If Bruins Lose Game 7 Tonight, Brad Marchand Needs to Go

It's time for Brad Marchand to do something positive for the Bruins. If he doesn't, it's time for the Bruins to do something about Brad Marchand.

We all loved him a few years ago. He was a pest and a rat, but he was our pest and our rat. Our little ball of hate. Now he seems to annoy Bruins fans as much as he annoys the other team.

He's not just a talented antagonist, he's a talented player. He's got the skills and speed to be a top-6 forward, he plays both the power play and penalty kill. He's scored 20+ goals three times, and was on pace to score 33 in the lockout shortened 2012-13 season. He also has a knack for scoring shorthanded goals. He led the NHL with 5 this year.

His regular season numbers are great. In 300 career games he has 92 goals, 94 assists, and he's +112.

In the 2011 Stanley Cup run he was amazing. In 25 games he scored 11 goals with 8 assists. His 10 even-strengthed goals were the most in the playoffs. He also had a shorthanded goal and was +12.

Since then, he's been a ghost in the playoffs. In his last 40 playoff games he's only managed to score 5 goals with 15 assists.

His career shooting percentage is 15.6% in the regular season. In the last 40 playoff games he's scored 5 times on 100 shots. The math is as easy as it is disappointing. When the games mean the most, he plays worse.

In 2012 against the Capitals, Marchand had a goal and an assist in Game 5. That was it. He was -1 in the series. The Bruins lost.

In 2013 he didn't score in the Toronto series but had 3 assists. He was good against the Rangers, scoring twice with 4 assists in 5 games. In Game 2 against the Penguins he scored a pair of goals. That was the last time he scored in a playoff game. June 3, 2013. He's failed to score in 19 consecutive postseason games.

He had 2 more assists in the Pittsburgh series. He did NOTHING against the Blackhawks and the Bruins lost. No points in 6 games with a -3. No points in the Red Wings series this year. He had 5 assists in the first three games of the Canadiens series, has done nothing since then.

In the last 19 playoff games he's scored 0 goals with 7 assists. Imagine how much more productive Patrice Bergeron would be if Marchand were playing better in those 19 games.

It's not just lack of offense, it's also poor decisions with the puck. He's helped opponents create scoring chances just as often as he's helped teammates, if not more so.

His former BFF Tyler Seguin was shipped out of Boston because of poor playoff performance, and because he didn't quite fit in with the "Bruins way." What's different about Marchand? The Bruins don't like his diving. His antics were once charming, now they're something to be embarrassed of. And his playoff production sucks.

The bottom line is, he's not producing as well as he's capable of. A guy who scored 25 goals in 82 games shouldn't be held to 5 goals in 40 playoff games. And if he is, he shouldn't become a defensive liability as well.

So if Marchand has another disappointing playoff performance tonight, and the Bruins lose and the off-season begins tomorrow, one of the first things the Bruins should do is get some packing foam and a big cardboard box to ship Marchand out of Boston.

If the Bruins Lose Game 7, We'll Only Have the Painful to Watch Red Sox to Entertain Us

It's mid-May. If the Bruins win Game 7 against Montreal Wednesday night, then we'll have at least two more weeks of playoff hockey to entertain us. Hopefully more. That would be fantastic because right now the Red Sox are almost too painful to watch.

They're 19-19 after losing to the Twins Tuesday night. With 124 games remaining, the Sox would need to play .629 baseball the rest of the way in order to equal last year's total of 97 wins.

The 8-6 loss to Minnesota Tuesday night is a perfect example of the difference between this year and last. Last year the Sox found ways to win such games. This year they find ways to lose them.

Jake Peavy allowed 6 runs in his 4.1 innings of work. The Twins did most of their damage in the 2nd. They were a triple shy of the cycle in the frame and they scored 5 times.

David Ortiz chipped away at the lead, hitting solo homeruns in the 1st and 4th, an RBI single in the 6th, and was part of a 3-run Sox rally in the 7th with another RBI single. The Sox tied the game at 6-6 in the 7th, although they also left the bases loaded. AJ Pierzynski struck out looking (which is odd for him). Pierzynski was 0 for 2 with RISP, he struck out 3 times, and grounded into a double play. My dislike for him is growing into hatred.

The Sox bullpen kept them in the game until Andrew Miller pitched the bottom of the 9th. With 2 outs Chris Parmelee hit a walk-off homerun.

So a bad start from Peavy. The Sox scored 6 runs but blew an opportunity to score a very important 7th run. And a reliever gave up a 2-run homer in the 9th. Just a perfect recipe for losing baseball. Each group of players found a way to lose.

