop saying that Thomas is a #1 goalie, because he clearly is not.

"...who wants to pay $1M per for a guy who’s going to play 30 games behind an established #1?"

But he is a backup goalie. He IS NOT a cup caliber winning goaltender.

Hahahahaha; hahahahahaha !!!! Boston is the only place, on this planet, where Thomas is consider as a #1 goaltender.

And here are some of the things I said:

(2007) I *knew* he had it in him to be a No. 1 goaltender. There was no question in my mind. I saw it last year. You combine his impressive play with the Bs with his extraordinary play in Providence, Finland, and his minor league record in general, and there should be little surprise.

Mark my words, if the B's do get a goaltender and somehow keep Timmy in the process, Timmy will end up the No. 1.

I've seen many a goaltender come and go, and like I said he's just as good a Gigeure or Taskala or Fenandez for that matter. All he needs is a team that doesn't sell him out every night, and a night off once in a while.

I knew it from late in the 2005/2006 season. I knew it when some jerk taunted me relentlessly when I said Thomas was an elite goaltender in every way that mattered. I knew it when the childish dolts who post at a certain "Rumors" blog adopted the mantra, "Tim Thomas is not a true No. 1 goaltender." I knew it when I read a story by some nitwit who claimed that O'Connell signed Thomas out of revenge when he realized his days were numbered. I knew it when PC picked up Fernandez this summer and many fans assumed he'd be the No. 1. I knew it all along: Tim Thomas is the best thing to happen to the Bruins in a long time.

Even the sportscasters do it. How many times have we heard it said this past season that Thomas has improved his game? By people like Mike Milbury, who wasn't even around to see Thomas play regularly in is early years with the B's. Even Brick, who I admire, has been caught buying into this idea that somehow Thomas got over his tendency to "flop." But I don't agree. The thing is that Thomas never gives up on the puck until it's in the back of the net. It has always been more important to him to make the stop than to look good doing it. When the defense breaks down in front of him he will make that last effort--sometimes making himself look comical--to make the stop. This is the "flop." Why did the flop go away? Because his team started playing decent defense in front of him. This made it much less necessary. Timmy was asked by a reporter earlier this season if he thought he was playing better. His response was no. He thought he had been playing at this level for a long time. While it may save face for those who didn't recognize Thomas' skill earlier on, I believe this idea that he has improved his game in the last two years is way off the mark.

Vezina Winners for the last decade:

2000-01 Dominik Hasek
2001-02 Jose Theodore
2002-03 Martin Brodeur
2003-04 Martin Brodeur
2005-06 Miikka Kiprusoff
2006-07 Martin Brodeur
2007-08 Martin Brodeur

and...

2008-09 Tim Thomas

'nuf said.

And So It Ends

2009-05-15T08:24:00.003-06:00

The Bruins lost in the second round to the Canes last night in game 7 in overtime. I am sure there are Boston sports fans who are angry and upset. But not me.

You see, I got a lesson in playoff perspective last week. I missed the critical game four and the first thing I did upon returning home was to see how the B's had done. It was a 4-1 drubbing! And from the articles I read it sounded like the Bruins played terribly and were never even in it. I wasn't just disappointed, I was angry! How could they come this far only to turn in a half effort? I started a post with the title, "Sharks in Bears Clothing" but was too angry to finish it. I even considered closing this blog. All seemed lost, and in the worst way.

But then I actually watched the game. They didn't play particularly well in game 4, but they hadn't played nearly as badly as had been reported. And then of course they came back with a roar in games 5 and 6, forcing game 7, where they took it to overtime. So in the end am I disappointed? Yes. Am I upset and angry? No.

The Bruins played a nearly flawless game 7. They controlled the puck, made smart breakouts for the most part, and forechecked very well. Tim Thomas was sharp and made some truly game-saving stops. But in the end my hockey instincts were right on this one. Hockey is a game of ebb and flow, of momentum shifts. And the team that storms back to force a game 7 usually seems to lose. Overtime is the same way: teams take turns dominiating the play. In the end the game is usually decided by the bounce of a puck, and so it was decided last night. Timmy went into his cocoon to smother the puck on a routine shot and it appeared to clip his stick on the way in. The puck deflected upward spinning end over end, and he wasn't able to contain it. As it fell in front of him Walker (of all players) tapped it into the net out of mid air.

So who do we blame for this loss? Timmy? The D-man who let Walker in front of the net? I say, nobody. The Bruins played their best, but in todays NHL it's not like the 70's and 80's. No team can dominate to the point where they can expect to win it all, no matter how good they are. It takes talent, hard play, great coaching, and yes--luck, to win a cup. It was the Hockey Gods who decided this one, and I am good with that.

Anybody who is angry about the way the Bruins played should stop and think about what it must feel like to be a Sharks fan right now.

On a final note, there was one player who I thought really stepped up in game seven: Lucic. People say he's no Cam Neely, but... what a force he was in that game! His stickhandling, the way he crashed the net protecting the puck, and his defensive play was outstanding! At one point he took on the role of the defenseman in his own corner and looked completely at home. He was a force on every shift, a one-man team. In short, his play was truly impressive! We are so lucky to have him in a spoked B!

Loooch!

2009-05-11T09:55:00.004-06:00

If somehow the Bruins win in Carolina and take the series in seven, and if somehow they go on to eventually win the cup, there are some moments that should be remembered along the way. I think one of those happened in game five last night when Looch put on a big hit in the first period. With that hit the crowd came alive, his linemates suddenly remembered how to play hard and sharp at the same time, and the rest of the lines followed their example. The result was a 4-0 win.

