Bruins Beat Whalers... I Mean Stars

Did anyone else look at the TV during Thursday night's Bruins game, see the color of the Dallas Star jerseys, and just for a moment think that the B's were playing the Hartford Whalers?

The Stars would become my second favorite hockey team if they adopted Brass Bonanza as their anthem.

The Bruins really needed to get points from this game. Dallas has been mired in a tremendous slump. The Stars were 1-6 in January entering this game. The Bruins have also been slumping, though not as badly. They've only managed 6 points in their last 8 games. They have the Blackhawks and Kings after this, so leaving Texas with 2 points was a necessity.

It was good to see Chad Johnson (hockey) play solidly. The minimum standard of play from a backup is someone who doesn't put his team in position to lose. You want a backup who is decent enough to make winning possible. Johnson did his job Thursday night. I wouldn't mind seeing him a few more times until Tuukka Rask is as sharp as usual.

It was also good to see the Bruins' top forwards carry the load and score some goals. Krejci, Marchand, Lucic, and Bergeron all scored. Krejci, Lucic, and Bergeron all had assists. The B's even scored on the power play. And it was a forward (Lucic) who did it! Not Chara or Krug! Krug did have an assist on that goal, his team leading 13th power play point.

I have faith the Bruins will play their way out of this funk. But the penalty kill allowed yet another goal. And beating Dallas doesn't demonstrate that they're out of it, or even that they've started to play out of it. It's a 2-point grab when you're playing poorly. If they play well in their next games, then maybe they'll be playing their way back into a groove.

The Bruins play Sunday afternoon in Chicago on NBC. Which is a nice appetizer before the main course of the AFC Championship.

Photo Credit:
Tony Gutierrez/Associated Press

I'm Sick of Hearing About Legacies

What does this game mean for Tom Brady's legacy? Peyton Manning's? Bill Belichick's? Who needs to win a Super Bowl more this year?

Ugh...

I am so completely and utterly tired of hearing legacies discussed on sports radio and at work, and being bombarded with stories about the topic. It's trivial crap. People are speculating and conjecturating (I know that's not a word, it's a Johnnie Cochranism) about what a game to be played in the future will mean in the more distant future when people look back on the past, which is our present. That does not make sense.

Can't we just look ahead at this future game and suppose what might happen WITHIN the game itself? Can't we say the Patriots need to hit Wes Welker and put him off his game, then find a way to pressure Manning without blitzing? Can't we say that if the Broncos hold on to the ball and slow down the Pats' running game, they have a good chance of winning?

Nope! We have to philosophize about the larger meaning of the game. What does it all mean?

Which is funny because whoever wins, this game will add nothing to their "legacy" if they lose the Super Bowl.

We don't know what will happen in this game. Which is why I can't wait for it to be played. I'm anxious, nervous, excited, optimistic. I'm ready to be entertained, hopeful to be elated, prepared to be disappointed. I'm on the edge of my seat thinking about how I won't be able to sit down on Sunday.

The other reason I can't wait for this game to be played is so people will shut up about legacies. Although they won't. Because one of these QBs will go to the Super Bowl, which means 2 more weeks of legacy talk. Along with the whole "changing of the guard" theme as Brady or Manning faces Kaepernick or Wilson.

What happens on Sunday is still unknown to us, to everyone. So I'm tired of people who don't know what will happen on Sunday, arguing with each other about how those unknown events will be seen by future generations of fans. Who cares and how can you know? How can you even guess? It's like speculating about how a child who isn't even born yet will be seen by his/her future kids.

Just live in the now, people. Enjoy the exciting build up, have fun watching the game, and stop thinking about legacies.

Why I'm Still Happy the Bruins Traded Seguin

The Bruins are in Dallas, facing off against a former Bruin who left the town quietly, but has since made considerable noise in his new city. Tyler Seguin has scored 21 goals with an equal number of assists for the Stars. He's well on his way to breaking personal bests for goals in a season (29) and points (67), both set in 2011-12.

There's two arguments one can construct from Seguin's rebirth in Dallas:

1. The Bruins were wrong to trade him, because look how well he's doing. The Bruins let a talented player go.

2. The Bruins were right to trade him, because look how well he's doing. The Bruins got rid of a player who wasn't living up to his potential.

