The PuckUps Podcast with Brian DeFelice, Ep. 36: Are the Bruins on the RIGHT TRACK?

Brian reacts to Don Sweeney, and Cam Neely's end of season press conference. How far away are the Bruins from becoming contenders? 

Join Brian DeFelice every Monday and Friday as he discusses all things Boston Bruins, NHL, and the world of hockey. Subscribe on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts and be a part the show by submitting comments, and questions via X (@briandefelice_ / @thepuckups), email: info@thepuckups.com, or voicemail (617)-539-6958.

Follow us on X: @thepuckups | @briandefelice_ 

Follow us on Instagram:  ⁨@thepuckups⁩ 

Follow us on TikTok:  ⁨@thepuckups⁩

Follow us on Substack: https://briandefelice.substack.com/?u...

Visit our website: https://www.thepuckups.com

#NHLBruins #BostonBruins #NHL #Hockey

Transcript

SPEAKER_08 0:01

You're listening to the Puckups Podcast. It's time to hit the ice with Brian D Felice. Welcome into episode 36 of the Puck Ups Podcast. I am Brian D Felice and thank you all for joining me. On Wednesday afternoon, Charlie Jacobs, Cam Neely, and Don Sweeney met with Bruins Media for their season-ending press conference. So on today's show, we're going to react to their commentary. But first things first, if you haven't done so already, please go ahead and subscribe to the puck ups on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or anywhere else that you get your podcast. And to get in touch with me or be a part of the show, you can email me at infothepuckups.com. You can tweet at me on X at Brian D Fleece underscore. You can tweet at the show at the puck ups or leave a comment on YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, anywhere the show has a social media account and post content. Now, this time last year, the Bruins Brass had to face the music. They had to sit up there at their season-ending press conference and answer some really difficult questions. And that'll happen when you finish with the fifth worst record in the National Hockey League and trade away your captain, among others, at the deadline. It was a year to forget for the Boston Bruins. That said, there were many Bruins fans, myself included, who welcomed the sell job at last year's trade deadline. Why? Because it was evident the Boston Bruins had to take steps backwards if they wanted to take giant steps forward. The moment that Patrice Bergeron and David Craichy retired, the Boston Bruins were skating on borrowed time. Which is why, to be honest with you all, and I know I sounded very pessimistic a couple of years ago, but that's why I could not get behind the centennial season. I just couldn't. The Bruins without a number one center were going nowhere. And it's not just that they didn't have a number one center, they had no plan for one. Pavel Zaka and Charlie Coyle, they were not number one centers. Everybody knew it. But what was worse was the Bruins didn't have any internal succession plan. Now I know it's easier said than done, right? Because there are many who say that the Bruins should have thought about this long before Bergeron and Crachy retired. And I understand it's fair to say that. But the reality is when you are perennially a Stanley Cup contender or close to it for nearly two decades, you spend a lot of trade deadlines trading away draft capital for win now moves. And obviously that caught up to the Bruins. So they didn't have many high-end first-round draft picks. They didn't have many first-round draft picks at all. The only high-end first rounder they had in the last 20 years prior to James Higgins was Tyler Sagan in the summer of 2010. And they got that from trading away Phil Kessel. And that was Toronto's draft pick that ended up being second overall. So even when the Bruins drafted high in 2010, it wasn't their own pick. Okay. And but what was instrumental to the Bruins championship success in 2011 was the fact that they hit on some later round draft picks along the way, right? Patrice Bergeron was not a first rounder. Brad Marshand, not a first rounder. David Craichy, not a first rounder, right? Uh the list kind of goes on there. So even though the Bruins were draft were trading away draft capital to go for Stanley Cups all those years. And so that explains why they had very few first-round draft picks at all, doesn't excuse the amount of non-first round draft picks that they were able to capitalize on. And I know it's harder to do so in later rounds in the first round, but other teams have found ways, right? So anyway, it's a long-winded way of me saying that the Bruins had to sell in the 24-25 season. And they started that year hoping to be a playoff team, but it was a happy accident that they weren't. Nonetheless, the Bruins had to answer the music at last year's press conference, even though they got how many draft picks in return for Brandon Carlo and Charlie Coyle and Brad Marshand and you know Trent Frederick. They got Fraser Minton, Will Zellers, they tanked by design and they fell from five to seven, but still managed to land James Higgins. None of that really happens if the Bruins are a playoff team last year. So it's it's good long term for the Bruins that they had a bad year in 24-25. But still, management and ownership had to answer for the underwhelming season that was 24-25, a shit year from Jeremy Swayman, uh firing their head coach and Jim Montgomery, trading away Brad Marshan. Why did it all get so ugly? Right? They had to answer those questions. This time around, the Bruins had a team in the regular season that very few believed in heading into the year that they would make the playoffs. Vegas had the Bruins as the fifth worst team in the NHL heading into the NHL regular season, and they ended up uh in the playoffs. So how would the Bruins ownership and management carry themselves at this year's uh press conference to end the season? Would they kind of be puffing their chest out at the fact that they proved people wrong? Or would they recognize that they are still a long ways away of being the team that they need to be if they want to win a championship? I would say it was somewhere in the middle, probably leaning more towards the latter. They know that they have a lot of work to do, okay? But I'll tell you one thing. This first question and answer from Don Sweeney is one of the few answers in this press conference that really kind of stuck up my craw. I didn't like this answer. This is a a masterclass by Don Sweeney in how to not directly answer a question. But let's get right to some reaction from the press conference. There's gonna be about four or five clips we'll react to between Don Sweeney and Kim Neely from this press conference. And we'll start off with the first one where uh Steve Conroy asked Don Sweeney about the Bruins giving up so many shots and chances against this year, and if that's a reflection on the Bruins system or their personnel or both. And here is what Don Sweeney had to say to Steve's question.

