Boston Bruins 24-25 Roster/Cap thread III

[BradMarchandismydad]

Any interesting non-qualified players out there? Who's the next Geekie?

There’s a few intriguing dmen like Brannstrom, POJ, and Nils Lundqvist (sp?)

Zadina is probably a bust but he’s on that list too

 

[dafoomie]

Yes. You file. Protect your right.

Then Swayman's only leverage is to use the media, stories will come out and we'll get all worked up over it but they all understand it's just part of the negotiation. I'm not worried about it, it'll take care of itself.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

There’s a few intriguing dmen like Brannstrom, POJ, and Nils Lundqvist (sp?)

Zadina is probably a bust but he’s on that list too

I was so sure Lundqvist was gonna be an NHL star. That’s stunning to me.

 

[Gee Wally]

Then Swayman's only leverage is to use the media, stories will come out and we'll get all worked up over it but they all understand it's just part of the negotiation. I'm not worried about it, it'll take care of itself.

No matter what happens we’ll get all worked up.
Its what we do.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

I hated the trade too. Still do. I’m not defending the return whatsoever.

But waiting to trade Ullmark and pushing a concrete return (knowing where you’ll pick and most likely the guy or 2-3 guys you’d get) is a lot different than a pick next year where you don’t know where it will land. Also may not have been able to move him later once the spots were filled and money is committed. So you’d be riding to the deadline and hoping you get something there. And that eats up another $2M now.

I think it’s quite possible that Ullmark wasn’t drawing good interest. I think it’s more possible that they did a great job with setting up their list. Ullmark refusing to waive or extend torpedoed the return completely.

I guess the difference is I’d have rather waited and risked losing Ullmark for nothing (or a worse return before the trade deadline next year) rather than taking what Ottawa offered.

I would anticipate at least one other team calling that Ullmark would or could be moved to after FA period is over and some teams reevaluate priorities based on who they were able or unable to sign.

Or if you have no luck there, another team calling if they have a team performing well but their goalie situation is causing them to fall in the standings early killing their playoff chances.

And if no luck there, I’d give it one more shot at the deadline. You’d give Ullmarks camp permission to start looking for a new home throughout the season and hope he gives you a couple options. Maybe you retain 50% to help facilitate a deal.

At the end of the day if he stays and walks, I missed out on a late first, I missed out on 2m in cap space, and I didn’t bail a division rival out of a cap dump.

I’d take the risk. The return we got wasn’t enough for me to think we couldn’t do better. And if I ended up being wrong, I wouldn’t have lost sleep over what I missed out on.

 

[UConn126]

They either arrive at a figure or go to arbitration.

I’m not concerned about an offer sheet.

Can arbitration award a long term extension? Or is it always a 1-2 year deal? If he goes to arbitration again he's as good as gone.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I guess the difference is I’d have rather waited and risked losing Ullmark for nothing (or a worse return before the trade deadline next year) rather than taking what Ottawa offered.

I would anticipate at least one other team calling that Ullmark would or could be moved to after FA period is over and some teams reevaluate priorities based on who they were able or unable to sign.

Or if you have no luck there, another team calling if they have a team performing well but their goalie situation is causing them to fall in the standings early killing their playoff chances.

And if no luck there, I’d give it one more shot at the deadline. You’d give Ullmarks camp permission to start looking for a new home throughout the season and hope he gives you a couple options. Maybe you retain 50% to help facilitate a deal.

At the end of the day if he stays and walks, I missed out on a late first, I missed out on 2m in cap space, and I didn’t bail a division rival out of a cap dump.

I’d take the risk. The return we got wasn’t enough for me to think we couldn’t do better.

That’s fair. Imagine the reaction here if he kept him and lost him for nothing?

The timing was important. Most likely on July 1 (it’s not required to be then, but most are), Ullmark resets his NTC list. A basic example would be…NJ was on his list before. He now takes them off and puts Ottawa on. So you’ve lost a destination. Now do that a few more times. Where’s the market? You’re hoping for an injury.

 

[BradMarchandismydad]

I was so sure Lundqvist was gonna be an NHL star. That’s stunning to me.

I wouldn’t be mad if we took a flier on any of those 3, they’ve got talent.

—

On another note the Skinner buyout went through today. If the plan is to only acquire one center we could roll out something like

Skinner - Zacha - Pasta
Marchand - Lindholm - Lysell

I think he’s still got the juice—he’s a phenomenal goal scorer.

 

[bruinmann77]

Give me skinner I be ok with add of a center

 

[Gee Wally]

Can arbitration award a long term extension? Or is it always a 1-2 year deal? If he goes to arbitration again he's as good as gone.

Depends on whois filing. Club or player. But no more than 2 years.

