SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Bruins '21 OFFSEASON Thread
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 15, 2021 15:24:50 GMT -5
Listen you can say you don’t want to go 2 years for Rask- that’s fine- but to say that I don’t want them to have money to upgrade elsewhere is a little ridiculous considering the post quoted literally has them upgrading at multiple spots…. My point, which I kinda thought was obvious, was that it would 4.5 mil less to upgrade the team. As for your plan above, you're assuming we have 26 mil (it's a bit less) and that we can spend even penny of it (that's not really how the cap works) and you have us signing players to deals that aren't necessarily unrealistic, but some are certainly optimistic. With that, it's, I suppose, an upgrade. replacing Reilly with Suter, Lauzon with Hakanpaa, Ritchie (or DeBrusk?) with Goodrow and Kuraly with "someone cheap". But it's somewhat unrealistic while still being basically a tinker around the edges that relies on a 37 year old to improve things very much. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 15, 2021 15:27:47 GMT -5
I'm confused, what are the terms? I don't see how you say no to anything without talking about money. I hate the idea of waiting to offer him a contract till he's healthy because of comments he made. That just seems like some huge distraction. Pick a path, that either includes Rask or one that doesn't. As long as it's a team friendly deal, I'm resigning Rask.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,855 
|
Post by cdj on Jul 15, 2021 15:30:04 GMT -5
I'm confused, what are the terms? I don't see how you say no to anything without talking about money. I hate the idea of waiting to offer him a contract till he's healthy because of comments he made. That just seems like some huge distraction. Pick a path, that either includes Rask or one that doesn't. As long as it's a team friendly deal, I'm resigning Rask. My proposal was 2/9, structured that it pays out 3 this year and 6 next year. Cap hit 4.5 Maybe it’s a little rich on the 2nd year because you probably wouldn’t need him to play more than half the games with Swayman around. But either way it’s not prohibitive. They can still do pretty much whatever they want this off-season |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Jul 15, 2021 16:53:41 GMT -5
Rask won’t be available until at some point in the second half. I’m not giving him a 2 year deal and if it’s true he will only play in Boston, I’m probably not evening signing him until later in the year if you need to once he’s healthy. I hear Tex on needing a veteran, but we are in roll the dice territory with the Bergeron timeline and I think I’m rolling the dice on a super cheap goalie corps to load up every where. It’s a gamble but a calculated one. 100%. Except it's not even a gamble, really. You bring in a cheap vet and you have half a year to see if Swayman can handle it (and there's no reason to think he can't) and, even if he can't, you have your vet plus Vladar. I suppose we could call it a risk that all three options would fail so badly that the season will be a washout before Rask could come back, but that's a stretch. BTW, the "give Swayman a chance" and "Wait on Tuukka" strategies are both the same- A cheap vet plus Swayman until Rask can come back. The only other real option would be to acquire a more expensive vet, which would basically proclude both possibilities. There is just no reason for a 2 year deal for Rask. We've got half a season to see what Swayman can do, and to evaluate how Tuukka is recovering. Then we can determine if we want him back as a back-up or a starter or not at all. Giving him a 2 year deal means you don't want to take a chance at getting better in the net AND you want to bank everything on an aging G coming back from injury AND you don't want money to upgrade the rest of the roster. No thanks. You do realize that Thomas had the same surgery at an older age and came back to have one of the greatest seasons ever for a goaltender right. To think that Rask has little value moving forward is not really based in reality. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 15, 2021 18:38:59 GMT -5
100%. Except it's not even a gamble, really. You bring in a cheap vet and you have half a year to see if Swayman can handle it (and there's no reason to think he can't) and, even if he can't, you have your vet plus Vladar. I suppose we could call it a risk that all three options would fail so badly that the season will be a washout before Rask could come back, but that's a stretch. BTW, the "give Swayman a chance" and "Wait on Tuukka" strategies are both the same- A cheap vet plus Swayman until Rask can come back. The only other real option would be to acquire a more expensive vet, which would basically proclude both possibilities. There is just no reason for a 2 year deal for Rask. We've got half a season to see what Swayman can do, and to evaluate how Tuukka is recovering. Then we can determine if we want him back as a back-up or a starter or not at all. Giving him a 2 year deal means you don't want to take a chance at getting better in the net AND you want to bank everything on an aging G coming back from injury AND you don't want money to upgrade the rest of the roster. No thanks. You do realize that Thomas had the same surgery at an older age and came back to have one of the greatest seasons ever for a goaltender right. To think that Rask has little value moving forward is not really based in reality. Doesn’t Tuuka have a bad back too though? |