SPEAKER_06 7:21

Uh Don, you guys gave up more high danger chances than I'm sure you would have liked. How how do you go about addressing that in the offseason? And is it all on the back end? Do you have to you know make sizable changes on the back end?

SPEAKER_04 7:34

Well, that's a collective uh uh process, Steve. Uh obviously, you know, Jeremy had a real bounce back season, so uh fortunate that uh you know, albeit he saw maybe some more high dangers, he was able to uh to to stop a lot of those and uh and be an Avesda finalist, I think, points to that. Um and and Jonas, you know, at times really, really played well. We might not have the same consistency level uh in quality starts that he acknowledged at the end of the year, but he he stepped up at some really important times for us, and and we're we're appreciative of both of those guys and going in. Now, again, we went through some ups and downs in the system adjustment that our players certainly were navigating. If you look at the data, even in the playoffs standpoint, the first three games far different than what we gave up in the in the secondary three games. So I can't look at at just one period of segment. I look at the January month that uh, you know, we won 11 games in the month of January in a very, very difficult schedule, and the data would point that we played well. We played to our standard that we wanted to. We didn't give up uh nearly as many as what you describe. Um it is definitely an area that that we have to continue to get better at. You know, it's been a a a staple of our organization, and we had a big change, and now we have to continue to evolve and uh and hopefully our players continue to adapt to it.

SPEAKER_08 8:46

All right, so the last parts of that answer, and for full transparency, it was about a two and a half minute answer. I think it was like 249 or something like that. I'm not playing the whole clip. Okay, so I kind of played the first half and then the last 10 seconds of the uh of the response. So just know that that wasn't the entire response, to be fair to Don. But you got the gist. And the last thing that he said, I'm glad he did, because I was waiting for him to say it, which was they have to get better. And that was that was essentially what you wanted to hear before he started to have word vomit for the first two minutes. And let's get to that word vomit. So, Steve Conroy asks a question about the amount of high danger scoring chances the Bruins gave up this year. Now, let me remind you all how many high danger chances the Bruins did give up this year, just for context, okay? Because it's important that we provide it. Now, we talked about it on previous episodes. The Bruins had an NHL 11th best goal differential this year at plus 22. And as I highlighted in the past, their expected goal differential was minus 30. So basically, they performed above their skis. But let's break down why their expected goal differential was a minus 30. It's because they had the fifth most shots on goal against in the NHL, they had the fourth most high danger shots against in the NHL, and they had the fourth most or 23rd most high danger shots on goal four. So you had the fifth most shots against in the league, you had the fourth most high danger shots against in the league, and you had the 23rd fewest, we'll call it, high danger chances four. Simply put, that's a team that is constantly being outplayed. Constantly. And what's Don Sweeney's response?

SPEAKER_07 11:00

His response is, oh, well, you know, uh, you know, Jeremy Swayman was there and uh he made the stops, and uh we have great goaltending with him in Corpus Solid.

SPEAKER_08 11:09

It's like Don, that's not that's not our that's not a solution. So somebody's somebody asks you why you gave up so many chances, and your answer is our goalies stopped them. What's that have to do with the team giving up the chances in the first place?

SPEAKER_07 11:24

Well, that's a good question there, Brian. Uh, I don't know, I guess I didn't really want to answer the question, and um, you know, it's just uh how I do things, how I roll.

