You're right, it can't be because the guy that was supposed to get the 3rd line winger role (Caron) has been injured and underwhelming in Providence. Or that the Providence leading scorer (Spooner) has expressed a discomfort with playing wing. Or that Sauve is injured, again & again. And Tardiff wouldn't even be eligible, based on your "advanced age+NHL games played" theory, since he's even older than Bourque with fewer games played.
So it obviously must be a case of nepotism, and Julien/Chiarelli/Neely are just willing to ice a weaker team to appease Ray Bourque. It's hilarious to me that you think it's all because of Ray, but then call other, more legit reasons "garbage excuses."
Paille and MarDermid are completely different players, so it's really not that simple.
I agree that Bourque isn't the answer, he's been given a fair shot and isn't up to the caliber that the team needs in that space. I don't know what the answer is, but unfortunately it's not Bourque.
He's not a bad player (he's not a GOOD player, but he's not bad either), he's just not in a situation that he can be productive in.
Thought the B's looked a little flat last night overall, with the exception of a few. It happens when you return from a trip, I experience this myself, so much to catch up on and no time to rest.
Give the sens credit, they hustle and didn't take a shift off. If not for Rask, the result could have been much different. Right now the B's remind me of a football team that does not produce when in the red zone, more finish please!
Still keep seeing plays up the middle paying off for the other teams, it's as if they have figured a loophole in the B's D and are exploiting it.
Hoping for sharper performances this weekend, especially on Sunday night!
Paille and MarDermid are completely different players, so it's really not that simple.
I agree that Bourque isn't the answer, he's been given a fair shot and isn't up to the caliber that the team needs in that space. I don't know what the answer is, but unfortunately it's not Bourque.
He's not a bad player (he's not a GOOD player, but he's not bad either), he's just not in a situation that he can be productive in.
At the very least they could swap paille and bourque, but like I said they refuse to give anyone else at shot at that 3rd line left wing.
Claude has definitely experimented with moving Paille up to the third line. That tells me that acquiring another fourth liner, probably of Paille's type, is an option. (Sorry but I dont think MacDermid bring NHL caliber skills to the table.
As far as the game goes, it was a blessing in disguise because they recognized to a man that they could play better. I suppose such maturity is to be expected from a group that has been together and has won for a while, but it is nice to see.
At the very least they could swap paille and bourque, but like I said they refuse to give anyone else at shot at that 3rd line left wing.
Oh good, so instead of *****ing about Bourque on the 3rd line, we can ***** about Bourque on the 4th line. It's not solving the problem, it's just moving the problem.
He's a 13th forward on this team. He's going to be the object of scorn until he's in his proper role, so unless there's a trade made that either permanantly bumps Paille up (which I don't love) or bumps Bourque back (fabulous, but who?) I don't see what difference which line he's playing on makes.
Despite seeing Paille up on the 3rd line from time to time I'm not really sold on the fact that it's something Claude wants to do provided it hasn't stuck. I can't say I blame him.
Oh good, so instead of *****ing about Bourque on the 3rd line, we can ***** about Bourque on the 4th line. It's not solving the problem, it's just moving the problem.
He's a 13th forward on this team. He's going to be the object of scorn until he's in his proper role, so unless there's a trade made that either permanantly bumps Paille up (which I don't love) or bumps Bourque back (fabulous, but who?) I don't see what difference which line he's playing on makes.
Despite seeing Paille up on the 3rd line from time to time I'm not really sold on the fact that it's something Claude wants to do provided it hasn't stuck. I can't say I blame him.
The first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. Moving bourque down would at least be admitting there is a problem. Right now the Bruins can't even admit bourque is a problem, which is disturbing.
I understand that people are frustrated with the third line, and that they just want to see somebody else in that LW spot, but let's just take a breath here for a second and admit that Daniel Paille and Lane MacDermid are, well...Daniel Paille and Lane MacDermid.
Paille is what he is, which is a good NHL role player, penalty killer on the fourth line. Could he be a temporary solution on the third line until Chia finds something more permanent? Sure, he might give that third line a spark with his speed, straight ahead play, and physicality. But to think that he is going to morph into anything more than what he's been, is hoping for a little much.
Lane MacDermid, God bless him, is a 4th line player if that...he might not even be that, fact is, he hasn't established himself in the NHL. In fact, Bourque is more established than him at both the NHL and AHL levels (and yes, I know they are different types of players). Does the kid deserve a crack? Maybe so, but once again, I am not willing to just assume he is going to make more of an impact than the players we have now.
Sometimes change for change sake is okay, and it pushes the other players on the roster, but let's not pretend that these guys are something that they are not. And right now, this clamoring for these guys reeks of the "the back-up quarterback is the most popular guy in the room" syndrome.
If they insert MacDermid in on the fourth line, and put Paille up to the third, I would be willing to give it two games before the, "Daniel Paille Not Getting it Done," and "Lane MacDermid is a Bum," threads start.
The first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. Moving bourque down would at least be admitting there is a problem. Right now the Bruins can't even admit bourque is a problem, which is disturbing.
Normally I would be the first one to say they have a problem, but Chia would not be looking around this much if he didn't think the team neeeded a couple of serious upgrades. I dont get the sense of Nepotism or denying they don't upgrades....I do think Chia might have a year similar to 2011 where he makes at least two trades around deadline time though.
I'm not defending Bourque because of his name. I'm defending him because the guy isn't responsible for Peverly/Kelly woes. If it's true that Bourque is a 13th forward, then the Bruins need to upgrade. The team should also explore the possibility to move Peverly in a trade. Not sure the Bruins will have the better end of that deal.
Seriously why do you pin at all on Peverley and Kelly haha. All you had to do is watch the games to see how Peverley is a more effective player. He is fast, tough to take the puck from, just lacks a little finish.
Considering Bourque has the least amount of points and thats all your basing your judgement off, I dont know why youre saying Bourque isnt the problem but we need to trade Peverley
Give me a break man. Are you forgetting all about last season? Pouliot almost had 20 goals... If you put Kelly and Peverley with a guy that can finish then our 3rd line woes aren't an issue anymore simple as that
Can you tell me why Peverley and Kelly are underpeforming then? Do you have a better idea?
The first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. Moving bourque down would at least be admitting there is a problem. Right now the Bruins can't even admit bourque is a problem, which is disturbing.
What are they supposed to say? That he sucks? You have no idea if they think he's a problem or not.
Seriously why do you pin at all on Peverley and Kelly haha. All you had to do is watch the games to see how Peverley is a more effective player. He is fast, tough to take the puck from, just lacks a little finish.
Considering Bourque has the least amount of points and thats all your basing your judgement off, I dont know why youre saying Bourque isnt the problem but we need to trade Peverley
Give me a break man. Are you forgetting all about last season? Pouliot almost had 20 goals... If you put Kelly and Peverley with a guy that can finish then our 3rd line woes aren't an issue anymore simple as that
I love this idea that Chris Bourque, who is yet to establish himself in the NHL and is making 500k, is supposed to be the one to carry his line and raise the play of his linemates.
But we don't expect the established veterans, Kelly and Peverly who make much more money, to have to take the younger player under their wing and help raise his play. They should be carrying him, not the other way around.
Are Kelly and Peverly such poor players that they can't function with Chris Bourque on their line? Bourque, in so far as I am concerned is living up to what I thought he was...a borderline roster player on a good team. Kelly and Peverly, to this point, have not lived up to what they are supposed to be: veterans who can contribute defensively AND offensively on a very good NHL team.
If the two of them stepped up their games, Bourque would look a hell of a lot better because of it.
