Player Discussion Andrew Peeke

[BiteThisBurrows]

The forwards struggled to score because the roster lacked top 6 skilled players. Something they're still lacking this year. Something that Korpisalo's and Peeke's money could have helped fill, and is a far bigger need than a bottom of the roster pairing depth guy and a backup goalie. Which has been my point all along.

Is it smart to overpay for bottom of the roster depth players while leaving top of the roster holes unfilled?

and you're just forgetting about the first round draft pick to further your argument.

We just added Lindholm as a free agent. That's a top 6 forward.

People like to ignore that Ullmark limited their trade options severely and they got the best they could from a team that wasn't on the list. Am I crazy about Korpisalo coming back even with the 25% retention? No. Definitely not, but it got the necessary done and if Goalie Bob can get him back to what he was in LA it's a steal. Have faith in Goalie Bob.

You need a balanced roster to succeed in this league and to win in the playoffs. Shiny bright top 6 guys are great but you don't build a winner with just high end talent. Look at Buffalo. Years of drafting top end talent and yet still, no playoffs.

Meanwhile, and this is a very interesting fact. The Bruins are (with expected rosters) now the 5th YOUNGEST team in the league. I mean WTF? I know all my non Bruins fan friends every year think Bruins, getting old, their time is over, the window's closing, they are going to fall soon, and yet there we are near or at the top of the division every year and at the same time have actually gotten younger. That is a heck of an accomplishment. Have more faith in Sweeney.

 

[NDiesel]

Sorry misspoke, meant to say acquired mason/byram BACK at the deadline. Byram played 19 career games before the 21/22 season. He wasn’t in their plans for a top 4 role when they were constructing the roster with their available cap the season before. Erik Johnson however was.

Don’t act like they paid Erik Johnson to be their third pairing D. He was playing 23 minutes a night when given that contract in 2015. He was absolutely a top 4 guy when Colorado chose to pay him.


Bruins chose to bring in Peeke as a 3rd liner and pay him at that rate.

All your attempted comparisons are don’t really apply. Except Vegas

Also saying ice time ONLY got cut by 3 minutes (180s) for 3rd pairing is wild. So what like 20% cut to ice time lol that’s a ton.

Your logic is really hard to understand at times. So it's okay that EJ was on the 3rd pair at 6 mil because they signed him for the 1st pair? Doesn't that mean they gave him too long of a contract if anything or signed him for a role he wasn't suited for?

Like if im understanding right, if Lindholm is 3rd pair in 2 years that's okay because we paid him to be 1st or 2nd pair? Legitimately hard to follow what the logic is

 

[BruinDust]

Sorry misspoke, meant to say acquired mason/byram BACK at the deadline. Byram played 19 career games before the 21/22 season. He wasn’t in their plans for a top 4 role when they were constructing the roster with their available cap the season before. Erik Johnson however was.

Don’t act like they paid Erik Johnson to be their third pairing D. He was playing 23 minutes a night when given that contract in 2015. He was absolutely a top 4 guy when Colorado chose to pay him.


Bruins chose to bring in Peeke as a 3rd liner and pay him at that rate.

All your attempted comparisons are don’t really apply. Except Vegas

Also saying ice time ONLY got cut by 3 minutes (180s) for 3rd pairing is wild. So what like 20% cut to ice time lol that’s a ton.

They are all exactly the same thing. At the end of the day, they all show that the recent cup champs placed value in having quality players on their 3rd pairing. They place value in those roles, you do not. That's what it boils down to. The model you want, recent cup champions have not used.

The Florida 3rd pair were down to an average of 14-15 mins a night in the playoffs. That's still 25% of the entire game. That's a ton. Those are still important minutes, especially on the road when you're not getting last change.

Fundamentally its a difference of opinion. You place more value in a middle-six winger (I'll say middle six because you aren't getting a top line forward with the difference between Peeke and Korpisalo vs. a RD and Back-up G at 775k anyways) than you do a 3rd pairing D-man. To each his own.

I respect your opinion on how to build a team, when it comes to 4th line players we think alike. We've seen models where what you are saying worked. Chicago 2015. Washington 2018. But in my opinion (and that's all it is), the game has changed significantly since those two cup winners. 2018 was a life-time ago.