Not to take anything away from the awesome play of Chara and Savard, but when people talk about leaders and leadership it comes in all forms. Milan Lucic for playoff MVP!

Can the B's win this series? After more seasons than I can recall I have developed a sort of hockey instinct. This instinct told me that after their loss in game four the B's would take it to seven games only to lose, perhaps in OT. But logic says otherwise. If the Bruins can find a way to win in Carolina then logic says they will win at home because in the end they are the more talented team overall. That, and Claude has pulled exactly this scenario off before (as we recall all too painfully).

But who knows? This is definitely not your classic playoff series. Usually both teams battle game in and game out. But this series has been marked by one team dominating the other (and then they switch roles). It's really difficult to tell if one team is making the other look bad, of if one just didn't show up to play. It's a weird series. So who knows what will happen? I guess that's why they play the games.

I just hope the Bruins give it their best effort tomorrow night.

Sneaky Canes

2009-05-04T10:14:00.002-06:00

The Bruins lost to the Canes in game two of the series--their first loss of the playoffs.

I did some reading of the Carolina media prior to the game, taking note of what the press, coaches, and players were saying after their loss in game one. Some phrases kept appearing over and over. One in particular was that the Canes would need to play "mistake free hockey" in order to beat our B's. At the time it sounded sort of desperate, like they didn't really know how to beat the talented Bruins except to hope that they could play smarter. Now I see what they really meant, and I have a lot more respect. These Canes are a sneaky lot--they can play very good team defense and take advantage of the scoring opportunities that come their way.

I knew the B's were in trouble late in the first period. Although they carried the play for much of the period the Bruins were unable to score. Every time they got a scoring opportunity a Cane would be on their back or have their stick on theirs. In short, it was an impressive display of last line defense in front of the net. Hockey can sometimes be a game of frustration, and I felt the frustration level grow toward the end of the first. When a team gets frustrated sometimes they lose their jump and their edge. This is exactly what happened as the B's came out in the second and the Canes were ready to pounce.

In the third the Bruins once again carried the play, turning up the heat in the offensive zone. But they seemed unaccustomed to such intense play and several players made mistakes with the puck. It seemed they were thinking ahead to the next move and forgetting to take care of what they were doing at the moment. This, combined with the sound defense in front of the net and excellent goaltending led to their failure to score.

One thing for sure: the Bruins are going to need to work on their power play if they expect to win this series.

So now the playoffs start in earnest! The Canes are going to be a formidable opponent. Now we get to see what happens when they have to step it up. With all the talent the B's can bring to (ahem) bear, I still believe they have an excellent chance to win the series.

It's the Canes

2009-04-28T20:47:00.005-06:00

The B's will face the Carolina Hurricanes in the second round, starting Friday night. So how did the B's do against them in the regular season?

December 20 in Carolina: Bruins win 4-2. Fernandez in goal. Scores by Savard, Krejci, Thornton, and Yelle. Three stars: Thornton, Thomas, Brind'amour.

December 27 in Boston: Bruins win 4-2. Thomas in goal. Scores by Wheeler (2), Ryder and Kobasew. Three stars: Wheeler, Ryder, Babchuk.

January 10 in Boston: Bruins win 5-1. Thomas in goal. Scores by Krejci, Yelle, Stuart, Ryder (2). Three stars: Krejci, Ryder, Thomas.

February 17 in Carolina: Bruins win 5-1. Thomas in goal. Scores by Wheeler, Hnidy, Krejci, Kobasew, plus a shorty from Bergeron. Three stars; Krejci, Chara, Thomas.

It's never easy in the second round. But as long as the B's want it badly enough they certainly have the tools they need to win this series. My prediction: Bruins win in 5.

Sharks Tank

2009-04-28T08:55:00.002-06:00

Longtime Bruins fans have a connection to the San Jose Sharks through the Thornton trade. At the time the experts around the league claimed the trade of Thornton for Marco Sturm, Wayne Primeau and Brad Stuart was an embarrassment for Boston. That and the race for the President's trophy this season between the B's and the Sharks has led me to keep one eye on the left coast during the playoffs. Some even believed it may come down to the Sharks vs. the Bruins in the cup final.

My view of the Sharks mirrors my view of Joe Thornton. They don't have what it takes to go deep in the playoffs. I watched Thornton play and he just floated around the zone waiting for the puck to come to him. You can't do that in the playoffs. You have to get in there along the boards and fight hard for the puck, and when you do get it you have to skate as hard and as fast as you can 100% of the time. I've said it here before: Thornton only has one speed. He has no "playoff gear" and neither do the Sharks as a team.

When I saw that San Jose had matched up against Anaheim in the first round my thought was that Anaheim was going to eliminate them. San Jose has a long history of disappointing results in the playoffs, and Anaheim has just the right hard-playing style to bring them down. But since I didn't see much of the western conference this season I must admit that this was probably 40% history and 60% wishful thinking. I had read that the Sharks had changed--that like the Bruins they had become a complete team. But when put to the test this proved to be an empty claim. And as for Anaheim, they are the first team I have watched this season that seemed familiar. They play very much like the Bruins, playing a hard complete team game. But one other thing I noticed was that they lacked the size and especially the talent of the B's. Their finish near the net just wasn't there. Time and again they would force a turnover or win the puck along the boards only to flub the pass or miss the shot.

