Confirmed with Link: Bertuzzi traded to Boston for 2024 1st & 2025 4th

[WingsToPick4th]

So last question on this, I guess: Why wouldn't Detroit pay him what he wants? Especially if it was already a good fit? Is he not a player to build around?

His playstyle will not age well. Hes rugged and can barely skate, back surgery, 2 broken hands and injured a ton. I love him and miss him and seeing him play against us makes me depressed, but long term it was the right call especailly if he wants 8x6-7 million, contract will age POORLY. treat him well doe <3 hopefully he wins a cup

 

[SoupNazi]

His playstyle will not age well. Hes rugged and can barely skate, back surgery, 2 broken hands and injured a ton. I love him and miss him and seeing him play against us makes me depressed, but long term it was the right call especailly if he wants 8x6-7 million, contract will age POORLY. treat him well doe <3 hopefully he wins a cup

Agreed. Letting him go was the right call, given that he clearly wanted more money than we were comfortable paying.

If someone pays him that money in FA, that contract is going to look like David Clarkson's before long.

 

[SirloinUB]

I think bertuzzi will age better than he is getting credit for but the risk and apprehension about paying him is definitely valid.

 

[Shaman464]

So last question on this, I guess: Why wouldn't Detroit pay him what he wants? Especially if it was already a good fit? Is he not a player to build around?

He's got a bad back. He refused to get the vaccine. His style of play doesn't age well. And he can't produce when he's not with Larkin/getting first line minutes. That's a bad mix for someone who is asking for a lot of term and money.

I think bertuzzi will age better than he is getting credit for but the risk and apprehension about paying him is definitely valid.

I don't see it, even if his back doesn't go out, his type of play leads to the kind of nagging injuries that either keeps a player on the IR as they age, or leads them to stop playing like that.

 

[SirloinUB]

He's got a bad back. He refused to get the vaccine. His style of play doesn't age well. And he can't produce when he's not with Larkin/getting first line minutes. That's a bad mix for someone who is asking for a lot of term and money.



I don't see it, even if his back doesn't go out, his type of play leads to the kind of nagging injuries that either keeps a player on the IR as they age, or leads them to stop playing like that.

Definitely a valid point of view.

I don't think he plays some crazy style. His injuries have been bad luck more than anything else. I also think teams do a better job of managing and rehabbing injuries. With modern training I think we will see more players perform later in their careers.

That said, I wouldn't be willing to sign him to an 8x$7 deal. The risk is real.

 

[Detroit Knights]

Not sure why his stance on the vaccine really matters when it comes to contract negotiations......

 

[Ezekial]

Not sure why his stance on the vaccine really matters when it comes to contract negotiations......

I don't think his stance on the vaccine should really be talked about at this point since it doesn't prevent him from playing anymore.

But you don't think a player willing to be the only guy in the league to decide to sit out games rather than play with his team affects his contract? Really?

 

[Detroit Knights]

I don't think his stance on the vaccine should really be talked about at this point since it doesn't prevent him from playing anymore.

But you don't think a player willing to be the only guy in the league to decide to sit out games rather than play with his team affects his contract? Really?

Going off of your first sentence, no I don't. It makes no sense to limit someone's potential earnings because of a vaccine that has research/peer reviewed papers that shows it helps 60% or lower efficacy and doesn't limit exposure to others, unlike the original reporting.

Obviously, we can't get political here and I won't, I just believe that it makes zero sense to have this brought up in contract negotiations in today's world. If this was 1 or 2 years ago, I believe it would matter because it was an issue of playing roughly 10-15 games (assuming east coast team, I think it would be more if west coast?). But this isn't 1 or 2 years ago.

 

[Shaman464]

Not sure why his stance on the vaccine really matters when it comes to contract negotiations......

He was the only player in the league selfish enough to sit out games for not getting vaccinated. Bad enough if he was a 13th forward, but he was a top line player choosing to not play games.

 

[Ezekial]

Going off of your first sentence, no I don't. It makes no sense to limit someone's potential earnings because of a vaccine that has research/peer reviewed papers that shows it helps 60% or lower efficacy and doesn't limit exposure to others, unlike the original reporting.

Obviously, we can't get political here and I won't, I just believe that it makes zero sense to have this brought up in contract negotiations in today's world. If this was 1 or 2 years ago, I believe it would matter because it was an issue of playing roughly 10-15 games (assuming east coast team, I think it would be more if west coast?). But this isn't 1 or 2 years ago.