Sure, you will have games where a coach leans harder on his Top 3-4 D (mostly Top 3). But to win the war of attrition over 4 rounds of playoffs with the open season we get on D-men come playoff time, I think the 3rd pairing guys are worth investing in, if they are the right guys. And I believe Peeke CAN be the right guy, because he is what I would want as my 3rd pair RD. Tall, rangy, decent skater, works hard, physical and big enough to handle himself. He's not some 33 year old on his last legs. If he was, I'd be more against the idea. We see the debates here all the time over guys in the mid-20s and if they are what they are or do they have more to give. See Frederic, Trent. Lauko, Jakub, etc. etc. Why can't that be Peeke? He's only 26. The same age as Bussi who has zero games of NHL experience yet you want him over Korpisalo.

After years of ridicule, I have some faith now in the Bruins pro scouting. They see something there. Time will tell if they were right. Same with Korpisalo.

 

[UncleRico]

They are all exactly the same thing. At the end of the day, they all show that the recent cup champs placed value in having quality players on their 3rd pairing. They place value in those roles, you do not. That's what it boils down to. The model you want, recent cup champions have not used.

The Florida 3rd pair were down to an average of 14-15 mins a night in the playoffs. That's still 25% of the entire game. That's a ton. Those are still important minutes, especially on the road when you're not getting last change.

Fundamentally its a difference of opinion. You place more value in a middle-six winger (I'll say middle six because you aren't getting a top line forward with the difference between Peeke and Korpisalo vs. a RD and Back-up G at 775k anyways) than you do a 3rd pairing D-man. To each his own.

I respect your opinion on how to build a team, when it comes to 4th line players we think alike. We've seen models where what you are saying worked. Chicago 2015. Washington 2018. But in my opinion (and that's all it is), the game has changed significantly since those two cup winners. 2018 was a life-time ago.

Sure, you will have games where a coach leans harder on his Top 3-4 D (mostly Top 3). But to win the war of attrition over 4 rounds of playoffs with the open season we get on D-men come playoff time, I think the 3rd pairing guys are worth investing in, if they are the right guys. And I believe Peeke CAN be the right guy, because he is what I would want as my 3rd pair RD. Tall, rangy, decent skater, works hard, physical and big enough to handle himself. He's not some 33 year old on his last legs. If he was, I'd be more against the idea. We see the debates here all the time over guys in the mid-20s and if they are what they are or do they have more to give. See Frederic, Trent. Lauko, Jakub, etc. etc. Why can't that be Peeke? He's only 26. The same age as Bussi who has zero games of NHL experience yet you want him over Korpisalo.

After years of ridicule, I have some faith now in the Bruins pro scouting. They see something there. Time will tell if they were right. Same with Korpisalo.

Well we will have to agree to disagree because when your minutes drop by 15-20% in the playoffs as a 3rd pair that’s a considerable and noteworthy amount in my mind.

Idk how it could possibly not be to you.

Inexcusable paying a #6 defender as much as they are paying their 2nd and 3rd line RWs combined. I value top 6 wingers infinitely more than a #6 defender.

You don’t agree. That’s fine agree to disagree.

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

Ok, but that model includes several years of finishing near the bottom to acquire the picks necessary.

Yes. I’m not actually advocating for that. I guess my sarcasm wasn’t clear.

The “model” appears to have two of the top five players in the league. The situation is not comparable. You can’t just go out there and get guys like that. There are not that many. If there were, don’t you (not really “you”, just anyone) think Sweeney would try to get one? Signing Peeke or Geekie or Boqvist isn’t stopping them from doing anything.

 

[BruinDust]

Well we will have to agree to disagree because when your minutes drop by 15-20% in the playoffs that’s a considerable and noteworthy amount in my mind.

Idk how it could possibly not be to you.

It's basically the difference in a few shifts where the 3rd pair in the regular season might not get out there in the playoffs because the top line is out there more. But those few shifts doesn't take their role from one of consequence down to one that really doesn't matter. Opposing coaches will target the 3rd pair more in the playoffs playing the same team every night.

Then factor in at the end of the day the entire season (regular season + playoffs) is one big marathon. If you can use your 3rd pairing guys more in the regular season, it leaves more in the gas tank for the top guys in the post-season. Same with having a competent back-up goaltender.

We'll agree to disagree. Listen when the Bruins extended Kevan Miller for 4 years to be on their 3rd pair I cursed and swore, ranted and raved about how you shouldn't sign players like that to term. I just don't let the Bruins cap situation get me worked up anymore. Every team has cap dollars allocated to someone who fans think they shouldn't and could be better spent elsewhere.

 

[Tbaybruin]

We should follow the model of getting players as good as Rantanen, MacKinnon, and Makar.

I pray we don’t. I don’t want to finish at the bottom of the league to get high draft picks.

 

[PlayMakers]

I pray we don’t. I don’t want to finish at the bottom of the league to get high draft picks.