So where does that leave our sleeping Bruins? Most observers around the league expect Boston to follow the Sharks lead, once they meet a real opponent. But those of us who have watched them all year know differently. They may not win the cup, but I'd be very surprised if the Bruins embarrass themselves in the playoffs. I have no doubt that they can beat any of the remaining teams in the eastern conference, and it does not matter who they match up against. The one worry I have is this: do they want it enough? Aside from the almost daily claims to the contrary, does this team feel they have already accomplished their goal for the season? We will find out... but only after this long excruciating wait is over.

Looch Suspended

2009-04-20T09:06:00.004-06:00

The NHL has announced that the B's Milan Lucic has been suspended for game three of the series against Montreal.

Many Bruins fans are up in arms, complaining of everything from inconsistency to a conspiracy by the NHL to help the Habs or lengthen the series. Many Habs fans are gloating, saying that this proves that Looch is the goon they have claimed him to be all along. My take? Both are off the mark.

The way I see it is this: both the NHL and the Players Association have been preaching that they want to crack down on blows to the head (partly as a result of Bergeron's concussion). It's like when a player gets his stick parallel to the ice and and hooks the blade around the midsection of the guy in front of him. It doesn't matter if he pulled hard enough to interfere with the progress of the player--it's going to be called every time. The NHL is looking to make a statement here, and what Looch did looked like a violent cross check to the face. Nevermind the fact that nobody was hurt, that he was only defending himself, that it has been the Habs all along who have acted like goons after the whistle not the Bruins, and that it was only his glove that made contact. It looked bad enough that they had to make the call.

In two or three games--when the Bruins are waiting for their next opponent--this will be forgotten.

In fact, I think this works in the Bruins favor. First it gets Byron Bitz into the game. He's got to be chomping at the bit to play and he knows this may be his only chance. I expect him to play like a monster out there. Second, it gives the B's something to get fired up about going into the likeliest game of the series for them to lose. And third, the league did send a message. Not just to Looch but to everyone. This hardly gives the Habs a free ride to continue being goons by raising elbows and bloodying players after the whistle. Rather, I think they may be looking over their shoulder at the referee.

Lastly, for anyone who hasn't followed the Briuns closely I want to say something about Lucic. I've watched all but a handful of his NHL games. Looch is no goon. He will dance when asked and usually win. He will hit hard along the boards. He does not set out to injure anyone. Rather, his hard hits are often beautifully timed to create a turnover or scoring opportunity. Unlike Laraque or some of the other journeyman goons, Looch can skate and score. No--he's not Cam Neely, at least not yet, but he is an impact player with considerable skill.

Little Lost Habs

2009-04-17T09:47:00.002-06:00

A good game by the B's last night although they gave me a scare with their lackluster play throughout much of the 3rd period. I did not expect that. But when they finally turned it on, they really turned it on. Overall I was left with the impression that the Bruins could beat the Habs with two lines in the stands and Fernandez in goal.

I loved this quote from Savard after Chara scored the game winner: “Then the monster was waiting back there with his stick touching the roof, so I slid one back and it was a great shot by him.”

But as a hockey fan I was very unhappy with what Lapierre did at the end of this game. Attacking an opposing player after the whistle is forgivable when that player has tried to harm your goalie or taken a cheap shot. But to go after the other team's top goal scorer after he scores an empty netter with no goaltender involved and no contact on the play--that crosses the line. There still is such a thing as being a poor sport. In fact, its one of the reasons that I steer my kids toward hockey. Behind the facade of fighting and rough play hockey is a sport filled with real heroes and upstanding role models. Players still shake hands after a tough playoff series and so far nobody taunts the other team when they score a goal. I would hate to see that change.

To top it off, after the siren sounded Komisarek went after Hunwick and gouged him in the eye! What bothers me most about this isn't how Lapierre and his fellow Habs acted after it was clear they had lost, but that few fans/comentators seem to be speaking out against it. I keep hearing, "that's what you have to expect between the Bruins and the Habs." But if it's ok to attack someone after the game ends just because you lost, then why not in the parking lot later? Can they jump out of the bushes at the guys home too? Where does it end? I think the league needs to consider handing out fines if this happens again. Two tough guys who have been beating each other up all game is one thing, but to go after a goal scorer just because you lost is quite another! That's not being tough. It's acting like a spoiled four year old. Shame on the Canadiens.

Anyhow, in terms of the playoff series what this says to me is that the Habs have lost their way. They know that they are supposed to go out there and intimidate the B's but they don't seem to know how to go about doing it properly.

Expectations, etc.

2009-04-16T10:47:00.003-06:00

Well here we are, the day we've all been waiting for. Game 1 against Montreal in the first round of the playoffs. I always think its a good idea to set realistic expectations before embarking on something so important, so here is my personal take on the B's chances this post season.

Do the Bruins have what it takes to win a Cup? The answer is a definite yes. Goaltending: check. Defense: check. Scoring: check. Coaching: check. Depth at every position: check (except perhaps in goal). Intangibles: check.

The intangibles include being up to the challenge when other teams try to get under their skin, the ability to play in a hard-checking playoff style, the ability and depth to adjust to injuries, and the ability to come back from a deficit.

I saw some hockey "expert" say that he didn't think a team that was in eighth place last year could win the cup the next. I know where he's coming from because that's exactly the sort of thing I say about teams I don't follow closely. But I am in a different position, having seen nearly every game the Bruins have played for the last three seasons. It's obvious to me that this team has all the tools--in spades--to win the Cup. And if they don't win it will be a lost opportunity.

That said, to my expectations. The road to the Cup is paved with adversity, some of which can bring down even the greatest teams. Goaltenders can get hot. Teams can get unlucky. Key players can become injured. On that last note, I doubt if Fernandez, even playing well, could get the B's to the final. And losing Chara would also have a possibly cup-losing impact.