• Player Elected Salary Arbitration eligibility:
  • Player must meet the Pro Years of Professional Experience requirement [CBA Section 12.1(a)]
  • Player electing for Arbitration must do so by making a written request [CBA 12.2]
  • Player must notify the Central Registry, NHLPA & Team by 5:00pm ET on July 5th [CBA 12.2]
    • For the 2019-20 off-season, due to the postponed playoffs caused by COVID, the window is the later of October 10th at 5:00pm ET, or 8 days after last playoff game played by the player's respective club
    • For the 2020-21 off-season, due to the postponed playoffs caused by COVID, the deadline is August 1, 2021 at 5:00pm ET
    • For the 2021-22 off-season, due to the extended season schedule (originally intended for the Olympics), the deadline is July 17, 2022 at 5:00pm ET
    • For the 2023 off-season, the deadline has returned to the usual rules as outlined above
• Club Elected Salary Arbitration eligibility (first window):
  • Club electing for Arbitration in the first window must do so in writing by the later of June 15th OR 48hrs after the Stanley Cup final by 5:00pm ET [CBA Section 12.4(a)]
    • For the 2019-20 off-season, due to the postponed playoffs caused by COVID, the first window is the later of October 4th or 48hrs after the last playoff game played by the respective club
    • For the 2020-21 off-season, due to the postponed playoffs caused by COVID, the deadline is 24hrs after the conclusion of the Stanley Cup Final
    • For the 2021-22 off-season, due to the extended season schedule (originally intended for the Olympics), the deadline is July 2, 2022 at 5:00pm ET
    • For the 2023 off-season, the deadline has returned to the usual rules as outlined above
  • Player had a base salary greater than $2,198,916 in 2019 [CBA Section 12.3(a)]
  • Player had a base salary greater than $2,269,479 in 2020 [CBA Section 12.3(a)]
  • Player had a base salary greater than $2,138,212 in 2021 [CBA Section 12.3(a)]
  • Player had a base salary greater than $2,185,419 in 2022 [CBA Section 12.3(a)]
  • Player had a base salary greater than $2,231,524 in 2023 [CBA Section 12.3(a)]
  • Club electing for Arbitration in the first window can be made in lieu of a Qualifying Offer [CBA 12.3(a)(ii)]
  • Player cannot be awarded less than 85% of his previous years combined base salary, signing bonuses and performance bonuses [CBA 12.3(a)(iii)]
• Club Elected Salary Arbitration eligibility (second window):
  • Club electing for Arbitration in the second window must do so in writing between July 5th at 5:00pm ET & July 6th at 5:00pm ET [CBA Section 12.4(b)]
    • For the 2019-20 off-season, due to the postponed playoffs caused by COVID, the second window lasts for 24 hours beginning on the later of October 10th at 5:01pm ET, or 8 days after last playoff game played by the respective club
    • For the 2020-21 off-season, due to the postponed playoffs caused by COVID, the second window spans August 1, 2021 at 5:01pm ET to August 2, 2021 at 5:00pm ET
    • For the 2021-22 off-season, due to the extended season schedule (originally intended for the Olympics), the second window spans Jul 17, 2022 at 5:01pm ET to July 18, 2022 at 5:00pm ET
    • For the 2023 off-season, the deadline has returned to the usual rules as outlined above
  • Club has to have made a valid Qualifying offer to the Player which has not yet been accepted [CBA Section 12.3(b)(i)]
  • Club offer for Arbitration in the second window equal to or higher than the Players previous years combined base salary, signing bonuses and performance bonuses [CBA 12.3(b)(ii)]
  • Player can only be subject to one (1) Club elected Salary Arbitration in his career [CBA 12.3(c)]
  • Club can only elect to have two (2) Salary Arbitrations per league year [CBA 12.3(d)]
• Arbitration Ruling:
  • Player & Club can settle on a deal at any point prior to the commencement of the hearing (Prior to the 2020 MOU, a settlement could be made at any point prior to the arbitration decision)
  • Once the hearing has taken place, the Salary Arbitration decision must be issued by email within 48 hrs of the closing [CBA 12.9(n)(i)]
  • Arbitration awards can only be 1 or 2 years in length [CBA 12.10(a)&(b)]
  • The party (Player or Club) who did not elect for Arbitration decides on the awarded term [CBA 12.10(a)&(b)]
  • Players who are in their final year Restricted Free Agency are only entitled to a 1 year term.
  • Club cannot walk away from a Club elected Arbitration Settlement [CBA 12.10(e)]
  • Player elected Arbitration Settlements of 1 year and greater than $4,538,958, Club can walk away from the awarded salary, making the player a UFA [CBA 12.10(a)]
  • Player elected Arbitration Settlements of 2 years and greater than $4,538,958, Club can walk away from the second (2nd) year of the awarded salary, making the player a UFA at the end of year 1 [CBA 12.10(b)]

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

That’s fair. Imagine the reaction here if he kept him and lost him for nothing?

The timing was important. Most likely on July 1 (it’s not required to be then, but most are), Ullmark resets his NTC list. A basic example would be…NJ was on his list before. He now takes them off and puts Ottawa on. So you’ve lost a destination. Now do that a few more times. Where’s the market? You’re hoping for an injury.

