Before the season starts, I’m going to try to bring in as many opinions as possible about what to expect from the Bruins. This interview is the first of several and it is my hope that by getting the opinions of the professional writers that follow the Bruins the most closely, I can provide you with some solid pre-season coverage.

The following transcript is from my interview with Douglas Flynn, Boston Herald Bruins Insider and contributor to the MetroWest Daily News. During the interview Mr. Flynn was kind enough to answer questions ranging from line-combos, to trade rumours, playoff chances, and much more. There is plenty of food for thought within this interview and I am grateful to him for giving up some of his time for this blog (and for this blogger). That being said; I hope you enjoy the interview:

GB: In what area do you think the team will be most improved next season?


DF: I would have to say, positionally, probably in goal with Fernandez. If you’re talking in terms of elements they bring to the game (as a team) I think probably the area they addressed most, which was probably their most pressing need, was they addressed the toughness question by signing Shawn Thornton and re-signing Jeremy Reich and hopefully they’ll unleash Chara a little bit and make him more like his Ottawa days.

GB: So do you think it was mostly Dave Lewis and that’s why he (Chara) didn’t fight? Do you know that for sure?


DF: I don’t know that for sure but certainly that seems to be definitely a part of it. Whether that was something that Chara was sort of able to use as an excuse to hide behind or if he really wanted to unleash himself I’m not sure. Dave Lewis did say on the record that he never talked to Chara in particular, or any of the players, about not fighting or not standing up for each other. I don’t know whether he said differently behind the bench or in the locker room but on the record he said that it was not part of his policy.

I think part of it might’ve been Lewis but I think part of it was also Chara himself, putting more pressure on himself with the ice time he was playing and I think he was worried about spending too much time in the penalty box and I don’t think he wanted to take himself off the ice as much as he had in the past. I think in some ways that’s counter productive because there were plenty of times late in games where there were blow-outs where he could’ve sent a message or even at the start of a game where missing three or four shifts wouldn’t have adversely affected the team too much and could’ve set a tone that could’ve helped them a lot more than anything negative from missing him for a few minutes.

GB: I agree completely and that segues nicely into a couple other questions I had. About Manny Fernandez, you’re a fan of the trade then I take it?


DF: Not completely. I think he’s definitely an upgrade. I don’t know if he’s four times the player that Tim Thomas is, which is what the cap hit is *laughs* and I certainly don’t like giving up on Peter Kalus, who I think is going to be a very good player in the not too distant future, but they did need to improve the goaltending. I think it was a team problem and not strictly a goaltender problem. It was the overall system as well as the defensive play that certainly contributed to the goals against but I do think the goaltending had to be addressed. So it was a high price to pay, with a good prospect, but Fernandez is a nice upgrade.

GB: When you’re talking about the team’s system, have you seen Claude Julien in action much yet?


DF: Well certainly I saw him quite a bit when he was with Montreal and New Jersey and he was very different between the two. New Jersey fell into a little bit of what Lou Lamoriello wanted to do which was trap and play a more defensive style than what his natural inclination is. I’ve talked to guys that have played for him, Bobby Allen played for him in Hamilton, Dan LaCouture played with him last year in New Jersey. Both of those guys had nothing but high praise for Julien. Bobby Allen, in particular, having seen him up close playing for him in the minors was shocked at the way he (Julien) had to play in New Jersey because he said that was pretty much against everything he did back then. He is much more aggressive, he allows guys to be more creative and play with a little more up-tempo. Allen, here in Boston, has been more of a defensive defenseman but in the minors he was more of an offensive guy. He was allowed some of that freedom to go up and join the attack when he saw an opening and Julien didn’t try to hold him back at all, so he expects to see more of that style. I think it’ll still be a little bit of a blend; he (Julien) was a defenseman as a player. He does have some defensive tendencies but I don’t think you’re going to see them use a trap. I think it’ll be more wide open and more entertaining.

GB: I’ve seen a few players comment that they think Claude Julien is a good communicator. Did Bobby Allen suggest Julien was really good at getting his message across with the players?


DF: Definitely, especially at that level. He was a very good teacher when he was in the minor leagues. With Montreal he had a very good track record of working with the younger players and he’s going to obviously have to work with a lot of young guys here in Boston. There’s going to have to be somewhat of a youth movement and he’ll have to work some of these guys into the line-up and I think that’s one of his strengths. He’s a very good communicator and he’s a teacher as well as a coach. He can be tough on the players when he needs to be but I don’t think he’s the type that’s going to get down on young players that make mistakes. He’s going to allow them to go and work with them and teach them more than punish them for making a mistake.

GB: About Chara, I take it you don’t think he quite lived up to expectations last year and I think a lot of people agree. Have you heard anything from him that would make you believe that he’ll be better next year? Do you think he’s taken this to heart?


