Player Discussion Andrew Peeke

[LSCII]

It’s harder to work the walls on your back hand.

I’m a left handed shot and I’m a lot more effective on the left side. And I have no problem making back hand plays. I’m just stronger on my forehand.

The reason there is more left handed D is because there are more right handed people. When you play defence you have one hand on the stick. So you would be holding the stick in your strong hand. The pool is way more crowded on the left which is why there is less nhl quality right players. Big rugged right shot defenders that have the skill to play in the nhl are a commodity.

No. I think ppl are just telling you to eat some crow.
This wasn’t a bad move at all regardless of how you angle your wording. He is young and doesn’t make an insane amount of money. Columbus was a gong show this season.

3rd round picks are by no means guaranteed nhl players. The ones that pan out are nhl destined in 4-7 years away from sniffing the nhl. Boston is trying to win this year and next year. Boston is always trying to win.

This is you justifying it after the fact, but that doesn't mean Sweeney could have and should have gotten the player for less.

And I have zero issues being wrong about something as anyone can go back and look at my post history to see I've been wrong plenty of times over the years.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

Would you guys have traded Pelosi for Peeke? If not that's the point.

 

[DominicT]

Would you guys have traded Pelosi for Peeke? If not that's the point.

No it's not the point.

How do you know that a 14 year old today will turn into Chris Pelosi in 3 years?

How do you know that Pelosi or that 2017 third round pick doesn't turn out to be Anthony Camara?

I can make the argument that Boston's 4th rounder from last year (Hendrickson) is better than their third rounder last year (Pelosi).

It's a crap shoot.

 

[DKH]

This is you justifying it after the fact, but that doesn't mean Sweeney could have and should have gotten the player for less.

And I have zero issues being wrong about something as anyone can go back and look at my post history to see I've been wrong plenty of times over the years.

Lonnie don’t beat yourself up you got something right last Tuesday

 

[Mad-Marcus]

We should just be happy we got a reliable player that someone else was giving up on. Could it have been cheaper, yes, but this is far from Tomas Kaberle, or Rick Nash for that matter(boy, would Lindgren look great in Black and Gold!!)

 

[Kalus]

I was critical of the trade. People here are focusing on the future third rounder. But I say again, for most of us that were critical of the trade, it wasn’t the third rounder that was the issue, it was taking on a $2.75M contract for 2 more full years for a player who looked to be a decent #6D. CBJ were probably relieved they didn’t have to retain just to get out from under the contract. It is about cap management and carefully allocating those limited cap dollars. I think $2.75M is too much for a #6 on this team.

If he proves to be better than that, maybe a #5D who can play decently with top 4 minutes when injuries crop up, then this will prove to be a good trade.

He has been good so far. I actually liked him with Grizz. You don’t want a $7M third D pairing ideally, but Grizz has declined and will likely walk after the season, so just get the most out of him that you can while you still have him.

We’ll get a real good idea in playoffs. From a personal standpoint, he is from a town nearby where I live and played in the same youth hockey league my son plays in, so I am really rooting for him to succeed, but that doesn’t mean I can’t be honest that I didn’t like the trade from a value perspective.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

But I say again, for most of us that were critical of the trade, it wasn’t the third rounder that was the issue, it was taking on a $2.75M contract for 2 more full years for a player who looked to be a decent #6D

This has somehow gotten lost in all this. That’s where I was too - didn’t care about the third rounder except to say it seemed odd to pay something to take that contract in. Not sure how many times it was said that it wasn’t about the player or the chance he could get better here, just about the cost and term associated with him.

Very glad he’s doing well - a friend of mine’s son played a lot with him growing up and they know the family very well. Said he’s an awesome guy.

 

[UncleRico]

This has somehow gotten lost in all this. That’s where I was too - didn’t care about the third rounder except to say it seemed odd to pay something to take that contract in. Not sure how many times it was said that it wasn’t about the player or the chance he could get better here, just about the cost and term associated with him.

Very glad he’s doing well - a friend of mine’s son played a lot with him growing up and they know the family very well. Said he’s an awesome guy.

Just to add onto this

Also a guy that was heavily rumored to be a CBJ buyout and very likely could have been signed for less in the offseason.

I’ll trade a 3rd every year for a bottom 6 forward or 3rd pairing D. I just would personally like to save that extra money for more premium players.

 

[Mad-Marcus]

He's obviously better than any of the 6th defenseman we've had recently, just on pure skating and physicality. The more he grows accustom to our system, the better he will look. 2.75M is about right for what I've seen so far and believe it will wind up being a deal.(much better than Forbort's contract)

 

[chizzler]

You know this team is a front runner when the fans are arguing about a trade involving a third round pick for a guy making 2.75 mil. Lmao.

 

[PB37]

I think CBJ paid him that much because there was some projections of him being a top 4 RHD moving forward. His development didn't go as planned the past season + but we're seeing now that there is that ability in him in the right environment. When you look around at some others in his age bracket, RHD, and playing status, the contract fits.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

No it's not the point.

How do you know that a 14 year old today will turn into Chris Pelosi in 3 years?

How do you know that Pelosi or that 2017 third round pick doesn't turn out to be Anthony Camara?

I can make the argument that Boston's 4th rounder from last year (Hendrickson) is better than their third rounder last year (Pelosi).

It's a crap shoot.

I guess?

 

[neelynugs]

when he was paired with zach werenski, peeke was pretty valuable. then kekalainen acquired way too many D, for way too much
money. and was too arrogant to admit his mistake. the current "brass" over there wants to make sure they don't get pants'd on
a trade while a search for a new GM is underway. ultimately sweeney overpaid in an asset and didn't take advantage of a team
in a bad spot................with that said, peeke has fit in nicely and looks like a competent 4-6 RHD that's not easy to find. so i
think it's much ado about nothing at this point - would've been nice to get him at half price, but they didn't.