So given all that, I expect the Bruins to win in the first round. Anything less will be a terrible disappointment. A loss in the second round would be disappointing as well, but not devastatingly so. After that, my expectations will be met.

If the B's win the conference final, I will be a very happy fan! If they lose, then so be it. And if the B's win the cup... well, after watching this team grow over the last three years that would be indescribably amazing!

Notes on the Caps vs. Rangers
Things that impressed me: the ferocity of the Caps attack, particularly in the 1st. Ovechkin, the one man team. The goaltending of Lundqvist.

But I thought both teams showed some weak spots. Neither showed particularly good defense. The Rangers PK did Ok, but did not play very well. The Caps PP seemed entirely about getting the puck to Ovechkin, who seemingly played every shift of the game as well. A good defensive team will shut that down. But most of all, if the Caps don't find better goaltending there is no way they can go very far.

Anybody who saw that game last night and wonders why Thomas got the big bucks, perhaps you need not wonder any longer. The Rangers did not win that game. Theodore lost it.

Christmas Comes in April

2009-04-03T09:33:00.002-06:00

I opened a web page this morning and my jaw dropped in disbelief. I will deny it to the last, but some who were present claim that this die-hard Tim Thomas fan even had a little tear in his eye.

According to the Boston Globe this morning, Tim Thomas has signed a new 3 year deal worth $5.2 million per year with the Bruins.

The one thing that has been bothering me as the Bruins get ready for what could be a long playoff run has been the prospect of Tim Thomas walking away as a free agent this summer. I believe that there is no better goaltender in the NHL and no more important player to his team. At $5.2 million he's a steal. My congratulations to Peter Chiarelli. So many years for the Bruins, so many goaltenders... but this one's the most special of them all.

And nobody deserves this payoff more than Tim Thomas!

I'm Loving It!

2009-03-21T15:16:00.001-06:00

I'm loving this! And they say Rask isn't competitive enough...

Nervousness

2009-03-19T10:14:00.003-06:00

I'm really getting sick of what I read in the papers these days. Recent headlines scream, "What's wrong with the Bruins?" Comments on articles and forums are full of hate for the team or various players on it. You'd think they were in last place!

Get real, people. The only thing broken is the fair weather "fans" lack of faith in the team.

Right now the only thing that truly matters is game 1 of the playoffs. The players know it, the coaches know it, management knows it, and most the fans who didn't tune in only last month know it. Yet it's only natural that everyone is nervous.

Let's say the team losses its confidence just before the playoffs. That's good reason to be nervous.

But how many times have we seen a high-flying team with a big point lead at the end of the season lose in the first round? If the B's were still flying high, I'd still be nervous, and I suspect many others would be as well.

So either way, it's only natural to be nervous. It's how we express this nervousness that matters. Do players tear each other down? Does management pressure the coach into desperate decisions? Do the fans attack the team they claim to love, like a bunch of spoiled rabid children?

I believe that as long as nobody is seriously injured--particularly Tim Thomas--it simply doesn't matter what happens in these last nine games. We are going to remain nervous. And nobody is going to remember them come summer, except maybe a few bitter "fans" who will act like the world came to an end when the B's lose in the conference final (or whenever).

The fact is that no matter what, everything will be reset in game 1 of the first round. Personally, I'm looking forward to it (and trying not to read the papers).

Much Ado About Little

2009-03-09T08:48:00.003-06:00

It was an interesting weekend for the Bruins. Against the Blackhawks on Saturday the B's had a good strong effort. The Hawks are a very good team, although it seemed apparent why their reputation doesn't match their record. It seemed to me that the Hawks played like a young team often does; they showed a high talent level but a lack of consistent play. Look for these guys to be a force next year.

The game on Sunday was a weird one, in part because it was on NBC. It's always fun to watch those guys put their own spin on a game. They made the choice before hand to concentrate on Chara and Recci for the B's and Avery for the Rangers. The very idea of making Sean Avery the focus of their positive attention made my skin crawl. It is also funny to watch Milbury squirm in his NBC gig. He's clearly very uncomfortable. Given how he sometimes intimidates his NESN coworkers, making them uncomfortable at times with the sheer force of his personality, it was sort of fun to see him squirm. On the other hand I felt sorry for him. That kind of sums up my feelings about Milbury: it's a love-hate sort of thing. On the one hand I like and admire him, and on the other I think he's a big jerk. Mostly, I'm thankful I don't have to work with him! Been there, done that, with his sort of personality.

As for the game itself, the B's played very well and very likely would have won had it not been for their goaltending. Fernandez had a nightmare of a game. He failed to hold close enough to the post on one goal, and actually put the puck into the net with his own stick. Then he foolishly spun around in the crease when he lost the puck, kicking it into the net in the process. And for a finale he tried to kick a wide shot to the corner and missed. When the puck took a weird bounce and came out the other side of the goal to a Ranger he was completely out of position. That last goal in particular really hurt, coming late in the game when it was tied and the B's were dominating the Rangers in the offensive zone. In retrospect I'm sure the coach wishes he'd pulled Fernandez or even started Timmy two days in a row.

But I'm not about to write that Fernandez sucks or that Julien is an idiot. I'll leave that to the juvenile posters on the Bruins boards. All goaltenders have bad games, or I guess at least most of them. It's been so long since Timmy had one of these games I can't even remember when it was. But he's the exception. I once saw Patrick Roy shoot the puck into his own net and then play like he was completely disinterested afterward. Patrick Roy obviously did not suck, but he sure could have a bad game.