I agree more with Argument #2. The fact that Seguin is doing so well in Dallas proves that he wasn't playing up to his potential in Boston. You can argue that the B's perhaps gave up on him too early. Then again he had three seasons to get with the program here. His on-ice performance showed no improvement. Actually the opposite. Especially in the playoffs. And his off-ice priorities were, in a word, selfish.

That's why he's a Dallas Star and not a Boston Bruin.

He still has talent. No doubt about that. That's why he's doing so well in Dallas. That's why he scored 29 goals and 38 assists in 2011-12. Talent isn't an issue for him. He has the potential to score 30-40 goals and add 50+ assists with the right linemates.

The issue with Seguin was how he deployed that talent, and how he failed to take full advantage of it. Strike that. He CHOSE not to take full advantage of it. He didn't put in the effort to be a Boston Bruin, he lacked confidence playing outside his comfort zone (which the playoffs require you to do), and didn't show a willingness to acknowledge and address the aspects of his game that needed attention.

Regular season performance wasn't an issue for Seguin. Although in 2012-13 he took a slight step back in production. He went from 29 goals and 67 points to 16 goals and 32 assists in a lockout shortened season. That's a pace for 28 goals and 54 points.

Then there's the playoffs...

A friend of mine pointed out that he scored some crucial goals in 2011 against Tampa Bay. And that's true. He scored in Game 1 and twice in Game 2. He also had 2 assists in Game 2. A great start to his postseason career.

His playoff production since then and overall, well, there isn't really any playoff production to speak of. In 42 career postseason games, about half a season, he's scored 6 goals with 12 assists. His playoff goal production was half of what his regular season production was for the Bruins (a goal every 3.6 games in his regular season Bruins career, a goal every 7 games in his playoff career).

He's played in 7 series and only scored a goal in 3 of them. In 4 series, including 2 Stanley Cup Finals, he's failed to score.

And in his last 40 playoff games he's managed to score a mere 3 goals with 9 assists. Twelve points. In 40 games.

Then you look at his off-ice priorities. I don't mind athletes having a good time. But Seguin was compulsive about it. And he seemed to get worse year after year. Maybe only what we heard got worse. Either way it showed no sign of improving, which mirrors his on-ice performance. Seguin needed a security guard to keep him in his hotel room during the Stanley Cup Finals. If he were scoring a goal a night, I wouldn't mind if he went out and drank 20 beers then hooked up with an entire Northeastern sorority. He wasn't doing his job in the playoffs yet he still wanted to celebrate.

Before all that there was the lockout. Most NHLers who played in European leagues went there to stay sharp and earn some cash. Seguin went there to binge. He chose the team and league his buddies were playing in. There were reports of him trashing rooms. And I'm sure he had his share of fun.

And I wouldn't have cared about that if he had returned to the Bruins and scored 20 regular season goals then 9 or 10 more in the playoffs. He didn't.

Maybe he's got his act together in Dallas. Maybe being traded was a wakeup call (something he's had trouble with in the past). Maybe the Bruins cut ties too soon. Then again they got decent players in return. Reilly Smith has 15 goals and 18 assists, already more points than Seguin had last year (in about the same number of games), and only needs to score once in the playoffs to match Seguin's total last season.

Seguin seems comfortable in Dallas. His problem up here was that winning requires you to go outside your comfort zone. And instead of being willing to risk discomfort in the pursuit of being a better hockey player, he'd prefer to go drinking with his male-groupie pals and bang some broads.

Good for you, Tyler. And good riddance.

Broncos and Seahawks Trying to Keep Patriots and 49ers Fans Out of Their Stadiums

There's a good chance you've already heard this story. Both the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks have gotten cute and decided to try to keep visiting team fans from going to Sunday's Conference Championship games. They're doing this by not selling tickets to people with addresses outside of their region. Only fans with addresses in the Rockies can buy tickets to the AFC Championship, and the NFC Championship is being sold exclusively to those living in the Pacific Northwest.

It's ridiculously childish. And moronic. StubHub and Craigslist don't care where your money comes from. Neither do the countless other legitimate ticket brokers and illicit scalpers.

