Let me put it this way........... Let's say that instead of "Bourque" on his back that it said "Sauve", or "Knipshear" for that matter. Would Claude be rolling out the red carpet to the third line, the powerplay, the shoot-out and who knows what else?
My guess is NO and based on Claudes previous decisions regarding young, undeserving, unproven players, I'm right on the money.
Let me put it this way........... Let's say that instead of "Bourque" on his back that it said "Sauve", or "Knipshear" for that matter. Would Claude be rolling out the red carpet to the third line, the powerplay, the shoot-out and who knows what else?
My guess is NO and based on Claudes previous decisions regarding young, undeserving, unproven players, I'm right on the money.
But on the flip side of that, if the last name on the shirt was something other than Bourque, would people here really be going out of their way to complain about a guy who hasn't done anything to hurt your chances to win, after all of two games?
But on the flip side of that, if the last name on the shirt was something other than Bourque, would people here really be going out of their way to complain about a guy who hasn't done anything to hurt your chances to win, after all of two games?
A bit slippery of you, LSCII...
True, we did happen to win both games, but some would counter that having him on the PP and in the shootout did in fact make it more difficult for us to win. We'll never actually know, of course, but things could have easily gone the other way yesterday if we had lost the shutout or if we had capitalized on one or more PPs.
Personally, as a big fan of Ray and a BU grad, I hope CB excels here. I think if he puts forth a consistent, major effort, he can.
__________________ My views have No Movement Clauses.
Bruins HF Board: Come for the lunacy; stay for the snipefest.
Marchand: Today's Linseman
In favor of replacing Naoko with Direct TV Genie girl
True, we did happen to win both games, but some would counter that having him on the PP and in the shootout did in fact make it more difficult for us to win. We'll never actually know, of course, but things could have easily gone the other way yesterday if we had lost the shutout or if we had capitalized on one or more PPs.
Personally, as a big fan of Ray and a BU grad, I hope CB excels here. I think if he puts forth a consistent, major effort, he can.
In terms of the PP, anyone else would have/could have done just as little. I mean, it's not like the roster is littered with offensive juggernauts that are sitting so he can get the PP TOI. I'm personally not a fan of his, but it's a bottom 6 role. Sure, he's also taken a couple of second unit shifts on the PP, but don't forget that it's a PP that has sucked for years now. Really to me, it's not something to get worked up over, especially after all of two games.
I think the shootout is really just an example of the problem on this team. I've been saying for years that they don't have enough talent on the top 6. People always counter that they have plenty of scoring, but when you look at the shootout lineup and see Bourque there, it exemplifies what I mean. Sure, Horton and Lucic have scored goals, but it's not like their offensively gifted. They score through hard work and physicality, not through elite offensive skills.
Let me put it this way........... Let's say that instead of "Bourque" on his back that it said "Sauve", or "Knipshear" for that matter. Would Claude be rolling out the red carpet to the third line, the powerplay, the shoot-out and who knows what else?
My guess is NO and based on Claudes previous decisions regarding young, undeserving, unproven players, I'm right on the money.
I really don't understand where you are coming from on this, as it relates to why you think he should not be given a chance on the powerplay or shoot-outs. He put up 93 points in the AHL last year and 28 points in 32 games this year. This isn't some "plugger" that's being put in the occasional offensive role. This is a kid with some offense who is asked to be more of a checker during 5-on-5, and is currently the best guy (in the farm) to be able do that and give you some offense. It remains to be seen if it translates to the NHL, but to think that an AHL ppg player being given a chance to contribute offensively is "nepotism" makes no sense.
You mean that year 3 when he was excellent in that playoffs run?
Ryder was a very good signing by the Bruins and helped them win the Cup.
And we would be in better shape right now with him on the team.
I'm not having this conversation with you yet again, because you're willing to throw out a two year period where he was terrible and underperformed just because he played well in a handful of playoff games.
Good for him for stepping up during the cup run, but last year was nothing but proof that Ryder is a guy who doesn't give a full effort night in and night out. He was lights out for Dallas because he was motivated, and for the money he pulled down over his time here, a few great playoff games doesn't offset his sub par effort over the last two years of that deal.
I miss Ryder and Pouliot, they were consistantly riddiculed by fans and posters here, but when they leave you see how good they are for 3rd liners, Ryder is an exception as the hate he got on here for his last season (18 goals) was un-warranted.
