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 '22 Offseason Thread
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,854 
|
Post by cdj on Jul 7, 2022 16:53:25 GMT -5
DeBrincat was just traded to Ottawa for #7, #39 and a 3rd Rd pick in '24. So while I agree, with CDJ on my desired return, I'm not sure you get #2 and Mercer based on the above return (unless, as some are suggesting, Chicago REALLY botched this and there are better offers out there). But if a 24 year old pending RFA got you that, a 26 year old pending UFA might not return what we'd want. I do think Pastrnak is a better player than Debrincat so that’s why I think the return would be more than what the Hawks got. They’re also a pretty inept org at this point though so I wouldn’t use them as a measuring stick for anything Probably not getting Dawson + 2 tho. And if I’m not I think I just hang on to the 40 goal guy |
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jul 7, 2022 20:16:08 GMT -5
I was just reading there a couple of interesting kids available in the 2nd rd.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigmarty58 on Jul 9, 2022 8:38:58 GMT -5
Same old same old from Sweeney at the draft. Looks like we will be looking for some creativity during the FA time period to improve the club...
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,854
|
Post by cdj on Jul 9, 2022 9:01:14 GMT -5
Same old same old from Sweeney at the draft. Looks like we will be looking for some creativity during the FA time period to improve the club... Idk what draft you were watching but it was nothing like past drafts. They actually drafted from Canada pretty extensively for once and everybody was picked around where they were expected. You apparently think they should draft a bonafide first liner with pick 54 or something lol If you’re referring to a lack of a trade that makes zero sense considering he’s added 2 huge names the last 2 years via trade, and has moved premium picks to do so (1st and 2nd rounders)…and again his best pick to move was 54. You’re not getting high end NHL talent for that pick And this is coming from somebody that wanted him fired, so the fact you’re making me defend him makes me sick! Lol |
|
|
|
Post by homerdante on Jul 9, 2022 13:11:47 GMT -5
I thought the all center approach for the first many picks of the draft also indicated some sort of search is strongly underway for the successor to Bergeron. I'm not sure if that approach works well in hockey or not--drafting for position. Obviously it's a mantra in baseball at this point--draft the player not the position. I guess we'll find out in a few years!
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 10, 2022 10:26:04 GMT -5
But drafting Cs seems to me like drafting SSs. There is a better chance they'd be able to move to a different position (in this case, a wing) than drafting a different position and hoping to move them to C.
I'd also argue it probably makes more sense when you're picking later in the draft where the boards are pretty jumbled anyway (not much differentiation between players so might as well take the C)
That's just my guess, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigmarty58 on Jul 11, 2022 15:07:27 GMT -5
David Krejci reported to be talking to the Bruins on returning. The second line center the B's need. Taylor Hall sure will be happy!
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 11, 2022 15:46:55 GMT -5
Would not surprise me if their offseason is limited to:
1. Hire new coach (Montgomery)
2. Resign Bergeron
3. Bring back Krejci
4. Trade a D (Grz?)
5. Trade a F (Haula if Krejci is back or, maybe, Smith)
6. Extend Pasta (hopefully)
7. Extend Swayman (maybe - both sides might want to wait to see what the "next step" looks like for him)
It's not sexy but, given where they are (cap space, thin prospect depth, too good to tank/not good enough to go for it), it's probably the right path for 1 year. See if the new coach can improve the stock of some of the kids and see what's next at deadline or offseason.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,854
|
Post by cdj on Jul 12, 2022 0:40:26 GMT -5
A lot of interesting talent didn’t get qualified
Brendan Lemieux can be cheap grit for the 4th line.