SPEAKER_08 11:32

All right, Don. Well, this is how I roll. You know, figure out why your team is giving up so many high danger scoring chances against, because it's not something that is going to be a recipe for success going forward. And again, something else Don said that I didn't like was he referenced how there were small pockets of the season, and he highlighted January, and he highlighted the first three games of the Buffalo series where the Bruins were performing well, and he and how he didn't like cherry picking certain parts of the year where the Bruins didn't perform well. Buddy, I just read off the season numbers. You guys know what those numbers are, those are the numbers that Steve's alluding to. Steve didn't just ask that question because you guys had a couple of bad weeks or bad, you know, a bad month or two. Your season totals tell everybody objectively that you gave up some of the most chances and shots in the NHL and you generated some of the fewest. So don't be condescending and gaslighting to the guy who asked the question about, well, you know, we uh in January we were good.

SPEAKER_07 12:37

In games one, two, and three against Buffalo, we were good. Okay, Don. How about the rest of the season?

SPEAKER_08 12:41

How about the season as a as a total, as a totality? So I didn't love that answer, and it was the first answer, question and answer of the segment, so it kind of sticks out to me. But we can move on from that. Uh, you know, other things Sweeney spoke on was the fact that with more familiarity uh with Marco's system, another year under Marco's system, you know, players they they know what they're doing more, and now that the system's foundation is in place, now Marco and the coaching staff can go ahead and make some adjustments that are necessary to help mitigate some of those chances again. So, you know, Don did give some feedback uh to Steve's question, but it was it was just funny to me that he started off with um, so Don, how do you get why do you guys get up so many chances? I don't know. Our goalie stops him, so who cares? That's that's not that's not that's not it. Um okay, let's move along to the next question. Um, I want to get to question and answer from Don Sweeney. And this happens to do with, we all know, based on Tuesday night's draft lottery, the Bruins do not have Toronto's first round pick anymore. Okay, in 2026. Toronto won the draft lottery, they're drafting first overall, their their 26th first-round pick that they traded to Boston in the Brandon Carlo trade was five uh top five protected. So what that means is, and I think it's still, I think the details are still technically being ironed out about if Philly or to or Boston get Toronto's 20 2027 first round pick. It seems like it's gonna be Philly. So the result is the Bruins are now gonna have three first round picks in 2028. Now, when the Bruins season ended, David Pasternak took to the media and just mentioned how he's cognizant of the fact that he's turning 30 before the start of next season, and that he's embarking on the second half of his career, which you only have so many kicks at the can to win a Stanley Cup in your career in general, let alone one half of it. And David's been playing with Morgan Geeky, who's a good finisher, but Elias Lindholm, nor Geeky or Elias Lindholm, can really set up passion ac and he needs more around him. But we all know the brewers are in transition. So how do you how do you build for the future while not sacrificing the current core's window? That's the challenge of having to retool during Pasternak and McAvoy's primes. It's it's it takes a lot of creativity and and boldness and execution. It takes a lot of hits for the Bruins to pull this off. So Don Sweeney was basically asked now that the Bruins aren't drafting six or seven overall this year, do you try to use those picks as draft chips to try to supplement your current core with some higher-end pieces? Now you'd have to have to add in a lot more than just these picks in a couple of years to get some high-end pieces. But Don was asked basically about his mindset when it comes to these draft picks in the future and if they're going to be utilized or used as trade chips or what have you.

SPEAKER_02 16:09

You guys could have three 2028 first-round picks a few years from now. How do you kind of gauge the value of those picks in your long-term plans? Well, also maybe measuring against, you know, David Posternik mentioning maybe a bit more urgency of more immediate help. And how does that kind of chart your guy's path moving forward for this offseason?

SPEAKER_04 16:25

Well, I mean, I applaud David in the sense of asking for immediate help. You know, I'd say 10 years ago when he was working his way into uh into our lineup, uh, you know, maybe the Berger on the chair has said, you know, how good is this young man? And we might say the same thing about Frazier Minton and Goosey and uh and James Hagen. So there's going to require some patience. I think we we all alluded to that last year, that we needed to get back to be a deeper uh skill-based and add and speed to our club. Um I love the competitive nature of what David is re that comment represents in terms of of him wanting it's a disappointing you know, end to a season where we were, you know, should have been on the doorstep of going back to a game seven in in everybody's mind if we had taken care of business at home. So that's a reactionary comment that, you know, from a really high-level competitive star player in the National Hockey League. And uh he's not wrong in the sense that we would like to to accelerate when we can. If that means we use the colle the the uh uh assets of of what you represented, are they all in the the 28-20 2028 draft, or is it one push of 20? That's still to be determined to some degree. Um the Olympic pong balls dictated that it wasn't gonna be this year. So we have to have everything in play in terms of how we continue to improve our our club, and we have that mindset. We didn't sit back last year and say this is a uh a five-year process. We just said we need to attack these areas, we need to be a competitive team, and then we're gonna allow some of our players to grow. And I use, you know, a couple of the younger players in that regard, and uh but we bounce back in some areas and and we're happy about, but now we have a lot of work to do to continue to get better.