Give Bourque time, Lundvquist has a 4+ GAA so should NY trade him? Give young guys (Bourque) time to develop and obtain chemistry with Peverley and Kelly, and you never know what can happen.
Let me put it this way........... Let's say that instead of "Bourque" on his back that it said "Sauve", or "Knipshear" for that matter. Would Claude be rolling out the red carpet to the third line, the powerplay, the shoot-out and who knows what else?
My guess is NO and based on Claudes previous decisions regarding young, undeserving, unproven players, I'm right on the money.
Unless the name on his back was "Hamilton" in which case Claude would give him about 23 minutes of ice per game, including 2 min. or so on the PP.
I miss Ryder and Pouliot, they were consistantly riddiculed by fans and posters here, but when they leave you see how good they are for 3rd liners, Ryder is an exception as the hate he got on here for his last season (18 goals) was un-warranted.
Give Bourque time, Lundvquist has a 4+ GAA so should NY trade him? Give young guys (Bourque) time to develop and obtain chemistry with Peverley and Kelly, and you never know what can happen.
This is what drives me crazy about this place. Ryder was not supposed to be a 3rd liner. He was brought in and paid to be a top 6, but gave such a lackluster effort he ended up on the freaking 3rd line, FFS. Pouliot was brought in as insurance for Caron and was fine for that role, since he wasn't being overpaid like Ryder. In a perfect world, having a guy with the skill and abilities of a Ryder for your third line is great if you can swing it. In reality though, he was not and should not have been on the third line. That's why he caught crap from people, and it was deserved.
This is what drives me crazy about this place. Ryder was not supposed to be a 3rd liner. He was brought in and paid to be a top 6, but gave such a lackluster effort he ended up on the freaking 3rd line, FFS. Pouliot was brought in as insurance for Caron and was fine for that role, since he wasn't being overpaid like Ryder. In a perfect world, having a guy with the skill and abilities of a Ryder for your third line is great if you can swing it. In reality though, he was not and should not have been on the third line. That's why he caught crap from people, and it was deserved.
The Bruins did swing it and won the Cup too, with him in that role. Not too shabby if you ask me.
Pouliot cost the Bruins 2 games in the playoffs last year with boneheaded plays.
There's something to be said for the whole "you get what you pay for" thingy.
Bourque's been OK, I don't like him on the PP, but no one has gotten anything done on the PP for the Bruins this year.
I'm not too sure if Bourque is a guy you want to go to battle with in that spot come playoff time though, I'm guessing they will get someone who is better at the deadline or closer.
This is what drives me crazy about this place. Ryder was not supposed to be a 3rd liner. He was brought in and paid to be a top 6, but gave such a lackluster effort he ended up on the freaking 3rd line, FFS. Pouliot was brought in as insurance for Caron and was fine for that role, since he wasn't being overpaid like Ryder. In a perfect world, having a guy with the skill and abilities of a Ryder for your third line is great if you can swing it. In reality though, he was not and should not have been on the third line. That's why he caught crap from people, and it was deserved.
I just think it is hilarious when fans absolutely have a hate on for a player when the team you are cheering for is one of the best, if not the best in the league, scores more then enough goals to win and has the best defense/goalie in the league. People forget too soon that top teams don't always stay at the top, imagine being a Leafs, Jackets, Isles fan, now there is something to complain about.
Sure some of the crap that was thrown at Ryder was deserved, but when your team is rolling, shouldn't you just be happy. I forget that alot of people on these boards are much younger than I, and haven't seen the up and downs of many seasons.
Remember Thornton and his first season, if the boards were created by then, I couldn't imagine the crap that would have been said about him.
I really don't understand where you are coming from on this, as it relates to why you think he should not be given a chance on the powerplay or shoot-outs. He put up 93 points in the AHL last year and 28 points in 32 games this year. This isn't some "plugger" that's being put in the occasional offensive role. This is a kid with some offense who is asked to be more of a checker during 5-on-5, and is currently the best guy (in the farm) to be able do that and give you some offense. It remains to be seen if it translates to the NHL, but to think that an AHL ppg player being given a chance to contribute offensively is "nepotism" makes no sense.
Love this post.
