Confirmed with Link: Bobby Brink Signs Two Year Contract - $1.5M AAV

[GapToothedWonder]

At the end of last season, I said I was going to do a write up of Brink and Foester -- I never got around to Brink, so I figured I would do it now. I also want to add that I'm a big Brink supporter, I think he could be a 60-70 point player under the right conditions.

Thru the first quarter of the season, Brink was on pace for ~50ish points, and was putting up very decent underlying numbers. He played very well with Farabee and Cates in most of those games. However, he started to bounce around the lineup, loosing Tort's trust in the process. For the first 30 games he was averaging around 14-15min per game, but then dropped to around 12 for the next 15ish, then subsequently sent to the AHL (put up 13points in 13 games played). But even through the first half of the season, Brink was still pacing for ~40 points, and putting up very good tracking numbers.

When he made his way back up to the big club, he was a noticeably different player than the beginning of the year. His overall underlying metrics took a nose dive, as did his production numbers. Ultimately he finished up with a projected 33 points over 82 games. There are some valid excuses to his degradation in play including returning from injury, 'tough love' from the coach, and first time playing this long of a season.... But even if I want to attribute some his late-season poor performances to the issues listed above, I still believe that Brink is responsible for his on-ice performances. He needs to be better when his number is called.

However, the one thing that stands out with Brink is his offensive ability with puck on stick. Below are his tracking numbers from the 23-24 season. The darker the blue, the higher percentile you are in that particular category. As you can see, he was very good in chance creation across the board.

View attachment 893619

Are the bad transition numbers becauae of his skating or was pretty much the whole team terrible because of Torta "style".

I didn't want enough this year to know.

 

[VladDrag]

Are the bad transition numbers becauae of his skating or was pretty much the whole team terrible because of Torta "style".

I didn't want enough this year to know.

The Flyers were a very good rush team this year, feasting on NZ turnovers. They converted a lot of NZ turnovers into chances for. But in terms of breaking out of their own zone, they were poor. They didn't have a lot of controlled exits, which makes attacking the NZ difficult. That's a system design, so that's on Torts.

In terms of carries/60 (how many times he skated the puck into the O-zone/60min) Brink was 3rd on the team behind Tip and Farabee. More than 50% of his entries were from carrying the puck into the zone. However, he was terrible at turning those carries into chances, (11th of 13 forwards tracked). But in general, a diminutive forward who isn't a fast skater is going to have issues skating the puck into the zone. I think he can get better at passing the puck into the zone, gaining entries in that way.

And maybe this is what limits his ability to produce points at a high level in the NHL, but I would give him every opportunity to figure it out because he's one of the more mature offensive players on this team.

 

[04hockey]

when he was playing with Farabee and he(Brink) had possession of the puck in the O zone it was fun watching Farabee trying to get open for his passes

 

[dragonoffrost]

At the end of last season, I said I was going to do a write up of Brink and Foester -- I never got around to Brink, so I figured I would do it now. I also want to add that I'm a big Brink supporter, I think he could be a 60-70 point player under the right conditions.

Thru the first quarter of the season, Brink was on pace for ~50ish points, and was putting up very decent underlying numbers. He played very well with Farabee and Cates in most of those games. However, he started to bounce around the lineup, loosing Tort's trust in the process. For the first 30 games he was averaging around 14-15min per game, but then dropped to around 12 for the next 15ish, then subsequently sent to the AHL (put up 13points in 13 games played). But even through the first half of the season, Brink was still pacing for ~40 points, and putting up very good tracking numbers.

When he made his way back up to the big club, he was a noticeably different player than the beginning of the year. His overall underlying metrics took a nose dive, as did his production numbers. Ultimately he finished up with a projected 33 points over 82 games. There are some valid excuses to his degradation in play including returning from injury, 'tough love' from the coach, and first time playing this long of a season.... But even if I want to attribute some his late-season poor performances to the issues listed above, I still believe that Brink is responsible for his on-ice performances. He needs to be better when his number is called.

However, the one thing that stands out with Brink is his offensive ability with puck on stick. Below are his tracking numbers from the 23-24 season. The darker the blue, the higher percentile you are in that particular category. As you can see, he was very good in chance creation across the board.

View attachment 893619

Point shot setups/60.... this f***ing team.... LOL

 

[deadhead]

The Flyers were a very good rush team this year, feasting on NZ turnovers. They converted a lot of NZ turnovers into chances for. But in terms of breaking out of their own zone, they were poor. They didn't have a lot of controlled exits, which makes attacking the NZ difficult. That's a system design, so that's on Torts.