SPEAKER_08 17:59

All right. Bit of a spicy response there from Donnie Boy, uh saying it's a reactionary comment, but he understands where David's coming from. But he also kind of says in the same breath listen, when when Bergeron and Marshand and Craichy and Chara, when they were in their primes, and they had to be patient on a young David Pasternak and a young Charlie McAvoy and Jake Debrasque and Brandon Carlo and Macras like like players like that, that they they had to take that risk of being patient for younger players. And I kind of feel like in one breath, Don is he's kind of speaking out of both sides of his mouth because he's he's agreeing with what David's saying that if we can, we will, in terms of uh upgrading at the forward position significantly. And at the same time, he's saying kind of, hey, listen, David knows, David and Charlie know uh by last year's moves, they knew what was coming here, which was you're probably not winning a Stanley Cup in the next couple of years because we're in we're gonna be transitioning. And so after year one of transitioning, you know, don't be so impatient, really. And and Don didn't say those words, but I'm kind of reading between the lines where he's kind of saying, Listen, David knows what we're dealing with right now, and he's gonna have to kind of just suck it up and keep doing his thing and and trust that we'll that we'll get the job done around him, but it's not an overnight thing. At the same time, if we can, we will. Now, what does that mean? If we can, we will. Well, the obvious one, and you're gonna hear it a lot, is is Robert Thomas. I don't I really don't know why St. Louis is so hell-bent on trading Robert Thomas, at least according to speculation over the last six months. He's only 26 years old. He's a true 1C in this league. And St. Louis has three first-round draft picks of their own this year. So I I I think, listen, I I don't, I'm not saying St. Louis shouldn't be rebuilding or retooling, but I don't know why trading Robert Thomas has to be part of that. If they didn't have any first-round draft picks coming up, then yeah, I'd be like, listen, you don't have any draft capital, you have to trade one of your best players to garner it, uh to gather it. But they do have a lot of draft picks to their name. So what's wrong with having those draft picks and Robert Thomas? But speculation is out there for a reason. Maybe the player wants out. Who who really knows? But outside of Robert Thomas, I don't really know, and and and no, no one really knows what's being said in these GM circles. These guys are all buddies, they all played together, they all have been a part of the same organization at one point in time, they've all crossed paths. It's a bit of a fraternity. I'm sure there's a big group chat among NHL GMs. In fact, I'm pretty sure I heard one of the GMs say that there was in recent uh in the last year. So all it takes is for two GMs to know something about certain players, and then the public knows and you get a deal done. This player's contract is up in a year or two, but he's not happy. Nobody else knows about it but us. Let's make a deal now. Like there are things like that that we just don't know about. But outside of trading for Robert Thomas as a top line center for the Bruins, again, he'd be 26 years old. I think he turns 27 this summer, so he'd be 27 starting next year. But he's younger than McAvoy Passenak. He fits that prime for them, and he's a he's a he's a long-term player for the Bruins if they were to acquire him, if they were to acquire him. But short of Robert Thomas, I don't know what other number one centers are out there for trading for. So, you know, David may be sorely disappointed that he doesn't have an established NHL top line forward because it's hard to get. Those deals done. And if the Bruins do want to get a deal like that done, you're going to have to sacrifice some of this highly coveted draft capital and prospects that you've recently finally restocked your system with. So they're kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place. I don't envy the situation that Don Sweeney is in right now. It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out over the course of this offseason. All right, let's move along now to some comments from Kim Neely. And we'll start off with a question that he was asked regarding the Bruins' appetite for naming a captain heading into next season.

SPEAKER_00 22:37

Cam and Don, what are your thoughts about having a captain, one captain, having gone through this season without that? If you feel it's something important, if you've discussed it. And I guess my natural follow-up, if you don't mind, would be if I'm assuming the two veteran guys in Charlie McAvoy and then Poster Nock, like, is that a difficult conundrum if you pick one, you know, pick A over B or B over A? Does that create anything else? Or just your general thoughts?