People act like that's a simple process. How long has Arizona been bad? Ottawa been bad? How long has Detroit been bad? How long has Buffalo been bad? 13 years ago, somebody in Buffalo thought they'd just get a couple high picks and start over with high end talent and they haven't made the playoffs since. Seems like there are a lot more examples of teams going that route and getting stuck being bad for a long time, than there are examples of teams that have a couple of bad years and then are back on top riding a new core of top10 picks.

Meanwhile, Vegas comes into the league without a single draft pick and go to the Cup finals in their first year with a team of 10th forwards and 4th defensemen. Seattle makes the playoffs their second year.

 

[False Start]

It's basically the difference in a few shifts where the 3rd pair in the regular season might not get out there in the playoffs because the top line is out there more. But those few shifts doesn't take their role from one of consequence down to one that really doesn't matter. Opposing coaches will target the 3rd pair more in the playoffs playing the same team every night.

Then factor in at the end of the day the entire season (regular season + playoffs) is one big marathon. If you can use your 3rd pairing guys more in the regular season, it leaves more in the gas tank for the top guys in the post-season. Same with having a competent back-up goaltender.

We'll agree to disagree. Listen when the Bruins extended Kevan Miller for 4 years to be on their 3rd pair I cursed and swore, ranted and raved about how you shouldn't sign players like that to term. I just don't let the Bruins cap situation get me worked up anymore. Every team has cap dollars allocated to someone who fans think they shouldn't and could be better spent elsewhere.

Right but I didn't want Mike Reilly and Derek Forbort for that many years.

Just like I didn't really want Peeke and Korpisalo for that many years.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Right but I didn't want Mike Reilly and Derek Forbort for that many years.

Just like I didn't really want Peeke and Korpisalo for that many years.

I agree with the sentiment.

But I see Andrew Peeke as being a much better player than Mike Reilly and a much much better player than Derek Forbort. Which makes me happy that he's here.

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

People act like that's a simple process. How long has Arizona been bad? Ottawa been bad? How long has Detroit been bad? How long has Buffalo been bad? 13 years ago, somebody in Buffalo thought they'd just get a couple high picks and start over with high end talent and they haven't made the playoffs since. Seems like there are a lot more examples of teams going that route and getting stuck being bad for a long time, than there are examples of teams that have a couple of bad years and then are back on top riding a new core of top10 picks.

Meanwhile, Vegas comes into the league without a single draft pick and go to the Cup finals in their first year with a team of 10th forwards and 4th defensemen. Seattle makes the playoffs their second year.

Yes, exactly.

 

[UncleRico]

People act like that's a simple process. How long has Arizona been bad? Ottawa been bad? How long has Detroit been bad? How long has Buffalo been bad? 13 years ago, somebody in Buffalo thought they'd just get a couple high picks and start over with high end talent and they haven't made the playoffs since. Seems like there are a lot more examples of teams going that route and getting stuck being bad for a long time, than there are examples of teams that have a couple of bad years and then are back on top riding a new core of top10 picks.

Meanwhile, Vegas comes into the league without a single draft pick and go to the Cup finals in their first year with a team of 10th forwards and 4th defensemen. Seattle makes the playoffs their second year.

Happens to every team after a while.

Hell Detroit owned the league for almost 15-20 years. 4 cups in what was it 11 or 12 years.

They held onto their vets and let them retire with the team which didn’t allow for a turnover of assets and they are reaping what they sowed and for 4 cups I’m sure they would take that trade off all over again

If you told me the bruins were going to win 4 cups in the next 20 years and then miss the playoffs 8 years in a row after. I’d sign right up.

 

[BiteThisBurrows]

People act like that's a simple process. How long has Arizona been bad? Ottawa been bad? How long has Detroit been bad? How long has Buffalo been bad? 13 years ago, somebody in Buffalo thought they'd just get a couple high picks and start over with high end talent and they haven't made the playoffs since. Seems like there are a lot more examples of teams going that route and getting stuck being bad for a long time, than there are examples of teams that have a couple of bad years and then are back on top riding a new core of top10 picks.

Meanwhile, Vegas comes into the league without a single draft pick and go to the Cup finals in their first year with a team of 10th forwards and 4th defensemen. Seattle makes the playoffs their second year.

This plays in to what I mentioned above. Somehow, despite staying near the top and in the playoffs Sweeney has managed to make this team relatively young. You can argue this roster isn't good enough to win the cup (I'd say it is close and could) but it's set up to be competitive for many years yet as is. If the prospects step up we have a REALLY good chance to win it all. We've avoided the fall that was predicted with the retirements. Pittsburgh hasn't. Washington is weird and might also be avoiding it. Tampa is hanging in for the moment, but as you say, Buffalo etc. is still on the outside and I see no change in that any time soon.