And who wants a stadium filled exclusively with their own fanbase? That's the remarkably childish aspect of this. That hurts atmosphere and crowd noise, it doesn't help it. Visiting team fans add to the raw emotional intensity of football. Just look at college football and the hordes of Alabama and Texas fans that follow their teams around the country. They come to town, they rile up the opposing fanbase, everyone takes the game personally because their enemy is sitting two rows behind them, and they want to see you feel miserable because your team failed. They cheer when your favorite player fumbles. They cheer when you're pissed. They're against you. I fucking hate them, don't you?!

That got away from me there but that's the kind of intensity visiting fans can bring.

I've been to every home Patriots game since 2007 and some of the most exciting atmospheres I've experienced at Gillette Stadium involve large numbers of visiting fans, especially at playoff games (the Ravens and Jets drew the most). There's tension in the building because of the animosity between the groups. There's a building energy as fan groups verbally react to every play and then emotionally react to each other's reactions. There are raised stakes because you spent an hour talking trash to the punk in the Revis jersey and you'd hate it if he gets to spend an hour talking trash to you. Victory becomes more enjoyable, defeat more painful. All on a personal level.

By the way there were plenty of Denver fans and Tebow fans at Gillette Stadium two years ago when the Broncos played the Patriots in the playoffs. We let you into our house. You can't extend the same courtesy to us?

Denver and Seattle don't want excitement and tension. They want monochromatic, bland, conformist fans at their games. No Brady or Kaepernick jerseys. Just Manning and Wilson. No blue and silver in Denver. No red and gold in Seattle. Everyone dressed the same, everyone cheering for the same team, everyone enjoying themselves the same. How very nice and pleasant. But the words "nice," and "pleasant" have no place in football.

That's just boring, just lame, just stupid. Grow up, Denver. Grow up, Seattle.

Flat Bruins Lie Down for Leafs

For most of this game the Bruins played flat, purposeless hockey. There were some occasional moments of spiked intensity. For the most part, however, the black and gold played a very gray game.

I'm not going to blame Tuukka Rask for the loss or for this slump. It's not his fault most of the team isn't playing well. He hasn't played poorly. Although he also hasn't played well. He isn't helping them get out of this funk. If the B's had a more reliable backup I'd suggest that Rask take a week off to regroup and refresh. You've got three non-conference games coming up, maybe Rask should play in only one of them. Maybe none.

Special teams are killing this team. The power play is 1 for its last 23 (4.3%) and the penalty kill has allowed goals in 10 of its last 27 (37%) shorthanded situations. The Bruins are also committing far too many careless, meaningless penalties. Since the Islanders game on New Year's Eve, they've had to kill 27 penalties and have only been on the power play 16 times. That's a difference of 11 in only 6 games.

The power play has been carried by defensemen all season long. But such production can't be relied on throughout an entire season. You can't depend on Chara (6 PP goals) sneaking in a rebound or Krug (4) driving in a slapshot. The forwards need to pull their weight. Chara and Krug have scored 10 of this team's 24 power play goals.

The return of Shawn Thornton has helped recharge the B's a bit. Brad Marchand put the Bruins up 1-0 a mere 35 seconds after a Thornton fight. Thornton was also on the ice when Gregory Campbell scored in the 3rd.

But each time the Bruins took the lead, they gave it back. They typically play harder after scoring a goal. Last night they downshifted after their first two goals. Very out of character.

They need to get their act together Thursday night in Dallas, because after that it's Chicago on the road and LA at home.

Photo Credit:
Elise Amendola/Associated Press

Will Middlebrooks and Good Sports Team Up to Donate Equipment to Dorchester Community Center

Boston Red Sox infielder Will Middlebrooks teamed up with Boston-based nonprofit organization Good Sports to donate $2,000 worth of athletic equipment to the Bird Street Community Center in Dorchester on Thursday January 9. Good Sports' donation of more than $2,000 worth of basketball, baseball, volleyball, and fitness equipment will allow the Bird Street Community Center to continue to support 200 at-risk youth, who otherwise would not have access to sports and fitness programs.

Middlebrooks helped kids who were in attendance test their new equipment, took pictures, signed autographs, and ran a skills demonstration.

Since 2003, Good Sports has provided more than $10 million worth of equipment to 1,150 youth programs, impacting more than 800,000 kids.

Photos courtesy of Elevate Communications.

Patriots Stampede Colts on the Ground

For the 8th time in the Brady-Belichick era, the Patriots are in the NFL's final four. That's 8 times in 12 seasons (2001-2007, 2009-2013). Enjoy these moments, Patriots fans, because times like these are rare.

