Bo-stunned

I want to preface my thoughts by saying that I've seen the Bruins win a Cup, I've seen the Red Sox win a World Series after an eight decade drought, I've seen the Patriots win their first three Super Bowls, I even got to see the Celtics win Banner #17. I'm not as pissed or as stricken with sadness as others are. After witnessing all those Championships, everything since then has felt like an opportunity for a bonus.

Also, as nice as it would have been for the B's to win a title after what happened at the Marathon, I think it was enough to have a deep playoff run and let the City enjoy that. The last few weeks have provided a sense of back-to-normal for this town, and that's more than we could ask for.

Now to the series. The Blackhawks deserved to win. They arguably brought the most talent to the series with Kane, Sharp, and Toews. At the very least, they brought an equal amount of talent. And they played the best. More importantly, they played the best when it mattered most. They outscored the Bruins 6-5 in the 3rd periods this series, and 2-1 in OT. They had two dramatic comeback wins in Games 1 and 6.

The B's had some great periods in this series, very few great games. They relied on Tuukka Rask and Zdeno Chara to carry them. And in Games 5 and 6, Rask and Chara were not able to carry the team all the way.

I'm not saying Rask cost them this series. I'm not saying Rask was the reason this team lost. But if they had won Game 6, Rask wouldn't have been a reason that they won. Had they won Game 5, Rask wouldn't have been a reason they won. The first goal Rask allowed in Game 6 was inexcusable. For an NHL goalie to have an open 5-hole like that is unfortunate. And the other goals were also saveable. Rask was not sharp in Game 6.

I'm a Tim Thomas guy. I think the Bruins did more to help Thomas in 2011, and were also against a weaker opponent. I don't like the Rask in '13 vs. Thomas in '11 comparisons. The situations are so different. The ages are so different. There's no reason to not be able to enjoy both of these goalies perform. Rask didn't quite equal Thomas in 2011, but he has plenty of years left to challenge his old friend.

Again, Rask was not the reason the Bruins lost. He was the best goalie in this series. The Blackhawks were good enough to cover for their goalie's weaknesses and shortcomings. The Bruins had fewer shortcomings to cover for, yet failed to do so.

The stars shone for Chicago. Jonathan Toews scored 2 goals and added 3 assists in this series. Sharp scored 2 goals. Kane scored 3 goals with 2 assists. Bickell scored a goal with 3 assists and hitched himself to Chara like a 233 pound anchor. The Blackhawks had multiple Conn Smythe candidates, while if the Bruins had won this series it would have almost certainly been Rask to win the Conn Smythe.

Meanwhile, the Bruins leaned on Rask and Chara. Chara seemed to be worn out or hurt in these last games. That's part of the game.

Not enough Bruins stepped up as Chara and Rask played like human beings. Seguin didn't score in the Finals. Neither did Krejci (and he was painfully close to scoring in Game 6, that's an opportunity he has to finish). Neither did Horton. Neither did Marchand. Nor did the Bruins get a handful of goals from a defenseman.

Lucic and Bergeron scored 4 goals apiece in the Finals, Kelly and Paille each scored 2. Peverley, Boychuk, and Chara each scored 1 goal. Where was everyone else? If just one more forward had a big series, or if three forwards contributed with goals, this series would have been completely different.

Only two of the top-6 Bruins forwards scored in the Finals. The 3rd line scored as many goals as the 1st and 2nd lines. Not enough talented forwards showed up for the Bruins in this series. They had assists, they contributed, they just didn't score.

Ultimately, I'd rather lose to the Blackhawks than a team like the Canucks. I'd rather see Chicago win the Cup than a hockey-apathetic town like Tampa or Raleigh. I don't mind Chicago winning nearly as much as I mind the Bruins losing, or at least losing the way they lost. A Krug turnover, a soft goal allowed by Rask, a missed opportunity by Krejci. This series was so close to turning in the opposite direction. The Hawks made the plays, the B's made the mistakes.