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 16, 2021 6:48:02 GMT -5
100%. Except it's not even a gamble, really. You bring in a cheap vet and you have half a year to see if Swayman can handle it (and there's no reason to think he can't) and, even if he can't, you have your vet plus Vladar. I suppose we could call it a risk that all three options would fail so badly that the season will be a washout before Rask could come back, but that's a stretch. BTW, the "give Swayman a chance" and "Wait on Tuukka" strategies are both the same- A cheap vet plus Swayman until Rask can come back. The only other real option would be to acquire a more expensive vet, which would basically proclude both possibilities. There is just no reason for a 2 year deal for Rask. We've got half a season to see what Swayman can do, and to evaluate how Tuukka is recovering. Then we can determine if we want him back as a back-up or a starter or not at all. Giving him a 2 year deal means you don't want to take a chance at getting better in the net AND you want to bank everything on an aging G coming back from injury AND you don't want money to upgrade the rest of the roster. No thanks. You do realize that Thomas had the same surgery at an older age and came back to have one of the greatest seasons ever for a goaltender right. To think that Rask has little value moving forward is not really based in reality. If I had said that I might feel compelled to respond. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 16, 2021 7:46:12 GMT -5
Following Colorado trading Ryan Graves to avoid losing him for nothing, there has been some chatter Boston might follow a similar path. No names or teams, just that thought.
Has to happen today though. Roster freeze in advance of the expansion draft.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,855
|
Post by cdj on Jul 16, 2021 8:59:21 GMT -5
Following Colorado trading Ryan Graves to avoid losing him for nothing, there has been some chatter Boston might follow a similar path. No names or teams, just that thought. Has to happen today though. Roster freeze in advance of the expansion draft. Could see them moving Debrusk |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 16, 2021 12:56:05 GMT -5
I'm confused, what are the terms? I don't see how you say no to anything without talking about money. I hate the idea of waiting to offer him a contract till he's healthy because of comments he made. That just seems like some huge distraction. Pick a path, that either includes Rask or one that doesn't. As long as it's a team friendly deal, I'm resigning Rask. My proposal was 2/9, structured that it pays out 3 this year and 6 next year. Cap hit 4.5 Maybe it’s a little rich on the 2nd year because you probably wouldn’t need him to play more than half the games with Swayman around. But either way it’s not prohibitive. They can still do pretty much whatever they want this off-season Kinda torn on that, can see both sides. If he was fully healthy that's a very good team friendly deal and it isn't bad even given the injury. Yet $6 million in two years is also real money by NHL standards. So if I had the option I'd prefer just one year 3 million. Yet what do I know, I'm a novice hockey guy at best. |
|
|
|
Post by homerdante on Jul 16, 2021 15:25:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 16, 2021 17:06:52 GMT -5
I was reading some similar stuff earlier. Landeskog has to be a back-up plan for Hall. No way can you sign a guy like that have one of them on the third line. Hyman seems way overpriced. He's a nice player, but first off, he says he wants an 8 year deal, which has to be a complete non-starter. Even the supposed salary of 5-6 mil per seems high. His production is basically Ritchie last year and DeBrusk the couple years before that. How much would we want to spend on that. He's a tougher, better D player than those two, but he also has benefited from playing with Matthews and Marner. Don't see it. |
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,855
|
Post by cdj on Jul 16, 2021 17:35:57 GMT -5
I do like Hyman’s game a lot but if a team offers anything over $5 mill they’re insane
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Jul 17, 2021 11:00:48 GMT -5
Waiting...
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 17, 2021 11:33:24 GMT -5
Rosters freeze at 3 EST. Only deals after that will be those Seattle makes with a team regarding the expansion draft.
