Thornton gone (ep)

right now, i can't put into words how much Bruins management disgusts me. I will put my thoughts to words later but for now here are some opinions from BSMW power play:

Thoughts on Thornton - 12/01/05

By Feejis

Joe Thornton came to Boston as the #1 overall pick, a gangly kid from Canada that then head coach Pat Burns eased slowly into the lineup. Though Thornton was the next in a long line of Bruins superstars, in the minds of many he never quite fulfilled his expectations. He only has one 100 point season under his belt, although the NHL has had a remarkable downturn in scoring during his career. Though he is considered among the game's best players, it often wasn't enough for many fans and media expecting their Bruins superstars to be otherworldly. Maybe that was an unfair expectation. Maybe it wasn't. Either way, it's all irrelevant now since Joe Thornton is now a San Jose Shark. At age 26, apparently it was time for him to move on.

It would be unfair to profess any inside knowledge of the workings of this organization. Their dysfunction knows no bounds in many areas but one has to believe this trade was signed off on from the top. Mike O'Connell has struggled mightily to put a quality product on the ice this season. And his owner, when he had him on the ropes, allowed him to trade the team's best and most expensive and least replaceable player. Is Jeremy Jacobs setting O'Connell up for failure by letting him sink or swim on the face of this deal? The popular opinion will be that this is strictly a monetary decision, what with Jacobs' reputation and all.

So now, the Brad Stuart, Marco Sturm, Wayne Primeau era begins. All three are former first round picks, just like Thornton. However, none of the three have even come close to living up to their billing. Stuart is a good defenseman, better by far than anyone currently on the Bruins roster. So he will help. And Sturm is a 20 goal a year guy that should be better but is still a pretty good part of the offensive rotation. Primeau is a checker, but all three players can fly and with Ottawa, Buffalo and Montreal on the regular docket in the Northeast Division, maybe that will help somehow. The Bruins didn't get a pile of trash in this deal, but they gave up a whole lot. It's a risk apparently Jacobs and O'Connell and Sinden felt they needed to take. Sure, trading an icon like Nomar worked for the Red Sox, and Thornton hasn't reached the levels Nomar reached in his sport, but there are huge differences in the motivations of these deals.

Nomar was traded because the team was a contender, had a surplus at one area and a deficiency in another and needed to make a change to get over the top. The Bruins do seem to have a surplus of offense, and a huge deficiency in defense, but they're in last place. They're not a contender. Is this a kickstart? Are they angling for potential big name free agents? There are some interesting UFA prospects, including Saku Koivu, Marc Savard, Derek Morris, Patrick Elias, Wade Redden, Zdeno Chara, our own Sergei Samsonov, Bryan McCabe and others. But would a team with Thornton and one of the above defensemen and some other changes look a bit better next year?

It's tough being a fan. We grow attached to the players on the teams, but if I didn't ditch the Red Sox after trading my favorite all-time player in Nomar, I won't ditch the Bruins for trading Joe Thornton. I want them to win a pile of cups in my lifetime, and I don't particularly care who the players are that do it. My elation over the 2004 World Series wasn't diminished one bit with Nomar out of the picture. I liked Thornton. I'll miss having him here, and with the new NHL scoring rules I expect we'll see a few more 100 point seasons out of him before he hits 30. And I don't have a problem with them trading him in theory. In practice however, I don't like what they got for him. I'll be thrilled to eat my words and see Brad Stuart age like Chris Pronger and Marco Sturm turn into everybody's favorite German and hoist the Stanley Cup sometime in the next few seasons. But I just don't see it happening without more improvement.

O'Connell made some mistakes this offseason, spent near to the cap and got a last place team for his efforts. So now he completely changes course and trades his best player? Why didn't they do this in the offseason while negotiating with Thornton? St. Louis was shopping Chris Pronger around. That wouldn't have made sense if they are truly unhappy with Thornton? I don't like it. This trade reeks of a year-to-year plan of attack, which to me indicates incompetence and instability. Some foresight and prudence in a new salary cap era would be nice to see. I expect further frustration in the coming years however. Go Celtics!!!

---------------
By Steve

Bill James once wrote that a sign of a bad organization was their tendency to blame their struggles on their best players. The Bruins have apparently decided to do just that by dealing Thornton.

Did Joe sometimes float along during his shifts? Yes, he did. Was giving him the "C" a mistake, in hindsight? Most likely, yes. Was he the best player on the team by far? Yes. Was he the most pressing of the Bruins' problems? Not by a long shot.