 

[Gee Wally]

Happens to every team after a while.

Hell Detroit owned the league for almost 15-20 years. 4 cups in what was it 11 or 12 years.

They held onto their vets and let them retire with the team which didn’t allow for a turnover of assets and they are reaping what they sowed and for 4 cups I’m sure they would take that trade off all over again

If you told me the bruins were going to win 4 cups in the next 20 years and then miss the playoffs 8 years in a row after. I’d sign right up.

True….but…..their dynasty and ability to spend was limitless in a pre Cap world.
I think when we make comparisons pre and post cap needs to be recognized.

 

[PlayMakers]

This plays in to what I mentioned above. Somehow, despite staying near the top and in the playoffs Sweeney has managed to make this team relatively young. You can argue this roster isn't good enough to win the cup (I'd say it is close and could) but it's set up to be competitive for many years yet as is. If the prospects step up we have a REALLY good chance to win it all. We've avoided the fall that was predicted with the retirements. Pittsburgh hasn't. Washington is weird and might also be avoiding it. Tampa is hanging in for the moment, but as you say, Buffalo etc. is still on the outside and I see no change in that any time soon.

I'm a big believer that you can rebuild on the fly and that there are other ways to build than through high draft picks. Chiarelli built a Cup winner and the two best moves he made were signing UFA's Chara and Savard. Thomas was a free agent signing. Seidenberg. The Horton trade was another big win. Boychuk and Ference trades... Not to say there weren't big contributions from guys they drafted but they didn't need to pick first overall for 10 years in a row like Edmonton to get to the final.

 

[UncleRico]

True….but…..their dynasty and ability to spend was limitless in a pre Cap world.
I think when we make comparisons pre and post cap needs to be recognized.

Ya true that’s definitely fair

 

[Kegs]

People act like that's a simple process. How long has Arizona been bad? Ottawa been bad? How long has Detroit been bad? How long has Buffalo been bad? 13 years ago, somebody in Buffalo thought they'd just get a couple high picks and start over with high end talent and they haven't made the playoffs since. Seems like there are a lot more examples of teams going that route and getting stuck being bad for a long time, than there are examples of teams that have a couple of bad years and then are back on top riding a new core of top10 picks.

Meanwhile, Vegas comes into the league without a single draft pick and go to the Cup finals in their first year with a team of 10th forwards and 4th defensemen. Seattle makes the playoffs their second year.

Trying to lose to win is a special idea.

 

[Over the volcano]

I'm a big believer that you can rebuild on the fly and that there are other ways to build than through high draft picks. Chiarelli built a Cup winner and the two best moves he made were signing UFA's Chara and Savard. Thomas was a free agent signing. Seidenberg. The Horton trade was another big win. Boychuk and Ference trades... Not to say there weren't big contributions from guys they drafted but they didn't need to pick first overall for 10 years in a row like Edmonton to get to the final.

It's amazing how much turnover they've had. This was their roster in 2022-23

2022-23 Boston Bruins Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the latest Boston Bruins Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

26 out of 37 guys who played at least a game for them just a season ago are no longer with the organization.

 

[BiteThisBurrows]

Trying to lose to win is a special idea.

Or as Tortorella put it last year "tanking is asinine"

 

[LSCII]

and you're just forgetting about the first round draft pick to further your argument.

We just added Lindholm as a free agent. That's a top 6 forward.

People like to ignore that Ullmark limited their trade options severely and they got the best they could from a team that wasn't on the list. Am I crazy about Korpisalo coming back even with the 25% retention? No. Definitely not, but it got the necessary done and if Goalie Bob can get him back to what he was in LA it's a steal. Have faith in Goalie Bob.

You need a balanced roster to succeed in this league and to win in the playoffs. Shiny bright top 6 guys are great but you don't build a winner with just high end talent. Look at Buffalo. Years of drafting top end talent and yet still, no playoffs.

Meanwhile, and this is a very interesting fact. The Bruins are (with expected rosters) now the 5th YOUNGEST team in the league. I mean WTF? I know all my non Bruins fan friends every year think Bruins, getting old, their time is over, the window's closing, they are going to fall soon, and yet there we are near or at the top of the division every year and at the same time have actually gotten younger. That is a heck of an accomplishment. Have more faith in Sweeney.

A balanced roster would be great, but this isn't that. It's a roster with a glut of fourth line and bottom pairing dman depth, and a lack of top 6 players. Nothing about that screams balance, in fact. Which is why overpaying those guys and the backup goalie is a contributor for why they have holes in far more key areas. Bottom pairing dmen are by definition replaceable plugs. You don't overpay and you swap them out like the spare parts they are if their price tag gets too high.