DF: Well he definitely has a lot of pride in his ability. He himself would probably be the first one to say he didn’t live up to expectations last year. Of course he doesn’t really talk about himself that often. When you ask him about his own performance he usually puts it in terms of the team and I think the team’s failure to make the playoffs is a reflection on himself as the Captain and the leader so I definitely think he’s going to come back hungry and try to prove that last year was an aberration and try to get back to being more the player he was in Ottawa. I certainly hope so and the Bruins need him to.

GB: That sort of also segues nicely into the next question. If you had to pick one person who is going to have a real break-out year, as compared to last year, who do you think is on the roster that fits that bill?


DF: That’s a good question. I think the obvious choice would be Phil Kessel who now has a year under his belt. He’s healthy after the cancer scare last year and he’ll be playing regular minutes. I think the coach is going to foster a young player and give him more opportunities and ice time. The other guy I would look at would be Brandon Bochenski who, depending on who he is teamed with, whether he plays with Kessel or Bergeron or someone that can set him up, he certainly showed ability to finish last year and I think may have a chance to have a very nice breakthrough year. He’s got plenty of incentive too because he signed a one year deal so he’ll be a free agent next year and be able to cash in.

GB: Right, good point. You were at the Bruins development camp were you not?


DF: Yes.


GB: From your vantage point, did anybody seem to stand out and do you think there’s a dark-horse that might crack the Bruins line-up this year from the prospects?


DF: The guy that really stood out, no surprise, David Krejci was by far the best player on the ice; which he should’ve been since he’s got a full year of Providence under his belt. There were a couple of other guys, Lashoff and Karsums, who also came from Providence but for the most part it was straight out of junior so you would expect Krejci with that experience, as well as his skill set, to be able to dominate and he clearly was a step ahead of everyone else.

The other guy that really impressed me, and this was the first time I really got to see him, was the first round pick this year, Zach Hamill. He’s still a few years away. He’s going to need to add some strength and bulk up but he’s got great vision, great playmaking abilities, and very soft hands. He really impressed me with his skill set. In terms of a dark-horse that might make it, it’s tough to say since there aren’t really that many spots that are up for grabs.

Matt Hunwick impressed me with his play on defense. I think he will be a good player in the near future but I don’t see him ahead of Lashoff or Allen or Stuart as far as making a spot this year and also since he’s come out of college he’s going to need time to adjust to Providence. He’s a guy that impressed me during the development camp. Brad Marchand was similar. I thought he was very impressive but again, he’s not a guy I would pick for this year.

GB: Now you said Phil Kessel might have a break-out year, and I think that’s a good bet. Do you think he should have that year playing at wing or at centre? I find he shows us better stuff at centre but then we have Patrice and Marc Savard to think about too. So how do you see the centres lining up?


DF: I actually like him much better at centre. I think he’s more natural in the middle and I think it suits his strengths better with his speed in the open ice. He still has to build strength and he’s not a great guy along the boards. That’s probably one of the bigger weaknesses in his game right now so I think he’s much better suited to the middle and that’s where I’d like to see him.
I don’t have a problem having three centres that can centre three lines that contribute offensively. It’s a great problem to have.

GB: Yeah for sure. The other thing I was going to bring up is, obviously Patrice is good no matter where you put him and do you think he’s just as good from the wing as he is from centre?


DF: He’s very effective on the wing but again, I like him better at centre and I like having those three guys to build three lines around. I think they have enough wingers now that they don’t necessarily have to move one of those guys out of position. I’d rather see, at least to start the year and if things don’t work out I’d be willing to adjust on the fly, but I would start the year with all those of those guys lined up as the top three centres.

Savard is going to be teamed with Murray, they have such good chemistry, I would take either a newcomer like Schaefer to add a little bit of defensive grit to that line or, if you need offense and you want to load up, put Sturm up there. I would probably keep Sturm with Bergeron, they have good chemistry together, with either Bochenski or Kobasew on the right side. I would definitely put Axelsson with Kessel. He’s got the speed to keep up with him as well as his defensive awareness to cover up his mistakes. Then I would either give him a finisher, like Bochenski, to work with or Kobasew to add a little bit of grit. I think clearly those are the top nine; how they’re matched up is the only question.

GB: So we’ve got the first three centres pegged down now. The fourth centre; do you think Mark Mowers gets that or, we have Carl Soderberg now, do you think Carl fits in anywhere?


DF: Well, to be honest, I talked to Peter Chiarelli a couple weeks ago and at that time he sounded a little pessimistic about Soderberg coming over. I’m not convinced that we’re going to see Soderberg in camp and if we do, obviously we’re going to see what kind of shape he’s in coming off the long layoff and the eye injury, as well as the fact that he really hasn’t had any experience in North America because he didn’t report to Peoria last year and he went back to Sweden. I think there’re too many question marks there to count on Soderberg. It would be a great, pleasant surprise if he comes in and wows us but I’m not counting on that.