Did see that Arizona IS very much interested in moving Garland with Boston interested. Any move would be post expansion draft and other teams might easily put together better offers but I'd like him.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 17, 2021 13:04:16 GMT -5
Miro Heiskanen just signed a big extension (~ 8.5M per) so that's probably the bar for McAvoy either this season or next.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 17, 2021 13:50:52 GMT -5
Interesting dynamic as I believe the Isles need to acquire a D-man as they currently don't have 1 that they can/want to leave exposed that meets the minimum criteria.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,855
|
Post by cdj on Jul 18, 2021 8:42:06 GMT -5
Interesting dynamic as I believe the Isles need to acquire a D-man as they currently don't have 1 that they can/want to leave exposed that meets the minimum criteria. I’d be a nice guy and send them John Moore for free |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 18, 2021 9:56:35 GMT -5
They ended up re-signing Andy Greene to meet the criteria.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 18, 2021 11:16:31 GMT -5
Seeing the list of exposed players and I'm trying to understand how UFA's play into this. I guess you get a short window of exclusive negotiating rights but is that really worth it? Why take a UFA when you can simply wait (getting word out to the player via agents) and take another player AND then sign the UFA?
And, of course, if it doesn't make sense for Seattle to take a UFA (though I've read that they just might do that with Chris Driedger), then why would a team waste a protection spot on 1 (Linus Ullmark, Philipp Grubauer and Joel Armia were included on their teams protected lists)?
|
|
|
|
Post by homerdante on Jul 18, 2021 11:25:51 GMT -5
If you're the GM, what's your team for next year? This has a list of the top players being exposed: www.nbcsports.com/boston/bruins/2021-nhl-expansion-draft-list-best-players-exposed-krakenObviously that's subjective, and each team's list might have another player debatably better. Like for the Bruins, they might take Lauzon or Zboril over Clifton, particularly because Leach is in their staff now. List re-printed here from the article linked above: Anaheim Ducks: Kevin Shattenkirk, D Boston Bruins: Connor Clifton, D Buffalo Sabres: Jeff Skinner, LW Carolina Hurricanes: Nino Niederreiter, LW Columbus Blue Jackets: Max Domi, C Calgary Flames: Mark Giordano, D Dallas Stars: Ben Bishop, G Detroit Red Wings: Vladislav Namestnikov, RW Florida Panthers: Chris Driedger, G Los Angeles Kings: Jonathan Quick, G Montreal Canadiens: Carey Price, G New Jersey Devils: P.K. Subban, D Nashville Predators: Ryan Johansen, C; Matt Duchene, C New York Islanders: Josh Bailey, RW; Jordan Eberle, RW Ottawa Senators: Matt Murray, G Philadelphia Flyers: James van Riemsdyk, LW; Jakub Voracek, RW St. Louis Blues: Vladimir Tarasenko, RW Tampa Bay Lightning: Yanni Gourde, C; Tyler Johnson, C; Ondrej Palat, RW; Alex Killorn, LW Toronto Maple Leafs: Jared McCann, LW; Alex Kerfoot, C Vancouver Canucks: Jake Virtanen, RW Washington Capitals: Conor Sheary, LW Here's your complete list since the above is just one writer's opinion on best available (and he only lists 21 teams): www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-protected-list-for-seattle-released/c-325681800?tid=289242400 |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 18, 2021 13:50:19 GMT -5
Heading into the week, I was convinced that Boston would lose Lauzon in the expansion draft. Felt he was the best combination of present value with some upside.
But looking at the expansion lists there are a LOT more LHD that would be similar to Lauzon than there are RHD that are similar to Clifton. So I'm now thinking Clifton could very easily be the guy that does. And, to be honest, that's less ideal.
Despite their flaws/inexperience, I'm not sure the difference between Lauzon and Zboril or Vaakanainen is that drastic. But the difference between Clifton and the next best RHD is (not even sure who it would be). Now, of course, some of their LHD can move to the other side (Lauzon, himself, played some RD last year) so maybe that offsets the need a bit. But with Miller retired and Kampfer to the KHL, we may end up needing to add 3rd Pair or "extra" RD to the needs list if Clifton is selected.
|
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 18, 2021 14:09:27 GMT -5
So, with he lists now available, I'm again looking at the possibility of trading with Seattle for a couple fo players they could draft who are a bit older and should be less attractive to them than more future-looking assets.
