HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Bartkowski Looks Awful

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-24-2013, 12:23 PM
  #26
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODAAT View Post
Happy your not the GM

Maybe we should ship out Spooner too while were at it, kid`s produced no pts in 4 games now??? Kids clearly a bust

Brilliant thread
I could be wrong (its happened on occasion) but Spooner's (21) a legit prospect and Bartkowski (24) appears to be a border line case for NHL.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 12:27 PM
  #27
Topshelf8188
Boston Strong
 
Topshelf8188's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,992
vCash: 500
So it was his fault that Krejci pulled up on Grabovski, and instead of taking the body he ( Krejci) tried poking it away and lost that battle? That was a brutally soft backcheck. Not Bartkowski's fault. The Kadri goal was partly Seidenberg's fault, but the pass from JVR to Kadri was sweet, also nothing Bartkowski did wrong there. He pinched beforehand but had support from Looch, which is usually a smart play but the end result was bad.

He looked OK. What did you expect? Not every young call-up is going to step in and light it up. It's not what they are brought up to do and at the very least we should expect them to play solid. He did just what I thought he would, nothing too extravagantly bad or good. His -2 is very misleading.

Topshelf8188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 12:54 PM
  #28
Alicat
Charge!
 
Alicat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: BOSTON
Country: United States
Posts: 22,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topshelf8188 View Post
So it was his fault that Krejci pulled up on Grabovski, and instead of taking the body he ( Krejci) tried poking it away and lost that battle? That was a brutally soft backcheck. Not Bartkowski's fault. The Kadri goal was partly Seidenberg's fault, but the pass from JVR to Kadri was sweet, also nothing Bartkowski did wrong there. He pinched beforehand but had support from Looch, which is usually a smart play but the end result was bad.

He looked OK. What did you expect? Not every young call-up is going to step in and light it up. It's not what they are brought up to do and at the very least we should expect them to play solid. He did just what I thought he would, nothing too extravagantly bad or good. His -2 is very misleading.
100% agree.

Bartkowski started off rocky but he had some great defensive plays at his own blueline that led to a few chances. The most telling for me was that he improved as the game went along.

__________________
"I choose to focus on the things I CAN do and am passionate about." - Sam Berns

I am Boston Strong
6.15.11
4.15.13

Alicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 01:08 PM
  #29
Andrew83
Registered User
 
Andrew83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 500
He was ok but there seemed like a big gap between him and Aaron Johnson.

Andrew83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 01:33 PM
  #30
cat400
Registered User
 
cat400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
...

I thought Bartkowski looked pretty damn good, honestly. Good on his skates, threw his weight around a bit. I don't know... My expectations were FAR lower than what I saw last night. Bart looks like with some time on the team, he could be a legit bottom-pairing player.

I don't get it.
Agree. He was throwing his weight around and as the game progressed was looking quite comfortable handling the puck.

cat400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 02:02 PM
  #31
Ogrim
Registered User
 
Ogrim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
Bart looks pretty good to me.
There's a slight hesitation on a lot of plays but that's to be expected considering he hasn't seen too much NHL time. Might grow alot with a bigger role.
Edit: Unless that hesitation is actually "butter in his brain"

Ogrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 02:03 PM
  #32
KrejciMVP
Registered User
 
KrejciMVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,727
vCash: 500
When I look at our defense, I cringe... hopefully Hamilton turns into a star

KrejciMVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 02:17 PM
  #33
northeastern
Registered User
 
northeastern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: boston
Country: United States
Posts: 5,075
vCash: 500
it was his first game this season. don't flip that fast.

northeastern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 12:11 AM
  #34
Alan Ryan
Registered User
 
Alan Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrejciMVP View Post
When I look at our defense, I cringe... hopefully Hamilton turns into a star

Chara, Seidenberg, Boychuk, Hamilton, Ference and McQuaid. This defense makes you cringe?

Alan Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 01:09 AM
  #35
CDJ
Registered User
 
CDJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cape Cod
Country: United States
Posts: 8,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrejciMVP View Post
When I look at our defense, I cringe... hopefully Hamilton turns into a star
We looking at the same D?

CDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 01:28 AM
  #36
MarshmontMcSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODAAT View Post
Happy your not the GM

Maybe we should ship out Spooner too while were at it, kid`s produced no pts in 4 games now??? Kids clearly a bust

Brilliant thread
Eh, with all due respect...I think he's correct.