Oh there’s for sure a hundred hypotheticals that could help or hinder the ability to have gotten a better return than the Ottawa deal. To cover them all would have made my post resemble one from the late great AOF (RIP).

We’ll have to see how the rest of the offseason plays out as well as leading up to the trade deadline to know if Sweeney could have taken advantage of any new goalie needs popping up.

I also find it strange we assume Ullmark is trying to block almost every move possible.

It’s in his best interest for his next contract to play out this season and playoffs as the #1 goalie somewhere. If he just kept blocking moves and was just content to play backup here that hurts negotiations for his next contract when he hit UFA.

As a GM my opinion would be swayed greatly if he had a strong playoff showing as the #1 somewhere this season than if he rode the bench in Boston.

If it’s true I guess I just don’t understand Ullmarks motivations + thought process

 

[goalieman40]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807578515698597936

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807577797289718050

I’m not getting my Stam-hopes up, but interesting approach by Tampa. Seems like they’re prepared to move on if he won’t take a big discount.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807578515698597936

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807577797289718050

I’m not getting my Stam-hopes up, but interesting approach by Tampa. Seems like they’re prepared to move on if he won’t take a big discount.

If Guentzels rights alone cost a 3rd, I wonder what the cost would have been for a sign and trade?

 

[JoeIsAStud]

If Guentzels rights alone cost a 3rd, I wonder what the cost would have been for a sign and trade?

I don't believe the NHL really has the concept of sign and trade

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

I don't believe the NHL really has the concept of sign and trade

Matt Tkachuk

 

[goldenblack]

I am actually shocked they traded Linus and the Sway contract wasn't all but done.

They must genuinely consider Arb to be a path, which is scary.

 

[DKH]

Bruins wanted Brannstrom draft year

Lindholm
Brannstrom ?
Amadio (Heinen leaves)

 

[wintersej]

I’ll start off by saying that I am 100% confident that Swayman will be signed long term in Boston. Seravalli doesn’t know anything and hasn’t said anything he doesn’t know.

THAT SAID
I said from the beginning that you get Swayman under contract FIRST - then you trade Ullmark. Folks were more concerned about maximizing Ullmark’s value than they were Swayman’s number or leverage in negotiating that number. Not me.

Then what happened? They traded Ullmark before signing Swayman - and didn’t even get value for Ullmark. Theoretically? Swayman has the Bruins bent over the kitchen counter.

So, if like you suggest, Swayman says “$9.5M AAV or I sit?” Sweeney has no one but his own damn self to blame.

You are right.

And Swayman’s agent would have been an idiot to agree to anything as early as the Bruins would have wanted.

That’s fair. Imagine the reaction here if he kept him and lost him for nothing?

The timing was important. Most likely on July 1 (it’s not required to be then, but most are), Ullmark resets his NTC list. A basic example would be…NJ was on his list before. He now takes them off and puts Ottawa on. So you’ve lost a destination. Now do that a few more times. Where’s the market? You’re hoping for an injury.

Right, if you don’t trade Ullmark before the draft, you probably aren’t trading him.

 

[Number8]

No, they don't.

In practice, yes, they do. Four long years at $3M is his value and the Bruins are indeed on the hook to pay it.

 

[KrugAvoy]

Bruins wanted Brannstrom draft year

Lindholm
Brannstrom ?
Amadio (Heinen leaves)

Improves C but the Wings would look bad. I'd rather save a couple mill on C and grab Stepenson and Stamkos. 2 Cup winning vets and inject them in our line up

 

[SPLBRUIN]

Bruins wanted Brannstrom draft year

Lindholm
Brannstrom ?
Amadio (Heinen leaves)

Do not want another undersized defenseman like Brannstrom who provides little offense. Have watched this guy a lot for Ottawa, surely we can do better, Dillon or Zadarov should be the target or players of their ilk.

 

[BlackFrancis]

The NHLPA does do that. Especially with now with a new head and time running out on the CBA.
If ‘you’ have a hammer the PA will at least reach out to the agent.

I never understood this, in a hard cap league.

It won't cause the cap to grow. It won't cause teams to spend more than the cap (Vegas the obvious aberration).

If a player gets mega-non-NHL media exposure or is a super gate draw, they could affect the cap, but that has little to no bearing on their salary.

Basically, it has no effect on hockey related revenue, so why would the PA give even half a shit?

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I never understood this, in a hard cap league.

It won't cause the cap to grow. It won't cause teams to spend more than the cap (Vegas the obvious aberration).

If a player gets mega-non-NHL media exposure or is a super gate draw, they could affect the cap, but that has little to no bearing on their salary.

Basically, it has no effect on hockey related revenue, so why would the PA give even half a shit?

Who are the loudest voices in the PA? The stars want more money for them. They’re not worried about the middle class.

 

[Gordoff]

Swayman still talking about what happened with arbitration. He's still salty about it. That worries me.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Who are the loudest voices in the PA? The stars want more money for them. They’re not worried about the middle class.

Yeah, but that ain't anywhere close to, "Do it for the union, bro!"