I'm thinking DeBrusk, next year's 1st and maybe a throw in prospect to get Clifton back (I'm guessing that's who they take) plus Alex Killorn and Jordan Eberle. Put those two guys with Clifton, and we have 3 lines to be excited about (assuming we re-sgn Hall and Krejci)
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,855
|
Post by cdj on Jul 18, 2021 20:58:25 GMT -5
I’d be trying to get Killorn or Palat
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 19, 2021 6:28:15 GMT -5
Gonna have to figure out how to move/bury some money though. Hall/Krejci will likely come in around 12 for the 2 of them. Killorn/Eberle are another 10. So, removing JD and that's about 17M leaving Boston with 8M to find a Top 4 LHD, a vet G to pair with Swayman and probably another Vet D.
Could get a little tight.
At some point (position) Boston is going to have to sprinkle in some youth (both to try them out and/or to balance the top end cap hits). Unlike last year, they just can't do it all at one position (Defense). I wouldn't be surprised if they give Studnicka another shot at RW.
If it's not working you have a whole season to add something at a manageable hit.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1toolplayer on Jul 19, 2021 8:18:55 GMT -5
If you're the GM, what's your team for next year? This has a list of the top players being exposed: www.nbcsports.com/boston/bruins/2021-nhl-expansion-draft-list-best-players-exposed-krakenObviously that's subjective, and each team's list might have another player debatably better. Like for the Bruins, they might take Lauzon or Zboril over Clifton, particularly because Leach is in their staff now. List re-printed here from the article linked above: Anaheim Ducks: Kevin Shattenkirk, D Boston Bruins: Connor Clifton, D Buffalo Sabres: Jeff Skinner, LW Carolina Hurricanes: Nino Niederreiter, LW Columbus Blue Jackets: Max Domi, C Calgary Flames: Mark Giordano, D Dallas Stars: Ben Bishop, G Detroit Red Wings: Vladislav Namestnikov, RW Florida Panthers: Chris Driedger, G Los Angeles Kings: Jonathan Quick, G Montreal Canadiens: Carey Price, G New Jersey Devils: P.K. Subban, D Nashville Predators: Ryan Johansen, C; Matt Duchene, C New York Islanders: Josh Bailey, RW; Jordan Eberle, RW Ottawa Senators: Matt Murray, G Philadelphia Flyers: James van Riemsdyk, LW; Jakub Voracek, RW St. Louis Blues: Vladimir Tarasenko, RW Tampa Bay Lightning: Yanni Gourde, C; Tyler Johnson, C; Ondrej Palat, RW; Alex Killorn, LW Toronto Maple Leafs: Jared McCann, LW; Alex Kerfoot, C Vancouver Canucks: Jake Virtanen, RW Washington Capitals: Conor Sheary, LW Here's your complete list since the above is just one writer's opinion on best available (and he only lists 21 teams): www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-protected-list-for-seattle-released/c-325681800?tid=289242400Haha, Jeff Skinner? Matt Murray? Yikes. The Senators in particular had some surprising omissions on their protected list. Chris Tierney in particular sticks out. Buffalo might have to give like 3 future first rounders for Seattle to take Skinner. I do agree in that Seattle might take Clifton over Lauzon for simply the right shot over left shot. Trying to mock their DCorp here are the left shot Dman I think have a realistic shot at being their respective teams targets based on a combo of contract/skill, and in some cases age versus the rest of their teams' respective pools: Left shot: Mark Giordano, Dennis Cholowski, Jake McCabe, Oskar Klefbom, Markus Nutivaara, Kale Clauge, Ian McCoshen, Will Butcher, Lauzon, Sami Niku, For right shot, its Clifton, Kevin Shattenkirk , Eric Johnson (I wouldn't be surprised to see the AVs work out a deal here), Cal Foote, Shae Weber (retirement rumors), Justin Braun. I think the left shot group is the better one, the right shot group prob has better options overall, too Like Cal Foote is a '17 1st rounder, rare right shot D w size, and no cap hit, but TB also has easily the best F group to draw from. Avs have 2 good Fs in Compher in Donskoi that I think Seattle would covet, and the Ducks have a trio of young left shot Dman that might make sense too. |
|
|