The game wasn't as lopsided as the 43-22 score suggests. There were periods that the Colts were just a play away from gaining control. They never made that play. All the big plays were made by the Patriots, or went the Pats' way.

Even the safety after a high-snap on a punt was a positive result of a Patriot miscue. Had punter Ryan Allen been tackled inside the 5, the Colts probably would have soon scored a touchdown, if not almost certainly a field goal. Instead Indy was awarded with 2 points, the Patriots got to punt from the 20, and Indy put together a long drive that ended with a turnover. If not for the safety, a 21-10 game probably would have become a 21-17 game.

Here's some earth-shattering analysis: the Patriots won this game on the ground. LeGarrette Blount, Stevan Ridley, and Shane Vereen combined for 233 yards on 43 carries (5.4 per carry). They demoralized the Colts defense in the first half. In the second half, they castrated them. This success on the ground set up play-action, which allowed for some big plays in the air. The Colts also brought their safeties close to the line, which allowed Blount to score a 73-yard TD in the 4th, because once he got past the first level there was nothing but green fieldturf ahead of him. A green carpet, if you will, to the end zone. To victory.

There was one drive in the first half that especially reminded me of Corey Dillon and the 2004 Patriots. The Pats ran the ball six straight plays, achieving two first downs. Then they went play action, which the Colts bit on, and Julian Edelman made a 27-yard reception. Eventually Blount finished the drive with a touchdown. His 4 TDs set a new franchise postseason record. Curtis Martin was the previous record holder with 3.

If you look at Brady's numbers (13 of 25, 198 yards, 0 TDs) one might think he had a bad day. I thought he played quite well. He made some plays, especially on 3rd down (Pats converted 11 of 18). He protected the ball. He got rid of it when he had to. He made big plays downfield (e.g. Danny Amendola's 53-yard reception). He wasn't just a "game manager" handing it off and making the occasional safe pass play.

He was also an adequate holder. And Stephen Gostkowski was a good punter. This team does not allow injuries or change to faze them. Shit happens, do your job, even if it's a job you haven't done in years or have never done.

The defense had excellent timing. They gave up a few big plays and a few long drives. However those were all when the Patriots had control of the game. The defense didn't allow Indy to seize control of the game or build any momentum.

And the D made some big plays themselves. Alfonzo Dennard's interception on the opening drive being the most obvious example.

Jamie Collins made some of the biggest plays. When it was 21-12 his 3rd and goal coverage of Coby Fleener in the end zone forced Indy to settle for a field goal. When it was 29-22 he sacked Andrew Luck for a loss of 8 and the Colts eventually went 3 and out. When it was 36-22 his interception effectively ended the game.

Collins' timing was perfect. He made big plays at key times that prevented the Colts from building momentum to mount a comeback. And he made a big play in the 4th quarter that sealed a victory. A sack, 2 tackles for a loss, 3 QB hits, a pass defended, and an interception. It's just one standout game from the rookie but his athleticism is obvious. I'm looking forward to seeing what he does for the team in 2014.

Of course 2013 isn't over yet, not for the Patriots. The Pats have another AFC Championship game to play. This time against Peyton Manning and the Broncos. The weather forecast for Sunday's game in Denver is partly cloudy with a high of 55 and a low of 33. This week's forecast for the New England region is partly optimistic with a 100% chance of trivial speculation and excited trash talk.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/Michael Dwyer

Let's Give Credit to Bill Belichick the GM

Bill Belichick has been praised for what he's done as a Head Coach in 2013. His team won 12 games, won a division title, and secured a first-round bye despite relentless injuries to key players.

I've even heard this interesting "hot take" (which sounds like a porn term) from sports pundits: Belichick's coaching is even more remarkable and praiseworthy, because Belichick the GM puts Belichick the Coach in tough spots with questionable personnel decisions. Suddenly Belichick is two people. One is a genius coach, the other is a GM that doesn't really know what he's doing.

I disagree. I think Belichick does a great job as the GM.

There was a time when this belief was common in New England. If anything his prowess as GM was arguably overrated and certainly overhyped. Everything he did seemed correct, even if it was counterintuitive. He drafted Brady and won a Super Bowl. He signed Rodney Harrison and won a Super Bowl. He signed Corey Dillon and won a Super Bowl. He traded for Wes Welker and Randy Moss and nearly won a Super Bowl.