Likewise I'm not going to second guess the coach's decision to leave Fernandez in. Had the B's won that game, and they almost did, it would have helped Fernandez regain his confidence. Leaving him in was a gamble, and when you gamble, sometimes you lose. Maybe Fernandez will battle back. Maybe they will bring up Rask. Either way, I think it imperative not to play Timmy too much going into the playoffs. He does have a tendency to burn out late in the season if played too often. Once the playoffs start it will be too late to rest him.

All-in-all it was an entertaining weekend, and the B's look fine to me. No worries. Fifteen games to go.

Lets Get on with the Playoffs Already!

2009-03-06T09:37:00.004-07:00

I wrote a blog by the title So This is It Then in early February. For the two of you who read it, my words may have seemed oddly timed. It was about how it felt to be a fan of a team that did nothing but win. I wrote that blog then to capture the feeling, because I knew that it wasn't likely to last much longer. By February 5th the B's were already falling back to earth.

I'm not sure I like it, this business of streaking to the top of the NHL. Once you reach the top expectations are heightened, yet there is nowhere to go but down. The winning gets just a little boring, and the losing stings more than it used to.

There are now 17 games left in the season. What are the Bruins playing for? Pride? Even if they lose every remaining game they will still likely make the playoffs. The number of series you need to win for a cup is the same either way. If I'm a player I'm wondering if pride is worth an injury that might give me a top row seat for the playoffs. And now other teams are fighting for a playoff birth, some coming to top form to get there. That makes winning all the more difficult.

Confidence was a primary reason the B's played so well earlier this year. Losing your way to the post season can only erode it. If I'm the coach I'm wondering if these guys are going to play well enough to win in the first round.

It's kind of ugly, isn't it? No matter what happens in the next 17 games, the season will start again in the playoffs. The B's may lose their sting. More likely they will find it again. Either way, the next 17 games are not likely to be pivotal. My prediction is that they will go 6-7-4 for a total of 109 points to finish second in the east.

Then we can get on with it.

Trade Day is Over

2009-03-04T13:17:00.004-07:00

Once again Peter Chiarelli has shown why he's the guy paid the big bucks (rather than fans and bloggers). The trades he made today improve the team for the playoff run without giving away too much in return. Both acquisitions are rentals which will give him options come summer, and the new players should fit into the room. Always true to his word, that's exactly what he told everyone he was setting out to accomplish. I personally think it's rather humorous that many fans will go with the wildest rumors rather than just take the GM at his word.

Anyhow, here is the big picture on the roster moves (rather than the usual who was traded for whom):

1. The B's swap Lashoff for Steve Montadore at defense. Montador is a solid defenseman who has played every game this year. At least in theory he will be a great fit in the room because he's a Right to Play guy. Both Chara and Ference are big in Right to Play and there will be a natural solidarity due to the fight to get the organization unbanned from the Olympics. Montador travelled to Africa with Ference last summer. He also made it to the cup final with teammates Ference, Kobasew and Yelle. His contract expires in the summer.

Lashoff is a defensemen who has great potential, but he was failing to truly thrive in the Bruins system.

2. The B's swap Karsums and Nokelainen for Mark Recchi at forward. Recchi is that left-shooting forward with experience the B's said they wanted. He will likely replace PJ on the power play, which will likely improve it and definitely make a lot of knuckleheads happy. As for experience and familiarity, Recchi won a cup in Carolina with Aaron Ward.

Karsums and Nokelainen are both promising forwards but both of them had yet to permanently make it into the NHL. There is a chance that one or both will thrive in time and make some wish they hadn't been traded away for a rental, but that isn't a given.

As far as I'm concerned, I really like these moves. Our team improves yet stays intact, and there is every reason to hope that the new blood will inspire the team to get out of it's current doldrums.

I Hate This Time of Year

2009-03-03T10:13:00.003-07:00

I really do. I just hate it. I should stop reading anything for at least a week prior to the trade deadline for the sake of my blood pressure. The trade deadline brings out all the idiots who never laced up a pair of skates and think they know more about hockey than the coaches and GMs who are paid to do it for a living. It brings out the quick fix people who would trade away the heart and sole of a team for a "name" player. It brings out the juvenile sports fans who watch three games per season and can't talk about hockey except in baseball metaphors. It brings out all the fickle fans who only tune in for the playoffs, but shoot their mouths off like they have been following the team closely all year.

I can't wait for it all to be over. Let's get on with the hockey.

Bruins Get Slap in the Face From Headline Writers

2009-03-02T08:33:00.003-07:00

I saw at least two articles about the game against the Caps with a headline about the B's being slapped in the face. Clever, yes, but accurate? No. In fact these two teams are very well matched. If they do meet in the playoffs it will be a series to remember. I'd give an edge to the Bruins 5 on 5 throughout a long series because they have greater depth. But it seems an edge also goes to the Caps for their OT play; they get it done.

With regard to the fluke 70-foot slapper that ended the game--I finally understand that old phrase, "the exception that proves the rule." That never made logical sense to me, but now I get it. It's the one mishap that puts history into perspective. That goal was unexpected and surprising because Timmy almost never lets in soft goals of any kind. Rather than start the "Thomas sucks" chants, as I am sure a few idiots are doing, it reminds us just how well he plays night in and night out; it's the exception that proves the rule.

But I fear that if the Bruins keep starting Thomas in every game we are going to see more of this. A big part of goaltending is mental, and for Thomas it may be even more so because of the intensity he plays with. Whether it be Fernandez, who has looked less than stellar lately, or Rask, Timmy needs to be rested before the playoffs.

