I have zero boyhood heroism for Cam Neely. I was probably 7 when he had to retire so I remember zero of his playing career. Can you be objective behind your blind hatred for Sweeney and Neely?

I am pretty disgusted by the firing of Cassidy but to call a hockey hall of famer a loser because they never won a championship is stupid. Does Jarome Iginla have loser in his blood? Is he a loser and Patrick Maroon is the greatest winner of all time?

Cam Neely as president has maintained plenty of winning since he took over. They have had the 2nd most wins in that span. They have had the 2nd most playoff wins in that span. They been to three cup finals.

He has arguably been at the helm of the most successful era in Bruins history. But yeah. He’s a loser. If you think the bad outweighs the good. We will never see eye to eye on many things
- Mahewman

Yes and I very clearly just was. There is nothing blind about it. I cant stand either of them.

Currently Iginla and Maroon aren't running franchises into the ground while not taking responsibility for their poor and misguided choices. Also Maroon will always have the rings. You can't take those away from him because he isn't Kucherov. He was also good enough to beat Cam Neely's Bruins. He very much helped grind Sweeny's 1 line team into a 7 game series loss. A team they've should've beaten in 5.

On a core that was mainly drafted and assembled by the previous and even worse management. So he was marginally better?

ok this is way off base lol.
Neely was a specimen as a player one of the greatest power forwards ever. Cmon dude he scored 50 in 50 and would kick ass. I’m not accepting that BS.

Terrible front office man, you got that right. I have no idea how he let this team get so soft. It doesn’t make any sense.
- Tachmo

Cool. Mathews had 60 this year and was a 1 round bounce again. People in this town, fans and media, can't separate that he hasn't been that guy in a long time. He is doing a horrible job. He's has overseen now 2 incompetent GMs and has allowed the firing 2 very competent coaches to protect Sweeney's bungling.

Yes and I very clearly just was. There is nothing blind about it. I cant stand either of them.

Currently Iginla and Maroon aren't running franchises into the ground while not taking responsibility for their poor and misguided choices. Also Maroon will always have the rings. You can't take those away from him because he isn't Kucherov. He was also good enough to beat Cam Neely's Bruins. He very much helped grind Sweeny's 1 line team into a 7 game series loss. A team they've should've beaten in 5.

On a core that was mainly drafted and assembled by the previous and even worse management. So he was marginally better?
- glove_was_stuck

Yeah. Patrick Maroons Zero points, -5 and 10 minutes TOI in the Stanley cup were the reason they won the cup.

Yeah. Patrick Maroons Zero points, -5 and 10 minutes TOI in the Stanley cup were the reason they won the cup.
- Mahewman

I'd still take him over Studnicka and a still has 3 could be 4 rings soon

I have zero boyhood heroism for Cam Neely. I was probably 7 when he had to retire so I remember zero of his playing career. Can you be objective behind your blind hatred for Sweeney and Neely?

I am pretty disgusted by the firing of Cassidy but to call a hockey hall of famer a loser because they never won a championship is stupid. Does Jarome Iginla have loser in his blood? Is he a loser and Patrick Maroon is the greatest winner of all time?

Cam Neely as president has maintained plenty of winning since he took over. They have had the 2nd most wins in that span. They have had the 2nd most playoff wins in that span. They been to three cup finals.

He has arguably been at the helm of the most successful era in Bruins history. But yeah. He’s a loser. If you think the bad outweighs the good. We will never see eye to eye on many things
- Mahewman

We agree that Neely was an awesome player. We will disagree on his management chops. I wish I could find the interview after the 2015 season during the shakeup (GM, Lucic, etc.) when Neely clearly stated the big bad Bruins didn't work in today's NHL and that the team was going to focus on speed and skill. The Blues big bad Bruin'd us in the finals. The Pens, the Caps, the Lightning now are bigger teams with skill.
Not saying Neely is terrible but I do believe Sweeney has very tight reins on him by Neely and many "mistakes" can be tied to Neely as much as Sweeney...especially the poor handling of personnel issues (Cassidy, Chara, Krug, etc.).

Because it translates. Good enough to fall short but not good enough to win it all.
- glove_was_stuck

Plenty of great players never won the CUP. Do they suck too?

How is it you can't separate the player from the Exec?

I'd still take him over Studnicka and a still has 3 could be 4 rings soon
- glove_was_stuck

God I hope Tampa doesn’t win again

God I hope Tampa doesn’t win again
- Mahewman

Ain't that the truth...

Yes and I very clearly just was. There is nothing blind about it. I cant stand either of them.

Currently Iginla and Maroon aren't running franchises into the ground while not taking responsibility for their poor and misguided choices. Also Maroon will always have the rings. You can't take those away from him because he isn't Kucherov. He was also good enough to beat Cam Neely's Bruins. He very much helped grind Sweeny's 1 line team into a 7 game series loss. A team they've should've beaten in 5.

