The kid needs a good 15 games plus to gel with his teamates. Give me a brake. 5 games in and people are wanting to move him already. Good thing they didn't do it with Marchand.
15 games is too long particularly with a shortened season.
How many times have they said "Bourque get's knocked off the puck"? I have watched CB and his brother play from the time the younger one was 6. I was really hoping that CB would show enough to put all the doubters to rest. However, I'm becoming convinced that, the trade was made because of someones continued request. How frustrating it must be, being almost too good for the AHL, but just a hair not good enough for the NHL. It has to be tougher then being RB's kid.
I was ridiculed when I started this thread last week. Is it so ridiculous now?
Yes, and I will tell you why...
First of all, the overall point of your original post was not to question whether or not Chris Bourque was a legitimate NHL player or even the right fit for the 3rd line, it was to imply that the name on the back of his jersey was somehow the reason that he was being used on the PP, the shootout, or even on the team at all:
"I hope this is not the case, but it makes one wonder if his fathers history with the team is having an influence on the decisions involving Chris. The guy is simply not that good."
Though the Bruins familiarity with the player may have been one of the reasons they acquired him in the first place, the fact that his father's number is hanging in the rafters has nothing to do with his role on the team.
I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I think Chris Bourque should be on the PP or on the shoot out or even that he is a great player or the best fit for the 3rd line, but I also understand why he got first crack at the job.
What were the other options at the start of the season?
Like I said in previous posts, if it were my team, I would have Ryan Spooner on this team in some capacity, but that is the impatient fan in me speaking. I understand why the Bruins feel like he could use some more seasoning in the AHL. Also, at the time the season started, Jordan Caron was injured and had been playing poorly in Providence, and other players such as Sauve and Tardiff had proven nothing more than Bourque at either the AHL or NHL levels.
During the lockout, the Bruin's had ample time to scout their players at the AHL level, and came away from that time believing that Bourque could help the team in some capacity, especially at the start of the season. They probably had a pretty good grasp on what they felt his PP and shoot out abilities were and how they might translate to the NHL level. They obviously think Bourque might be better than some of us do, and they have seen him play a hell of a lot more than we have.
They may end up being wrong about those abilities, but Bourque was the best option available to you at the start of the season.
Secondly, had you waited to create this thread after the 6th game of the season, it would have been a little less "ridiculous," but as it was, you posted it after the 2nd game of the season, not enough time to fairly evaluate a player.
Despite the name on the back of his jersey, Bourque may well lose this spot, and I expect him to lose it at some point this season, whether it be in the form of the call up of Caron/Spooner, or the acquisition of a veteran player closer to the trade deadline.
And to this point, based on what you have expected of them, which player has underperformed more? Bourque or Kelly? How about Bourque and Seguin? Nobody is saying that Bourque is the savior of the franchise. He is an AHL player and likely temporary call up that has been getting third line minutes, and due to his perceived skill set and likely his left-handed shot, has been getting a chance on a PP that nobody else on the current roster was able to help much to begin with.
If Bourque and the rest of the third line begin to produce, then he will earn a spot, if not, he will be sent down to Providence at some pont this season, it's as simple as that. The fact that he is Ray's son has no bearing on any of this.
First of all, the overall point of your original post was not to question whether or not Chris Bourque was a legitimate NHL player or even the right fit for the 3rd line, it was to imply that the name on the back of his jersey was somehow the reason that he was being used on the PP, the shootout, or even on the team at all:
"I hope this is not the case, but it makes one wonder if his fathers history with the team is having an influence on the decisions involving Chris. The guy is simply not that good."
Though the Bruins familiarity with the player may have been one of the reasons they acquired him in the first place, the fact that his father's number is hanging in the rafters has nothing to do with his role on the team.
I still stand by saying that the name on his back has everything to do with him still being on the roster. Had Spooner, Caron, anyone played as poorly as he has they would have been sent down long before now. He is NOT an NHL player.
I obviously have no proof of this, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Ray was teasing the Bruins to get him in the first place. Again, no proof and only a guess on my part.
Good call. I'd sit Bourque for two games, and then put him in there for another three games and see how it goes. If it isn't working then, I'd move in Sauve or Caron.
The biggest problem with MacDermid is that he doesn't belong on the third line, which means breaking up the fourth line so that Paille can move up.
I still stand by saying that the name on his back has everything to do with him still being on the roster. Had Spooner, Caron, anyone played as poorly as he has they would have been sent down long before now. He is NOT an NHL player.
I obviously have no proof of this, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Ray was teasing the Bruins to get him in the first place. Again, no proof and only a guess on my part.
So once again, you were making this proclamation after two games had been played.
So after two games of what you term "poor" play, Spooner or Caron would have been immediately sent down, even though there was no better option? Not likely. If a player makes the team out of training camp, they are not going to be dumped after two games. That is not showing faith in your players.
I don't think you could even say he had played poorly the first two games. If I recall, the first game against the Rangers, the line played pretty well, and I thought Bourque held his own. Against the Jets, you're right, the entire 3rd line, including Bourque, was ineffective. But if the Bruins believed that he was their best option going into the season, what they saw after the first two games would not have been enough, IMO, to cut bait and send him back to the AHL.