I noticed that the B's web site has a poll running. The question is, "If the B's were to make a trade before the deadline, which position should they focus on?" The choices are forward, center, defense, and "they don't need to address anything." Notice what's missing? They left goaltending off the list entirely because there would be no point to it. Long time Bruins fans can appreciate how comforting that is. They say that teams are built from the goal out, and nobody is questioning the foundation of these Bruins today. The way I see it the Bruins have a shot at winning the cup this year, but it's only a shot. I've been around for a while and this story usually plays out with a loss in the final or conference final. The Cup comes the following year when they are truly hungry for it, assuming the team hasn't been dismantled in the off season. That is why I feel that the number 1 job Chiarelli has is to sign Tim Thomas, who will be a free agent in the summer.

Bruins Have Ducks in a Row

2009-02-27T13:01:00.002-07:00

Another great effort with very sharp play. If the Ducks were an Eastern Conference team they might have known better than to try to intimidate the B's in their own building. The last team to try that was the Stars back fall and they regretted it too.

I wonder what's up with Savard? He missed the 3rd period with an "upper body" injury and is likely to miss the next game as well. He was a target all night and ended his game being thrown down to the ice in a brawl with Niedermayer. But I noticed his play was off right from the start. In the 1st period he uncharacteristically seemed to have trouble finding the puck in front of the net, missed several passes, and in general had difficultly handling the puck. Something was clearly bothering him even then.

And I agree with jimbuff that Looch needs to stop when the other player is down. I am proud of the fact that my Bruins play a clean game and I'd hate to see Looch get a bad reputation. It seemed pretty clear to me what happened last night--for once he got a bit of his own medicine, taking a hard punch to the jaw early in the fight. It appeared to make him so angry that he just unloaded on the guy. Not pretty.

Bitz and Pieces

2009-02-25T08:41:00.003-07:00

Last night the Bruins and Panthers didn't look like the same two teams that played last week. The B's were in their all black and the Panthers were in their old familiar road whites--a uniform that strikes fear into the hearts of no one. But more importantly, after a freaky role reversal last time, the two teams got back to being who they really are.

We haven't seen the Bruin team was saw last night in a very long time. They were completely dominating in all three zones, and had that crazy killer instinct where after every goal they only wanted more. How were the Bruins better than in their recent efforts? In every single possible way.

If you asked me to pick the best three Bruins or tell you which player had a poor night, I'd be at a loss because this really was a total team effort. From the goal out: spectacular and timely goaltending, hard hitting nasty defense, good quick decisions on the breakout, tape to tape passing, a jump in the offensive zone, domination on the forecheck, and "finish."

I am sure B's fans everywhere had big smiles after this one. It was like starting the season over again. After seeing them struggle we bear witness to the full rebirth of this amazing, absolutely dominating, team. It was sweet and worth the wait.

The fans who think this team needs more talent need to stop and think. I keep reading pure lunacy, like trading Axe for a rental, or giving up their young talent for one. The B's don't need more talent. Hockey is a team sport. Doesn't anybody remember the 1980 Olympics? Or at least seen the movie? Teamwork and hard work trump talent. If you add, say, an Eric Cole, you add talent, but risk screwing up the team chemistry. Chiarelli has shown a flair for making that little trade with solid positive results and I'm hoping he pulls it off again this time. Just look at his signing over the summer: people, myself included, were worried that Ryder, his struggling replacement for Muzz, would struggle for the B's too. But instead he thrived. Just like Julien said he would.

While it is tempting to think in the short term for a cup run, I think Chiarelli should instead look to the long term. Trade Fernandez while he still has some value. Trade him for some future: a draft pick or prospect. The Bruins aren't going to win a cup with Fernandez in goal. He's just not consistent enough. If Timmy goes down with an injury the only thing that would get them there would be an amazing rookie run by Rask. On the other hand, we need Timmy rested. I'm worried he's going to burn out again. I'd bring Rask up and let him play every other game until the end of the season. It would be good for both of them.

Now for the actual Bitz and Pieces:

Hearing the crowd chanting "We want Bitz" at the end of the game was great! And the big roar when he skated out. How fun was that?
Seeing the hard working but snake bit Bergeron take that puck to the net... I swear my heart actually stopped. And when he scored! How fun was that?
Ryder played like a starving dog with a piece of meat dangling in front of him! One has to wonder if Ryder wasn't the spark that made this team explode again. Is Ryder, next to Thomas and Chara, one of the essential ingredients to this team?
Axe's big hit and all around physical play. How can you tell the difference between someone who understands hockey and someone who doesn't? Just ask them what they think of Axe. If they say he wouldn't be missed... they don't get it.
Kobasew and Looch played like cruise missiles looking for something to explode on. And the best part was that their hits weren't just statements, they often resulted in a turn over or scoring opportunity. Now that's hockey!

Just What the Doctor Ordered

2009-02-18T11:13:00.003-07:00

Prior to last night's game against the Canes I was thinking that what the B's really needed was one of those 7-2 blowouts to rebuild their confidence. It turned out that 5-1 was good enough.

It was Shane Hnidy who made it happen. Ever since that puck went off Thornton's skate into the goal, the puck hadn't been bouncing the B's way. You could see their confidence sag, particularly against New Jersey. New Jersey won that 1-goal game on a fluke that went under Thomas. The Bruins couldn't buy a goal, even a fluke. It seemed the Hockey Gods were aligned against them.