On a core that was mainly drafted and assembled by the previous and even worse management. So he was marginally better?
- glove_was_stuck

Neely just may be one of the worst Presidents in the league, this is true. While not many people are sticking up for him (I'm not), that doesn't mean his legacy as a Bruins PLAYER is tarnished in any way. You can poop on him all you want in terms of what he's done for our team POST-playing career. But to suggest that he is a loser because he took a cheap shot that ended his career pre-maturely (still scored 50 in 50 with one good knee while playing every other game), and didn't single handedly lead his team to beat 2 of the greatest teams ever assembled in the Pens and Oilers in the Cup? Silly talk my man. We're all pissed about getting bounced, and we aren't happy with where things are going, but let's not try to re-write history here.

Bruins did not "git rid" of Chara. He wanted more playing time than they were willing to give him.

Chara was a major force with Was & NYI? His 24pts and +14 over those two seasons suggest otherwise. He played a total of 5 post-season games over the two years and only had 2 PIM to show for it. Time to take off your nostalgic glasses.



- Nasty_Duck

Think you should put on a pair of glasses.
Playing time especially on the Bruin left side and in general is determined by player effectiveness. They( Sweeney) told Chara he was going to be a healthy scratch so he could play his stud #1 picks. And like Krug no offer was made. I call that moving on .
If he stayed with the bruins he would have played a good amount because he was the better option. Your stat recap doesn’t say that his season stats are better than any of his replacements. Major force was referring to his physical presence. He was still feared. He killed penalties, hit, blocked shots has much or more than forbert . And he still ripped guys with the gloves off. All for 2 million less.

Think you should put on a pair of glasses.
Playing time especially on the Bruin left side and in general is determined by player effectiveness. They( Sweeney) told Chara he was going to be a healthy scratch so he could play his stud #1 picks. And like Krug no offer was made. I call that moving on .
If he stayed with the bruins he would have played a good amount because he was the better option. Your stat recap doesn’t say that his season stats are better than any of his replacements. Major force was referring to his physical presence. He was still feared. He killed penalties, hit, blocked shots has much or more than forbert . And he still ripped guys with the gloves off. All for 2 million less.
- johnnypie

Why are we talking about Chara? He is not great anymore. He has been gone for two seasons. We bounced his team in year one and then he went to a team that severely under performed. Letting Chara go hurt but was not a mistake.

His true strength is on the PK and the Bruins PK has been just fine without him.

Why are we talking about Chara? He is not great anymore. He has been gone for two seasons. We bounced his team in year one and then he went to a team that severely under performed. Letting Chara go hurt but was not a mistake.

His true strength is on the PK and the Bruins PK has been just fine without him.
- Mahewman

Agreed.

He was running out of gas come post-season. Bruins recognized this and offered him a lesser role. Chara didn't agree with that assessment, but it's proven to be true based on results.

Nothing wrong with moving on. Of course OTHER mistakes have been made that hurt the Bruins but moving on from Chara was not one of them.

Agreed.

He was running out of gas come post-season. Bruins recognized this and offered him a lesser role. Chara didn't agree with that assessment, but it's proven to be true based on results.

Nothing wrong with moving on. Of course OTHER mistakes have been made that hurt the Bruins but moving on from Chara was not one of them.
- Nasty_Duck

As I said, not disagreeing that we needed to move on from Chara based upon his "demands"...the problem is we haven't. We haven't actually replaced him. Forbort has come closest but frankly I would say that is a wash to the Chara that was here at the end...not really better (and more expensive). We have creampuffs for defensemen. They have plenty of skill and play a great system (we'll see if that holds) but when push comes to shove (as in the post season)...we are the one's being pushed around thanks to NO actual "replacement" for Chara.

I see you guys harping on Sweeney and Cam for moves made...

Curious would the Lindholm extension fall into that realm ? I know Verbeek offered him more money and less term.. how do you guys feel about it.

Also I've seen some here say the Bruins are soft... But we traded you the best enforcer in the game who could play 2nd and 3rd line minutes.. Thiic Nic is a beast .. what was the problem with him.. Because no team with him is Soft..

I see you guys harping on Sweeney and Cam for moves made...

Curious would the Lindholm extension fall into that realm ? I know Verbeek offered him more money and less term.. how do you guys feel about it.

Also I've seen some here say the Bruins are soft... But we traded you the best enforcer in the game who could play 2nd and 3rd line minutes.. Thiic Nic is a beast .. what was the problem with him.. Because no team with him is Soft..
- dozerD10

Lindholm has looked solid so far when he has played but he’s also been injured a couple times which is already starting to scare me.

Time will tell.

Thick Nick did nothing for me. I was pissed we traded Heinen for him but honestly at times I wondered how he was even in the NHL.

Lindholm has looked solid so far when he has played but he’s also been injured a couple times which is already starting to scare me.

Time will tell.

Thick Nick did nothing for me. I was pissed we traded Heinen for him but honestly at times I wondered how he was even in the NHL.
- Mahewman

I love Danton... so dumb of us to trade him to Pens.. guy was and is just a really solid player.