They don’t really have a ton of cap to work with unless people get moved around, Sweeney doesn’t really strike me as somebody willing to get creative in that way though. I think you’ll maybe see them make a couple of cap dumps and that’s it
What I’ll say this this- If Krejci is playing at a high level and Bergeron + Marchand play like they did this past year then this team is a contender provided they have good health. They’ve always been missing a #2 defenseman, Krejci, or a winger for Krejci. Sometimes more than one of those things at the same time. If Krejci is still playing like a 2C we will be in good shape.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 7:39:01 GMT -5
Re-visiting my earlier offseason prediction (with cap projections):
- B’s are starting at 2,383,333 of cap room (according to CapFriendly) accounting for Marchand/DeBrusk/Hall/Haula/Pasta/Frederic/Coyle/Smith/Foligno/Nosek/Steen/Wagner up front, Lindholm/McAvoy/Reilly/Carlo/Grzelcyk/Forbort/Clifton/Zboril on the blueline and Swayman/Ullmark in net
- Studnicka/Filipe/Ahcan received qualifying offers making them restricted free agents. Filipe/Ahcan are waivers exempt and the QOs are below the 1.125M that you can bury so their re-signings wouldn't go against the cap (for now). Studnicka is NOT exempt (and they’ll likely need him on the roster while Marchand is out – assuming the rest of my “predictions” come true) so I’m going to say they’ll need to use up some space to re-sign him. He’ll likely come in somewhere between his 814K QO and, say, Frederic’s 1.05M
- Given Sweeney’s statement that they will not use the buyouts, the biggest way to clear space is to bury Wagner (so his cap hit is 225K instead of 1.35M). We’re now at around 3.5M
- Ty Anderson (98.5) had a piece today saying that Krejci could get done with a cap hit of 1M and the rest in bonuses (where they’d, ideally, address potential overage THIS season so they don’t have to carry into next). For the exercise, I’ll even say 2M. I would also assume a similar thing could be done with Bergeron. That puts you at 492K OVER the cap (remember, you can be over during the offseason – and sometimes want to be if you hope to use LTIR – more on that later).
- But, given that they’ve just replaced Haula as #2 C, I think they could/should trade him. Doing so for draft considerations (he’s good enough that you should receive something not have to pay someone to take him), would take his 2.375M off the books
- That leaves you plenty of room to sign Studnicka, call it 1M so they’re at around 883K in space.
- That’s obviously very tight and you will need to THEN call up a re-signed Ahcan to help with the absence of Grzelcyk (November return) and maybe Reilly (September return).
- Referenced LTIR briefly above and this is where it likely comes in. You probably want to use it but not to bring in anyone big. You just want/need the cushion in case other short-term injuries/absences cause you to need more room. When you start to get bodies back, THEN you can look to move a LHD (either Reilly or Grzelcyk) to create more space. This will allow you activate the LTIR player you designated and/or decrease the bonus overages so there isn’t much carryover next season (when, hopefully, a new Pasta deal will hit the books as well a new contract for your clear cut #1 goalie Jeremy Swayman – ideally). Now if PB/DK DO some in at closer to the 1M than the 2M each, you may not even choose to use LTIR unless you need it (more injuries than expected). Of course you will likely want to create even more space to reduce overage carryover however.
- IF there are opportunities to make a deadline deal, you will need to move roster players/salary in those deals (or separate/parallel ones). Ideally, the early injuries will also provide opportunities for some of the younger players to step up and either increase their trade value OR render other players expendable.
- There is talk that there is mutual interest between Lazar and the Bruins so you might need some more room for that. If so, could that mean a Smith deal is also possible (with Steen/Lazar battling to see who gets 3rd line vs 4th)? That would obviously create more wiggle room and bring in another future asset or 2.
It may not seem sexy but, IF Krejci can come back as good as he was when he left (not a given, obviously), then that’s a pretty big addition that could/should make that second line flourish (it may even be the 1st line with Marchand out). Survive the early injuries and get some improvement from some younger players and go from there. Could buy you some time while you figure out what’s next.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 8:27:41 GMT -5
In the above scenario you start off with the following 2-Man combinations for each of the lines with the 3rd guy up for grabs on all but 1 line:
JDB/Bergeron
Hall/Krejci/Pasta
Frederic/Coyle
Foligno/Nosek
The 3rd guy on line 1 could either Smith or Studnicka (where Bergy could help bring him along???). Though part of me has a "you want him, you got him" theory that puts Foligno up there with the guy that recruited him. Don't actually think it would happen . . .
