Boston Bruins 2026 OFFSEASON Roster & Salary Cap III.

[Dr Hook]

But don't you think the money is the biggest factor in general?

Generally, yes, but I also think there are players who will take less to go to a preferred destination whether that be for a better chance at the Cup, a location they would rather be in, a chance to play with friends, proximity to services (like Uncle Nick and the children's hospital in Boston) etc.

 

[GHFC79]

PLAYOFFS 15-16 to 24-25 (10 seasons)

Boston ranks:
3rd in playoff appearances
10th in playoff series wins.
Boston made one Final appearance.

Seven different teams won the Cup, and thirteen reached the Stanley Cup Final.

 

[Sheppy]

Would you guys take a look at Brendan Gallagher? I know there's probably not much of a need but if so, move him to the wing, put Kastelic at C and say goodbye to Kuraly?

That said, I think he goes to Vancouver.

 

[RhodyMike]

The age debate is pretty tiring. But some stats from this year:

Only 62 players 35 or older played a game in the NHL this year.

Only 7 players scored 20 goals - Ovechkin, Crosby, Tavares, Stamkos, Eberle, Marchand, and Jordan Staal. Two generational players, two other former #1 picks, two outliers (Staal hadn’t scored 20 in 10 years). And then Marchand, the exception to a lot of rules.

27 35+ year olds had 30+ points. Take the above plus some D like Karlsson, Josi, Letang and Carlson, add in Patrick Kane and Malkin. Add some old warhorses like Benn, Giroux, Burns, Perry and Kopitar. And then a handful of mid tier guys like JVR, Anders Lee, Killorn and Backlund.

Only 18 had 40 points.

Of the top 100 points leaders only 12 were 33 are older. That’s 57 or more points.

Only 5 of the top 50 were 33 or older. Panarin, Crosby, O’Reilly, Stone, Tavares.

Only 1 of the top 38 were 33 or older - Panarin.

Of the top 50 average TOI leaders (22:23 TOI or more per game), only 4 were 33 or older. Karlsson, Carlson, Josi, Doughty.

Only 11 in the top 100 were 33 or older.

And for fun, only 6 of the top 50 on hits were 33 or older and 16 of the top 100 (and that somehow includes Ryan Reaves).

It’s not common to be an impact offensive player in your mid 30s or later -and many of those players are mutants like Kane, Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Ovi and the like.

So when people who are hesitant to sign up players like Zacha or Arvidsson to deals into their mid-30s are denigrated, to me it’s kind of silly.

Thank you for these numbers.

Something that worries me about a contract with him is that there’s a chance the majority of that term- let’s say during or after year 1, Zacha gets bumped to wing because 3 of Minten, Hagens, Letourneau, Lindholm, Poitras, or “traded player(s)” are here as 1-3c. I don’t think Zacha 31yo as a 7.5m+ winger with 4-5years left on contract is a good look or value. Chances are he holds an NMC for part of that during potential expansion draft years too.

Without Elias, outlook is different.

 

[Dr Hook]

Would you guys take a look at Brendan Gallagher? I know there's probably not much of a need but if so, move him to the wing, put Kastelic at C and say goodbye to Kuraly?

Even though hes a dirty Hab, I always kind of liked the player. I wonder now, though, if he really brings anything more than Kuraly in overall terms. He's looked pretty poor for the past couple seasons- a shell of himself. Not that I think Kuraly is great by any means, just that I don't know if anything is gained by signing Gallagher.

 

[Sheppy]

Even though hes a dirty Hab, I always kind of liked the player. I wonder now, though, if he really brings anything more than Kuraly in overall terms. He's looked pretty poor for the past couple seasons- a shell of himself. Not that I think Kuraly is great by any means, just that I don't know if anything is gained by signing Gallagher.

And that's my thing too, I just look and see that he had 21 goals in 2024-25 which is more than Kuraly has ever scored in a season.

But yeah, he's not the Gallagher of 10 years ago, that's for sure.

 

[goldenblack]

Here's a thought exercise for you. Assume that

1) Vegas doesn't win this cup, which hey, is a 60-40 thing still probably (in their favor).

2) After that, Pietro retires soon, Stone and Herlt fall apart, Theodore is on the wrong side of 30, William Karlsson is suddenly 34-35, even Mitch is 30 all of a sudden.

3) They don't win another cup with that group. But they have no picks! They've been trading those picks every year to go for it.

Suddenly it's "They only won one cup with that core????"

And the only difference between that and not that, is this tight series vs Carolina.

Who does that sound like?

If 2013 or 2019 had a different outcome on a coin flip, largely the bitching doesn't really happen. But the finals are still about which team shows up healthy (that wasn't us in 2013) and which team has the better goalie in the big moment (that wasn't us in 2019).