Last year, when a starting pitcher failed to go 5, the bullpen saved him. When the 2013 Sox had the bases loaded with 2 outs in a 6-6 game in the 7th, they seemed to always get a hit. This year they have AJ Pierzynski being useless. Last year there were runners on base when Ortiz hit homeruns. Last year the Sox didn't have .232 hitting Grady Sizemore batting 5th.

I'm going to introduce something new to my Sox posts. It's a Blame Pie. A percentage of responsibility for each Red Sox loss will be attributed to players (and perhaps coaches). So here's the Blame Pie for Tuesday's 8-6 loss:

Jake Peavy - 55%
Only went 4.1 innings, allowed 6 runs on 9 hits and 2 walks.

AJ Pierzynski - 20%
0 for 4, 3 strikeouts, GIDP, 0 for 2 with RISP

Andrew Miller - 20%
0.2 IP, 2 hits, 2 runs, 1 HR

Will Middlebrooks - 5%
0 for 4, 2 strikeouts, stranded Bogaerts on 3rd in the 2nd

The Sox and Twins will provide between period entertainment during Wednesday night's Bruins game. Felix Doubront (1-3) faces Kevin Correia (1-4).

Photo Credit:
Craig Lassig/Associated Press

Bruins Can't Finish in Montreal

As if this series could be anything less than 7 games.

The Canadiens played like a team in survival mode. The Bruins did not play like a team on the verge of killing off their opponent.

I was stuck in a car all day Monday, listening to sports radio, and the midday hosts on both major stations expressed tremendous confidence that the Bruins would finish this series in Montreal on Monday night. But that prediction went against historical trends. The Bruins under Claude Julien have never clinched a series on the road in a Game 6. Furthermore, the Bruins entered this game with a 3-11 all-time record in potential series winning games played in Montreal.

The Bruins got 26 shots on goal. Can you remember more than a handful of them? How many of Carey Price's 26 saves were difficult to make? Sure Loui Eriksson hit the crossbar, and a puck almost drifted across the goal-line before David Desharnais batted it out. It was more "bad luck" for the Bruins.

I'm sick of people blaming "luck" in this series. How come when a puck glances off a Bruins skate and into the net, it's a result of good hard play, but when a Bruin shooter can't hit the target, it's bad luck?

The B's did have one extended possession in the 2nd period, keeping the puck in the Canadiens zone for a long time, preventing the Habs defenders from changing. The broadcasters called it a "dominant" possession. But it wasn't dominant. The Bruins didn't take many shots during that stretch, they just passed it around the perimeter. There was no pressure. And when Milan Lucic finally did get an opportunity and lots of net to shoot at, he hamfisted his shot and completely missed.

That extended possession was like a football team driving the ball 80 yards, achieving 5 or 6 first downs, taking 9 or 10 minutes off the clock, then failing on 3rd and goal and missing the subsequent field goal.

This game was lost at the trade deadline. The Bruins didn't get a legitimate defenseman and the Canadiens acquired Thomas Vanek. Vanek has 4 goals in this series. How many goals have been allowed while Kevan Miller has bumbled and stumbled around the crease?

Miller's unforced turnover gave Montreal their first goal, gift wrapped with a bow on it. Miller then fell down on Montreal's power play goal, allowing Vanek time and space to give the Habs a 3-0 lead. That goal was the back-breaker.

Even with the Bruins' defensive mistakes in this series, the onus of blame lies with their best players who aren't doing their best. Brad Marchand, David Krejci, Milan Lucic, where is the offense from these guys? Carl Soderberg has been the most dangerous forward.

One of these top players needs to show up for Game 7, Wednesday night in Boston.

Photo Credit:
The Canadian Press, Paul Chiasson/Associated Press

Dominique Easley: Approve or Disapprove?

I don't know if fans will approve of the Patriots drafting Dominique Easley, or disapprove. On the one hand the Patriots didn't trade down, and people seem to hate when they do that. They also drafted defense, which many fans wanted them to do.

On the other hand, Dominique Easley has injury problems. He might even be "injury prone." And he also went to school at the same place that some other unsuccessful Patriots draftees played (Aaron Hernandez, Brandon Spikes, Chad Jackson, and I'm sure people will include no-lose acquisitions like Tim Tebow and Olympic sprinter Jeff Demps).

I'll address the Florida Gator concern first. Do you really want the Patriots to avoid drafting players from one of the top programs in the top college football conference in the country? Just because their previous choices from that school haven't worked out? Do you really want Belichick and the Patriots personnel people to say "We like this guy... but he's a Gator... next?"