He made the choice to not play games. I don't care about the rest. (edit: and him not being vaxxed has no affect on my opinion of him, unlike for some other people, I still really like Tyler Bertuzzi the person and hockey player)

GMs will also care about that choice.

 

[Detroit Knights]

He made the choice to not play games. I don't care about the rest.

GMs will also care about that choice.

I don't think they will really care if it doesn't effect him anymore...like you said...this is why it is nonsense.

He was the only player in the league selfish enough to sit out games for not getting vaccinated. Bad enough if he was a 13th forward, but he was a top line player choosing to not play games.

Are you both really saying you are that naive at this point with everything that has come out? Or do you just not know...

Probably best if we just agree to disagree because I can already feel soupnazi or whoever else staring at these comments waiting for someone to overstep lol.

Go Wings! (still hope they lose so we can draft better position but hope they make it competitive!)

 

[Cronuss]

He's got a bad back. He refused to get the vaccine. His style of play doesn't age well. And he can't produce when he's not with Larkin/getting first line minutes. That's a bad mix for someone who is asking for a lot of term and money.



I don't see it, even if his back doesn't go out, his type of play leads to the kind of nagging injuries that either keeps a player on the IR as they age, or leads them to stop playing like that.

I don't see how the vaccine plays into any of this whatsoever. Honestly, I may or may not agree, but good for him to sticking to what he believes is best for his own body.

 

[Shaman464]

I don't think they will really care if it doesn't effect him anymore...like you said...this is why it is nonsense.



Are you both really saying you are that naive at this point with everything that has come out? Or do you just not know...

Probably best if we just agree to disagree because I can already feel soupnazi or whoever else staring at these comments waiting for someone to overstep lol.

Go Wings! (still hope they lose so we can draft better position but hope they make it competitive!)

I am literally a virologist and know the data. You're quoting omicron data. He refused the vaccine before omicron emerged and delta variant was the major circulating variant. And the vaccine was 89-95% effective at preventing symptomatic disease against delta.

He wasn't following the science. He made a selfish choice that no other player made. Every other player got the vaccine, 0 reported major side effects. This choice cost Detroit their top line winger for multiple games. GMs will consider this.

 

[Detroit Knights]

I am literally a virologist and know the data. You're quoting omicron data. He refused the vaccine before omicron emerged and delta variant was the major circulating variant. And the vaccine was 89-95% effective at preventing symptomatic disease against delta.

He wasn't following the science. He made a selfish choice that no other player made. Every other player got the vaccine, 0 reported major side effects. This choice cost Detroit their top line winger for multiple games. GMs will consider this.

Like I said, would rather just agree to disagree so I don't randomly get banned. If you want to continue we can go off and talk in private messages or something.

Going on an argument on here will most likely not end well for anyone involved.

To the original argument, it makes absolutely no sense to lower someone's earnings potential based off of something that is now a historical, non-relevant event for a 26 year old moving forward. Again, if it was 2 years ago, I also have said on this forums that if he wants to earn more, he would need to concede and get the vaccine. But that isn't an issue anymore and because it isn't an issue anymore in playing games, it shouldn't be an issue going further. He has done absolutely nothing wrong in his entire career, so there isn't a character issue that we can easily define, other than not getting the vaccine when he could have. A one-off doesn't ruin your life unless it is catastrophic (i.e. murder, etc.) . This isn't catastrophic.

 

[Ezekial]

I don't see how the vaccine plays into any of this whatsoever. Honestly, I may or may not agree, but good for him to sticking to what he believes is best for his own body.

So if a player felt no matter what they had to sit out every 5th game (load management) because it would be best for their body, no NHL GM would care?

Who are you to tell this player what is best for him and his own body?

 

[Detroit Knights]

So if a player felt no matter what they had to sit out every 5th game (load management) because it would be best for their body, no NHL GM would care?

Who are you to tell this player what is best for him and his own body?

you are really going to compare load management and taking a vaccine? That is the worst argument to go off of. They are completely different.

One is general fatigue felt playing games, of which I don't agree with, I mean come on they have been playing 82 games for decades so settle down people. The other is literal injecting something into your body.