Bart has been in the organization longer than any other Providence defenseman (bar Cross Iguess.) We got him within weeks of acquiring Kampfer if I remember. Kampfer contributed to a CUp winning team. And had a really good first 20 games in Boston and looked as good as most of our PMDs with short stints have done (but was undersized and Claude couldn't trust him in the playoffs as we know.) He wasn't good enough to stay here permanantly but he was a contributor on the 2011 team and PC tried to get his name on the Cup.

Bartowski has just looked awful and like a liability when called up. Bartowski has been giving chances now for 3 years running. So this thread is more than fair and you cannot compare him to Spooner who is a first year pro.

Hey, I can credit Bartowski for doing OK in Providence (can't be awful down there if he gets a call up) but the guy has had a few looks in Boston and been very bad.

Sentiments like this thread are to be expected, and when Pandawful plays big minutes every night I think questioning some of our decision making is fair and justified.

Any reason Krug shouldn't have been given a look instead? (Only reason I can think of is PC thinks Bartowski has trade value and wants teams to see him.)


*Its just 1 game and Bartowski is a big kid so if he looks better next couple games for us I could be wrong.

MarshmontMcSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 02:47 AM
  #37
rcduthie77
Registered User
 
rcduthie77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,221
vCash: 500
Thought Bartkowski looked fairly good last night. Best thing is he is still young and will continue to learn! Fact is he has NHL size and speed. He makes a hard, crisp first pass and has a good shot from the point.

I believe he and Krug are both going to be solid NHL contributors and if we can develop a couple of Trotman, Cross, Chudinov, Matt Grzelcyk, O'Gara or Cohen into NHL players we will look pretty darn good.

rcduthie77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:12 AM
  #38
22Brad Park
Registered User
 
22Brad Park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,255
vCash: 500
I seen kid now few times and he has alot to learn i think.

22Brad Park is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:25 AM
  #39
Braunbaer
also a giraffe
 
Braunbaer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharaTriedToEatMe View Post
Bart has been in the organization longer than any other Providence defenseman (bar Cross Iguess.) We got him within weeks of acquiring Kampfer if I remember. Kampfer contributed to a CUp winning team. And had a really good first 20 games in Boston and looked as good as most of our PMDs with short stints have done (but was undersized and Claude couldn't trust him in the playoffs as we know.) He wasn't good enough to stay here permanantly but he was a contributor on the 2011 team and PC tried to get his name on the Cup.

Bartowski has just looked awful and like a liability when called up. Bartowski has been giving chances now for 3 years running. So this thread is more than fair and you cannot compare him to Spooner who is a first year pro.
Bartkowski hasn't impressed me either but last I game I thought he did ok. He wasn't bad.
Don't get the comparison to Kampfer though. He was paired with Chara ... anyone who plays next to Chara looks solid.

Braunbaer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 07:04 AM
  #40
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I could be wrong (its happened on occasion) but Spooner's (21) a legit prospect and Bartkowski (24) appears to be a border line case for NHL.
Nowhere in my post did I state he would be someday a lock for a top 4 D-man spot and you have followed this game long enough I am assuming that you perhaps recognize that he wouldn`t be the first defenseman in history to require time to get "it" and raise his game to find himself in an NHL uniform full time.

3rd year pro defenseman, there once was a time when a prospect or a pick was given the time to develop, and it was hardly shocking to see those prospects/picks given 4-5 years before a team started thinking in a different direction in regards to their future. Now???? If a player hasn`t cracked the pro lineup and isn`t producing within two years, they`ll never make it according to some here (not saying you however)

ODAAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 09:46 AM
  #41
bostonphoenix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,287
vCash: 500
I would be happy if they brought Krug up. He's going o be great.

bostonphoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:16 AM
  #42
Bergyfan37*
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 46
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by andersonBruinsPEI View Post
Rask should of started, Pandolfo needs to go period, Julian's little pet from the Devils is just ridiculously out of place, Chris Bourque has the skills and made plays, Kelly and Peverley's production has been down long before Bourque got there, his exile was way to soon to Providence, and Caron?? has been boring, has no set skills to admire what so ever, Julien seems to be out of touch with this team, wtf are they doing on the power play??? Its terrible, maybe bring in someone to teach a properly set up power play, I'd play Spooner and Bourque together and add a tough guy on there wing, give them room to make plays, they are skilled hockey players!! or maybe Julian can bring up his buddy Trent Witfield again and sit Marchand? remember that move, seems like only yesterday Tim Thomas was carrying Claude's ridiculous player movers, and here we go again, Pandolfo??? really??? and where is Soderberg, he is so good why stay in Europe, where he is? who the hell cares about a league in Europe? The NHL is the hockeyleague of the world, period,,, what is he waiting for?
You realize this thread is about bartkowski right?