I see you guys harping on Sweeney and Cam for moves made...

Curious would the Lindholm extension fall into that realm ? I know Verbeek offered him more money and less term.. how do you guys feel about it.

Also I've seen some here say the Bruins are soft... But we traded you the best enforcer in the game who could play 2nd and 3rd line minutes.. Thiic Nic is a beast .. what was the problem with him.. Because no team with him is Soft..
- dozerD10

The problem with Ritchie was he had a decent season on the last year of his contract, and Sweeney doesn't pay those guys. He signs bums for the same money, or more the following year. With NMC's of course.

The problem with Ritchie was he had a decent season on the last year of his contract, and Sweeney doesn't pay those guys. He signs bums for the same money, or more the following year. With NMC's of course.
- ProvBrewin

15 goals in 56 games.. that seems pretty solid for a 3rd liner ... that's about a 22 goal pace.

15 goals in 56 games.. that seems pretty solid for a 3rd liner ... that's about a 22 goal pace.
- dozerD10

Yeah a large portion of those were on the power play. Don’t get me wrong, He was a decent net front presence on the power play but that was about it.

15 goals in 56 games.. that seems pretty solid for a 3rd liner ... that's about a 22 goal pace.
- dozerD10

How did he work out for the Leafs?

How did he work out for the Leafs?
- Nasty_Duck

He sobered up and got the hell out of that dumpster fire as fast as possible.. that's how...

How did he work out for the Leafs?
- Nasty_Duck

General rule for GM’s when making roster moves is to try and get more production for the lowest cap hit. Are you talking about Foligno in your above question ? Ritchie scored more , hit more, fought more and has more of a future than Foligno. Is a much better fourth line option and by the way is a lot cheaper. So we won’t talk about Chara being cost affective. But Foligno for Ritchie who does more cheaper. How about his 4th line center brought in to get more scoring depth. Nosek 2 goals , Kuraly 15.
Along with the fact Kuraly does more but does cost under a million more. It’s these moves under Sweeney that go back a few years where he replaces more physical types with guys that he thinks are going to produce that hurt. And none are cost effective.

General rule for GM’s when making roster moves is to try and get more production for the lowest cap hit. Are you talking about Foligno in your above question ? Ritchie scored more , hit more, fought more and has more of a future than Foligno. Is a much better fourth line option and by the way is a lot cheaper. So we won’t talk about Chara being cost affective. But Foligno for Ritchie who does more cheaper. How about his 4th line center brought in to get more scoring depth. Nosek 2 goals , Kuraly 15.
Along with the fact Kuraly does more but does cost under a million more. It’s these moves under Sweeney that go back a few years where he replaces more physical types with guys that he thinks are going to produce that hurt. And none are cost effective.
- johnnypie

Kuraly should have 100 percent been resigned. He brings energy every night and was only going to get better in my opinion. However there is always the chance that he wanted to go play for his hometown team. He’s a heart and soul type of player and that goes a long way with depth players.

Lazars improved play this year with Kuraly on the 4th line would have made a very good 4th line. Regardless of who else was on the line with them

General rule for GM’s when making roster moves is to try and get more production for the lowest cap hit. Are you talking about Foligno in your above question ? Ritchie scored more , hit more, fought more and has more of a future than Foligno. Is a much better fourth line option and by the way is a lot cheaper. So we won’t talk about Chara being cost affective. But Foligno for Ritchie who does more cheaper. How about his 4th line center brought in to get more scoring depth. Nosek 2 goals , Kuraly 15.
Along with the fact Kuraly does more but does cost under a million more. It’s these moves under Sweeney that go back a few years where he replaces more physical types with guys that he thinks are going to produce that hurt. And none are cost effective.
- johnnypie

Why would you think I was talking about Foligno???

In Ritchie's case he did so poorly for the Leafs he was placed on waivers. This is a guy you think the Bruins should spend money on?

For the record neither Foligno nor Ritchie would help the Bruins. It's not either/or. It's neither.

Why would you think I was talking about Foligno???

In Ritchie's case he did so poorly for the Leafs he was placed on waivers. This is a guy you think the Bruins should spend money on?

For the record neither Foligno nor Ritchie would help the Bruins. It's not either/or. It's neither.
- Nasty_Duck

Because foligno didn’t exactly work out for the leafs. Giving up a #1.....
Again that’s your answer for everything nobody would have helped . I’m making comparisons of player choices and money paid by Sweeney. Ritchie still scored 12 goals last year. The leafs slotted him higher in their lineup. When he didn’t jell with Matthews etc they moved him because they were tight against the cap . He would fill a need for the bruins a lot more than foligno and for a big savings. He tripled the goal output for Sweeney’s 2 4th line FA’s and he actually is a pretty intimidating player. Guess the bruins don’t need that in your view. No let McAvoy and Marchand handle the dirty work.