The 3rd guy on line 3 could be Smith, Studnicka, Steen or Lazar (if re-signed)
The line 4 candidates would be the line 3 guys sans Smith (add Wagner if you don't bury him but this all would be based on my predictions above so . . . no)
When Marchy comes back, he's with Bergeron and JDB with the 3rd guy being moved (either down in the lineup or in a trade).
On the blueline, it's a little uglier to start. Lindholm/Carlo as the top pair with Forbort/Clifton/Zboril/Ahcan making up the up the bottom 2 pairs. If Reilly is on time in his return (again, September hopefully) he's in that mix too. When McAvoy's back he's obviously on the top pair with Hampus. Grz or Reilly with Carlo (or, hey, maybe Zboril/Ahcan do so well earlier on that both Grz/Reilly can be moved) #2. Forbort/Clifton/Zboril/Ahcan factoring in on the bottom pair.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,854
|
Post by cdj on Jul 12, 2022 8:30:33 GMT -5
Apparently there is some interest in Forbort but the Bruins like him
Teams definitely value him more than fans do. He is for sure that type of guy. Makes sense though, they do a lot of the dirty work in regards to shot blocking and logging tough minutes (tons of PK time and defensive zone starts)
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 8:48:20 GMT -5
Apparently there is some interest in Forbort but the Bruins like him Teams definitely value him more than fans do. He is for sure that type of guy. Makes sense though, they do a lot of the dirty work in regards to shot blocking and logging tough minutes (tons of PK time and defensive zone starts) As you suggest, he has more value to Boston than he'd likely return in assets. He also has an 8-Team no trade list that, technically, decreases his trade value (a tad, I suppose). |
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,854
|
Post by cdj on Jul 12, 2022 8:58:32 GMT -5
Apparently there is some interest in Forbort but the Bruins like him Teams definitely value him more than fans do. He is for sure that type of guy. Makes sense though, they do a lot of the dirty work in regards to shot blocking and logging tough minutes (tons of PK time and defensive zone starts) As you suggest, he has more value to Boston than he'd likely return in assets. He also has an 8-Team no trade list that, technically, decreases his trade value (a tad, I suppose). If I had to guess they could probably get a late 2nd or 3rd for him after his performance against Carolina. Not sure that’s worth it, like you said. They’ll have to clear cap some way- I bet it will be a Haula or Smith deal like you mentioned |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 9:08:05 GMT -5
Hmm, a 2nd or 3rd might actually tempt me tbh. But i'm terrible at those type of evaluations. It'd have to be a 2nd/3rd, no retained salary and a replacement in place (a cheaper alternative that would likely come from outside the org).
Either way, I think we land in the same place (Forbort as a Bruin next year is the likely outcome).
One addition to my above (and I think I referenced this in my initial prediction) is that trading Nosek instead of Haula is only about a 600K reduction in savings (which is not nothing, admittedly given the cap situation). But there could be a rationale to move him instead of Haula (Haula moves to 3LW while still proving protection if a middle 6 C is needed at some point; Frederic to 4th line as the C where some still feel he fits best) OR Haula as 4th line C.
Haula gets you more in savings and likely return but Nosek probably doesn't belong in the middle 6 where, over the course of a long season, you might need to move someone up.
Either way, 1 of Haula/Nosek is likely redundant if Bergy/Krejci are back.
|
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jul 12, 2022 11:29:26 GMT -5
Listen I love my bruins but I can not stand Don Sweeney. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt but he really, really screwed up last offseason. 1st problem giving Foligno 2 years. 2nd big mistake trading Vlader for a 3rd pick. 3rd giving a 5year deal at 5 friggin million to a backup goalie. Why he was scarred he had a rookie at goalie? Swayman? He had a perfect opportunity to have 2 goalie rookie deals and use that money on offense. So he pisses the money away on a backup with no trade claus first 2 years. Foglino too lol.