In terms of carries/60 (how many times he skated the puck into the O-zone/60min) Brink was 3rd on the team behind Tip and Farabee. More than 50% of his entries were from carrying the puck into the zone. However, he was terrible at turning those carries into chances, (11th of 13 forwards tracked). But in general, a diminutive forward who isn't a fast skater is going to have issues skating the puck into the zone. I think he can get better at passing the puck into the zone, gaining entries in that way.

And maybe this is what limits his ability to produce points at a high level in the NHL, but I would give him every opportunity to figure it out because he's one of the more mature offensive players on this team.

I think you have to be more patient with good but not great talents.
Brink has improved his skating, but could still improve further.
He's still learning to deal with smaller windows and more physical play.

He also needs better players around him, he's not someone who's going to control play and pace by himself, rather, he's more a facilitator, who needs linemates who can get in position to make plays and do something with the puck when he finds them.

 

[CanadianFlyer88]

 

[deadhead]

Speaking of Brink, you can't separate him from the decision to trade down from #11 (Boldy) to end up with York (instead of Caufield) and Brink.

last two years, 5x5 scoring per 60:
Caufield 2.03 (82), goals 1.08 (34)
Boldy 1.90 (122), goals 1.08 (36)
to put these numbers in perspective, even with the neck injury a year ago:
Farabee 2.09 (71), goals 0.91 (90)

Boldy is more durable, better defensively, both are top 6 forwards right now, but marginal 1st line.
Primarily goal scorers who need a center who can feed them

York is clearly a top 4 D-man, maybe he can be a #2, he held his own on the first pair last season, but sacrificed some offense, can he take it up another level this season? If he could QB the PP successfully, that would add to his value.

York v Boldy is probably close to a wash right now, York > Caufield.

Brink the last two years, 1.59, 0.65. Marginal 3rd line numbers with subpar defense.
Brink developing would be a bonus.

 

[Magua]

There is no argument that Boldy and York are a wash. Just because it's uttered here doesn't make it true. I can say Provorov and Werenski were a wash too; why, I can say anything! Caufield isn't a player I desperately covet, and it's a smaller gap than Boldy, but York surely isn't better than him. And he's not better than Harley, the defender we preferred.

I like Brink, but I appreciate the humor of saying in one thread that he was horrible the 2nd half and deserved to be demoted.....while also being the key separator between an average-above average 2nd pair defender and one of the better young 2-way wings in hockey. Reminds me of a more recent draft decision involving Minnesota.

 

[deadhead]

Boldy scores at a 2nd line level, that's more valuable than a 2nd pair D-man who held his own as a 1st pair D-man? My opinion is as valuable as yours (i.e. since no one is paying either of us . . . ).

Both are young enough to improve, will they?

 

[freakydallas13]

We can't seperate Brink from the decision to trade down? This from the guy who wants to seperate things that make the Flyers look bad like Ghost and Risto?

 

[deadhead]

We can't seperate Brink from the decision to trade down? This from the guy who wants to seperate things that make the Flyers look bad like Ghost and Risto?

Huh? What? Ghost was AV. He wanted him gone. Nor did CF overpay to dump him, Stralman cost TB more to dump. And Ghost is a bit overrated around here, on two decent teams (Carolina, Detroit) he was a 3rd pair D-man. Overpaid for that role with the Flyers, now has a more appropriate salary.

Risto was CF falling in love. Turns out he's not a bad player with good coaching, not worth what they gave up in trade or the extension, but that's a different issue.

Thing with CF is he generally paid market price, just bought the wrong things in the market.

But got to credit him with a great Giroux trade, Tippett, Barkey and Edmonton's 2025 1st.
Too bad he followed that with the Risto extension and TDA trade.

 

[pit]

That looks like two, maybe three, mistakes.

I'm reeling.

 

[freakydallas13]

Huh? What? Ghost was AV. He wanted him gone. Nor did CF overpay to dump him, Stralman cost TB more to dump. And Ghost is a bit overrated around here, on two decent teams (Carolina, Detroit) he was a 3rd pair D-man. Overpaid for that role with the Flyers, now has a more appropriate salary.

Risto was CF falling in love. Turns out he's not a bad player with good coaching, not worth what they gave up in trade or the extension, but that's a different issue.

Thing with CF is he generally paid market price, just bought the wrong things in the market.

But got to credit him with a great Giroux trade, Tippett, Barkey and Edmonton's 2025 1st.
Too bad he followed that with the Risto extension and TDA trade.

Sure thing, skip.

 

[renberg]

It must be summer. We’re rehashing rehashed stuff. We all know what went down and why. No need to kick around this can again.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

It must be summer. We’re rehashing rehashed stuff. We all know what went down and why. No need to kick around this can again.

