|
|
Post by Lord Stanley on Mar 4, 2004 9:43:17 GMT -5
According to both tsn and rds
For a 2nd rounder in 2006
hmmmph
Lord stanley
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Mar 4, 2004 10:05:32 GMT -5
Boston is now fully loaded for the playoffs. If Andrew Raycroft holds up, this is a very dangerous team:
Knuble/Thornton/Murray
Samsonov/Nylander/Bergeron
Axelsson/Rolston/Lapointe
Gonchar/O'Donnell
Slegr/Boynton
Gill/McGillis
Raycroft
Size, skill, and toughness all over the ice. Most of these guys are right in their prime years as opposed to a veteran-heavy team like Toronto. I think Boston is the now the most balanced team in the East.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Mar 4, 2004 11:08:33 GMT -5
Holy frijole! The Bears be loaded.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 4, 2004 14:00:02 GMT -5
First round: B's 4 Leafs 1. Unless Leafs find some D. Then B's 4 Leafs 2.
And life is sweet.
|
|
|
|
Post by HabbaDasher on Mar 4, 2004 17:24:08 GMT -5
The Bruins are starting to look dangerous....
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Mar 4, 2004 17:28:30 GMT -5
The Bruins will be interesting when some of their major players are potential UFAs. Murray and Rolston come to mind, but there may be others as well. What will the Jacobs Brothers do?
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 5, 2004 1:51:49 GMT -5
Jeeze, why do I see weaknesses where everyone else sees power? Solid 1st line, but its been there all year. On the 2nd Nylander is fast, creative and shifty, but has been injured most of the year, as has Samsonov. That's a very small 2nd line. Solid 3rd line (I like it better than the 2nd). There's never been a dispute that Boston lacks forwards. It's on D and in goal (ever the heretic am I) that they run into problems. I'm not impressed with Raycroft. It just seems he spent too much time in the minors, 3 years, and then a mediocre year in Boston as a backup/starter before he 'blossomed'. To me,he hasn't followed the path the very, very good goaltenders do. Mostly they come out of juniour or college or Europe, spend a year, maybe two at most in the minors, carrying a team on their backs and then come into the NHL with promise. I always thought Raycroft was a permanent back-up/journeyman goalie, so when he starts lighting it up I think Steve Penney instead of Patrick Roy. I could be wrong. He doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies, which is good, because he's a Bruin.
Then there's that defence. O'Donnell is another Quintal. Aging, slow and can be beaten with speed. Sleger is mistake prone and a gambler. Boynton can be cycled and overpowered. Gonchar has a reputation for weakness in his own zone. Gill is a Chara without the talent and McGillis.....(?) sorry he's not on my radar. Anyway, each of these guys has some ability of course, but some serious issues in one way or another. I think T-O would eat these guys alive in the Bruin zone. Hopefully, if they meet, they'll wear themselves out. But Belfour trumps Raycroft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Mar 5, 2004 10:15:25 GMT -5
Boston's blueline has always been a weak spot, but I would say it's by and large acceptable and they have one elite player in Gonchar and one near-elite player in Boynton, whom I like a lot. The other guys - O'Donnell, Gill, Slegr, are McGillis are merely OK, but they are veteran guys and not liabilities.
Raycroft is the wild card. But if he's solid, there is more than enough talent among the rest of the team to do some damage in the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 5, 2004 19:00:53 GMT -5
But Belfour trumps Raycroft. That's what TSN told us last year about Belfour vs Cechmanek & it was Belfour that caved. |
|