If Dominique Easley doesn't work out, it won't be because of where he went to school.

But he might not work out because of injury and his potential proneness to said injury. He's torn each of his ACLs. You tear one ACL and that's just football (see: Tom Brady, Wes Welker). You tear two and everyone takes a step back. You get that "injury prone" label. You fall from the top 10 to 29th, and projected by some to go even later.

I'm not a doctor. Most Patriots fans aren't doctors. I will say that ACL tears don't worry me as much as back issues. ACLs tear all the time in football, and it happening twice might be injury proneness, it might be horrible luck. Logan Mankins tore his ACL in college and he's played 14.4 games per season in the NFL. He even tore an ACL in 2012 and kept playing because he didn't realize it. Which is astounding. Mankins has torn an ACL twice, yet he isn't considered "injury prone."

Easley tore an ACL in November 2011. By September 2012 he was playing for Florida again. I'd be more concerned if he were one of those guys who came back from injury slowly (like Gronkowski). He evidently recovers at the expected rate. He played 13 games in 2012 and into 2013, then his other ACL tore. I'd be more concerned if the same ACL tore, because that would be another sign of possible recovery issues.

Despite the two tears, he managed to play 29 games for Florida.

He's still an unknown variable, just like any draft pick. Taking into consideration the "if healthy" tag does make him more of an unknown. What I like about this pick is that if he's good (and healthy), the Patriots can definitely use him. If he's not good, they don't depend on him. They can take a chance with a defensive lineman because they have some decent ones already. Signing Will Smith complements this pick very well.

The Patriots don't need Dominique Easley to be healthy to have a good defensive line. But if he is healthy, he can make that line significantly better, and younger. Wilfork, Kelly, Smith, Chandler Jones, Ninkovich, and then add Easley. Not too shabby. Then at linebacker you have Jerod Mayo back, Jamie Collins showed exciting sparks last year. Then the improved secondary with Revis and Browner...

It's not a bad defense. Easley can make it better. If he's injured or fails, the defense will still be good.

Matt Fraser Wins Game 4 in Overtime

On May 3rd Matt Fraser played for the Providence Bruins of the AHL, as they beat the Springfield Falcons 6-3 to advance in the Calder Cup Playoffs. 4,427 people were there. The next game Fraser found himself in, he scored a game-winning overtime goal to push the Boston Bruins over the Montreal Canadiens, in front of 21,273 Habs fans. What a difference a week makes.

Fraser scored the goal to end the game, but it was Tuukka Rask's play that won the game. In the 2nd he stopped Brian Gionta on a breakaway after David Krejci was stripped of possession. In the 3rd Rask stopped Gionta again on a point blank shot. He made all the big saves, he kept his team in the game when they were struggling to score at the other end. He stopped all 33 shots the Canadiens took at him. You can't ask anything more from a goalie.

If not for Rask's play, Matt Fraser would never have gotten the chance to be the playoff hero.

The Bruins played this game much more solidly than Game 3. There were fewer glaring mistakes. At the same time, there wasn't much pressure put on the Canadiens or on Price. The Krejci line is still a nonfactor. Krejci himself did win more faceoffs than he lost (10 for 18), and Iginla leveled a nice hit on Max Pacioretty, but Krejci only had 1 shot on goal, Iginla had none. Lucic managed 4, but most were token shots at the logo on Price's sweater.

Carl Soderberg's line produced the best chances. Soderberg hit a crossbar late in the 1st, and Fraser was skating with the Soderberg line in overtime when he knocked in a rebound to win the game.

Zdeno Chara and Johnny Boychuk were the Bruins best defensemen and their best skaters. Chara broke up a 2-on-1 in the 1st (PK Subban soon thereafter broke up a Bruins' 2-on-1 at the other end of the ice). Boychuk made a big block late in the 3rd period, one of his 4 blocks in the game.

This was a classic, defensive Bruins victory. The Bruins were patient and poised, and they leave Canada on a victorious note.

It's such a massive difference to come back to Boston tied 2-2 as opposed to being down 3-1.

Game 5 Saturday night in Boston.

I Don't Know What the Patriots Will/Should Do In the NFL Draft Tonight

I love the NFL Draft, I hate Draft Day. I can't stand grown men acting like children the day before Christmas, hoping Santa Belichick comes down the chimney with a stud receiver, then getting all frustrated and whiny when they get socks (offensive linemen).

I can't stand people obsessively analyzing something that hasn't happened yet. It pisses me off when someone is pissed off that the Patriots might trade down, and the Draft is hours, even days away.

