Boston Bruins: Lucic Injured; Lefebvre Called Up
Milan Lucic, who’s coming off a five-hit performance less than 24 hours ago, will be sidelined for tonight’s game and possibly more with a currently undisclosed injury.
In typical Boston Bruins fashion, the injury remains undisclosed, leading me to believe that they’d give us GM Peter Chiarelli’s personal cell phone number before telling us above a top six forward’s injury. Regardless of the info, or lack there of, the question remains; Just how did Milan Lucic suffer this injury we know little to nothing about?
It’s very possible that Lucic’s physical play last night could’ve banged him up, as he seemed to have an extra giddy-up (they were playing in Texas, so that’s acceptable for this post) in his physicality. Whatever the injury may be, the Bruins have called up forward Guillaume Lefebvre up from the Providence Bruins on an emergency basis.
Essentially when examining the call-up of the 28-year-old forward from Quebec, the Bruins are replacing one menacing force with another.
Lefebvre, who spent all of the 2008-09 season with the Springfield Falcons of the American Hockey League, tallying 206 penalty minutes along with 13 points in 70 games, has already made his mark in the Providence penalty box. Just four games into the AHL season, Lefebvre’s totaled 25 minutes in the sin bin and is expected to be in the line-up tonight for the Boston Bruins.
This likely means that Byron Bitz is getting moved up to the third line while Recchi moves up one, or that Lefebvre will be a direct substitution for Lucic on the second line. However, the latter of these plans seems unlikely as in short, Lefebvre’s there for his physical play, not his offensive skills.
Tonight will mark Guillaume’s first game in the National Hockey League since February 4th, 2006 when he was with the Pittsburgh Penguins.
Word from John Bishop via the Bruins Twitter account is that Lefebvre will wear number 92 tonight for the black and gold.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?