SPEAKER_01 23:03

Well, I I think obviously we would love to name a captain. Um, but it's we've had some great captains here. So one of the things that we want to do is make sure we're we're we're picking the right guy, and Marco's gonna be a big part of that. So having a new coach come in and and and implementing a new system, getting to know the players, um I think it it only made sense to see how the season played out, and then we're gonna have plenty we've already started discussions about that for sure, and we're gonna have plenty more in this offseason.

SPEAKER_00 23:31

If I could just ask you specifically about Charlie McAvoy, just what you've seen in that leadership profile, maybe Kim or Don, whoever wants to speak to it, but just what you've seen in the growth and development of his profile in that regard.

SPEAKER_01 23:43

Well, I think I think all the players that have been here a while have grown. Um and that's what you hope for. Uh Charlie had a lot going on this year, unfortunately, both with injuries and some family things. Um So we probably didn't see the full growth of Charlie for this particular year, but he's he's grown a lot since he's been here. Um same with David, really.

SPEAKER_08 24:06

I think Pasternak is their choice. I could be wrong. Tell me if you if you feel otherwise, but there's a couple of comments now that I'm starting to feel like Pasternak is their choice for the captaincy, and here's why. Cam Ney mentions that the Bruins have already started those discussions. But to end that clip in a follow-up question, he basically said that Charlie didn't have the opportunity to really showcase all of his growth as a leader this past year because of a plethora of issues on the ice, off the ice, whatever, injuries, family matters. So in an off-season where they're discussing who the next captain's gonna be, they also don't think Charlie has had the ability to showcase his full leadership last season. So are they gonna give him the captaincy following a year where they don't think he was able to showcase his full leadership capabilities? I don't know. That that would see that would seem strange to me. It kind of feels like they're gonna go with Pasternak. And also, Marco Sturm said after the season that he he tried to work with Charlie this year about navigating the ups and downs of a game and a season, and that he can lose his temper, and that you know he cares so much. And Marco Sturm also called him, you know, uh a great Bruin because he does care so much. But I don't know that that comment from Neely, those those combinations of comments from Neely made me raise my eyebrows and say, uh, maybe they aren't going with Charlie here. I mean, I'd go past Snack anyway. I've made that known he has the seniority and he's their best player, and I do think his personality is a bit more approachable for his teammates. I think Charlie kind of runs hot and cold. But when Cam says that they've already had discussions about naming a captain and that they want to name a captain, but also Charlie didn't have the opportunity to show all of his leadership this past year, then you're gonna name him captain right now? I don't know. That that didn't seem like it made a lot of sense to me. But who knows? I honestly don't really care um which guy they choose. I think they're both good options. I think they both have room to grow. I I think I don't think they're both perfect players or perfect leaders, but I'd go Pasternak. I don't think it'd be the end of the world if they went McAvoy. Um now, something else Cam talked about is on if the Bruins need higher-end talent. We all know the answer to that question, but it's always fun to hear the Bruins be self-aware and have to have to answer the tough questions. So here's Cam Neely talking about um what the Bruins need going forward.

SPEAKER_03 26:57

Uh when you look at this roster, do you think that you guys have enough high-end talent or star power? You said you want to be more than just a playoff team, you want to be contender. Do you think you need to add more?

SPEAKER_01 27:09

Yeah, we got bounced in the first round. So yeah, we need more talent, we need more speed. That's something that you know we have to try to try to acquire um one way, shape, or form. But um you look at the the the elite teams in the league, we're not there. And and like I said two years ago, when we stripped it down like we did, it you're you're not gonna be there in one season. So it's gonna take some time. But what we accomplished this year, give the guys credit, but it's it's uh like I said early on, it's building blocks. Um so we've we've got work to do to improve this club still.

SPEAKER_03 27:42

And my my follow-up to that would be do you have I I know how badly you guys want to win. Do you have the patience to the long approach, the drafting and developing those players, or are you more saying, no, we want the help now, we want the ready-made help assets available?

SPEAKER_01 27:56

Well, I think showing what we did uh a couple years ago showed like, okay, we're gonna have to have some patience here. Um how long that is remains to be seen. What we can do with those assets uh that we that we have now that we didn't have um that remains to be seen. But you know, we also have to look at our current roster, uh the core players and their age group and where they're at, and and you know, what can we do to build around them? Um, you know, right now for me it's it's about today, tomorrow, and the next day, and and we'll go from there.