A better comparison is saying a team refuses to pay a player fair market value because he refuses to take benzos out of fear for his health...

 

[Ezekial]

Like I said, would rather just agree to disagree so I don't randomly get banned. If you want to continue we can go off and talk in private messages or something.

Going on an argument on here will most likely not end well for anyone involved.

To the original argument, it makes absolutely no sense to lower someone's earnings potential based off of something that is now a historical, non-relevant event for a 26 year old moving forward. Again, if it was 2 years ago, I also have said on this forums that if he wants to earn more, he would need to concede and get the vaccine. But that isn't an issue anymore and because it isn't an issue anymore in playing games, it shouldn't be an issue going further. He has done absolutely nothing wrong in his entire career, so there isn't a character issue that we can easily define, other than not getting the vaccine when he could have. A one-off doesn't ruin your life unless it is catastrophic (i.e. murder, etc.) . This isn't catastrophic.

It's a very easy point to understand. You've already shown your cards as to why you care about this topic so much and I know you will never agree that it will affect it because you simply don't think it SHOULD affect it.

The fact of the matter is, he proved to be the only person in the league willing to sit out games. He showed GMs how far he is willing to go to play NHL hockey, something some guys would literally kill for.

 

[SirloinUB]

Like I said, would rather just agree to disagree so I don't randomly get banned. If you want to continue we can go off and talk in private messages or something.

Going on an argument on here will most likely not end well for anyone involved.

To the original argument, it makes absolutely no sense to lower someone's earnings potential based off of something that is now a historical, non-relevant event for a 26 year old moving forward. Again, if it was 2 years ago, I also have said on this forums that if he wants to earn more, he would need to concede and get the vaccine. But that isn't an issue anymore and because it isn't an issue anymore in playing games, it shouldn't be an issue going further. He has done absolutely nothing wrong in his entire career, so there isn't a character issue that we can easily define, other than not getting the vaccine when he could have. A one-off doesn't ruin your life unless it is catastrophic (i.e. murder, etc.) . This isn't catastrophic.

He prioritized his choice over playing every game with his teammates. Hockey culture is often about the logo on the front over the name on the back. Its not really a stretch to say some GMs may not like that.

And to be clear I doubt anyone holds his choice against him but if you are trying to decide who you want to spend 50 - 60 million on and nearly 10% of your cap space, Bert may not be at the top of the list.

For the record, id love to see him back.

 

[Ezekial]

you are really going to compare load management and taking a vaccine? That is the worst argument to go off of. They are completely different.

One is general fatigue felt playing games, of which I don't agree with, I mean come on they have been playing 82 games for decades so settle down people. The other is literal injecting something into your body.

A better comparison is saying a team refuses to pay a player fair market value because he refuses to take benzos out of fear for his health...

It's choosing not to play in games.

 

[jkutswings]

Everybody is doing a great job at hastening this thread towards locked status.

 

[Detroit Knights]

Everybody is doing a great job at hastening this thread towards locked status.

this is why i said agree to diagree lmao. I'll just stop lol. I give up you all win, i'll se myself out.

 

[Bench]

I know you guys are eager to get your 2023 vaccine and body autonomy arguments out there, but Bert is gone. He's a Bruin now. It's done. Your watch has ended.

And let's not deny the mods of the Boston Bruins forum all the fun! Give them a chance to enjoy this banter, you know?

 

[Detroit Knights]

I know you guys are eager to get your 2023 vaccine and body autonomy arguments out there, but Bert is gone. He's a Bruin now. It's done. Your watch has ended.

And let's not deny the mods of the Boston Bruins forum all the fun! Give them a chance to enjoy this banter, you know?

I'm on it!

 

[Shaman464]

I know you guys are eager to get your 2023 vaccine and body autonomy arguments out there, but Bert is gone. He's a Bruin now. It's done. Your watch has ended.

And let's not deny the mods of the Boston Bruins forum all the fun! Give them a chance to enjoy this banter, you know?

It was about the question why Bert was shown the door. The answer it seems that the dollars and term he wanted lead to negotiations to dead end. As to why he's not worth what he's asking the vaccine is a small facet of it. His injury history and play style would be the major reason I wouldn't want him on Detroit for 8 more years at more than 5 million/season

 

[stillwater]

I don't think his stance on the vaccine should really be talked about at this point

You had bingo, and then you didn't.