How The Boston Bruins Fell.

15thMay. × ’14

The President’s Trophy winning Boston Bruins are going to be watching the final two rounds of the playoffs from Slovakia, Finland, Toronto, and Michigan and points all over the world. What they won’t be doing is playing any more. For a number of reasons, and with the play of several players being disappointing, they didn’t have enough to get the job done.

Zdeno Chara:

At no point in the playoffs was Zdeno Chara a dominant player. Against Detroit he was effective, and at times in the Montreal series he was visible. Not one minute of the Montreal series did he look like a Norris trophy worthy defenseman. We know he had some sort of hand/wrist injury that limited him measurably. He had three games against Montreal with one or zero shots. He totaled ten shots in seven games against Montreal, and twelve shots in five games against Detroit. He seemed to skate at about his normal level, without any moments where he hustled up ice to beat a rushing attacker (this could be good or bad, as the number of rushes when he was on the ice was fairly low) as we’ve occasionally seen. Was he awful? Only in-comparison to his best, he was honestly average, aggressively average in this post season.

David Krejci:

If ever there was a player who wore their current mental state like a one man-band kit, it is Krejci. When he’s dialed in, his passes are crisp, he makes clever lateral moves, and he moves the puck either as a pass or a shot at exactly the right time. When the signal gets fuzzy, he’s ruinous, he dangles more than Tomas Kaberle, his passes are as deft as a walrus on stairs, and he just doesn’t shoot. For the first five games we got bad Krejci, Lucic and Iginla would have charged up ice and gotten to the net, he’d be almost into the zone. The light of good Krejci did strobe briefly across the ice in game six, but it was merely a cameo. When the center isn’t there to control the middle of the ice, the plug is pulled on the whole system. In Julien’s system this is arguably the most important skating position.

Tuukka Rask:

Let’s start with the numbers:

  • Game 1 4 goals allowed SV% of .879
  • Game 2 3 goals allowed SV% of .893
  • Game 3 3 goals allowed SV% of .880
  • Game 4 0 goals allowed SV% of 1.000
  • Game 5 2 goals allowed SV% of .935
  • Game 6 4 goals allowed SV% of .857
  • Game 7 3 goals allowed SV% of .833

Two of the series wins are pretty easy to pick out. The third win? You can’t look at those numbers and say “this one”, you just can’t. By comparison, Marc-Andre Fleury put up better numbers in his seven game series than Rask. Was the defense in front of Rask perfect? No, but he was not only below average for him, in this series he was below average for the the NHL. He wasn’t alone, but as a goalie, the last mistake was his to make, and he did. frequently. Best of all, there’s only three more years left on his $7,000,000.00 a year contract that have the full no movement clause.

The Rest:

Its pretty easy to go through the roster and find players not named Torey Krug or Patrice Bergeron or Dougie Hamilton, or Carl Soderberg and say they were a or the problem. Kevan Miller and Matt Bartkowski were on again off again good to bad. While Miller was making his playoff debut, and has a grand total of 11 playoff games and 47 regular season contests Bartkowski is a bit more experienced with last years 15 playoff games and a total of 84 NHL regular season events. Meszaros was a non factor. Marchand while not potting any goals on several pretty open cages, still created turnovers, made several key passes, and played hard. Eriksson was not what we hoped, but he wasn’t awful, like most of the rest he was pretty average.

The Fatal Flaw:

What killed the Bruins in this series was two things; trepidation and inexperience. The biggest regrets any player should have this summer is the things they didn’t do and they way they didn’t play. Against the Wings and for most of the regular season they were physical, rough men who who stood ready to win at any costs. Against the Habs they played terrified to step into the penalty box. That little corner of the arena looking back  at the team that several players were so familiar with, some how became taboo. Players didn’t commit to the system and they allowed the Canadiens to dictate the way the game was played.  When you’re in a bad matchup, you can’t play your opponents style and win. No matter what style you play, half your roster can’t be playing  like its a father son game full of 11 year olds. Not if you expect to win.




Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Steve

    To be fair, when you get sent to the box for snowing the goalie, and the opponent’s power play is chewing you to pieces, it’s easy to understand being a bit trepidatious about taking penalties.

    • Puck Sage

      Steve,

      The timidity started early in the series, probably game one. It did only get worse, but they still allowed the Habs to pick the playlist and take the lead.

  • Darren

    The Rask criticism is a little overblown I think. Yes he wasn’t his usual stellar self, but he still played well for the most part. Let’s take the last game for example. An .833 save percentage sounds bad but consider that the first two were defensive breakdowns that led to wide open 1-timers that he had no chance to stop and the third was a weird deflection that he probably should have stopped, but was not easy by any means.

    • pucksage

      What part of his sv% is arguable? He had FIVE games where his sv% was under .900, two of them well under. He was rather ungood, period.

Follow

Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers:

Puck Sage: Hockey served spicy is Stephen Fry proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache