Player Discussion Andrew Peeke

[PB37]

Alright so you have the info then. Among guys who are around Peekes 38 games played let’s say 30-45 games played range. What are the salaries for those RHD

I don’t see any posts talking about RHD that played roughly the same amount of games as Peeke.

You're making your own weird criteria on that. I made my post on similarities that I found important - size, age, hand type, playing status ( bottom pairing ). You can look back if you want and feel free to discuss.

 

[bruinmann77]

I think he a good piece to the puzzle with this defense

 

[UncleRico]

You're making your own weird criteria on that. I made my post on similarities that I found important - size, age, hand type, playing status ( bottom pairing ). You can look back if you want and feel free to discuss.

I didn’t know using someone with similar games played was weird criteria. Especially considering all his healthy scratches.

 

[DKH]

Got a Luke Richardson vibe watching him

 

[PB37]

I didn’t know using someone with similar games played was weird criteria. Especially considering all his healthy scratches.

IMO it is. Especially considering he played 82 and 80 games in his prior seasons as a full time regular.

 

[UncleRico]

IMO it is. Especially considering he played 82 and 80 games in his prior seasons as a full time regular.

But when the bruins acquired him Peekes value was of a player who was a healthy scratch more often than not and he was a healthy scratch because the previous year he was one of the worst defensemen in the entire NHL.

You said you had all the numbers and now you just keep dancing around the topic

Do you have the numbers or not?

I just want to see the numbers and end the conversation

 

[DKH]

Didn’t realize Peeke was one of top shot blockers & hits

Leach probably only has to build a little structure in game

Weed out or maybe see a hypnotist and remove that he ever played for Columbus (I know someone who got over sugar thru a hypnotist so I’m sure Peeke can be helped with replacing negative thoughts from his experience as a Blue Jacket)

Lot to work with - the question is more so his fighting. Needs to get better at

He’s willing and McQuaid I hope invests time in a couple techniques to help him

After going back and reading Red Line, Hockey News, mckeens etc 2016 draft guide he’s a product of a shitty environment

Dealer Don gambling but I like it

 

[Dr Quincy]

nevermind- was looking at playoffs not regular season

 

[PB37]

But when the bruins acquired him Peekes value was of a player who was a healthy scratch more often than not and he was a healthy scratch because the previous year he was one of the worst defensemen in the entire NHL.

You said you had all the numbers and now you just keep dancing around the topic

Do you have the numbers or not?

I just want to see the numbers and end the conversation

I'm not dancing around it at all.

As I said, I posted other comps of defenseman of similar status, position ( RHD ). Others have posted other similar comps. If you're looking for more pedantic criteria like that you created in your own mind ( 30-45 games played lol ) to fit your created illusion, you're more than welcome to take the time to investigate yourself.

 

[UncleRico]

I'm not dancing around it at all.

As I said, I posted other comps of defenseman of similar status, position ( RHD ). Others have posted other similar comps. If you're looking for more pedantic criteria like that you created in your own mind ( 30-45 games played lol ) to fit your created illusion, you're more than welcome to take the time to investigate yourself.

How is comparing him to players who had similar deployments at the time of his acquisition by the bruins considered pedantic criteria?

 

[Pia8988]

The point is Peeke is a luxury teams with cap space can afford. Boston is not and it has been a constant trend of Don Sweeney to overvalue bottom pairing D, Back up G while having giant holes in their top 6. They're rather run 2 'solid' but flawed 2nd line if it means the 3rd line, 4th line, have stronger pieces. The problem is those 3rd and 4th liners are like that for a reason and when the game gets harder for the most part their impact wilts even more.

Will he lose them games, probably not many. Will he win them many? Also not really. So now you have an extra 2 million on your bottom pair to just take up a slot and not really move the needle one way or the other.

 

[Kalus]

Oh I'm aware, I'm tired of being optimistic all the time so I'm just trying to slowly make my way over to the pessimists.

At the end of the day Peeke is here now, I don't see a lot of reason to continue bitching and moaning over it, but maybe that's why I haven't been inducted into the pessimists just yet

There is a space between eternal optimism and eternal pessimism, it is occupied by realists who can make objective assessments based on the facts. Sometimes you think your team’s management made a good move and sometimes you think they didn’t. Case by case.

 

[Gordoff]

You think zadorov impact is going to be similar to charas?

I love the addition of Zadorov don’t get me wrong but my god send me some of the koolaid because that stuff has something a little extra in it

This is the Peeke thread so hopefully we don't derail it:
IIRC, a lot of people here were disappointed with Chara's performance
in his first year or so. Descriptive words like "traffic cone" etc were being thrown around.
A year or so later Dave Lewis is gone, Claude Julien is the bench boss and
a little at a time Chara's mastery and talent quieted the nay-sayers.
Maybe for the first 1/2 season or so he'll have some issues rounding out his games. He'll be tried with a various defensive partners and there will be hiccups but IMO even if he's (Zadorov) Chara-lite, he's exactly what the team needs.

 

[BruinDust]

The point is Peeke is a luxury teams with cap space can afford. Boston is not and it has been a constant trend of Don Sweeney to overvalue bottom pairing D, Back up G while having giant holes in their top 6. They're rather run 2 'solid' but flawed 2nd line if it means the 3rd line, 4th line, have stronger pieces. The problem is those 3rd and 4th liners are like that for a reason and when the game gets harder for the most part their impact wilts even more.

Will he lose them games, probably not many. Will he win them many? Also not really. So now you have an extra 2 million on your bottom pair to just take up a slot and not really move the needle one way or the other.

Recent cup champions have all invested cap space in their bottom pair, so Sweeney isn't unique in that regard at all.

Now, is there an argument he's invested in the wrong guys? Sure. But generally speaking, he's doing the exact same thing in terms of how much cap space to use as the most successful teams are. All the recent champs have been up close to the cap. Florida won a cup with 14 million spent on the goaltending but Sweeney gets raked over the coals here daily because the money spent on Korpisalo and a tandem that will make about 11 million combined. A franchise that has invested in having two quality goaltenders for awhile now and have 8 consecutive playoff appearances and 7 consecutive Top 5 finishes in GAA to show for it. The two years previous to that run (2015 and 2016), they did what some here are suggesting (go cheap on back-up goaltending) and it's resulted in Playoff DNQs but that never seems to get mentioned. Brandon Bussi could be Niklas Svedberg 2.0, we really don't know he's 26 years old and has never played an NHL game yet for whatever reason.

Part of the issue is far too many keep looking at the team with this clear-cut Top 6/Bottom 6 forward group and it's an antiquated concept in today's NHL. There isn't much difference these days between a teams 2nd and 3rd lines or the players on those lines. Swap out Peeke (who normally plays 16-17 mins a game) and Korpisalo, replace them with a RD and G making 775k each, and all-in-all your talking about a middle six winger playing about the same number of minutes as Peeke making about 5 million bucks.

At that point you're basically splitting hairs. You can choose to be slightly better defensively on D and G, or you can be slightly better offensive with the middle-six winger. Either way, the impact is slight and not really worth the amount of hyperbole that we've seen since the Peeke and now Korpisalo trades. Some philosophical differences in cap management that are miniscule in the grand scheme of winning hockey games.

And come trade deadline time, if I'm a GM I'd much rather have a need for a middle six winger than a big RD or a goaltender. Middle six wingers seem to be a lot more plentiful commodity. But people want their April playoff roster set in October and won't be satisfied otherwise.

Sweeney has one last thing to accomplish this off-season (extend Swayman) which we may not see until close to camp possibly so it seems like a good time for me to get outside and enjoy the summer sunshine.

Cheers!

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

So everyone knew Peeke was going to be bought out? But Sweeney just didn’t know?

 

[Pia8988]

Recent cup champions have all invested cap space in their bottom pair, so Sweeney isn't unique in that regard at all.

Now, is there an argument he's invested in the wrong guys? Sure. But generally speaking, he's doing the exact same thing in terms of how much cap space to use as the most successful teams are. All the recent champs have been up close to the cap. Florida won a cup with 14 million spent on the goaltending but Sweeney gets raked over the coals here daily because the money spent on Korpisalo and a tandem that will make about 11 million combined. A franchise that has invested in having two quality goaltenders for awhile now and have 8 consecutive playoff appearances and 7 consecutive Top 5 finishes in GAA to show for it. The two years previous to that run (2015 and 2016), they did what some here are suggesting (go cheap on back-up goaltending) and it's resulted in Playoff DNQs but that never seems to get mentioned. Brandon Bussi could be Niklas Svedberg 2.0, we really don't know he's 26 years old and has never played an NHL game yet for whatever reason.