SPEAKER_08 28:29

Retooling and rebuilding, it is a very hard thing to do in the NHL. It requires a lot of luck, and it requires just an incredible success rate at hitting on drafting and developing, and it requires that you don't have your best players being too old to participate in it, right? Like you look at the Bruins championship window back in 2011, and yeah, I think Chara was probably in his early 30s at that point in his career, but still pretty young. I'd have to go back and double check. But Chara, I think Chara was around 31 when the Bruins won the cup. Again, I'll double check. Don't quote me on that. But Bergeron was 24, Craichy was 23, Marshan was 23, Nathan Horton was in his late 20s, Sagan was 19, um, you know, Timmy Thomas was obviously your goalie, he was older, but you had you had Tuca as a succession plan. You know, you you you had those guys that were they were your core, but they were all in their in their mid-20s, a lot of them. But right now, you have you have McAvoy and Pasternak who are approaching 30. They're not there yet, okay? But if you don't become a contender soon, then they're gonna start to look around and say, hey, we wanna win. And if they say they want to win and they want to go elsewhere, then you know you gotta move them, and you have to hope that you can find a player in a draft that's half the score that Pasternak is, right? And we I know Charlie McAvoy has his detractors, but when he's on his game, he's a top 12, top 10 defenseman in the NHL. Those guys don't grow on trees, and you can't waste their prime years. So what do you do? Right? Like this is this is why it's difficult because you can't waste their prime. Because if you do, and you and you just sit here and hope to draft prospects and and and and hope that they hit, by the time that they hit, how old are your top players now? And how many kicks of the can do you have with them? Right? So I'm not saying that the Bruins trade all of their futures right now. I'm not saying that at all. I like you have to draft and develop. But if they can't get a Robert Thomas, who's a guy who's like in his prime, then I don't think they should go out there and just trade away picks for uh uh you know a secondary prize just to do something. Like you have to you when when Cam Neely says that by selling at last year's deadline, it showed that they're willing to be patient, and then 30 seconds later he says, How how patient will we be? Well, that remains to be remains to be seen. That's kind of the problem that Bruins fans talk about with this Bruins team is the Bruins are not going to want to endure any sort of long-term rebuild. And so if you're like if you're gonna retool, rebuild, you have to commit to it. You can't if you're don't if you're Cam Neely and Don Sweeney, you can't get impatient. Like you can't just get impatient two years into it. If if Robert Thomas can be had, or somebody like that who's a significant addition to your top six, especially at center, you go for it. But I I I wouldn't trade the farm for you know anything shy of a guy like that. Because you might, you know, Pasternak and McAvoy, they might be upset for the next year or two not having the all you know the best team in the league. To Cam's point, they're not gonna have the best team in the league when you just sold at the deadline last year. It's gonna take a couple of years. So if if David has to wait until he's 31, so what? So what? You you you'll still have a solid five, six good years left. So this will be a very telling offseason. I'm very curious to see how this offseason goes for the Bruins. I don't think that they're I mean, listen, they have five first-round draft picks in the next three years, so that's great. Where those draft picks are obviously remains to be seen. What happens with Toronto? Does Austin Matthews demand a trade out of Toronto still, despite getting the first overall pick because he doesn't trust their vision or their execution as an organization and he wants to go elsewhere and win right now? Okay, then if you're trading Austin Matthews if you're the Leafs, they're probably going to be in a rebuild for the next couple of years, despite drafting first overall this year, because they don't have many first-round draft picks beyond their first pick this June. So in that case, maybe the Bruins picks, uh, the Bruins pick from Toronto in a couple of years is a is a top 10 pick again, unprotected. You just don't know where things go. Um so I I kind of lean, but also free agency, fuck free agency. I I if you can get you know somebody like Darren Radish on a on a on a decent deal and and you're not breaking the bank for him, like okay, I'd like him on the Bruins back end for sure. I'm not really enamored with Rasmus Anderson. I think I think he'd be diminished returns. Alex Tuck, great player. I'm not giving the bank to him on the back half of his career and anchoring myself to another agent contract. I'm not doing that. This Bruins team is not in win now mode, so I don't think that's the case. If the Bruins can make a significant trade, you do it. Otherwise, I would I would just keep rolling with the with the youth movement right now. I would keep I would go another full year of Minton, uh, a first full year of Haggins, another full year of Hoosna Dinoff. This time next year, Dean Laterno is probably a pro with either either Providence or Boston. And and the ceiling looks pretty high for Dean Laterno. Will Zellers, I think, the world of Will Zellers as a playmaker. Matt Potra, can he be somebody who steps into the lineup next year? Um you know, the Bruins have other prospects. Cooper Simpson, he's you know, he's years away. We'll see what he does at North Dakota next year, but USHL player of the year um this past season. Uh Vlashek Blenar, Vashek Blenar, I think it is. That uh that defenseman, you know, what is what does he become? I think he's going to UMass Amherst this this upcoming season. Um, raw, skilled, great skating defenseman, left shot defenseman. Who do the Bruins draft at 23 overall this year? Do they move up in a draft this year? Right? So if you can't get a Robert Thomas, I still think, listen, if if the Bruins don't make the playoffs next year or don't win the cup, it's okay. 31 other teams won't do it either. Unless you can get Robert Thomas. And even then, with Robert Thomas, I still wouldn't move Haggins. Thomas might take Laterno and a couple of firsts and maybe a roster player or two. I'd go for that. It would hurt. But you don't you don't get something that's that valuable of a of a 26, 27-year-old true number one center, and not have to give up something that hurts in return. You have to. Okay. But barring that, I'm kind of a proponent of the Bruins just if you know not being that active in free agency and letting just letting their picks and prospects just continue to come into the system. And if that means that David Pashtenak has to wait until he's 31, until the Bruins are a more serious team, it is what it is. It's the nature of hitting your prime when your team's retooling, rebuilding. That's how I feel about it. Okay, one final comment here from Cam Neely before we sign out here. And this has to do with the ceiling he thinks could be for Fraser Minton and James Higgins. And he admits something out loud that we all know, but again, it's nice to hear the Bruins admitted out loud.