I think it’s more do you go with Mowers who is a dependable guy that can penalty kill, who’s not going to contribute any points but you know he’s not going to make a lot of mistakes out there? Or do you go with more of a crash and bang line and bring in a guy like Nate Thompson to team with Reich and Thornton and have an energy line? Another option, and what I personally wouldn’t mind, is put a guy like Krejci there. Limit his exposure, let him get his feet wet gradually, fourth-line so he’s protected with a couple physical players so he’s not going to get KOed by Adam Mair. Also, you could use his offensive talent by having him on a second power play team so he gets fourth line minutes and gets to play on the power play.

GB: How do you think this team stacks up to its North East rivals this year?


DF: Well, not only do you have to look at the North East but you have to look at the whole conference because of the way the playoffs seed but in the division the team that was hurt most by free agent movement was Buffalo, losing both Drury and Briere. They have so much depth there that I don’t think they’re going to be first place again in the conference put I can’t see them dropping too significantly down. There’s still Ryan Miller between the pipes. There’s still Roy and Vanek and other guys so they have plenty of firepower.

I think Ottawa is probably the team to beat now in the East, coming off of the Stanley Cup Finals last year and keeping that nucleus intact. And it might also be the final run for the total group if they’re going to have some free agent issues come up next year with some of the guys coming up for contract.

I think the Bruins probably are a step ahead of Montreal, which didn’t really do much to improve itself this summer and Toronto is kind of a wild card. I think a lot of that depends on what Toskala does and what kind of chemistry they have in terms of settling what they do with their goaltending. Are they going to keep Raycroft? Is he going to be having split time or a back-up role? Is that going to be a distraction? What’s going to happen with Mark Bell with the legal issues? Is that going to be a distraction? So I think Toronto could fall anywhere. I would say certainly the Bruins match up well with them and I don’t see them being as strong as Ottawa or Buffalo this year.

GB: So what do you think though; playoffs yes or no? What’s your call?


DF: Well I just talked to Tim Thomas out on the golf course up in Vermont about an hour ago and he is definitely predicting playoffs. He’s totally confident.

I think it’s going to be tough. I think I could see them finishing anywhere from sixth to seventh all the way down to twelve or thirteenth. I think the difference between sixth and thirteenth will probably be ten or twelve points at the most. I think it’s going a big pack of teams and it’s going to come down right to the end.

GB: A lot of people criticize Peter Chiarelli because he touts this plan where he’s trying to rebuild and stay in the hunt for the cup. Do you think he’s been successful so far with that? Do you think it’s a good plan? Would you go into full rebuild mode or would you try to stay in the hunt and rebuild?


DF: Well, personally I would rather see a full rebuild but I don’t think that’s possible in this market. I don’t think ownership would stand for three or four years of last place finishes like Pittsburgh did. Unfortunately, he can’t really go into a full rebuild mode and I don’t think that’s up to him. He won’t be able to keep his job long enough to actually do a full rebuild project so I think he’s doing the best he can in terms of hedging between and trying to make a team competitive and at least playoff caliber if, not championship caliber now, without mortgaging the future too much.

The overall plan I don’t have a problem with; some of the individual moves like trading away young assets like Boyes and Jurcina and possibly Kalus, although at least he did get a quality goaltender back for Kalus. Some of the individual moves I question but the overall plan is a good one. It’s just that we need some better execution to see it to fruition.

GB: Last question. There have been a lot of rumours about Patrice Bergeron being traded. Have you heard anything about that? Do you think it would happen?


DF: I know there’s a lot of smoke and they say “if there’s that much smoke there has to be some fire.” I can’t see and I don’t believe anything I’ve heard that Chiarelli has been shopping him. I’m sure other GMs are kicking the tires. They see the depth at centre the Bruins have and I’m sure they’re making inquiries to see if a guy like Patrice is available. Unless you’re going to get a franchise, young defenseman or you’re going to blow him away with an offer like that, there’s no way that he (Peter Chiarelli) can afford to trade him. He won’t keep his job. *laughs*

I don’t believe he’s actively shopping him but it wouldn’t surprise me if some of these rumours were coming out from other teams maybe to try to gauge whether there is any possibility or they’re kicking the tires but I don’t believe the Bruins are actively shopping him.

- Gerz

Join the Discussion: » Comments » Post New Comment

» Unsettling Times

» Sens Lose Third in a Row

» WHY????

» Got Some Catching Up To Do

» Sens win 4-1, Show Huge Signs of Improvement