I don't feel like we need to mourn this season. It could have produced more, but it didn't. It could have produced much less and ended in the first round with an epic collapse against Toronto. There does need to be some evaluation. The cap will be tighter in 2013-14. Seguin needs to realize his potential instead of being a 3rd liner. And the supporting cast needs to be changed. I won't miss Rich Peverley.

Thankfully there's no CBA BS to prolong our wait for more hockey.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/Charles Krupa

GIF Credit:
Yahoo! Sports

Morning Sports Radio in Boston Sucks

I turn on the radio this morning to listen to some sports talk while taking a shower, brushing my teeth, and all that. I turn on Toucher & Rich on 98.5 because I don't want to get Whitey thoughts on WEEI, or hear about today's Senate election, or listen to two dunderheads in love with their own opinions fail at understanding the game of hockey.

Unfortunately, T&R babble on and on just as badly as D&C. After enduring 3 minutes of commercials featuring people with fake Boston accents in an effort to endeer (endee-yah) themselves to the people of Massachusetts, I get to listen to Toucher and Rich go on a tangent about this weird, very inside joke about Adolfo's father encouraging him to have kids. This goes on and on. Not mentioned in passing. And then a caller joins in talking about how overwhelmed he is by 4 children. This would be great stuff if the show were called The Fatherhood Hour on NPR, but it's allegedly a sports radio show on a station that stylizes itself as sports radio.

I don't want to be required to listen to a show day in and day out to understand the jokes. And I don't want to listen to stupid jokes about wacky Adolfo and his zany father on a frigging sports radio station, the morning after a Stanley Cup Final was lost, days after a championship winning basketball coach left town, and a week after a Pro-Bowl tight-end was implicated as being involved in a murder. I know it's crazy of me to anticipate sports talk on a sports talk station, especially with such a lack of stories to discuss. Call me persnickety.

We have two sports talk stations in Boston. Yet finding sports talk in the morning on either of them is a hit or miss proposition. And I'm tired of it.

Vents closed, rant over.

Chicago Kane, They Shaw, They Crawford

Were the Bruins ever the superior team in Game 5? Apart from a brief series of plays in the 1st period, the Bruins rarely imposed their will on offense. They didn't move the puck well through the neutral zone. They weren't able to string together successful puck battles. And defensively they were sluggish and late. If not for some brilliant stops by Tuukka Rask, the Bruins would have lost this game by 4 or 5 goals.

Is Zdeno Chara out of gas? Has playing 30 minutes a night taken its toll? Maybe Chicago's Bryan Bickell is starting to chop the giant down. Bickell has focused on Chara all series, pushing Chara's buttons, making Chara exert himself even after the puck's gone and the whistle's blown. Bickell's not a small guy at 6' 4" 233 pounds. And all he has to do is focus on Chara. Chara has to deal with Bickell AND defend the crease AND play the point on power play AND play 25+ minutes against Chicago's best, fastest forwards.

Chara left Kane wide open on Kane's first goal. No excuse. And although Chara scored the lone Bruins goal, his performance was one you'd like to forget but won't be able to for awhile.

Offensively the Bruins looked lost. Marchand without Bergeron is like Robin without Batman. The Bruins barely had an offense in this game. They were sloppy in the neutral zone, they turned pucks over, they didn't get pucks deep into the offensive zone. When they won possession battles there wasn't support to take advantage of it. The few good plays they made, like Jagr's moves through traffic from the halfwall to the net, were individual efforts, not team-based offense.

The Bruins managed 5 shots on goal in the 2nd period. Five! Then only 9 in the 3rd. They're facing a goalie who has shown repeated vulnerability and they're making his job easy by failing to force him to make saves. On average in this series, the Blackhawks are getting 5 more shots on goal per game than the Bruins. Crawford will allow goals. But you have to get shots on goal to make that happen.

Give credit to Chicago. Kane was brilliant, nearly scored a natural hat-trick. Patrick Sharp was robbed a few times in the 1st. The Blackhawks did a good job harassing the B's in the neutral zone. They controlled the ice in front of both nets. This was the Blackhawks' best performance in the series. And the Bruins' worst.