 

[DominicT]

when he was paired with zach werenski, peeke was pretty valuable. then kekalainen acquired way too many D, for way too much
money. and was too arrogant to admit his mistake. the current "brass" over there wants to make sure they don't get pants'd on
a trade while a search for a new GM is underway. ultimately sweeney overpaid in an asset and didn't take advantage of a team
in a bad spot................with that said, peeke has fit in nicely and looks like a competent 4-6 RHD that's not easy to find. so i
think it's much ado about nothing at this point - would've been nice to get him at half price, but they didn't.

The point is that they probably could have gotten Peeke for a third and had CBJ retain. But the Bruins wanted a contract spot. Peeke in would have left them with no contact spots.

Hence Zboril. Rather than retain 15 to 18 percent, CBJ took on the balance of the Zboril money, but more importantly the contract.

Now, whether the Bruins get to make use of that spot is still to be determined. They lost out on Graf which would have required that spot. There is still Bengtsson (as early as next week) and Tsyplakov (May 1). So we will see.

Not always black and white.

 

[goldnblack]

The haters doubling down reminds me of when the Seny pick was defended. That was a bad moment on the site too.

 

[Kegs]

This is you justifying it after the fact, but that doesn't mean Sweeney could have and should have gotten the player for less.

And I have zero issues being wrong about something as anyone can go back and look at my post history to see I've been wrong plenty of times over the years.

Maybe he wasn’t available for less. I’m willing to bet they weren’t even shopping him.

 

[LSCII]

The haters doubling down reminds me of when the Seny pick was defended. That was a bad moment on the site too.

See, this take is f***ing silly. Why can't someone be critical of something like the move, and not the player? And why is it if you are, you have clownshoes takes saying basic zero value crap like "hater". It's hack and it's sad that this is the best you can do. Be better.

 

[DKH]

McQuaid so far looks pretty smart on this guy

He should be better after a summer and camp working with staff

Blocks shots, hits, clears crease - young and cost in crazy for 20 minutes and top rotational PK

I hope McQuaid gives him a few pointers defending self and staying balanced if he drops them

 

[Kalus]

See, this take is f***ing silly. Why can't someone be critical of something like the move, and not the player? And why is it if you are, you have clownshoes takes saying basic zero value crap like "hater". It's hack and it's sad that this is the best you can do. Be better.

Because the easiest path is to cheer every move Bruins management makes, assume only upside outcomes, and admonish those that evaluate deals analytically and from an intellectually honest perspective.

 

[sarge88]

This has somehow gotten lost in all this. That’s where I was too - didn’t care about the third rounder except to say it seemed odd to pay something to take that contract in. Not sure how many times it was said that it wasn’t about the player or the chance he could get better here, just about the cost and term associated with him.

Very glad he’s doing well - a friend of mine’s son played a lot with him growing up and they know the family very well. Said he’s an awesome guy.

Here’s what I always come back to in these situations. Despite the fact that they too make mistakes, the scouts/player development people know way more than us.

So, when we see a guy even 10x in season or two and make our mind up about what they are or could be here, those guys both have more knowledge about their potential and are more attuned to how likely that the player will work out.

I guess in the end, I’ll ask anyone who didn’t like this trade because of the cost to get him or his contract this question….

If you were given an 85% certainty that he’d play this well, would you be happy with the deal.

Because, there’s a likelihood that the Bruins were probably pretty convinced that it would be a good move, and therefore worth the cost, both in assets sent out and salary paid.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Here’s what I always come back to in these situations. Despite the fact that they too make mistakes, the scouts/player development people know way more than us.

So, when we see a guy even 10x in season or two and make our mind up about what they are or could be here, those guys both have more knowledge about their potential and are more attuned to how likely that the player will work out.

I guess in the end, I’ll ask anyone who didn’t like this trade because of the cost to get him or his contract this question….

If you were given an 85% certainty that he’d play this well, would you be happy with the deal.

Because, there’s a likelihood that the Bruins were probably pretty convinced that it would be a good move, and therefore worth the cost, both in assets sent out and salary paid.

Dude you won’t find someone more pro-management than me on this board. It was a point in time - seemed like a lot of term and a lot of money when we’re getting ourselves out from under Forbort and Reilly. I don’t think it was unfair to question the deal at the time.

 

[goldnblack]

See, this take is f***ing silly. Why can't someone be critical of something like the move, and not the player? And why is it if you are, you have clownshoes takes saying basic zero value crap like "hater". It's hack and it's sad that this is the best you can do. Be better.

LSCII, the haters put themselves in spots where with 1/50th of Sweeney's ability, they question if we overpaid by like a round. Then very quickly realize they were wrong, and have only one possible move: shove all their chips in

That is what a hater does on this board. It's what they will forever do. I don't look to change it. That would be like trying to change the moon or the sun.

 

[sarge88]

Dude you won’t find someone more pro-management than me on this board. It was a point in time - seemed like a lot of term and a lot of money when we’re getting ourselves out from under Forbort and Reilly. I don’t think it was unfair to question the deal at the time.

Maybe….but again, they were likely coming at it from the perspective that it was a no brainer that he’d work out.

That affects how they think about payment.

 

[Alan Ryan]

Peeke and Wotherspoon are a really good third pair. Hope the B's stick with them for the playoffs.

 

[Mad-Marcus]

Peeke and Wotherspoon are a really good third pair. Hope the B's stick with them for the playoffs.

It nice to see a pairing with this much snarl, it been a while