Sports are supposed to be enjoyable, not painful. But Patriots fans act like they've been constipated for 9 years, waiting to shit out another Lombardi Trophy, but mean old Ebeneezer Belichick keeps feeding them Imodium to keep Pats fans blocked up and prevent them from the relief that Super Bowl #4 would provide.

"I don't want the Patriots to trade down..."

"The Pats should trade down..."

"They should trade up..."

"They should draft a linebacker..."

"They need a receiver..."

"This kid Random Name from Some School State would be perfect..."

The demands of these whiny fans are relentless. And if they don't get what they want, you hear about it on Friday. You hear about it all year.

Amateur GMs who watch a few college games in the fall, then read a draft preview magazine while they're on the john, consider themselves to be Draft Day experts. There are people out there whose full-time job it is to evaluate the talent of these college players, and not only do they get it wrong sometimes, they frequently disagree with each other.

It's not a crapshoot, but there is an unpredictable element to it. Imagine if your workplace selected you based on how you performed at college. I know successful people that could barely pass a test, and I know unsuccessful people that were honor students.

And yet some of you people out there, who spend a handful of hours a year watching Alabama play Auburn and Michigan play Penn State think you can predict which players will succeed in the NFL and which won't.

It's one thing to have fun with it, have friendly arguments with your friends about it, speculate, guess, predict. That's all part of the fun of being a sports fan, second-guessing included. But the people who get emotional about it, that's just pathetic. The people who can't focus on their lives because the Patriots picked a tight-end and not a pass rusher, who grumble and groan about Belichick and the "Patriot Way." These people are emotionally scarred by the departures of Adam Vinatieri and Richard Seymour. I'd pity them if they didn't annoy me so much.

You don't know as much as you think you know. None of us do. And the people doing the selecting spend their entire year doing this, and even they screw up.

So I don't know what the Patriots will do. Nor do I know what they should do. I'll sit back and enjoy the Bruins game, occasionally catch a glimpse of the Draft. I probably won't cheer whoever the Patriots pick, nor will I boo them, the way Texans fans booed J.J. Watt in 2011 or Jets fans cheered Vernon Gholston in 2008.

I'm Going to Criticize Tuukka Rask, Because He's Not Doing His Job

Tuukka Rask wasn't THE reason the Bruins lost Game 3 to the Canadiens. However, his job is to help the Bruins win, not just to avoid being a reason they lose. He didn't do much to help them win Game 3. Nor did he do much to help the B's win Game 1. Had the Bruins won Game 3, his play wouldn't have been a reason they won.

Here's what makes the goaltending position so important and so special: good goaltending covers for bad play. Good goaltending keeps a struggling offense close to their opponent, it prevents turnovers and defensive lapses from becoming goals. Pundits and fans have been pointing to defensive miscues and poor performing forwards as reasons the Bruins lost Game 3. And while that's accurate, it's also within the powers of the goalie to mask those weaknesses, and help his team win despite their failings. Tuukka Rask didn't do that.

It's okay to criticize Rask for not doing what he's capable of doing.

For instance, he is quite capable of making saves on breakaways. Like this one in March...

This year he had a .727 save percentage in shootouts. In his career it's .694. So about 70% of the time that he's facing an opponent's best shooters one-on-one to decide a regular season game, the puck doesn't go in.

And in the NHL as a whole, shooters converted 31.65% of shootout attempts. More than 2/3 of the time (68.35%), the puck fails to go in and the goalie is successful.

Breakaways aren't easy to stop, but they are stopped very often.

Rask is quite capable of stopping Dale Weise (who has 10 career goals) on a breakaway. Had he stopped Weise's breakaway, Rask would have helped his team win. It's okay to criticize him for failing there. And yes, it is a failure. A goalie of Rask's caliber, who stops 70% of shootout attempts, leaves his 5-hole wide open and allows a 4th liner beat him? That's a failure.

Even if you disagree with that assessment, you must concede that Rask didn't come up with a big stop there. And a big stop would have helped the Bruins win. On that play, Rask didn't help the Bruins win. Which means he didn't do his job.

In Boston we've seen how much of an impact big stops can have in the playoffs. The breakaway and odd-man rush saves can be seen at 0:00, 0:16, 0:30, 0:50, 1:41, 2:30, 3:03, 3:35, and 5:17.