SPEAKER_05 36:51

Cam, I'm curious about your insight on in terms of the development of a number one center. So if I'd asked you about Bergeron, maybe three years into his career, would he be a number one center? I'm not sure I would have had that answer. I'm not sure how you would have felt.

SPEAKER_06 37:05

Right.

SPEAKER_05 37:05

But if you've here we've got Minton and Hagens, as I think, in terms of skill set, where they where they're sort of positioned, they could get there. Do you agree they have they have that skill set? And if they do, how do they get there?

SPEAKER_01 37:22

I I think they both have that skill set. Um they're both a little different players. One's more like Berge as far as a 200-foot player, and and maybe not sees the ice as well as as Hagen's does. Um Hagen's heads up all the time, like he's constantly looking to distribute. Um it Fraser said to me at the exit meetings, he's like, wow, what a difference playoff hockey is compared to regular season hockey. So this that experience for him was invaluable. Um he realizes how things close quicker, there's not as much time to do anything. Umce he figures that out, like every player does over time, or most players do over time, I think he's gonna grow and continue to grow. Whether they either become number one centers is up to them and and and uh how that how that goes for them and what the path is for them. But you know, we we want to give these guys every opportunity to take a job that's that's staring at staring at staring at them. I mean, we all in this room recognize we don't have a true number one C. Um, you know, and that's that's something that that we want to try to rectify, whether it's uh this offseason or or those guys growing into it, um, but it's something that we know that that's that's needed.

SPEAKER_08 38:37

Yeah, so that this is the problem is that we all know this, we've all known this. The Bruins don't have a true number one center. Now, Fraser Minton and or James Higgins could develop into one. And to Cam's point, that's a possibility, but that's a hope. That's not a guarantee. And outside of trading for Robert Thomas, who who else is it gonna be?

unknown 39:09

Right?