After his goal last night Hnidy said he was just putting the puck near the net and it just happened to go in. After that, the Bruins skated harder and made better decisions more quickly. You could see the room to skate opening up as their confidence swelled. Throughout the last few games the most obvious difference was that there seemed to be less room. The breakout was stalled because a defender would be all over the forward when a pass arrived. The other teams were pressing hard in all three zones. But after Hnidy scored that began to change. As the B's had more room to skate you could see their confidence swell with each shift. And in turn they had even more room. With six minutes to go in the 3rd the Bruins were ahead 2-1. Six minutes later thay had added four goals.

Take a rest boys--you earned it.

A Devil of a Game

2009-02-14T09:23:00.002-07:00

This was a great game. It had a playoff feel to it with both teams playing at their best. New Jersey played the best team defense I have seen in ages. The Bruins rolled all four lines with hustle all night long. Those 7-2 Bruins wins earlier in the season were fun--don't get me wrong--but last night, now that was Hockey!

THE Game

2009-02-11T08:57:00.004-07:00

Well, I missed it. Yeah, I missed the biggest game of the season. Didn't even hear it on the radio. Thanks to Dish Networks' little flap over Versus that put it on the most expensive tier (with nothing else I want). Thanks to a hellish day at work that made me forget to put my backup plan to record the internet radio broadcast in motion. Thanks to a snowstorm that kept me from getting home in time to listen in person.

From what I've been reading the B's forgot who they were in the 3rd period. I wish I could say I was surprised, but this team hasn't had to dig deep in a long time. Not since they played the Wings last fall. It's easy to forget how to do it.

But you know, even before the game I was thinking that a loss wouldn't be such a bad thing. Sure it stings now, but you can bet it stings in the locker room even more... and that's the stuff that builds a cup team.

So This is It Then

2009-02-05T14:29:00.002-07:00

This is it, this is what we Bruins fans have waited for all these years. It's really quite amazing, and different, to be a Bruins fan this season. On TV I watched yet another team head for the locker room in dejection and disappointment. I wonder if the Flyers will go into a long slide now, as other devastated Bruins opponents have. But mostly I wonder if they even realize that they didn't come close to seeing the best that the Bruins had to bring... because they simply weren't good enough to bring it out in them.

Ah, but there's the rub. I know that some fans will want to hit me over the head with my beloved copy of "Black and Gold" for saying it, but this is getting boring. We've recently seen that you have to remove at least one full line of forwards from this team to make it a fair contest. Otherwise they just breeze past most opponents like they aren't even in the same league. There's no drama.

In a weird way I miss the previous three seasons. The Bruins struggled. They were always the underdog. Some idiot fans even wanted Timmy replaced because they couldn't tell a great goaltender from an armadillo... unless the team was winning. That was drama. When the Bruins won against a good team it was due to sheer grit, heart and determination. Every game was a battle... drama.

Now I tell my 10-year old that the Bruins won "again" and he looks at me as if to say, "So?" I watch other teams play each other and I'm struck by how poorly they seem to play. "Why didn't he just pass it to the other D man behind the net?", I ask the TV. Or, "Why do they have so much trouble on the breakout?" I mean, it's not like it's all that hard. I've seen the Bruins do it, again and again and in pretty much exactly the same way, something like 500 times. Other teams don't seem to be playing the same game. How weird is that? It's like playing NHL '06 after you long ago figured out how to score at will. Every game and every goal is the same.

Now some people will think that this can't last. The Bruins may fall like Ottawa before them, and I'll regret not enjoying it more. But that's just the point: we learned last year that this team has huge reserves of heart that it can draw on when facing adversity. This team has enormous character, but they seldom need it anymore. I cannot imagine much that can stop them from cruising into the playoffs, and past the first round.

Only after that will the drama finally begin.

Other than February 10th of course. Damn, I need to find someone who gets Versus!

The '03/'04 Cup Team

2008-12-20T18:04:00.004-07:00

I recently read this article by Stephen Harris in the Boston Herald. He compares this season's team to the pre-lockout team of '03/'04, and I must admit to being somewhat amused by what he said:

"It was widely seen as a squad that would win at least one Stanley Cup, maybe more."

I recall those days rather well, and there were few if any Bruins fans who thought that team had a chance of going beyond the second round. I recall what the pundits said too. The general belief was that the B's didn't have the depth to win a cup, and they were right. Nobody who was paying attention thought that team was going to win a Cup. This despite the late season rentals of Gonchar and Nylander who were never more than just passing through. Samsonov's best days were behind him, although he played with more heart than any other Bruin during the playoff series with the Habs. Rolston and Bergeron had yet to fully mature, and like many young players during that time seemed destined for true greatness... in the future with some other team.

And then there was Jumbo Joe. Looking back, it was just wrong. From the day he was drafted the pundits around the league heaped praise on him and by extension on the Bruins. We fans bathed ourselves in it. But it was never quite right. He was brought along too slowly. Then too quickly. Then it seemed everyone expected him to be a natural leader as well. Joe Thornton is a very good player who will tally your team a lot of goals. But he was never "the" player, the one that everyone seemed to expect him to be. And the blame for that falls squarely on the Bruins management who mishandled him from the start and built the wrong expectations. Yes, he played injured during the playoff series. But in that series he was more often a liability than an asset, taking stupid penalties and playing frustrated. He may not have been able to play at 100% but he had 100% control over how he played and over the way his play affected the rest of the team.

Were they a team destined to win a cup? No. The management showed little respect for the players or for the fans and the players showed little respect in return. Time and again players came to Boston only to fail or worse, move on to a higher salary elsewhere. Looking back, it was truly awful. The fans that turned their backs on those Bruins had every reason to do so. They were a broken team and a broken organization.