How's this for a dose of reality. Chiarelli has done such an effective job that we've become relatively spoiled. Take a look around the league at some of the 3rd and 4th liners putting on a sweater every night. This team has zero question marks up front save for one of 12 spots (not to mention D and Goaltending as well). That's 11 guys that are effectively slotted into their ideal roles. I think it's more than fair to question whether Bourque is the right guy for that 3rd line LW spot, and I don't think he is if I'm being candid. But for the moment, his resume says he's the best solution internally, and he's got to be put in a position to succeed before ruling him out. That's all Claude is doing. He's putting him in a position to succeed based on what he's proven at the AHL level.
In a related story, I coached against Bourque back in his Cushing days. He and Keith Yandle used to run the Power Play from the point. That was a nightmare to defend.
Unless the name on his back was "Hamilton" in which case Claude would give him about 23 minutes of ice per game, including 2 min. or so on the PP.
What other option did he really have ? Call up Warskovsky or Ryan Button ? In that case he must go with the guy who can actually play hockey. As for Bourque, he isn't better than any forward on the roster.
What other option did he really have ? Call up Warskovsky or Ryan Button ? In that case he must go with the guy who can actually play hockey. As for Bourque, he isn't better than any forward on the roster.
Ya, I'm not sure why Bourque is getting more PP time than Peverley? Doesn't seem right, I think that you need to put you best players out there in those times.
I just think it is hilarious when fans absolutely have a hate on for a player when the team you are cheering for is one of the best, if not the best in the league, scores more then enough goals to win and has the best defense/goalie in the league. People forget too soon that top teams don't always stay at the top, imagine being a Leafs, Jackets, Isles fan, now there is something to complain about.
Sure some of the crap that was thrown at Ryder was deserved, but when your team is rolling, shouldn't you just be happy. I forget that alot of people on these boards are much younger than I, and haven't seen the up and downs of many seasons.
Remember Thornton and his first season, if the boards were created by then, I couldn't imagine the crap that would have been said about him.
I hear you, this place can be really aggravating at times.
That's how I feel about this thread though, to be honest. Yeah, they could have been better, and specific players may have gotten more TOI than I personally would have liked, but they've won both games they've played. For now, I'm just happy they're playing again, and sweating details like who plays 3rd line LW isn't high on my list.
Ya, I'm not sure why Bourque is getting more PP time than Peverley? Doesn't seem right, I think that you need to put you best players out there in those times.
Because Bourque was a PP quarterback and a high scorer in the AHL, and they're seeing if he can translate that to the NHL.
If it doesn't work, it doesn't work, but you don't know until you try. With all the whining about the Bruins' PP, I don't get the whining about trying someone/something different.
Ya, I'm not sure why Bourque is getting more PP time than Peverley? Doesn't seem right, I think that you need to put you best players out there in those times.
Funny that Pervs went from our PPTOI leader in 2011-12 to not even being on the first two units...Found that strange.
Because Bourque was a PP quarterback and a high scorer in the AHL, and they're seeing if he can translate that to the NHL.
If it doesn't work, it doesn't work, but you don't know until you try. With all the whining about the Bruins' PP, I don't get the whining about trying someone/something different.
I'm not against trying him on the PP, I just find it odd that he would get more PPTOI than a guy like Peverley, who is quite a bit better than him. Bourque got a full minute more on the PP than Seguin last game.
I'm of the opinion that you need to have you best players on the ice to have success, if you want to throw a guy out there for the odd PP, fine. But if you're not rolling you're best players out there, there's no one to blame but yourself.
Thinking about it, why wouldn't they play him in every situation early on?
If he fails, then they know early that its not working and they can say well we have given him every chance to succeed but now we need to get someone else in there.
Not going to lie, kind of frustrating this is being done for the 2nd year in a row, but at least they are getting a read on him early.
Boston's PP has truly sucked for a long time. There were times in the past where many of us would have supported putting out 4th line out there for God's sake.
I cannot believe that just two games into the season we are having this discussion.
I'm not against trying him on the PP, I just find it odd that he would get more PPTOI than a guy like Peverley, who is quite a bit better than him. Bourque got a full minute more on the PP than Seguin last game.
I'm of the opinion that you need to have you best players on the ice to have success, if you want to throw a guy out there for the odd PP, fine. But if you're not rolling you're best players out there, there's no one to blame but yourself.
I'm all for giving Bourque a chance, but this just can't happen IMO.
I also don't want to see him in the shootout before guys like Krejci & Marchand.