After game two, what alterations to the lineup would you have made assuming Bourque was going to be sent back down to Providence?
Would you then have given the player who was called up only two games to prove themselves? Or have you been overly critical of this player BECAUSE of his connections?
BTW, Bourque is sitting tonight in place of MacDermid...I wonder if Ray has okayed that move...
I still stand by saying that the name on his back has everything to do with him still being on the roster. Had Spooner, Caron, anyone played as poorly as he has they would have been sent down long before now. He is NOT an NHL player.
I obviously have no proof of this, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Ray was teasing the Bruins to get him in the first place. Again, no proof and only a guess on my part.
I say if there was a full, drawn out camp, with scimages, pre season games, etc. he would not be on the roster. But he is here now because there is a hole, and they needed to fill it with a warm body who did have success this season.
I still stand by saying that the name on his back has everything to do with him still being on the roster. Had Spooner, Caron, anyone played as poorly as he has they would have been sent down long before now. He is NOT an NHL player.
I obviously have no proof of this, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Ray was teasing the Bruins to get him in the first place. Again, no proof and only a guess on my part.
It amazes me that a Bruins fan would think so lowly of Julien, Chiarelli & Neely, to suggest that they'd do anything other than icing the players that they think would put the team in the best position to win the game. I also think it's laughable to suggest that R. Bourque would call in his history to the team to get unfair treatment for his kid.
And, lastly, I totally disagree that one of the kids from Providence would've been sent down before now. C. Bourque isn't doing much to help the team win, but he's also not doing anything to prevent them from winning; he's kind of just there. If Caron, Spooner, et al, were doing the exact same thing (not helping but not really hurting, either) they'd have been given the chance to sink or swim, just the way that Bourque did.
It amazes me that a Bruins fan would think so lowly of Julien, Chiarelli & Neely, to suggest that they'd do anything other than icing the players that they think would put the team in the best position to win the game. I also think it's laughable to suggest that R. Bourque would call in his history to the team to get unfair treatment for his kid.
And, lastly, I totally disagree that one of the kids from Providence would've been sent down before now. C. Bourque isn't doing much to help the team win, but he's also not doing anything to prevent them from winning; he's kind of just there. If Caron, Spooner, et al, were doing the exact same thing (not helping but not really hurting, either) they'd have been given the chance to sink or swim, just the way that Bourque did.
I still stand by saying that the name on his back has everything to do with him still being on the roster. Had Spooner, Caron, anyone played as poorly as he has they would have been sent down long before now. He is NOT an NHL player.
I obviously have no proof of this, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Ray was teasing the Bruins to get him in the first place. Again, no proof and only a guess on my part.
And yet you get worked up when people call BS on your conspiracy.
Newsflash for you. Caron has done nothing, as in zero, to stick with the big club, yet they've basically given him a spot multiple times. They probably would have given him yet another chance if it weren't for his injury. The point is that they've given others plenty of chances when they haven't done anything to really warrant them. Nepotism has nothing to do with this.
Caron had a 7-8-15 line in 48 games last year and at least has some size/can play a physical game. I'd much rather see him out there than Bourque. It's not even a contest.
Hell, forget Caron. I like tonight's forward lineup just fine.
It amazes me that a Bruins fan would think so lowly of Julien, Chiarelli & Neely, to suggest that they'd do anything other than icing the players that they think would put the team in the best position to win the game. I also think it's laughable to suggest that R. Bourque would call in his history to the team to get unfair treatment for his kid.
And, lastly, I totally disagree that one of the kids from Providence would've been sent down before now. C. Bourque isn't doing much to help the team win, but he's also not doing anything to prevent them from winning; he's kind of just there. If Caron, Spooner, et al, were doing the exact same thing (not helping but not really hurting, either) they'd have been given the chance to sink or swim, just the way that Bourque did.
Good post.
It's pretty commonplace that a guy who lights up the AHL gets a shot in the NHL.
Ray Bourque sure didn't pull any strings to put his son at the top of the AHL scoring race last year. Chris Bourque earned an NHL chance this season. I'm not sure he will stick--at least not in Boston--but he earned a look by playing so hard and so well in the AHL.
I don't post much anymore but I totally think this is ridiculous.
Chris Bourque is on this team because he earned his spot being a GREAT AHL player and Claude said as much today.
MacDermind is in there because Claude feels Chris is putting far too much pressure on himself. I agree with that decision, let him watch from the press box for a night and have him chat with Doug Jarvis about things he can do to improve.
Claude said it today he believes Chris will develop into the player he says they know he can be and for the record Chiarelli said on TSN 1050 yesterday morning that Bourque will continue to have the spot unless they feel they can upgrade via trade closer to the deadline with a veteran (pretty good vote from the GM and from the Coach I'd say).
