But it's 5 more years at 7 million, up to his age 38 season. It would be shocking if there are not 2-3 really bad years at the end of that contract. No way would i take that risk
Boston Bruins 2023-24 Roster and Salary Cap Discussion X
- Thread starter Gee Wally
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play.
- Status
But it's 5 more years at 7 million, up to his age 38 season. It would be shocking if there are not 2-3 really bad years at the end of that contract. No way would i take that risk
- Mar 2, 2015
- 963
- 2,264
It's a risk for sure but Lindholm (if we target him in the offseason) will likely want $9+ up to the age of 37-38 as well ...and he's got no real playoff pedigree. Kadri might be able to hold is own as a 3rd line Centre in the last few years ..he's crafty. I doubt he is on the Bruins radar at all but it's the type of move I'd like to see while Calgary resets, there are likely other comparable options out there ...and sign Hanifin in the offseason ..don't waste capital on a guy who will come here for "free".
Demon Eyes
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2014
- 557
- 332
That type of thinking is like buying an in ground pool BEFORE you get your yearly bonus check; if the bonus check doesn't come, you could end up with the Jelly of the month club instead.
Ozzy Osbourne
Registered User
- Nov 14, 2023
- 1,470
- 1,678
Yeah, but that’s the gift that keeps on giving the whole year.
UncleRico
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 9,267
- 12,038
Yes but the cap hasn’t moved up in what 3 years or something? Everyone’s going to want a piece of the pie on a 23 man roster. While it’s not a huge impact, the nhl minimum will also be going up and lower salary players will want that reflected in their salary as well.
I’m not to sure people realize the impact of the cap not going up the past few years and how much this money will likely have to get spread around through the whole roster.
If reports are true and the Devils are offering whats reported for Saros or Markstrom I do not understand why the Bruins wouldn't make Ullmark available.
UncleRico
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 9,267
- 12,038
1) we don’t know if Ullmark would waive his no movement clause
2) the bruins like the two elite goalie system because it helps their regular season record
Any chance the Preds make Orielly available. I think he’d be exactly what this team needs in the top 6.
He’s on the wrong side of 30 has a few more years left on the deal but his contract isn’t terrible.
He’s on the wrong side of 30 has a few more years left on the deal but his contract isn’t terrible.
I don't know. Just think this is poor asset management.
1) They’re contenders
2) Swayman hasn’t handled a full workload ever and isn’t under contract long term yet
3) team chemistry is a thing
4) Linus M-NTC
It’s an offseason kind of move
The don godfather
Registered User
Ullmark ain't hurting team that's for sure and our goaltending tandem is probably 80 percent why we arent at the bottom of the Atlantic division.
Dr Quincy
Registered User
- Jun 19, 2005
- 29,325
- 11,593
Doubt he'd be available. Kings are in a playoff spot and trading their 2C probably wouldn't make sense. They could use a LD... but neither Forbort or Gryz would have that kind of value.
They have 4 goalies right now (Swayman, Ullmark, Bussi, DiPietro), at least 1, and maybe 2 will be gone next season.
JRull86
Registered User
They'd be stupid not to.
With Swayman due for a big raise, and having shown enough to warrant investing in him as the 1, with someone like Bussi/vet backing him up. The bruins would be doing their cap a disservice by keeping Ullmark at 5 mil.
Once Swayman gets signed, the cost of carrying these 2 goalies is probably going to be upwords of 11 million/ year, that's far too much for a team that has several areas that need improvement. Further to that Bussi is supposed to be more then ready to play in the NHL.
you are assuming again that the teams on his list both need and can afford him. Bruins wont give him away for nothing if the trade isn't there,
Ty Anderson was saying that the bruins had a trade in the works last offseason that would've sent Ullmark out, but it fell through. So we know they're willing to move him, it's just a matter of getting good value back.
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,183
- 23,861
Can you imagine the bad look it would be if they traded Ullmark here mid-season and ended up missing the playoffs while running Swayman into the ground down the stretch.
People talk about trading Ullmark like the Bruins have already locked up a playoffs spot but there is plenty of runway left yet.
Deal with it in the off-season. With Bussi needing waivers next October very likely between now and then the situation will be clarified one way or the other.
Yup-couple that with the fact that I don’t think they’re gonna get nearly as much as some ppl think for him and I don’t see why they’d do it now
UncleRico
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 9,267
- 12,038
I would prefer an every day player, especially come playoff time. It is what it is though. This is apparently what Sweeney prefers at the moment even though it hurts the team come playoff time
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,183
- 23,861
That's the other side of this is they would be dealing Ullmark to a team that wants to win now. Very unlikely the Bruins get back any significant pieces to help them win this year. I assume at this point if/when they Ullmark, it will be mostly future-type of assets coming back.
yeah there was alot of speculation that the Pens were close to sending 14OA and the bruins were going to interview Oliver Moore incase he was available but Im guessing Ullmark nixed it. Id say that was good value 
- Status