Don did good at trade deadline to get a quality defenseman. There is no plan for future.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 11:45:04 GMT -5
This narrative is both silly and exhausting and encompasses nearly every cognitive bias we have in analysis (yes, I just finished Inside Game so I try to throw in those concepts every chance I get).
Love ya Jrrusso but there really should be a temporary ban (maybe just a couple of hours) for anyone who suggests that not going into a year (one that might've been your last shot) with 2 rookie goaltenders was a mistake by Sweeney.
1. I don't believe in absolutes so I'll say 99% of NHL GMs would've done the same thing as far as trying to get a veteran goaltender instead of going with 2 rookies in that scenario.
2. He didn't sign a backup goalie for 5M per. He signed a starting goalie for 5 per and that guy ended up getting beaten out by the younger player. Most thought Ullmark would be much better with a better team and he was. Swayman just happened to be better.
3. Going rate for a starting-caliber FA goaltender is right around what you got him for.
4. 6M for an above average tandem (not yet elite, of course) is pretty darn good. When it's time to pay Swayman (next year), the NMC reduces to limited no trade and you can move on. Timed perfectly.
5. Ullmark went through stretches where he carried the Bs more than most backups would.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 12, 2022 12:15:50 GMT -5
Ullmark has what a no movement clause for two years and a 16 and 15 team no trade clause the last two years. All that for a backup goalie paid starting level money?
Yeah you sign a veteran. The debate really is who, how much and why four years with that many clauses? You can't easily move him for all four years. You shouldn't do that with a good young goalie.
With Sweeney it's always little crap. Like he paid a little extra for a guy or gave him too many years. He's not horrible, he's just not great either.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 12:29:08 GMT -5
Ullmark played in 41 games and had the 7th best GAA and 10th best SV% in the NHL (Sway was 5th and 16th). He's only a backup goalie bc it supports the narrative.
Meanwhile, prior to last season, Swayman was considered a "meh" prospect who had a great initial run at the end of the prior season but whose status was also bumped by him being "not Tuukka". Otherwise, he had done little more than many other rookies who adapted quickly but faded quickly thereafter. So far, Swayman hasn't faded (and let's hope he doesn't). But he was not a lock to be what he ended up being by any stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jul 12, 2022 13:29:17 GMT -5
This narrative is both silly and exhausting and encompasses nearly every cognitive bias we have in analysis (yes, I just finished Inside Game so I try to throw in those concepts every chance I get). Love ya Jrrusso but there really should be a temporary ban (maybe just a couple of hours) for anyone who suggests that not going into a year (one that might've been your last shot) with 2 rookie goaltenders was a mistake by Sweeney. 1. I don't believe in absolutes so I'll say 99% of NHL GMs would've done the same thing as far as trying to get a veteran goaltender instead of going with 2 rookies in that scenario. 2. He didn't sign a backup goalie for 5M per. He signed a starting goalie for 5 per and that guy ended up getting beaten out by the younger player. Most thought Ullmark would be much better with a better team and he was. Swayman just happened to be better. 3. Going rate for a starting-caliber FA goaltender is right around what you got him for. 4. 6M for an above average tandem (not yet elite, of course) is pretty darn good. When it's time to pay Swayman (next year), the NMC reduces to limited no trade and you can move on. Timed perfectly. 5. Ullmark went through stretches where he carried the Bs more than most backups would. That wasn’t by design they wanted Tuuka back , it didn’t work out. Look where it got us he was looking for scoring all year . It’s not my fault there drafts except for Lysel I think are not impressive. I respect your voice but sometimes you have a situation just run with it. One season later are we better or worse. We can agree to disagree. He was expecting Tuuka back by mid season. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 13:42:17 GMT -5
TBC, I'm only talking about the Ullmark narrative. Sweeney has NOT been a success and I'm not here to suggest otherwise. Just think the Ullmark "failure" is not what everyone is suggesting. Sometimes you can do the right thing and have it go wrong (or, in this case, just differently than planned).