SPEAKER_08 39:09

So so like that that's kind of the problem that Bruins fans have is the Bruins just kind of seem wishy-washy, like like that, like there's wishful thinking for them, but they don't really have any concrete plans. Now, listen, obviously, me, you guys listening, watching, none of us know Cam Neely or Don Sweeney aren't gonna tell us their plans. Of course not. I'm sure they have some some uh some plans for the summer, some plan A's, some plan B's, plan C's, and plan D's. Of course, you would like to think that. Just because we don't know that doesn't mean that they don't have their plans and their ducks in a row. But it is difficult to see because as fans and analysts, we still can see the landscape of the NHL. We know what players are out there, what players are under contracts, what players seem very happy where they are, right? Um there's only so many possibilities. Now, if the Bruins can't get a Robert Thomas as a true 1C in his prime, could you go out there and try to see if Jason Robertson, who's a winger, not a center, but he's a prolific goal scorer and point producer in his prime, could you try to bulk up on the wing with scoring and then have Minton and who's uh Minton and Haggins kind of be those those center iceman acres along with Paul Zacca? Like, could you could you have established scoring on the wing with future and promise at center? Yeah, you could do that. Um if not Jason Robertson is Brady Kachuk available. I don't know. These are all these are all pipe dreams. I'm not saying that they are, but what could the like I'm very curious what names are on what I'm curious what established top six NHL forwards that are currently under contract with somebody else that the Bruins have on their trade board that they realistically think they could have a conversation with another NHL GM and trade for that player? Because it has to be somebody who's significant enough to upgrade your top six, it has to be somebody who's on the front half of their career, ideally. So I I guess that's what I'm curious about. Wait, what does the Bruins big board look like? What's their trade big board look like? I'm curious. We don't know the answer to that. Maybe um, you know, some of you are locksmiths, and we can try to you know sneak into Donnie's office at Warrior or the Garden and check out his Cenopad left open on his desk. But um, besides that, you know, I think you have to hope that Hagans or or Minton are those guys. And then you never know, like maybe maybe it's Dean Laterno, maybe it's Dean Laterno. Maybe Dean Laterno turns into you know uh an alternative version of a Tage Thompson in the future. Like honestly, who knows? Uh Laterno looked very, very good with uh with BC this past year. You can start to see him learning how to utilize his his size and his body. Um can he be more of a physical presence? Sure. But you know, what's he 6'7 with with great hands and a great shot? Like maybe that's the answer. Maybe he's an answer. Um maybe the Bruins draft somebody this year at 23 overall, that ends up becoming a future stud. Because you know, a 23rd overall pick is still pretty good, um, especially in a deep draft. Now you have a lot of I think you have a lot of defensemen probably going in a top 10-12 this year. So maybe a lot of forwards fall. Not the top forwards, like Stenberg and McKenna, they're gonna go. Malhelter's gonna go, but you know, maybe maybe they maybe the Bruins end up with that guy. I guess ultimately what I'm saying is before we sign out here, if the Bruins can acquire Robert Thomas, I would, I would, I would do what it takes, probably minus Haggins to do it. Definitely minus Hagens. I don't want Hagens going. I'm actually starting to get pretty optimistic about Laterno. I'm very curious to see how Dean Laterno does next season at BC. I think that I think Laterno is gonna prove a lot of us wrong from last year, who all thought he was a bust. Um uh that might be strong, but even though he was playing at BC a year before he was supposed to be, it still wasn't the most encouraging season with three points and no goals. But this past year. Different player. And you know what? Credit to where it's due. That first year probably went a long way in helping his confidence in his sophomore year because he understood the the pace of play and what it took to excel at that level. So maybe it's Laterno. Um outside of acquiring a Robert Thomas or Jason Robertson or something like that, I think the Bruins are better off just kind of letting the youth movement continue. Let it continue. And if you upset Pasternak or McAvoy, um then you know what? Shame on them. Because championship teams don't grow on trees. And they know that, you know, when David says that he's been in a league for you know 11 years and he only had one kick at the can at a Stanley Cup championship. I think that's kind of bullshit, honestly, because the Bruins had a lot of good teams that he was on. They only went to the finals once, but they won the president's trophy in 2020, and they couldn't get their game together in the bubble. They obviously uh broke records in 22-23, were ousted in the first round. And not for nothing, in 2019, you had game seven on home ice, and you know you you know showed after 10 minutes. So and the Bruins were in the playoffs many other times besides those. So, you know, you had many teams that were contenders in the first half of your career, David, and you only got to the finals with one of them. Whose fault is that? The GMs? I don't know. I mean, people can say what you want about Don Sweeney, but that Bruins roster in 22-23, to say they underachieved is an understatement. That that team had the talent to go on a Stanley Cup run and win a cup. No doubt about it. Did they have some injury luck, uh, some some injury misfortune towards the end and a lack of chemistry because of that? Yeah, you went out of the deadline, you brought in Hathaway, you brought in Orloff, you brought in Bertuzzi, you put a couple of guys on IR to fit them under the cap. And then when people got healthy um, you know, towards the end of the year, you know, then Bergeron goes down, then Creechy goes down. So it was a perfect storm, but either way, for Pastor not to say that he only had one kick of the can um in the first 10 plus years of his career, okay, whose fault is that for not getting there? You guys had many teams that should have been there. You should you you had teams that should have gone further. So you're not gonna you're not gonna be in the NHL for 15 to 20 years with one team and not have to endure what the Bruins are going through right now. So if the if if he and McAvoy, you know, can't be a little bit more patient here, if they don't get a Robert Thomas, um, and I'm not saying that they won't be. They they very well may be, but you know, I don't want to hear any comments next year if they can't get Robert Thomas. Well, hey, I'm 31, I'm 32, relax. The player help is on the way. Um, and that's how I feel about it. Okay. Thank you all very much for listening. Enjoy your weekend, and I'll talk to you soon.