Bergyfan37* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:59 AM
  #43
hoss75
Registered User
 
hoss75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cambridge, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
...

I thought Bartkowski looked pretty damn good, honestly. Good on his skates, threw his weight around a bit. I don't know... My expectations were FAR lower than what I saw last night. Bart looks like with some time on the team, he could be a legit bottom-pairing player.

I don't get it.
Agree, it's all about expectations.

hoss75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:05 AM
  #44
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8spokesontheB View Post
If I never see him again in the spoked B it will be too much that I've seen him.

No?
I think we have to give him a little more time. Guys like Matt Hunwick looked good in very small sample sizes. With little more than a first impression many people were ready to say Hunwick could be the puck moving D that everyone thought the Bruins needed at the time. Now we know that would have been a huge mistake just like 2 years from now we may know that Bartkowski started off shaky and then became a solid player. That remains to be seen, but it is possible and I think we need to give him a little more time before we just throw him on the scrap heap.

nmbr_24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:10 AM
  #45
bb_fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: boston
Posts: 9,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bostonphoenix View Post
I would be happy if they brought Krug up. He's going o be great.
Kind if we what everyone been saying about Bart..... till now apparently.

bb_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:30 AM
  #46
Bruins 54
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bostonphoenix View Post
I would be happy if they brought Krug up. He's going o be great.
I didnt Bartkowski did all that bad.

Haven't seen Krug play but looking at the Providence site looks like he is a minus player down there and small by NHL standards for a defenceman.

Bruins 54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:33 AM
  #47
Ratty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Rive Gauche
Posts: 5,965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergyfan37 View Post
You realize this thread is about bartkowski right?
Fine. But can't we allow alternatives in the discussion?

Ratty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:36 AM
  #48
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,983
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonzothe7thDman View Post
Whose the last defensemen our team has drafted and developed into a solid contributor? Mark Stuart?

For a team that has had the 3 Best D-man of all time (Orr/Shore/Bourque) on the team, we cant draft defensemen for ish.
Dougie Hamilton?

Other than that who is the last D-man the Bruins have drafted, Button?


They didn't even draft Bartkowski

patty59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 12:02 PM
  #49
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharaTriedToEatMe View Post
Eh, with all due respect...I think he's correct.

Bart has been in the organization longer than any other Providence defenseman (bar Cross Iguess.) We got him within weeks of acquiring Kampfer if I remember. Kampfer contributed to a CUp winning team. And had a really good first 20 games in Boston and looked as good as most of our PMDs with short stints have done (but was undersized and Claude couldn't trust him in the playoffs as we know.) He wasn't good enough to stay here permanantly but he was a contributor on the 2011 team and PC tried to get his name on the Cup.

Bartowski has just looked awful and like a liability when called up. Bartowski has been giving chances now for 3 years running. So this thread is more than fair and you cannot compare him to Spooner who is a first year pro.

Hey, I can credit Bartowski for doing OK in Providence (can't be awful down there if he gets a call up) but the guy has had a few looks in Boston and been very bad.

Sentiments like this thread are to be expected, and when Pandawful plays big minutes every night I think questioning some of our decision making is fair and justified.

Any reason Krug shouldn't have been given a look instead? (Only reason I can think of is PC thinks Bartowski has trade value and wants teams to see him.)


*Its just 1 game and Bartowski is a big kid so if he looks better next couple games for us I could be wrong.
For those who actually remember Kampfer, he came out of the gate quick, had tongues wagging here, then decided skating with his head down was wise and then his game became brutal and he bacame expendable, he has since, if I`m not mistaken, not even played 20 games in a Wild uni and is/has been a minor leaguer, like Bartkowski ever since.

Sorry, there`s a reason why Mngt brought him up ahead of Krug, what that may be is not something I`m privy to but......again, I`m not saying Bart has NHL written all over him, I have no clue, but far too many make some pretty hasty judgements which go either way, positive or negative when it comes to evaluating a player.

Remember Matt Hunwick, much said that resembled the talk surrounding Kampfer, he`s had anything but a great career. We`ll see with Bartkowski, is he being played to try and "showcase" him? I don`t know, I`m sorry, I didn`t see him have a great game against the Leafs, nor did he look any worse than anyone else IMO

ODAAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:56 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.