I'd also argue that "hoping" Tuukka comes back and going all in on it are 2 very different things.
Just looking at last year, his mistakes were more overpaying 3rd and 4th lines and 3rd pairing guys than it was Ullmark. And if we're talking about what he was planning, he was planning on Krejci coming back. And if it was on the type of deal folks are suggesting now (low cap hit, bonuses to figure out later), that's a much better team from the start (even with the overpays).
I just think we look at the result and blame the process (and the person who executed the process) despite the fact that players have a significant role in the outcome. It's obvious to say it but we overlook it (either by accident or by choice) when we evaluate decision makers.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 12, 2022 14:00:18 GMT -5
Ullmark played in 41 games and had the 7th best GAA and 10th best SV% in the NHL (Sway was 5th and 16th). He's only a backup goalie bc it supports the narrative. Meanwhile, prior to last season, Swayman was considered a "meh" prospect who had a great initial run at the end of the prior season but whose status was also bumped by him being "not Tuukka". Otherwise, he had done little more than many other rookies who adapted quickly but faded quickly thereafter. So far, Swayman hasn't faded (and let's hope he doesn't). But he was not a lock to be what he ended up being by any stretch. He's a backup in my book because Swayman started 5 playoff games going 3-2 with darn good numbers, Ullmark was 0-2 with bad numbers. Everything I see shows him #1 and #2 on our prospect ranking at this time last year. Top college goalie to dominating providence to darn good in 10 games in NHL. Not my idea of a "meh" prospect. |
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 12, 2022 16:00:43 GMT -5
Ullmark has what a no movement clause for two years and a 16 and 15 team no trade clause the last two years. All that for a backup goalie paid starting level money? Yeah you sign a veteran. The debate really is who, how much and why four years with that many clauses? You can't easily move him for all four years. You shouldn't do that with a good young goalie. With Sweeney it's always little crap. Like he paid a little extra for a guy or gave him too many years. He's not horrible, he's just not great either. This is exactly it. They were always going to sign a vet G, but giving that much money to one while the team had limited cap and so many real needs is what made it such a bad deal. In a vacuum, Ullmark is a decent value (not great, but decent) at his money (but giving him a NTC is positively boneheaded). But it's not a vacuum. Ullmark is good, but he's never going to be the kind of guy who's going to carry you to a Cup. The team would need to be tremendous around him to win one. And you were spending the resources you need to build such a team by signing him. Signing him meant you needed to go with the likes of Eric Haula as your #2 center and not sign the scoring depth you needed. If the team was going to have a G be a major factor in a Cup run, it was always going to be Swayman or Rask. He gave bug money to Ullmark because he was terrified everything might go wrong and the team might not make the playoffs. He chose to spend the resources to ensure a playoff run and not on a possible title run. The whole mindset was cowardly. It's the worst kind of personnel decision. Especially when you have a shrinking window to win with a couple of HOFers. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 12, 2022 16:04:41 GMT -5
Ahhh, yes. I always forget about "your book".
What rankings are you looking at? Lohrei and Lysell were 1/2 by most major outlet. Corey Pronman, who does one of the most exhaustive prospect dives considered him an NHL player but nothing more. Not sure anyone had him as a Top 100 guy (Pronman, Wright, TSN, THN, etc)
He had 9 games in Providence prior to last year. Can't help but think if the data wasn't in your favor you'd consider that statistically insignificant.
He was a 4th rd pick so he didn't come with much hype either.
Maybe "meh" isn't the right description but it's not "lock starter" either.
|
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jul 12, 2022 16:30:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