Vegas will look like geniuses here if they win. But if they don't their rebuild is soon with no picks, something Sweeney has so far done pretty impressively (by mostly acquiring them and young players).

Either Vegas is a smart franchise or they aren't. And having that be the outcome of just this series? That seems funny to me. But that's what this thought experiment shows.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Generally, yes, but I also think there are players who will take less to go to a preferred destination whether that be for a better chance at the Cup, a location they would rather be in, a chance to play with friends, proximity to services (like Uncle Nick and the children's hospital in Boston) etc.

And two years later he was off to Chicago.

 

[BruinDust]

Vegas will look like geniuses here if they win. But if they don't their rebuild is soon with no picks, something Sweeney has so far done pretty impressively (by mostly acquiring them and young players).

Either Vegas is a smart franchise or they aren't. And having that be the outcome of just this series? That seems funny to me. But that's what this thought experiment shows.

What Vegas is doing isn't really ground-breaking stuff.

They aren't blowing their high picks and prospects on rentals. If they move picks/prospects its for established players who they plan to have around for awhile. Plan being the appropriate word as they aren't afraid to pivot if need be.

And they aren't getting involved in the mid-tier UFA market where the Bruins like to shop. The go to the store where the big fish reside like Pietrangelo and Marner.

Meanwhile Sweeney has spent significant draft and prospect capital on rentals (Orlov, Bertuzzi, Nash, etc.) and spent term/cap space on guys who aren't true difference makers (Elias, Backes, Beleskey, etc. etc. etc.).

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Would you guys take a look at Brendan Gallagher? I know there's probably not much of a need but if so, move him to the wing, put Kastelic at C and say goodbye to Kuraly?

That said, I think he goes to Vancouver.

Nope. I like him, but not what we’re lacking.

 

[Dr Hook]

And that's my thing too, I just look and see that he had 21 goals in 2024-25 which is more than Kuraly has ever scored in a season.

But yeah, he's not the Gallagher of 10 years ago, that's for sure.

If they moved Kuraly (unlikely) I wouldn't hate Gallagher coming in on a short deal. But I also want them to put Poitras in the middle between Jeannot and Kastelic. I don't know if Gallagher moves the needle enough to justify blocking a younger player (because he would for sure even if just initially).

 

[Dizzay]

Sure, just do that.

I'm a little unclear on how Poitras ends up on the first line as a left winger, too.

We're a little light on skill in the top 6 on the wing......I also forget Lindholm hahahaha. Kind of a key piece I suppose. I'm just thinking maybe Poitras ends up a winger if he's to crack this team, we have Zacha-Minten-Lindholm-Hagens-Letourneau- and assumingly a new top 1C at some point.

 

[Sheppy]

I still don't get all the Poitras love.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Would you guys take a look at Brendan Gallagher? I know there's probably not much of a need but if so, move him to the wing, put Kastelic at C and say goodbye to Kuraly?

That said, I think he goes to Vancouver.

He is a winger.

A right winger, which is a need for this team.

 

[goldenblack]

What Vegas is doing isn't really ground-breaking stuff.

They aren't blowing their high picks and prospects on rentals. If they move picks/prospects its for established players who they plan to have around for awhile. Plan being the appropriate word as they aren't afraid to pivot if need be.

And they aren't getting involved in the mid-tier UFA market where the Bruins like to shop. The go to the store where the big fish reside like Pietrangelo and Marner.

Meanwhile Sweeney has spent significant draft and prospect capital on rentals (Orlov, Bertuzzi, Nash, etc.) and spent term/cap space on guys who aren't true difference makers (Elias, Backes, Beleskey, etc. etc. etc.).

Rasmus Andersson is a soon to be 30 year old UFA who cost Whitecloud, a first, and a 2nd round pick (that can convert to a first). If they DON'T win, that's potentially what he cost them.

They did this with Mantha, and he walked.

They did this with Janmark, and he walked.

They did this with Lehner, and that didn't work out.

Nick Cousins walked.



Where they've done well is the rental to signing market, and THAT is due to them being a tax state. Hanafin, Marner, Stone, Barbashev....a dollar is not worth a dollar in Vegas or Florida or Texas.

But let's not pretend that they didn't swing for guys who then bailed on them. They have and they did.

 

[GHFC79]

Even without touching Letourneau, Hagens, or the Florida, Toronto, and 2028 Boston first-round picks, I think Boston still has enough assets to put together competitive offers for players like Hronek, Barzal, or Thomas if they ever become available.

Thomas feels extremely unlikely to me.