 

[Mad-Marcus]

Exaggerated take
Mac = not bottom pairing
Lindy =not bottom pairing
Carlo = not bottom pairing
Lohrie, talent wise and potential based on the playoffs = not bottom pairing
Zadorov = middle to bottom pairing, PK specialist and 1st policeman since Miller/Quader
Peeke = middle to bottom pairing(other than his ~-40=/-, -14+/- on very bad team, jury's out on what he is, only 2 full seasons. Amateur credentials are pretty good, NDU captain, Hockey Easy all rookie)

He's going to be a much better Bruin then he ever would have been a CBJ

 

[BiteThisBurrows]

A balanced roster would be great, but this isn't that. It's a roster with a glut of fourth line and bottom pairing dman depth, and a lack of top 6 players. Nothing about that screams balance, in fact. Which is why overpaying those guys and the backup goalie is a contributor for why they have holes in far more key areas. Bottom pairing dmen are by definition replaceable plugs. You don't overpay and you swap them out like the spare parts they are if their price tag gets too high.

I often wonder what the heck you negative types are even watching??? This was a team that was right near the President's trophy and gave the cup winner a very tough series. To that team they lost streaky inconsistent DeBrusk and super soft Gryz and swapped in a massive rock of a D man and one of the best 2 way centers in the league who is the closest they can get to Bergeron right now and yet you guys think this team is lacking and unbalanced. I think the perspective you have forgotten you have is spoiled rotten.
This team is ready to compete for the cup right now (assuming Swayman signs of course) and if ANY of the prospects can play decent mid level NHL hockey, ANY of them, just one, then this team is already a strong cup contender.

I think sometimes Bruins fans get lost in their criticisms and need to spend a week watching Buffalo or some other inept franchise to remember just how good their own team actually is.

 

[EverettMike]

I'm a big believer that you can rebuild on the fly and that there are other ways to build than through high draft picks. Chiarelli built a Cup winner and the two best moves he made were signing UFA's Chara and Savard. Thomas was a free agent signing. Seidenberg. The Horton trade was another big win. Boychuk and Ference trades... Not to say there weren't big contributions from guys they drafted but they didn't need to pick first overall for 10 years in a row like Edmonton to get to the final.

Thomas was MOC.

 

[LSCII]

I often wonder what the heck you negative types are even watching??? This was a team that was right near the President's trophy and gave the cup winner a very tough series. To that team they lost streaky inconsistent DeBrusk and super soft Gryz and swapped in a massive rock of a D man and one of the best 2 way centers in the league who is the closest they can get to Bergeron right now and yet you guys think this team is lacking and unbalanced. I think the perspective you have forgotten you have is spoiled rotten.
This team is ready to compete for the cup right now (assuming Swayman signs of course) and if ANY of the prospects can play decent mid level NHL hockey, ANY of them, just one, then this team is already a strong cup contender.

I think sometimes Bruins fans get lost in their criticisms and need to spend a week watching Buffalo or some other inept franchise to remember just how good their own team actually is.

And I often wonder what you happy consumers that willingly eat the shit sandwich year after year without complaining and asking for seconds are watching. This team last year wasn't good enough to win, They've gotten worse roster wise this year while the rest of the division have gotten better. Since this isn't about the regular season I could give a flying f*** about how close to any really dumb president's trophy bullshit they were in your opinion. The fact of it is, they've gotten it fed to them in back to back years by Florida and Florida got better than you in the off season. After winning a cup. What was the Bruins answer? Leaving a hole in the top 6 and adding bottom of the roster depth players, that they've overpaid for, yet again.

 

[bearcountry17]

And I often wonder what you happy consumers that willingly eat the shit sandwich year after year without complaining and asking for seconds are watching. This team last year wasn't good enough to win, They've gotten worse roster wise this year while the rest of the division have gotten better. Since this isn't about the regular season I could give a flying f*** about how close to any really dumb president's trophy bullshit they were in your opinion. The fact of it is, they've gotten it fed to them in back to back years by Florida and Florida got better than you in the off season. After winning a cup. What was the Bruins answer? Leaving a hole in the top 6 and adding bottom of the roster depth players, that they've overpaid for, yet again.

You think the Panthers got better? They lost Montour, OEL, Tarasenko, Lomberg, and Stenlund. They added Shmidt, Nosek, Greer, and Boqvist. They had to give out 7.5 million in raises to just retain their players. I don’t see it.