We should all be grateful that today the Bruins are no longer broken. No matter how well they do for the rest of the season, the Bruins are an immeasurably better team than anything put on the ice in the O'Connell days. They have respect for one another from the top down, they work hard, have fun, and they play like a team. Even today I read comments from fans who long for a big name free agent to "fix"the team or "push them over the top." These fans just don't get it. Hockey is the ultimate team sport and that goes for the entire team, on and off the ice. You could fill a team with "name" free agents and it would fail without the proper management and attitude throughout the organization. It is this rare and elusive quality that the Bruins have today in spades.

Look at the current roster today, because in ten years many of their names will be remembered well. Hell, some of them may even be hanging from the rafters. Look at those names, because one day they will make the '03/'04 roster look weak in comparison.

Back in Black

2008-12-10T13:55:00.002-07:00

Ok, not the most original title, I know. Yes, I am back, my three readers. And of course, so are the Bruins--back, in black, and, oh man, are they back!

Where to start. Hmm... maybe my return would be a good excuse for a recap of the season so far.

The season started out normally enough. The post I had planned to start the season would have gone something like, "They've come this far but can they take it to yet another level?" And in the early going it looked like more of the same as last year: good, but not great hockey. The home loss to the Leafs was disappointing, but you can't win them all, right?

And then something happened. The Stars came to town and they brought their goons with them. Sean Avery and Steve Ott may have been the best things to happen to the Boston Bruins since the last time we beat the Habs in a playoff series. Imagine the very idea of coming into Boston and trying to intimidate the Bruins with cheap shots. The Stars tried it with the result that nobody is likely to try it again for a very long time. The Bruins beat the Stars in every sense of the word. During that game the Bruins came together as a team. I will long recall seeing Savvy pounding on Avery at the end of the game. Sure, it may have been more symbolic than pugilistic, but the gesture held great meaning.

Prior to that game the Bruins were 5-3-2. Since the drop of the puck against the Stars on Saturday, November 1st, the Bruins have gone 14-1-1. Thank you, Dallas. And thank you Mr. Avery. Good luck to you in your next profession. I don't know what you will do, but I'm sure it will be sleazy.

The next highlight has to be a 6-1 stomping of Montreal at home. That felt oh so good.

Unfortunately the next memorable game wasn't nearly so sweet. Those Rangers are pretty darned good. The Bruins lost in a shootout in New York. This was a tough game where for one of the few times since November 1st the opposing team seemed of similar caliber.

Speaking of teams of similar caliber, the home game against the Red Wings has to be the second most memorable game of the season so far. What made this game truly awe inspiring was that the Wings played very well. Unlike other opponents they didn't let the B's into their zone like water through a chain link fence. The Bruins had to really work to win this one. The score may have been a lopsided 4-1, but the play was much closer. You really got the feeling that the Wings had brought their A game and still lost.

Lastly, the low point of the season, at least for me, came on November 26th, in Buffalo. Not only was this the only regulation loss in November, but it was an awful game to watch. This was made worse for me by the fact that The Dish Network failed to pick up the NESN broadcast for Center Ice so I had to watch the Buffalo broadcast. Now, I'm not such a die-hard fan that I can't watch another teams' broadcast. In some cases it's a welcome change. But the Buffalo broadcast team is just awful! They do it old school and it's about as much fun as watching a puck dry after a game. Give me Jack Edwards. He may be partisan to the point of silliness sometimes, but at least he's always having fun. And his fun is contagious. And Brick, of course, is the perfect counterpoint. I really think those two are the best broadcast team in the NHL. But I digress.

I have way more thoughts, but I'll save them for another post or two or three.

Getting a Late Start

2008-10-21T22:45:00.002-06:00

Just a quick note that this old B's fan will be getting a late start on the season. I haven't gone away and I'm enjoying the season very much so far! It's just that "real" life is requiring all of my time at the moment. But never fear, loyal readers (all three of you!) that will change eventually.

Chiarelli Throws the Dice

2008-07-05T13:06:00.002-06:00

Michael Ryder. To tell the truth this free agency acquisition worries me. Last year at this time I wrote that I didn't understand why the Bruin's GM had obtained Manny Fernandez and this year I have a similar feeling. But at least last year I figured that it couldn't hurt to have two good goaltenders. I'm really trying to see the bright side this time around, but I'm left trying to figure out how we are better off with two Glen Murrays.

There are things here that just don't add up. Why are we told by the Bruins that Ryder is a good two-way player when he's a career -24? Why are we told that he's big going into the boards when that doesn't gel with his reputation? He's a lot faster than Muzz (Murray), I'll grant them that. And I'll add that he doesn't appear to be injured as often. Like Muzz, Ryder had a very bad year last year. But unlike Muzz he wasn't fighting injury and it was a big year prior to his free agency and his big chance to cash in. We are told that the coach didn't give him playing time, but come on. No coach is going to bench a good player just because he doesn't like the way he looks. There are no signs that Ryder was unhappy or having personal differences with the coaching staff. So why did he spend his big year on the bench?

No, there only seems to be one clear reason why Ryder is coming to Boston: coach Julien wants him. And to tell the truth, if I were Chiarelli I'd probably listen to Julien too. I just hope Julien knows what he's doing with this guy. A change of scenery and a new coach that believes in a player has the potential to bring him around. But it's a big gamble. Not only is Chiarelli gambling that Ryder helps the team by scoring, but he's gambling that Ryder will respond to Julien's defense-first system and become a better two-way player. But what worries me most are the consequences for the GM if this gamble makes him look foolish. How many bad moves will Chiarelli be allowed before someone with less hockey acumen starts looking over his shoulder and telling him what to do?