However, when the Super Bowl parades stopped and the parade of fan favorites leaving the team began (Seymour, Vinatieri, Samuel, Law, Vrabel, Moss, Welker, Woodhead), fans started to grumble, and question Belichick the GM.

Draft picks were scrutinized. When Belichick traded picks, Pats fans groaned and screamed in agony, like they were passing a jagged kidney stone.

The Patriots continued to make the playoffs, but failed to go all the way. And Belichick the GM was to blame. He was the one who failed to build a defensive backfield, the one who failed to draft an outside receiver, the one who failed to acquire a pass rusher.

Patriots fans let their emotions revise their favorite team's recent history.

After Belichick let Welker go to Denver, people forgot that it was a Welker drop and a Brady safety against the Giants that cost the Pats Super Bowl XLVI. In the new version of history it was the GM's fault, and the cheapness of the team he ran.

And Super Bowl XLII wasn't won by a ruthless Giants pass rush or a freakish catch by David Tyree. The GM simply didn't put together a roster with enough talent to win the Super Bowl. Or at least that's what people criticizing Belichick the GM would be forced to conclude if they took their logic a few steps further.

If Belichick is a bad GM for letting Welker go, isn't he also a good GM for acquiring him in the first place?

And have the Patriots lacked the talent to win Super Bowls since 2004? Has that been the reason? Didn't a Reche Caldwell drop in 2006 potentially cost them a trip to the Super Bowl? Were they not talented in 2007? How about 2011?

Let's return to 2013 and look at the decisions made by Belichick the GM that have put the Pats in position for playoff success:

He drafted Julian Edelman. Belichick the GM is frequently (and quite fairly) criticized for failing with his WR draft picks. Edelman is finally a success story in that department. In 2013, the 7th round pick in 2009 caught 105 passes for 1,056 yards. He also has the highest punt-return average of all time. The Pats also re-signed him this past off-season. How good is that re-signing looking?

He drafted Logan Mankins. Belichick the GM has struggled to draft receivers, DBs, and other positions. But he's been more than solid at drafting offensive linemen. Who, by the way, protect the most important player on the team. Mankins is a 6-time Pro-Bowler at left guard. And now he's playing left tackle due to injuries.

He built the RB corps. The Patriots were 9th in the NFL in rushing yards (2,065) and yards per carry (4.4). They were 2nd in rushing TDs (19). Stevan Ridley (773 yards, 7 TDs) was drafted in the 3rd round in 2011. LeGarrette Blount (772 yards, 7 TDs) was acquired from the Buccaneers for Jeff Demps and a 7th round pick. Solid deal. Brandon Bolden (271 yards, 3 TDs) was an undrafted free agent. Shane Vereen (208 rush yards, 427 receiving yards, 4 total TDs in only 8 games) was drafted in the 2nd round of 2011.

When evaluating the job done by Belichick the GM, I think people get caught up with mistakes, bad moves, and moves that made them angry. I'll get you started: Ochocinco, Adalius Thomas, Ras-I Dowling, Jermaine Cunningham, Brandon Tate. But trying to weigh the good moves against the bad moves is an inexact science. Do you judge an architect by the individual decisions he makes when designing a building? Or do you judge him by the quality and strength of the building as a whole?

The only fair way to judge a GM is to look at the teams he puts together. Are they strong, talented, cohesive, flexible, balanced? Do the pieces make each other better? And when I look at Belichick's tenure as GM, I see some great teams (2001, 2003, 2004, 2007), I see some very good teams (2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012), I see some above average teams (2002, 2005, 2008). So 4 great teams, 5 very good teams, and 3 above average teams. What does that say about the GM?

I see 5 teams that undoubtedly had the players to win a Super Bowl (the GM's job), and 3 of them that did it, 2 of them were a few plays short. I see more teams that had the players to do more damage, but didn't make the big plays in the big games.

The jury is still out on 2013, but I think talent-wise they have enough to win it all. Despite the injuries. And if healthier just imagine how fearsome they'd be to face.

They're a flawed team in a League of flawed teams. However, the team's strengths are stronger than most teams. And that's because it was built by a good GM.