Game 6 tonight. Without Bergeron it's time to dig deep. Chara, Marchand, Seguin, Kelly, Peverley, everyone has to play up to their potential. And then find a way to play a little better.

Photo Credit:
Scott Stewart-USA TODAY Sports

GIF Credits:
Yahoo! Sport

Coaches Gather at Fenway

On Tuesday June 18th, Fenway Park hosted the Second Annual Coffee with the Coaches, a fundraising breakfast to benefit the Boston Chapter of the Positive Coaching Alliance (PCA). The event featured a panel of easteemed professional and college coaches: Red Sox Manager John Farrell, Notre Dame football Head Coach Brian Kelly (who was born in Everett, raised in Chelsea, and played football at Worcester's Assumption College), Connecticut Sun Head Coach Anne Donovan (who has 4 Olympic gold medals in women's basketball as a player and 2 as a coach), and newly appointed Boston College football Head Coach Steve Addazio.

The event was hosted by WEEI's Michael Holley and Mike Salk, and raised $95,000 for PCA-Boston.

What struck me about these coaches was how different each of their situations are, and how that requires them to adjust to those different and always changing situations. The job description of a coach changes every day, every game, and every season.

Three of the coaches (Farrell, Donovan, and Addazio) are in their first seasons running their squads. Although Farrell has already been an assistant coach with the Red Sox.

There is also a vast difference in what each coach is expected to do. Kelly's Fighting Irish finished last season 12-1, runners up in the National Championship game. And at the other end of the table was Steve Addazio, who inherits a BC program that went 2-10 last year and hasn't played a bowl game since 2010. Kelly has to reload after losing talented seniors, Addazio has to rebuild a program from scratch. Kelly is expected to contend for a BCS bowl, Addazio is expected to lead the Eagles to bowl eligibility.

Anne Donovan and John Farrell are also in unique positions. Donovan's Connecticut Sun have been a competitive team, but they've yet to win a WNBA Championship. She's tasked with pushing them over the top. Farrell inherited a Red Sox team that was in utter disarray, despite high expectations and a high payroll. He's tasked with reintroducing winning baseball to Boston, and ending an era of bitter disappointment.

Despite the different situations, different styles, and different philosophies, all the coaches have a tremendous respect for the impact a coach can have on someone.

Both Donovan and Addazio reflected on coaches in their lives who pushed them to maximize their potential. For Donovan, who is 6 feet, 8 inches tall, she discussed a high school coach who "Would not let [her] just be tall," and challenged her to add more dimensions to her game than just sitting under a rim, rebounding, and shooting layups. Addazio spoke of a Little League baseball coach who made him a catcher, even though he wasn't especially enthusiastic about the idea, and mentored him to be a leader. Neither of these coaches would be who they are or where they are without the coaches who coached them.

The coaches also found common ground on several issues.

Addazio and Farrell had similar philosophies on how to rebuild their respective teams. Addazio is making an effort to "Squeeze selfishness out," while Farrell is working with Red Sox GM Ben Cherington to change the culture of the team, to find the right "People inside the player," as he put it.

Both Farrell and Donovan agreed that athletes are all looking for direction, and want to be part of something bigger than themselves. So that even if they're getting paid millions of dollars, they still want more from the game.

When asked about concerns in high school sports, Brian Kelly, Addazio, and Farrell all spoke about social media and the effects of over confidence on young athletes in the recruitment process. Kelly mentioned the need to keep recruits humble, despite the constant praise and attention they receive. Addazio told a story about a parent who bragged about their 12-year old son being "Phenomenal." To which Addazio asked "Where do you go from phenomenal?"