What makes no sense to me is that they dealt Joe when he had 2 more years remaining on his deal. That doesn't seem to make much sense. A far better deal would have been to move Samsonov, who is on the last year of his deal and is unlikely to re-sign with the team for next year.

Brad Stuart's a good defenseman. Marco Sturm is a useful winger. Wayne Primeau is yet another mucker and grinder who isn't significantly different from the other muckers and grinders on the team currently. None of them are as good as Joe Thornton.

It's amazing to me that the Bruins have decided they can live without Thornton yet Hal Gill is still considered a vital part of the club.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The best analytical diatribe about the trade i've read:

Say It Ain't So, Joe
by Andrew Kang
Posted 12/01/2005

So GM, Mike O'Connell pulled the trigger and tried to follow in the footsteps of smart local GMs Theo Epstein and Scott Pioli by trading franchise player Joe Thornton for Marco Sturm, Brad Stuart, and Wayne Primeau. A major shakeup indeed, but I'm not sure if its going to help the team overall. Sure, it will shore up the D. Sure it adds some speed and grit. But does it replace 90-100 points? Does it account for the fact the Joe, while often lackluster himself, always elevated the play of his linemates. Watch the fortunes of Samsonov and Murray plummet. The papers have all said that something always seemed to be missing with Joe, that he lacked fire, that he wasn't a strong leader. I can't disagree with that. But at what point does sheer production overcome that? I guess we could ask Barry Bonds or some similar guy who wasn't enough to help his sad-ass team. The fact is that the GM was covering his own butt for failing to come out of the lock out with a respectable team. The Bruins approach in the three YEARS leading up to the lockout, which they KNEW was coming - because they're so SMAHT - was that they weren't going to sign guys to long-term contracts. It was a theory that dovetailed perfectly with the Bruins' overarching attitude of cheapness. So, no long term deal. This basically took them out of the running for most of the good players out there. And what did it get them in the end? Jack. They were forced to scramble to assemble nearly their ENTIRE ROSTER from free agents, who were flying from the shelves faster than cabbage patch dolls and tickle me elmos combined. They passed on Forsberg, which is what they really needed - another scoring center to run two strong lines and take the pressure of Joe. Then they got Scatchard, Isbister, McEachern and Zhamnov. Some serious lack of production there. Scatchard and McEachern are gone. Zhamnov has barely played, and when he has, he looks about 80, and Isbister has been a nonentity since early this season. They let Nick Boynton hold out and miss all of camp over a mere $250k. Nick is still prying Jeromy Jacobs' cold fingers of that wad of cash. And they started the season with 3 rookie defensemen. Why is it a surprise that the D is pourous and taking stupid, rookie-type penalties late in games? It shouldn't be. Now, they have Leetch back, Tanabe, and Stuart on the blue line, a substantial improvement to be sure. They will need to lock it down in a hurry if the Bs are going to get to the playoffs. As one astute reader e-mailed this morning, "looks like a race for the eighth place playoff spot.... which will get a match up with Ottawa in the first round." Nice. The rage continues....

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blaming Thornton wrong move for Bruins

Shawn P. Roarke / Special to FOXSports.com
Posted: 58 minutes ago

As usual, the Boston Bruins took the road less travelled.

Generally, when a team struggles like the Bruins have — losers of nine of 10 and now 10 points out of a playoff position — the coach's head is the first to be placed on the chopping block. Sometimes, it is even the general manager, the architect of the underachieving club, that is handed his walking papers.

Rarely, however, is blamed laid at the feet of the players — no matter how culpable they might be.

Well, Wednesday night, the Bruins laid the blame for their current mess on the players — or at least upon the franchise player.

GM Mike O'Connell, who has constructed a fatally flawed team, traded Thornton to the San Jose Sharks for defenseman Brad Stuart and forwards Marco Sturm and Wayne Primeau in a deal that shook the foundation of the Boston franchise and shocked the rest of the NHL.

Asked during a Wednesday night conference call, set up by the Sharks, if he felt he was being railroaded for the Bruins' woes, Thornton found it hard to disagree.

''You could say that," said Thornton. "Who knows? Hindsight is 20/20. I don't know what to say about that. I came here to win and we haven't been winning. Whose fault is that? I'm not sure. Obviously, I'm out of here so it must be mine.

''It's definitely a shock. Obviously when you don't win games, things are going to happen. That's what happened here. It's disappointing. It's definitely tough but it's a new chapter in my life. Obviously, they believe in the coach and GM and I'm next in line so it's disappointing, but you've got to move on."