NAK makes less than ND

 

[Beef Invictus]

Huh? What? Ghost was AV. He wanted him gone. Nor did CF overpay to dump him, Stralman cost TB more to dump. And Ghost is a bit overrated around here, on two decent teams (Carolina, Detroit) he was a 3rd pair D-man. Overpaid for that role with the Flyers, now has a more appropriate salary.

Risto was CF falling in love. Turns out he's not a bad player with good coaching, not worth what they gave up in trade or the extension, but that's a different issue.

Thing with CF is he generally paid market price, just bought the wrong things in the market.

But got to credit him with a great Giroux trade, Tippett, Barkey and Edmonton's 2025 1st.
Too bad he followed that with the Risto extension and TDA trade.

If decisions around Brink are interrelated, then decisions around acquiring Ristolainen are related too. For years you claimed they aren't.

Also, AV did not trade Ghost for a loss. Fletcher did. GMs are the boss, not coaches. At least not in a well managed organization.

 

[ybnvs]

Huh? What? Ghost was AV. He wanted him gone. Nor did CF overpay to dump him, Stralman cost TB more to dump.

Why do you insist on lying so incredibly much? What is in it for you?

Ghost was on AV - Lie - AV didn't run the team, CF did. Oh wait, Holmgren did. Oh wait...
He wanted him gone - Truth - but CF was the GM so this was CF's decision. Every coach on every team wants certain players gone - no coach gets along and likes all the players on any roster given to him. Don't be obtuse.
CF didn't overpay to dump Ghost - Lie - How on Earth can you sit here and say Ghost trade wasn't an overpayment (overdump?)?
Stralman cost TB more to dump - Lie - Stralman left TB as a pending UFA.

I generally don't read beyond the first two sentences or so of your posts, because I refuse to read further into your propaganda. Cut the snake off at the head, sort of thing.

Comparing these two types of players is ridiculous to do, anyway. Stop shifting the goalposts every single time Ghost gets brought up. You have been proven wrong every single time. Are you a glutton for punishment? Do you enjoy being proven wrong over and over again?

Stralman was 35 years old when traded to Arizona (FROM FLORIDA where he was routinely scratched at end of season, not Tampa). He was overpaid at the time he signed his last deal for an overaged defensemen. That's apples to f***ing zucchini to Ghost's contract, dude, and completely irrelevant anyways.

Totally different than a 50+pt Ghost who was making 4.1m on the Flyers and was only 28 years old, but go ahead, you do you and consider those two transactions of completely different caliber and type of players and their respective ages to be similar. Makes sense.

Stralman was and is cooked. Ghost was busy showing the league a 51 and 41pt season yet, being awarded a trade to play for Carolina in the playoffs, and then signing a nice new deal in Detroit.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Right, at this point the pro-team narrative around Ghost has been so thoroughly debunked that it's madness to keep pushing it instead of admitting to being wrong.

 

[deadhead]

Why do you insist on lying so incredibly much? What is in it for you?

Ghost was on AV - Lie - AV didn't run the team, CF did. Oh wait, Holmgren did. Oh wait...
He wanted him gone - Truth - but CF was the GM so this was CF's decision. Every coach on every team wants certain players gone - no coach gets along and likes all the players on any roster given to him. Don't be obtuse.
CF didn't overpay to dump Ghost - Lie - How on Earth can you sit here and say Ghost trade wasn't an overpayment (overdump?)?
Stralman cost TB more to dump - Lie - Stralman left TB as a pending UFA.

I generally don't read beyond the first two sentences or so of your posts, because I refuse to read further into your propaganda. Cut the snake off at the head, sort of thing.

Comparing these two types of players is ridiculous to do, anyway. Stop shifting the goalposts every single time Ghost gets brought up. You have been proven wrong every single time. Are you a glutton for punishment? Do you enjoy being proven wrong over and over again?

Stralman was 35 years old when traded to Arizona (FROM FLORIDA where he was routinely scratched at end of season, not Tampa). He was overpaid at the time he signed his last deal for an overaged defensemen. That's apples to f***ing zucchini to Ghost's contract, dude, and completely irrelevant anyways.

Totally different than a 50+pt Ghost who was making 4.1m on the Flyers and was only 28 years old, but go ahead, you do you and consider those two transactions of completely different caliber and type of players and their respective ages to be similar. Makes sense.

Stralman was and is cooked. Ghost was busy showing the league a 51 and 41pt season yet, being awarded a trade to play for Carolina in the playoffs, and then signing a nice new deal in Detroit.

CF never really ran the team until Holmgren "retired", he was hired to run a consensus FO (after Hextall's Kremlin approach). AV had a lot of pull with that contract (it took a total collapse for the FO to eat the rest of his contract). AV wanted Ghost and Voracek gone, given there was no cap room b/c of the flat cap due to COVID, CF was backed into a corner. Trading Ghost and Voracek freed about $8M in cap room to get players AV wanted. Nor would keeping them have made a difference, the problem with the team was fundamental, aging, cap strapped with little left in the talent pipeline. The team had 61 points, had they kept those two, what, 66 points? Big deal.