I once thought it unfair to compare Rask or any other goalie to what Tim Thomas did in the 2011 playoffs. It was superhuman at times. Then I heard the Boston Globe's Christopher Gasper argue that Rask's stats in the 2013 playoffs were comparable to Thomas' in 2011, so the performance levels were also on a similar level. Really? Even though Rask lost 3 in a row against Chicago that year, allowing 11 goals in those 3 games?

Rask rarely gets criticized for not helping his team win playoff series. And he should. Such shortcomings are not new. In 2010 Rask was a significant contributor to the Bruins' 3-0 collapse to the Flyers. He allowed 16 goals in the final 4 games, and in Game 7 he failed to hold a 3-0 lead. Last year the Bruins had a 2-1 lead in Game 6 against the Blackhawks, who scored twice in the last 2 minutes to win the game and the series.

In 2010, 2013, and now in 2014, many are quick to point out the various other reasons that the Bruins have lost games and series. David Krejci was hurt at the end of that Flyers series, as was Patrice Bergeron in the Stanley Cup Finals. There were turnovers, Tyler Seguin wasn't scoring, Milan Lucic wasn't finishing opportunities. All valid points, all true, all contributing factors to defeat.

It isn't about blaming Rask, it's about pointing out when he hasn't helped the team win.

As I said earlier, good goaltending can make up for those deficiencies. Tim Thomas' goaltending carried the Bruins when their power play was the worst to ever win a Stanley Cup. Patrick Roy's goaltending did it for the Canadiens and Avalanche. Jonathan Quick's goaltending did it for the Kings. Carey Price's did it in Game 1. Tuukka Rask's did it against Detroit.

The Bruins have the good goaltender. Now they need him to play up to his ability. They need good goaltending from that good goalie.

Tuukka Rask, more than any other individual player on the Bruins, has the power to turn this series around. When a defenseman turns a puck over, Rask has the power to stop the ensuing breakaway. When the Krejci line doesn't produce, Rask has the power to keep Montreal scoring to a minimum.

His job is to help the team win. It's time for him to do his job.

Photo Credit:
Allen McInnis, Montreal Gazette

Bruins Get Their Bell Rung in Montreal

There were no officials to blame, as we all were paranoid about before Game 3. The refs only called 2 penalties. When was the last time the Habs had their first power play 48 minutes into a home game?

The Bruins are the type of team that's built from the defense out, starting with the goalie, then the defensemen, then the forwards. So I'll give my thoughts on the Bruins' 4-2 loss to the Canadiens in that order.

Tuukka Rask will probably win the Vezina as the NHL's best goalie. Yet he's allowed 3+ goals in all 3 games this series. He allowed a pair of bad goals in Game 1 and the OT game-winner was also shaky. In Game 3 he was beaten badly on two breakaways. Where did that Vezina winner go?

He flopped down too early on PK Subban's breakaway goal, committing far too early, making it easy for Subban to score. He stayed too high on Dale Weise's breakaway, his 5-hole wide enough to drive a truck through. He didn't make it hard for Subban or Weise to beat him.

Rask's job is to tend goal. He's not tending it. He's allowed 10 goals in 3 games. The Bruins build their team defensively, he's the last and most important line of defense. They've made a serious investment and commitment to Rask. He was great in the regular season. He's a great goaltender that isn't playing like a great goaltender.

Let's move on to the defensemen.

For many of the young blue-liners, this was their first taste of playoff hockey at the Bell Centre. And they looked Bell-shocked. Torey Krug and Kevan Miller confused their assignments when Tomas Plekanec put Montreal up 1-0. Dougie Hamilton was guilty of defensive negligence and allowed PK Subban to start his breakaway.

These young defensemen are a double-edged sword, as they're some of the small handful of Bruins producing on offense. The Bergeron line along with Hamilton and Krug are responsible for the bulk of the Bruins' scoring in this series. They've scored 6 of the Bruins' 10 goals.

The remaining forwards have been quiet in this series. The first line has scored twice, one of them against an empty net. Jarome Iginla has barely been seen. Milan Lucic has been more of a rumor than a force. In Game 3 David Krejci was 4 for 14 at the faceoff dot.

There have been plenty of chances, plenty of posts, plenty of misses. The Bruins have bombarded the CH on Carey Price's sweater. They've also tokenly shot from the point so often that the Habs are blocking dozens of shots a night.

The young defensemen deserve some blame for this defeat, but in the end they looked and played like young defensemen. It's unfair to fault them for being what they are.

However, your Vezina finalist goalie, and your top line of all-stars and a future Hall of Famer, they don't look the way they're supposed to look. They're not being who they can be, who they should be.

Game 4 Thursday night.

Photo Credit:
The Canadian Press, Paul Chiasson/Associated Press