Part of the issue is far too many keep looking at the team with this clear-cut Top 6/Bottom 6 forward group and it's an antiquated concept in today's NHL. There isn't much difference these days between a teams 2nd and 3rd lines or the players on those lines. Swap out Peeke (who normally plays 16-17 mins a game) and Korpisalo, replace them with a RD and G making 775k each, and all-in-all your talking about a middle six winger playing about the same number of minutes as Peeke making about 5 million bucks.

At that point you're basically splitting hairs. You can choose to be slightly better defensively on D and G, or you can be slightly better offensive with the middle-six winger. Either way, the impact is slight and not really worth the amount of hyperbole that we've seen since the Peeke and now Korpisalo trades. Some philosophical differences in cap management that are miniscule in the grand scheme of winning hockey games.

And come trade deadline time, if I'm a GM I'd much rather have a need for a middle six winger than a big RD or a goaltender. Middle six wingers seem to be a lot more plentiful commodity. But people want their April playoff roster set in October and won't be satisfied otherwise.

Sweeney has one last thing to accomplish this off-season (extend Swayman) which we may not see until close to camp possibly so it seems like a good time for me to get outside and enjoy the summer sunshine.

Cheers!

Teams add wingers at the deadline all the time. Teams also typically have an influx of contracts over performing their value to offset that spending on the bottom slots of the roster. This is the second problem of Sweeney have to constantly pay to remove his mistakes, the influx of young talent has never been there.

So back to my point. As the roster and organization is structured. Peeke is a luxury. Just like Forbort was. He is the type of player you're looking to upgrade from come deadline. You point to Florida, they paid for depth, and picked better, but they also paid for that depth cheaper. Take OEL last year for them. 2.25m. Schmidt this year at a league minimum. Kulikov is their comparable to Peeke. 1m last year. 1.15 this year. Yeah there is some age considerations. But the bottom pair that make Peeke money do so because they are expected to be able to carrying a pairing and move up in case of injury. I don't think he can.

Don Sweeney overpays depth that limits the top end talent the team can fold. You need both to win and he's never been able to field the balance so you get the good not great Boston Bruins.

As for Bussi being an unknown. Should have given him a few games. Then you could have made a more informed decision. Is Korpisalo good enough that if you Swayman does go down, they actually believe he can lead the team in the playoffs? Not really. Can he win a few extra regular season games. Yes.

 

[Mad-Marcus]

If Swayman goes down, no one, currently in the system, will lead them to the playoff.
At least contract aside, Korps has some history of playing well with a good team in the NHL.
Backup to Bobrovsky and his short stint in LA.

People around here really discount how badly a poor program can mess up an athlete. Of course some of it is on them, but a high % of hockey players that made it to the NHL have been coddled, not all are wire to deal with adversity, just like the rest of us in our own lives.
The classic change of scenery CAN make a difference.

We will just have to wait and see how much value can be placed in a thread about a 3rd pair defensemen or a vet backup goalie that are rebuilding their reputations.

They wouldn't be the first or last to succeed or continue to fail. But you don't know until they play.
The B's obviously want to build from the back out (goalie thru the D) and valued putting more $$ into those positions. Right or wrong I understand the attempt philosophically.

The Islanders used this approach and had some success, prior to having injuries with a few of their only scorers. The year they bounced us relied on building from the net out.It can be done and we already have more offense than that NYI had.

I also agree, come the 2025 TDL, that W will be easier to acquire than any overpriced Dman(as we already know Peeke cost too much)

 

[PlayMakers]

The point is Peeke is a luxury teams with cap space can afford. Boston is not and it has been a constant trend of Don Sweeney to overvalue bottom pairing D, Back up G while having giant holes in their top 6.

I don't think Sweeney considers spending "an extra $2m" on a bottom pairing defenseman a bad investment. Ditto for the backup goalie. He spends that money every year because he wants to. I know it drives fans crazy but It's not an accident or a "trend" it's by design.

He obviously must believe that having a combination of a deep defense 1-6 and a good 2-goalie tandem wins you more games than a complimentary winger alone.

 

[Mad-Marcus]

Sway at ~55G and Korps at~25G, plus the D 1-7(overall deeper than it's been) will keep you in a lot of games. Losing Jakes ~20G hurts, but they played many stretches w/o anything from him.
They go out get a winger if no one steps up from PROV. Aside from Guentzel, no one was worth the investment and they finally have someone that can win a D zone FO.

 

[Pia8988]

I don't think Sweeney considers spending "an extra $2m" on a bottom pairing defenseman a bad investment. Ditto for the backup goalie. He spends that money every year because he wants to. I know it drives fans crazy but It's not an accident or a "trend" it's by design.

He obviously must believe that having a combination of a deep defense 1-6 and a good 2-goalie tandem wins you more games than a complimentary winger alone.

And that is why he is a mediocre GM

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

This is the Peeke thread so hopefully we don't derail it:
IIRC, a lot of people here were disappointed with Chara's performance
in his first year or so. Descriptive words like "traffic cone" etc were being thrown around.
A year or so later Dave Lewis is gone, Claude Julien is the bench boss and
a little at a time Chara's mastery and talent quieted the nay-sayers.
Maybe for the first 1/2 season or so he'll have some issues rounding out his games. He'll be tried with a various defensive partners and there will be hiccups but IMO even if he's Chara-lite, he's exactly what the team needs.

He's not a Chara anything!

Peeke's a 3rd pair defenseman. Chara was a first team all-star before he came to Boston.

 

[Gordoff]

This would hold more weight for me if the CBJ fans weren't in full agreement with the benchings and all under the assumption they would have to pay to dump Peake with retention due to how ass he was.

If they all were confused why he was being benched it would be a different story.

If he bounces back, thats great. Doesn't fix that Don bought high on a guy that was rumored to be heading to the buy-out block.



This just makes me think of the guys who use to do dances to bring on the rain. And when it finally rained they felt proven right that it was due to all the pop lock and drops they had been doing.

For several years many of us have been complaining about the Bruins "pro scouting department" but from what I've read here by several other prominent posters Sweeney has rebuilt the scouting department(s).
Maybe they were going to buy him out or whatever but I think that Sweeney and his scouting department know more about the player and situation that us armchair GM's know, by a lot. In the last few years they've done a great job in recognizing talent and bringing them aboard. If they overpay by a bit, I'm sure there's a damn good reason.

 

[Dr Quincy]

People around here really discount how badly a poor program can mess up an athlete. Of course some of it is on them, but a high % of hockey players that made it to the NHL have been coddled, not all are wire to deal with adversity, just like the rest of us in our own lives.
The classic change of scenery CAN make a difference.

If you truly believe this, then you should be more upset about the acquisition of Korpisalo. If all you need to do is find a goalie stuck on a bad team, who has had "some" success when on a good one, you can sign one of these guys:

Reimer 1m
Copley 825k
Kahkonen 1m
Wedgewood 1.5m
Campbell 775k
DeSmith 1m
Murray 875k

Or go with Bussi

You want it both ways- The B's can take a guy who was the worst goalie in the league last year and make him good.... but they couldn't take other goalies who were better, and signed for cheaper this year, and make THEM good.

 

[IveGotToBeMe]

32 pages on Andrew Peeke...or on management's poor decision to solidify the third D pairing...or how the overpayment (which I don't believe) has handcuffed this team from signing the next Guy Lafleur...or how the front office can't do anything right...or how we could have signed a smallish RD instead for less money...you can tell we are in the hot hell of summer...32 pages...UNF***ING believable...LET IT GO

 

[Gordoff]

probably not as shocked as he was when he got dealt to the Bruins and wasn't a buy out candidate anymore wondering where his next check was going to come from.

Well I'm not that bright of a guy so I'm wondering this, if Columbus wanted to get rid of him so badly, why not put him on waivers first to see if there were any takers? Unless of course they did and nobody took him?