Also people seem to be ignoring in the offensive zone Chris Kelly has been attrocious and Rich Peverley is just starting to get his jump back...Peverley and Kelly combined for 0 goals and for people who think Bourque is dragging them down, they had two shifts with Seguin in the last game and Kelly iced the puck twice and Peverley once.
Has Chris Bourque been great? No. But has Chris been useless? NO! He's brought more defensively then I expected. He'd be a -1 if it weren't for a Kelly giveaway and Boychuck deciding he was going to play Chara's side without telling him. He's also been decent on the PP and Brad Marchand's PP goal came directly because of Bourque drawing players in on the half boards, opening up Hamilton and Peverley out high.
I'm getting off my soapbox now but for crying out loud it's been 6 games on a line that has zero between three players. Let them gel and this is going to be a very, very good third line!
I don't post much anymore but I totally think this is ridiculous.
Chris Bourque is on this team because he earned his spot being a GREAT AHL player and Claude said as much today.
MacDermind is in there because Claude feels Chris is putting far too much pressure on himself. I agree with that decision, let him watch from the press box for a night and have him chat with Doug Jarvis about things he can do to improve.
Claude said it today he believes Chris will develop into the player he says they know he can be and for the record Chiarelli said on TSN 1050 yesterday morning that Bourque will continue to have the spot unless they feel they can upgrade via trade closer to the deadline with a veteran (pretty good vote from the GM and from the Coach I'd say).
Also people seem to be ignoring in the offensive zone Chris Kelly has been attrocious and Rich Peverley is just starting to get his jump back...Peverley and Kelly combined for 0 goals and for people who think Bourque is dragging them down, they had two shifts with Seguin in the last game and Kelly iced the puck twice and Peverley once.
Has Chris Bourque been great? No. But has Chris been useless? NO! He's brought more defensively then I expected. He'd be a -1 if it weren't for a Kelly giveaway and Boychuck deciding he was going to play Chara's side without telling him. He's also been decent on the PP and Brad Marchand's PP goal came directly because of Bourque drawing players in on the half boards, opening up Hamilton and Peverley out high.
I'm getting off my soapbox now but for crying out loud it's been 6 games on a line that has zero between three players. Let them gel and this is going to be a very, very good third line!
I don't post much anymore but I totally think this is ridiculous.
Chris Bourque is on this team because he earned his spot being a GREAT AHL player and Claude said as much today.
MacDermind is in there because Claude feels Chris is putting far too much pressure on himself. I agree with that decision, let him watch from the press box for a night and have him chat with Doug Jarvis about things he can do to improve.
Claude said it today he believes Chris will develop into the player he says they know he can be and for the record Chiarelli said on TSN 1050 yesterday morning that Bourque will continue to have the spot unless they feel they can upgrade via trade closer to the deadline with a veteran (pretty good vote from the GM and from the Coach I'd say).
Also people seem to be ignoring in the offensive zone Chris Kelly has been attrocious and Rich Peverley is just starting to get his jump back...Peverley and Kelly combined for 0 goals and for people who think Bourque is dragging them down, they had two shifts with Seguin in the last game and Kelly iced the puck twice and Peverley once.
Has Chris Bourque been great? No. But has Chris been useless? NO! He's brought more defensively then I expected. He'd be a -1 if it weren't for a Kelly giveaway and Boychuck deciding he was going to play Chara's side without telling him. He's also been decent on the PP and Brad Marchand's PP goal came directly because of Bourque drawing players in on the half boards, opening up Hamilton and Peverley out high.
I'm getting off my soapbox now but for crying out loud it's been 6 games on a line that has zero between three players. Let them gel and this is going to be a very, very good third line!
So once again, you were making this proclamation after two games had been played.
So after two games of what you term "poor" play, Spooner or Caron would have been immediately sent down, even though there was no better option? Not likely. If a player makes the team out of training camp, they are not going to be dumped after two games. That is not showing faith in your players.
I don't think you could even say he had played poorly the first two games. If I recall, the first game against the Rangers, the line played pretty well, and I thought Bourque held his own. Against the Jets, you're right, the entire 3rd line, including Bourque, was ineffective. But if the Bruins believed that he was their best option going into the season, what they saw after the first two games would not have been enough, IMO, to cut bait and send him back to the AHL.
After game two, what alterations to the lineup would you have made assuming Bourque was going to be sent back down to Providence?
Would you then have given the player who was called up only two games to prove themselves? Or have you been overly critical of this player BECAUSE of his connections?
BTW, Bourque is sitting tonight in place of MacDermid...I wonder if Ray has okayed that move...
It's been six games, not two. Yes, most would have been sent back by now.
I've said many times that I would move Paille up to the third and Mcdermid to the fourth.
He's had more than two games now. Why is that so hard for you to understand? He has also been with the Caps for long enough to have proven something so it's not like he's got untapped potential like a younger guy from Prov.
I you're going to keep up with the "two games, bla, blah, blah" stuff I'm just not going to waste my time trying to explain this to you. Lifes too short.
There are plenty of others who agree with me on this.
Yeah but mentioning Mark Mowers and Chris Bourque in the same sentence is perfectly acceptable and even encouraged. 