Coaching is one of the most demanding and unique jobs in sports, from guys like Farrell coaching millionaire professionals to youth league volunteer coaches teaching kids the fundamentals of the game. Coaches, particularly in youth sports, can have a tremendous impact on the lives of their players. Because those coaches are uniquely positioned to push kids to be, as the PCA's motto states, better athletes and better people. There are so many lessons that can be learned through sports, and kids are eager to learn them. As PCA founder Jim Thompson put it Thursday "Youth sports leaders are among the most important leaders in this country," with the ability to affect "Hundreds of kids' lives."

And with the $95,000 raised at this breakfast, that's exactly what the Positive Coaching Alliance will strive to do in the Boston area, as well as in their expanding number of chapters across the country.

Celtics-Clippers Trade Talk Sounds Like Soap Opera Plots

I don't follow the NBA. I'm a very passive Celtics fan, only really paying attention in the playoffs. My basketball IQ is lower than Shaq's career free throw percentage. Maybe lower than his three-point percentage. I'm trying to follow this Doc Rivers-LA Clippers drama, and it sounds so much like someone describing the plot of a soap opera.

Blake and Chris don't like each other, but Chris wants to play with Blake because Blake helps them win. If Chris can't play with Blake, or with Kevin and under Doc, he'll leave LA and go somewhere else. That's a love/hate work relationship there.

Doc and Kevin want to stay together. And Paul wants to stay with Kevin. If Kevin leaves, Paul might quit. If Doc leaves, Kevin will probably quit. If Doc, Kevin, and Paul leave, Rajon will take over the business in Boston. Classic love triangle with a young buck waiting in the wings to take over the company.

Meanwhile, in New York, the Commissioner of the Association, David, has stepped in and declared that Doc and Kevin cannot go to LA, and DeAndre can't go to Boston. It's like Stern has burst into a wedding just as the priest asks "If anyone has any objections to this marriage, speak now or forever hold your peace."

It's As the NBA Turns or Days of Our Stern.

Bruins Back to Square One With Chicago

The Blackhawks took this game by the proverbial horns and never let go. The Bruins spent the whole game chasing them. And then in the overtime the B's played conservative try-to-be-mistake-free hockey, while the Blackhawks gambled and went for it. And the result was a Chicago win, and a 2-2 series. It's now a best of three series, and the Blackhawks have home ice.

Some things that alarm me about this game are the names of the players that scored for Chicago. Kane, Seabrook, Sharp, Toews. Kane hadn't scored in this series, and Toews hadn't scored since May 25th, his only other goal of the playoffs. Some of these Blackhawks were sleeping giants, and they woke up in Game 4.

For the first time, the Blackhawks beat Rask straight-up for a goal. The overtime goal was a puck Rask should have stopped.

Another Bruin that disappointed was Chara. For two Chicago goals, Chara was sitting on his ass on the ice, pushed down somehow. He was -3 in this game, and that's very rare for him. He hasn't been -3 in a game since March 11, 2012 against Pittsburgh.

All the aspects of the game that the Bruins dominated in Game 3, the Blackhawks improved on. In faceoffs it was essentially even, Chicago won 39 and lost 38. In special teams the Bruins scored 2 power play goals but allowed a power play goal and a shorthanded goal. And as weak as Crawford has looked on his glove side, Rask also gave up some goals he could have stopped. Rask allowed the same number of goals in this game as he had allowed in the last 5 games combined.

The Blackhawks also got offense from their myriad of star players. Toews, Kane, Sharp, Seabrook. The Bruins grinded out offense, but most of their big names didn't score. Krejci didn't score, neither did Horton, neither did Marchand, and Seguin only managed 1 shot on goal and a -3.

The Blackhawks played deeper last night.

So it's all starting over. 2-2 after four games, only three left, what's going to happen?

That's the billion dollar question. Will Rask and Chara recover and resume playing amazingly? Will Toews and/or Kane get hot and start scoring? Chicago's power play finally scored, will that continue?

As a Bruins fan, I'm worried. I feel like a giant has been awoken, and now the B's have a real fight on their hands. They are capable of defeating the foe, but everyone needs to chip in. Seguin can't be quiet anymore. Chara and Rask can't allow easy goals. All lines have to click.

