Miller over mcquaid

Donato isn't a center. Towards the end of his NCAA career he played wing, in the Olympics he played wing and in Boston he played wing.

I think they will rotate only placed him there out of personal preference they will both play

I like Studnicka to win position, however, Donato, Heinen, Backes or Kuraly one need to play.

Kuraly will be the #4C again this season. Backes is the most obvious choice but for whatever reason he's been a RW since coming to Boston. Donato struggled last year in his own end with significantly less responsibility playing the wing and I don't know that he'd be able to handle center defensive responsibilities. Heinen hasn't played any center in the NHL, but of the guys you've listed, he'd probably transition well.

I am concerned with the lack of depth on the right side too many left shot youngsters paying out of position. Heinen might work he does have a 200 ft. game.

Yes and no. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is if you produce. If my entire team was left handed, but I won a cup, I'd take all lefties. They do still have Senyshyn down in Providence and this will be a big year for him in regards to figuring out if he's going to be able to make the jump. You're right those, we do have quite a few left shot wingers on the team.

I think you're dealing with too many absolutes here.

Donato doesn't need to step up and play center. The Bruins have a ton of guys that can play center, and their top three forward prospects (Frederic, JFK, Studnicka) are all natural centers. I thought Donato looked pretty solid on the wing and pretty brutal at center.

backes could play on the fourth line. My opinion of his play as the season progressed was that he's a fringe third liner, and a very good fourth liner, but imagine this scenario. Back to back seasons the Bruins have watched Backes break down, and play sparingly in the playoffs (I know against Ottawa, he had four points, but he had 3-4 awful games and 2 good ones). Maybe the Bruins want to limit his ice time for the first 60 games and as the rookies wear down Backes starts to get some more ice time. I personally like that concept.

I think Krug can play on the second pair, but I would definitely prefer him on the third.

I can think of four or five guys that could win a role out of camp, and another few that can win bigger roles in camp. Let's let this play out, there are very few absolutes with this team.

Agree with this.





And this.

I agree with everything you said except the Backes part. The injury issues he had last 2 years (surgery elbow, surgery colon, leg laceration and concussion) combined moving to a new city/team I think he did quite well. Outside of the concussion they were pretty freak injuries and would have keep most guys out significantly longer. He's not a fourth line player, his ppg alone he's a 2/3 and will be the leader and steadying influence on the 3rd line.

quote=ajc;574099]I am concerned with the lack of depth on the right side too many left shot youngsters paying out of position. Heinen might work he does have a 200 ft. game.[/quote]



Right shots are harder to find. 2 out 3 players shoot left. I think Minnesota only has one right shot Fwd. The fact Boston has as many right shot options right now that are NHL caliber or close to it is impressive.

Yaaaa he couldn't skate on the same ice as the lightning

Is this your idea of a rebuttal?

re·but·tal
[rəˈbədl]
NOUN
a refutation or contradiction.

I would say outside of the top line NONE of the Bruins could and it had almost nothing to do with their skating ability. Things like schedules and health play role in winning. It's not that absolute as saying they were blowing by him so he's a fourth liner. Fourth liners don't get 33pts in 57 games.

Okay you're not getting this. What he was at the end of the year, was a 4th liner

Oh I'm getting what your saying. What I don't get is what that has to do this year. Enlighten me.

Um. 34 year old power forwards decline

What power forward ever played fourth line?

like, 80% of power forwards....

Can you be anymore vague or uncompelling. For a guy that posts as much as you, you would think you would be able to formulate some kind of opinion with substance.

Speed and skill typically play top six. Size and grit, more often than not, play bottom six. I didn't think I actually would need to explain that

Once again you are responding with generalizations and no substance. Try examples or names or statistics. Better yet all three, otherwise it's just your opinion which means absolutely nothing until proven elsewise.

I'd really prefer to not walk you through how 2+2=4

But you seem so intelligent and knowledgeable about hockey. Can't you impart some of your wisdom on some of us.