Stralman had one year left at $5M, that should have been a cheaper salary dump. What matters in a salary dump is how much cap room you take on, not the quality of the player - Arizona was tanking, they didn't care about the quality of player they received. Cap room was at a premium around the league.

 

[Beef Invictus]

CF never really ran the team until Holmgren "retired", he was hired to run a consensus FO (after Hextall's Kremlin approach). AV had a lot of pull with that contract (it took a total collapse for the FO to eat the rest of his contract). AV wanted Ghost and Voracek gone, given there was no cap room b/c of the flat cap due to COVID, CF was backed into a corner. Trading Ghost and Voracek freed about $8M in cap room to get players AV wanted. Nor would keeping them have made a difference, the problem with the team was fundamental, aging, cap strapped with little left in the talent pipeline. The team had 61 points, had they kept those two, what, 66 points? Big deal.

Stralman had one year left at $5M, that should have been a cheaper salary dump. What matters in a salary dump is how much cap room you take on, not the quality of the player - Arizona was tanking, they didn't care about the quality of player they received. Cap room was at a premium around the league.

Holmgren was barely involved relative to other advisors. That defending the team and Fletcher relies on fantasy devoid of reality is a good sign it's a terrible position. For example, the fact that Holmgren supposedly retired has led to absolutely no change in process shows this is a thing you've dreamed up.

It's ok to admit you were intensely wrong for years on end.

 

[deadhead]

I was right, the fundamental problem was the organization wouldn't accept the need to rebuild, CF was the symptom, not the disease.

If Holmgren had accepted the need to rebuild after 2018-19, he'd have hired a different GM, and then retired to avoid the flak, after blaming Hextall for blowing a chance to rebuild. G, Voracek, Ghost would have been traded while they had value (got lucky to get so much for an older G).

No one was going to keep that team competitive, they got one lucky season in a weird situation, then came crashing back to earth.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

CF never really ran the team until Holmgren "retired", he was hired to run a consensus FO (after Hextall's Kremlin approach). AV had a lot of pull with that contract (it took a total collapse for the FO to eat the rest of his contract). AV wanted Ghost and Voracek gone, given there was no cap room b/c of the flat cap due to COVID, CF was backed into a corner. Trading Ghost and Voracek freed about $8M in cap room to get players AV wanted. Nor would keeping them have made a difference, the problem with the team was fundamental, aging, cap strapped with little left in the talent pipeline. The team had 61 points, had they kept those two, what, 66 points? Big deal.

Stralman had one year left at $5M, that should have been a cheaper salary dump. What matters in a salary dump is how much cap room you take on, not the quality of the player - Arizona was tanking, they didn't care about the quality of player they received. Cap room was at a premium around the league.

So when Danny is fired in a few years will your defense be he never really ran the team as well? Then shift blame to the other 2 stooges?

This nonsense that CF didn't run the show is just that. Much like Ronald he was in complete control. He made the choices and path he choose.

 

[freakydallas13]

I was right, the fundamental problem was the organization wouldn't accept the need to rebuild, CF was the symptom, not the disease.

Even if this was true (it's not), CF did an absolutely awful job of making the team good. Holmgren didn't have a gun to Fletcher's head telling him to trade that much for Risto.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I was right, the fundamental problem was the organization wouldn't accept the need to rebuild, CF was the symptom, not the disease.

If Holmgren had accepted the need to rebuild after 2018-19, he'd have hired a different GM, and then retired to avoid the flak, after blaming Hextall for blowing a chance to rebuild. G, Voracek, Ghost would have been traded while they had value (got lucky to get so much for an older G).

No one was going to keep that team competitive, they got one lucky season in a weird situation, then came crashing back to earth.

If you were right about Ghost then he wouldn't be in the league anymore.

If you were right about th Flyers and Holmgren then there would have been substantial change when he stepped away.

Nothing supports your claims. There is no evidence or facts that supports them. You just like to believe them for no reason.

 

[VladDrag]

Boldy scores at a 2nd line level, that's more valuable than a 2nd pair D-man who held his own as a 1st pair D-man? My opinion is as valuable as yours (i.e. since no one is paying either of us . . . ).

Both are young enough to improve, will they?

You're allowed to have any opinion that you want, but the analytics on both players shows Boldy is legit top line winger, in the top 10percent of impactful players.

Cam York, who I like, is nowhere close to those types of impacts.

It doesn't mean they aren't good, but York hasn't have nearly as impactful of a career as Boldy, as of yet.