Game 5 will be Saturday night in Chicago.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/Charles Krupa

Bruins Break Deadlock

Everything that had been even and level about this series was lopsided last night. The Bruins dominated in the faceoff dots, Rask was clearly better than Crawford, and special teams play heavily favored the Bruins.

The Bruins haven't lost on home ice since Game 5 of the Toronto series. That's 7 in a row. Home ice might be why the B's were so much better at faceoffs (40-16, 71.4%) in Game 3. The Blackhawks had previously been able to match the Bruins in the dots.

What truly decided this game was goaltending and special teams. Rask didn't need to stand on his head, just do his job. He really hasn't been straight-up beat for a goal by Chicago in this series. Meanwhile Crawford's glove side seems very vulnerable. The Bruins are targeting him high glove side, and that's where Paille beat him in Game 2 and last night.

The Bruins are also dominating on special teams. Not only has their power play scored twice, not only has their penalty kill shut down Chicago, their penalty killers are creating very dangerous shorthanded scoring opportunities. Chicago have adjusted their PP unit to focus on the area of the ice closer to the net, but they can't get anything set-up to execute that plan. Meanwhile, on the Bruins power play, Jagr and Bergeron executed a similar strategy to perfection in the 2nd period.

Chicago looked lost for most of this game. I don't think they're accustomed to playing without the puck this often. They seem to be trying to adapt, but last night the Bruins had an answer for them at every turn.

Game 4 Wednesday night. Let's hope the Bruins continue to avoid big mistakes, continue to win battles, and Rask continues to play like he's playing.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/Charles Krupa

Splitting Up to Boston

In Game 1 the Bruins started strong, the Blackhawks finished strong. In Game 2 it was the Blackhawks who started strong, and the Bruins who finished strong.

The B's were fortunate to escape the 1st period only down 1-0. Chicago was beating them everywhere, on the boards, in front of the net, in the neutral zone. The Blackhawks outshot the Bruins 16-3 to start the game, and 19-4 in the period. If not for Tuukka Rask stopping 18 of 19 shots, and if not for Nathan Horton's back-checking potentially preventing another Torey Krug turnover from becoming a Chicago goal, the Bruins might have found themselves with a steep hill to climb.

Then the game flipped. Although the B's only managed 24 shots in the remaining 2+ periods, they held Chicago to 15. All the good chances were Boston's. Marchand hit the inside of a post. Jagr hit a post in overtime. This time Corey Crawford was making the big saves to keep the Hawks in the game.

Putting Chris Kelly, Daniel Paille, and Tyler Seguin together worked almost immediately. Seguin was sing his speed to make plays without the puck, and Kelly's goal was a product of Paille's maneuvering more than anything else.

Why did it take Julien so long to separate Kelly and Peverley? Both have slumped all season long, and both have to try to emerge from those slumps while playing with a slumping player.

This line would strike again in the overtime. And their contributions were the difference in the game. It isn't always the big names that win these games, especially when two talented teams meet. It's the role players and grinders that provide the separation between winning and losing.

Speaking of which, once either of these teams figures out their Power Play, that's going to be the difference in a game. It was almost the difference in Game 1.

There are reasons for Bruins fans to feel optimistic. The B's now have home-ice advantage, they've won in Chicago, they're a turnover away from being up 2-0, Rask has been great, and so on.

My cup isn't half full. Nor is it half empty. It's half. This series is dead even. 186 minutes of hockey and each team has 5 goals. The Bruins have the better goalie but the Blackhawks are getting more shots on goal. The faceoffs in Game 1 were 58-56. The Bruins had Chris Kelly in Game 2, the Blackhawks had Dave Bolland in Game 1.

The margin between these two teams has been imperceptibly slim. Every edge one team has is counteracted by an edge on the other. Mistakes (advantage Chicago so far), goaltending (advantage Boston), special teams (advantage Boston), scoring from defensemen (advantage Chicago), these are the factors that will determine the victor of the series.

Game 3 tonight in Boston.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast