Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

chippa13

Boston Bruins 2015-2016

Recommended Posts

I don't think there are any current NHLers who use that extra hanging plastic piece. I've wondered these days why they stopped wearing them.

Between the shape of the masks and the collars that most guys wear, the "gobblers" are more likely to get in the way than they are to stop a puck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halak, Lundqvist, Ranta, Gibson, Fleury just to name a few who still wear them that I could remember off the top of my head. If you do them up right they really aren't a big issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether last night's game leads to a trade of Eriksson. They may be in contention for the playoffs, but they obviously are nowhere near contending for the Cup; consequently, if they could get a decent return for Loui, I think they should do it.

Also, yesterday's game illustrated something I haven't liked about the Bruins the past two seasons: they lack size. It's not enough just to be big, but to have a team with decent size and decent skill creates space and wears down other teams. That certainly happened last night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is necessarily a lack in size. The issues on the back end stem from their two best shut down guys being slowed by recent knee injuries and an apparent regression going on with Kevan Miller (he definitely didn't sleep well last night). Combine that with some growing pains for Trotman, Morrow, and Colin Miller and it can make things look real bad at times.

As for Eriksson, I am really not sure what will happen there. He did buy a house in the area in the last year which gives the impression that he would like to stay and Sweeney keeps saying how much he would like to keep him (at the right price). The next couple of weeks will be very interesting. I think Sweeney gives himself another week to try and get something on paper with Eriksson before he really starts working the phones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The slowing is more a result of age and miles than injury and we are far enough removed from those injuries where that shouldn't be the issue. The problem is both Chara and Seids have looged a lot of miles and the coaching staff still leans pretty heavily on them.

At age 38 Chara is still averaging over 24 minutes of ice-time per game. Since the 02/03 season he's only avreaged less than 24 minutes a night one time. His AIT has dropped only 1 minute per game since the 2011 season. He had over 21 minutes of ice-time in a blowout against the Kings. We know he keeps himself in great shape, but that a ton of time on ice.

Other than this season (19:50 AIT) Siedenberg has never averaged less than 21:50 playing in Boston, he's 34.

When Trotman and K. Miller are averaging over 19 minutes a night, you're in trouble. Tory Krug is a great story, but he's not a 17+ minute a night guy.

This is what really burns me about the Boychuck & Hamilton deals. You had two guys that were proven and were capable of taking minutes away from Z & Sieds, helping extend their careers, and they were dealt for futures....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no team in the league that could afford the defensive corps of Chara, Seidenberg, Boychuk, Hamilton, Krug, and McQuaid. Committing $26 million this season and having Krug coming up for another bump for next year, that is just too much money to be spent on the backend. They had to start looking at ways to retool.

I still don't hate the Hamilton deal and unless the picks turn out to be complete busts then I probably never will. He makes too many bad puck decisions and refuses to use his size. I said when he signed his contract in Calgary that he won't be in Calgary when it ends and I still believe that.

Yes, age is a bit of a factor with Seidenberg and Chara but they are also two of the best conditioned players the Bruins have. Even being a bit removed from their injuries, you can see a clear difference in their before and after mobility.

I look at this season and next as years in which the Bruins will find out whether or not any of the younger guys will be capable of stepping in and taking over. They are also evaluating their pipeline. In the cap era you simply have to retool every so often. The nature of the business now dictates that you can't simply keep everyone that you would like to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, age is a bit of a factor with Seidenberg and Chara but they are also two of the best conditioned players the Bruins have. Even being a bit removed from their injuries, you can see a clear difference in their before and after mobility.

It's so much more than just their mobility which is why I don't think that's the main reason for their drop in play. At their ages, you really can't discount the amount of wear and tear they've put their bodies through. They are far enough removed from those injuries where it should no longer have an impact.

I disagree with the notion that no team could afford those 4. Everyone thought the Pens would never be able to afford Malkin AND Crosby. Not only can they afford them, they are still able to pay Letang and Fluery. The same goes for the Hawks, they mange to keep Toews, Kane & Keith. Now it takes some shrewd management decisions and some tough choices, but it's doable. Lets start with not handed out top dollar to every player that comes up for contract. Which is what cost Chiarelli his job, and rightfully so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at what they say is a trouble spot for Calgary. They have $28 million committed to their top 6 defensemen for next year. On top of that they have no NHL goalies under contract for next season and have Hudler, Gaudreau, and Monaghan all needing new contracts for next season. They are in a really tough situation.

You want the Bruins to be spending $26 million this season on defense and point to the Blackhawks. Well, the Blackhawks are only paying $19.9 million dollars for their blueline this year. I believe the entire Penguins defensive corps is costing them about $10 million this season.

As for the top dollars getting thrown around. The only contracts that could be questionable are Kelly and McQuaid, and Sweeney signed the McQuaid deal. The 4 biggest cap hits on the team are Krejci, Rask, Chara, and Bergeron. It is safe to say that those names would be in the top 4 on any team. The next biggest cap hit is Marchand at $4.5 which is looking like a decent price based on this season's production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saying, it's not impossible. Other players would need to be moved or take a bit of a discount when resigning, but it's not impossible.

The Bruins need talented young defenesemen that can play at this level, you can't deny that. In the past two years they've moved two defensemen both under the age of 30, both capable of handling top 4 minutes.

The previous GM spent like a drunken sailor and now we're paying for it. Look, I like David Krejci, but he's not a 7+ a year player. Chara's last contract was a bit of an overpayment. We have a 38 year old Dman on the books for two mores year at 6.9 per year. I don't want our GM to go all Harry Sinden on these guys, but hell...how about taking a bit of a discount to stay, or not giving them max term deals with No Movement Clauses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to break the news, but based on several of the deals other top centers have received in the last year or two, Krejci's contract is right in line. He is a 200 foot player and a playoff performer. Two years from now Krejci and Bergeron are going to look like bargains.

When Chara signed the extension he was one year removed from a Norris trophy season and his crazy fitness indicated that he should be able to sustain a high level of play for most of the extension. He actually did take a discount on that extension since very few Norris trophy guys basically resign for about the same amount as their last deal. In exchange for not pressing for a raise he was given term. Since he signed the deal he has been a Norris finalist 3 more times. If Chara had hit the open market instead of signing the extension then you can bet he would have received at least the same contract, if not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's agree to disagree.

FWIW, I think you're giving them a bit of a pass. It's widly known and accepted that PC put them in cap hell. It's probably the #1 reason why he lost his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, a couple of the third and fourth line contracts became overpays at the end, but I think the cap puts every team in cap hell. I hated the Sequin trade, but ultimately Krejci would have been gone. Boychuk could have been with them last year, but maybe it would have come done to him or Dougie this year, with Dougie bailing them out because he wanted out.

What team hasn't had problems with the cap? LA and Chicago both have, but they did a better job of backfilling their rosters with younger players. We have no idea how Chiarelli did, because Julien seldom puts the call ups in positions to succeed.

Here's a interesting idea. You may have heard the Patriots were the most injured team this year, but it turns out they were the second most injured over the last six years. Now, it makes sense that they cut ties with the Strength and Conditioning coach, right? Until you see that five of the top seven injured teams were perennial contenders. So maybe all those extra weeks of practice and games leads to players either not being filled healed when the next season starts or not healed enough to work out to build up the strength for the next season. When that happens, more injuries occur and guys who seemed like solid contributors become overpays before their contracts end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.tsn.ca/trade-talk-ducks-have-prospects-for-rentals-1.439242

Boston Bruins winger Loui Eriksson has been the subject of trade speculation as he plays on an expiring contract, but he may not be on the market after all.

TSN Hockey Insider Darren Dreger said on Tuesday’s Insider Trading the Bruins would prefer to keep Eriksson on a three- to four-year deal.

Eriksson, 30, has 20 goals and 25 assists in 57 games with the Bruins this season. He currently owns a cap hit of $4.25 million and owns a partial no-trade clause.

I hope he's wrong. I can't imagine the Bruins paying him what he wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweeney has been saying for weeks that his preference would be to sign Eriksson, so long as the number makes sense.

That would be a gigantic mistake. He can't afford to resign him even at his current rate and still have money left to sign Marchand, Krug, Spooner & Pasternak.

Yeah, he's saying that, doesn't mean he'll do it or that its the right thing to do....unless of course he takes less than what he's currently making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Sweeney resigns Erickson then why did they fire Chiarelli?? That is how they got into their current situation. Sign too many veterans to long term deals.

With all the help they need on the back end, they need to acquire defensive prospects or draft picks. Then hopefully find help in free agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marchand, Spooner, and Pastrnak don't come due for new deals until summer 2017. This summer they will be cleared of the Lucic and Kelly cap hits that free up some $5.75 million of cap space. Pastrnak and Spooner will likely sign 1-2 year bridge deals and after that Chara, McQuaid and Seidenberg will be off the books.

Eriksson may decide he loves Boston and agree to stay for a little less than market value in exchange for term and security. Obviously, he'd be getting a raise over current salary but he and Krug could share some of the freed up $5.75 mentioned above.

The back end is littered with prospects right now but everyone is upset that they aren't playing like Norris finalists yet. You've got Morrow, Trotman, and Colin Miller back there with Zboril likely headed to Providence next season and some other property plying their trade in NCAA at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some? I was watching the Beanpot tournament a couple weeks ago and the announcer said something along the lines of the Bruins having 9 prospects and picks between those teams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be more exact. They look to have about 23 million to spend going into next season with 12 spots to fill (Erikkson, Kelly, Connolly, Talbot, Kemppainen, Randell, Ferroro, Krug, Morrow, K. Miller, Trotman & a backup goale). The following year it's Marchand, Spooner & Pasternak.

With that in mind, is a 30 year Loui Erikkson worth 5+ mil per year and not only that, is he worth the roster spot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The correct question would be; Is a 25-30 goal first line winger worth $5+ million? The answer to that question is yes.

For how many years? There is a cost that is too much and a time frame that is too long, the contract has to fit into that scale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sfdz6_20_07 said:

I think the money would be more wisely spent on Defense. 

Especially considering his age and play. You can't just look at the numbers, there is so much more to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, nobody is saying to sign Eriksson to a max deal for 8 years. If they can get him to agree to a 3/4 year, $5 million AAV then I think they really have to consider it. That would take him to age 34-35, not exactly time for the convalescence home but not a bad time to ship him out as a rental or let him walk over the summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, chippa13 said:

Ok, nobody is saying to sign Eriksson to a max deal for 8 years. If they can get him to agree to a 3/4 year, $5 million AAV then I think they really have to consider it. That would take him to age 34-35, not exactly time for the convalescence home but not a bad time to ship him out as a rental or let him walk over the summer.

With the season Eriksson is having I think some team would offer him closer to 4/5 year $6  million AAV. Plus this will be his last chance at a big contract. I don't think he would take a discount to stay here.

I still think they are much better off trading him and getting some future assets. They have young wingers in the system to replace him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...