But something like Lohrei + Lysell + Simpson + Boston's 2027 1st for Hronek feels reasonably competitive. Likewise, Geekie + Zellers + a 2026 1st and 2nd for Barzal doesn't strike me as an unserious offer.

 

[BruinDust]

Rasmus Andersson is a soon to be 30 year old UFA who cost Whitecloud, a first, and a 2nd round pick (that can convert to a first). If they DON'T win, that's potentially what he cost them.

They did this with Mantha, and he walked.

They did this with Janmark, and he walked.

They did this with Lehner, and that didn't work out.

Nick Cousins walked.



Where they've done well is the rental to signing market, and THAT is due to them being a tax state. Hanafin, Marner, Stone, Barbashev....a dollar is not worth a dollar in Vegas or Florida or Texas.

But let's not pretend that they didn't swing for guys who then bailed on them. They have and they did.

But they really haven't. Maybe they let Andersson walk but certainly that wasn't their intention when he declined a deal to Boston to go to Vegas.

Mantha was a 2nd and a 4th. Janmark was a 5th. Cousins a 4th. Peanuts.

I like how you included Lehner who they got for a 5th and signed a long-term deal. Nice try.

Yeah, they've been good at acquiring solid players on expiring contracts and extending them. If you want to cry about it being only because they are a no-state tax team that is on you.

 

[Bmessy]

Wonder if we could get a deal together involving Pettersson for E. Lindholm as a base. High risk possible high reward. E Lindholm isn't going to give you much more, Petterrson at his worst is better than him. Wonder what else it would take

 

[goldenblack]

But they really haven't. Maybe they let Andersson walk but certainly that wasn't their intention when he declined a deal to Boston to go to Vegas.

Mantha was a 2nd and a 4th. Janmark was a 5th. Cousins a 4th. Peanuts.

I like how you included Lehner who they got for a 5th and signed a long-term deal. Nice try.

Yeah, they've been good at acquiring solid players on expiring contracts and extending them. If you want to cry about it being only because they are a no-state tax team that is on you.

What I said was IF they lose this cup, they will potentially be the next "only one cup with this core?" group, alongside what might be the Avs. But nobody thinks the Avs and Vegas have been disappointing. And I dont think our franchise was either with that same mindset. It's that tough a league.

The "only because they are a no tax state" thing is wild. Look where the cups are going.

Tampa
Florida
Vegas
etc...

If we don't start acknowleding what this advantage does man, I dunno. The last 6 cups go

Tax state
Tax state
Tax state
American tax state that's WAY more favorable than most
Tax state
Tax state

We going to wake up to this, or nah? Players, their families, and their agents are all about these states for the most important reason to these guys now. The original 6 are NOT the prime destinations anymore.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Does Gallagher come with the fork stuck in his back or would the Bruins need to furnish a new one?

You can't be an effective player in this league at 5'-9" when you cannot skate anymore.

 

[PB37]

Most likely it was the security of the 6-year term for a guy who only had 1 and 2 year deals since his ELC expired and had played for 4 teams in 5 years. Then factor in trade protection something he never had before on any previous contract.

But that doesn't sound nice for the media so they play up the "Original 6" narrative.

Nope. He mentioned in one of his interviews that the money was great but that he wanted to win and felt the Bruins were his best option over the Canucks, who also were trying to resign him and offered him the same contract money wise. He had several locations in mind and in the end chose what was more relevant to him for his hockey life and more relevant for his family life. Big life decisions are rarely ever about one thing.

 

[BruinDust]

What I said was IF they lose this cup, they will potentially be the next "only one cup with this core?"

Mitch Marner is in year 1 of his 8 year deal and wasn't even there for the last cup. Eichel's 8-year deal starts next year. A bit premature to be talking about potentially one cup with this core or whatever.

Once again, if you want to be upset about the no-state tax advantage that's on you. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Bruins could take a page out of what they are doing. Stay away from signing the Elias Lindholm's of the world as UFAs, and stop chasing pure rentals with their top picks and prospects.

 

[BruinDust]

Nope. He mentioned in one of his interviews that the money was great but that he wanted to win and felt the Bruins were his best option over the Canucks, who also were trying to resign him and offered him the same contract money wise. He had several locations in mind and in the end chose what was more relevant to him for his hockey life and more relevant for his family life. Big life decisions are rarely ever about one thing.

Want to know what is relevant for his family life? The security of knowing your likely not having to pack up and move your family again for awhile.

If some team had offered him a full NMC for all 6 years he's not a Bruin.

 

[GHFC79]

 

[GHFC79]

Nothing against those guys, but it's notable that the Bruins have taken care of Nutter, Sweezey, and Reichel before addressing RFAs with larger roles or greater long-term potential.