Actually, for all the negativity that has swirled around Thornton since he arrived as the first-overall pick in the 1997 NHL Entry Draft, the current mess can not be laid at the feet of "Jumbo Joe." Like a true professional, Thornton put all of the ugliness of the past few years — the cryptic accusations from the front office that Thornton was soft and the bitter contract negotiations from this summer — in the past and played some of the best hockey of his career.

Joe Thornton had to battle the Canadiens and a rib injury in the 2004 playoffs. (Charles Laberge / Getty Images)

Thornton, who signed a new three-year deal just four months ago, leads Boston in scoring with nine goals and 24 assists in 23 games. His 33 points are tied for ninth on the league's scoring table and put him on pace for a career-best 113-point season. His even plus/minus rating jumps out on a Bruins roster loaded with negative ratings. And, he has just six penalty minutes on a team that has taken foolish penalty after foolish penalty in the first quarter of the season.

''I felt like I was playing well, I was playing consistent," said Thornton. ''But, it just wasn't good enough."

It makes one wonder what exactly would be good enough.

The apologists for Bruins management already have their revisionist history ready to defend this move.

Thornton, they say, has never delivered on his status as a No. 1 pick. Yet, Thornton has outclassed every forward selected in the first round of his draft. His 421 points are 31 better than Marian Hossa, who was selected at No. 12. More importantly, no player in the first round of the 1996 NHL Entry Draft, nor any of the top 10 selections in 1995, have yet to reach Thornton's totals.

They'll also argue that Thornton was soft when it counted, pointing to the fact that he has just six goals and 18 points in 35 postseason games. More damning, they believe, is that in 2004 Thornton had zero points in Boston's stunning first-round collapse to hated Montreal.

That is an unforgivable sin in the eyes of his critics, yet they fail to mention that Thornton played that series with a severe rib injury — playing through pain that would sideline many players. And, they also conveniently ignore the struggles of other players during that series.

Thornton is not a leader, they insist. The Bruins have never gotten out of the second round of the playoffs in Thornton's seven-year tenure, the critics point out. Also they insist Thornton did little this season to publicly fix the struggles that have sent this edition of the Bruins freefalling to the cellar of the Northeast Division.

Therefore, they argue, the face of this franchise was expendable. Simply, he is not a winner — not a Tom Brady, not a Curt SchillIng, not a Larry Bird — and consequently he is no longer needed on the Boston sporting landscape.

Doug Wilson, the GM of the Sharks, obviously is not buying what these revisionists are selling. Sure, Wilson parted with in an elite defenseman in Stuart — the third-overall pick in 1998, a quality two-way forward in Sturm, and a valuable role player in Primeau for the opportunity to land Thornton. But, Wilson believes, it was the right price. In private, he may even call it a bargain.

Sure, Stuart, 26, might wind up being a franchise defenseman, but the Sharks are adequately deep on the blue line. Sturm, also a first-round pick, has never scored 50 points in any of his first seven NHL seasons and has just 16 points this year. Primeau, at 29, is on his fifth NHL team and has yet to break the 30-point plateau.

"(Thornton) is a leader who scores points and makes other players around him better," said Wilson. "To get a player of this caliber, you have to give up something to get something. You would make this trade last month, this month or next year. It follows our philosophy of making our team better for this year and next year."

Wilson would make this deal at any time because he must be objective, something rarely possible in Boston because of the passionate fan base that supports the city's teams. Simply, Wilson does not believe the hype about Thornton's shortcomings. He understands Thornton could not succeed alone, as he was asked all too often to do during his tenure in Boston.

Instead, Wilson believes Thornton can come here, join forces with the dynamic players left on the Sharks roster and rouse this sleeping Western Conference giant out of its season-long slumber.

"When you do a deal of this magnitude, character is still the main thing," said Wilson. "The main thing is he fit in our core group. He is an upbeat guy who loves to play the game. We just want him to come in and be Joe Thornton. He doesn't have to carry us, but he can help elevate us. We have not been scoring timely goals and that is what Joe has done in his career."

So, who is right? Has Wilson become the latest to be conned by Thornton's blinding potential? Or, did the Bruins run their franchise center out of Beantown just as that player was about to enter the dominating portion of what has already been, by all statistical accounts, an elite career?

Only time will tell, but at first blush, I would have to say that Wilson will win this gamble hands down.