Bozak signs 1 year deal at 750k

[67Blues]

I'm probably less concerned about Perron than most. I think his number will be exceptionally team friendly, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it worked out before camp breaks. I think his next deal will start with a 5.

Perron will retire a Blue.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I'm probably less concerned about Perron than most. I think his number will be exceptionally team friendly, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it worked out before camp breaks. I think his next deal will start with a 5.

I think you are right on Perron, but that means both he and Parayko go up about $1mm. Where do we find that $ if we don't deal Tank?

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Perron will retire a Blue.

If there is any justice in the world, he ought to. Perron has made some comments in the past that show he isn’t going to chase max salary. If the Blues an make a reasonable offer they should be able to sign him. The guy has earned respect in this process.

 

[Ranksu]

We need the toughness IMO

Hmm, I didn't see Clifford play extra physical. Be that you are afraid of. He hasn't legs for it, so in my eyes he looked Steve Ott in his last years. Always late and just put himself out of position and hurt forecheck and put defensive game harder position when he overplayed. Ofc he put good hit numbers, but how many times it will cost to us in too overly aggressive play, but rest of team in akward position.

MacMac, Poganski and Joshua were imo were much physical how they played vs Clifford. Ofc Schenn and Sanford can bring their own shares in physical game. We have enough guys who play physical and fight.

Blais was really in another level playing physical game vs rest of team.

NHL Stats

 

[Stealth JD]

If there is any justice in the world, he ought to. Perron has made some comments in the past that show he isn’t going to chase max salary. If the Blues an make a reasonable offer they should be able to sign him. The guy has earned respect in this process.

The Blues paid Alex Steen $5.7M when he was a shell of his former self at age 36. If the Blues don't give Perron another $4M x 4yr deal, even at age 33, I'll begrudge Army for being a cheap ass. Perry has earned a raise if nothing else.

 

[Ranksu]

The Blues paid Alex Steen $5.7M when he was a shell of his former self at age 36. If the Blues don't give Perron another $4M x 4yr deal, even at age 33, I'll begrudge Army for being a cheap ass. Perry has earned a raise if nothing else.

Well, Army wants to squeeze players balls, to be under control of everything. Not shocked if Army does some idiotic move.

 

[Mike Liut]

The Blues paid Alex Steen $5.7M when he was a shell of his former self at age 36. If the Blues don't give Perron another $4M x 4yr deal, even at age 33, I'll begrudge Army for being a cheap ass. Perry has earned a raise if nothing else.

I’d rather I’d be a little shorter term. 3 yrs max. 3 yr 12 mill

 

[Stealth JD]

I’d rather I’d be a little shorter term. 3 yrs max. 3 yr 12 mill

Perron would be foolish to do that after the past two seasons he's put up. Might as well fire your agent and represent yourself if you're going to let Army do you like that.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Perron seems like a player that is going to play well into his 36 year old season and still be a good middle six player in his 37 and 38 year old seasons. I'm all aboard for a 4 year deal.

Also Sanford, Clifford, and Bortuzzo's contracts all end after this season. So that's another 4.376 Mil off the books. Barbie and Sunny's contracts would be easily moved if desperately needed as well.

 

[Mike Liut]

Perron seems like a player that is going to play well into his 36 year old season and still be a good middle six player in his 37 and 38 year old seasons. I'm all aboard for a 4 year deal.

Also Sanford, Clifford, and Bortuzzo's contracts all end after this season. So that's another 4.376 Mil off the books. Barbie and Sunny's contracts would be easily moved if desperately needed as well.

This team isn’t deep enough to move Barbie and Sunny. They are key players for the Blues type of play. Identity types

 

[Linkens Mastery]

This team isn’t deep enough to move Barbie and Sunny. They are key players for the Blues type of play. Identity types

Did you even read what I said? I said they would be easily moved IF DESPERATELY NEEDED. Not saying we should, but, if needed they can be.

 

[Mike Liut]

Did you even read what I said? I said they would be easily moved IF DESPERATELY NEEDED. Not saying we should, but, if needed they can be.

I didn’t you say said we should, I said we shouldn’t move them at all. Too important especially at their price. Very key players.

 

[Mike Liut]

I’d rather have Barbs and Sunny over Bozak and Sanford.

 

[Brian39]

Capfriendly has confirmed the bonus structure of Bozak's deal and there are a few interesting tidbits.

He has a full NTC that expires 2 weeks before the trade deadline. If things go south this year, Army can move him as a rental.

There are a number of bonuses available. He gets $750k for playing 10 games, another $250k for hitting 41 games, another $100k if we win 1 playoff round and another $150k if we win another round. So essentially this is a $1.5M deal barring disaster, a $1.75M deal if he is relatively healthy and part of the healthy starting 12 forward group and up to $2M if he is around for a playoff run. And we can flip him for a pick at the deadline if the season goes sideways.

Nice.

 

[Mike Liut]

Capfriendly has confirmed the bonus structure of Bozak's deal and there are a few interesting tidbits.

He has a full NTC that expires 2 weeks before the trade deadline. If things go south this year, Army can move him as a rental.

There are a number of bonuses available. He gets $750k for playing 10 games, another $250k for hitting 41 games, another $100k if we win 1 playoff round and another $150k if we win another round. So essentially this is a $1.5M deal barring disaster, a $1.75M deal if he is relatively healthy and part of the healthy starting 12 forward group and up to $2M if he is around for a playoff run. And we can flip him for a pick at the deadline if the season goes sideways.

Nice.

1.75m is much more realistic than 750k.

 

[jura]

We need the toughness IMO

pls no

 

[Ranksu]

Does it matter?

 

[Mike Liut]

pls no

That really really sucked. He’s probably my favorite player

 

[Celtic Note]

Hard disagree. He had 4 fights through 50 games, which was tied for 12th in the league. He overwhelmingly won two of those fights, lost a close fight and got worked over by Reaves. Fighting is way down league wide from what it used to be. The league leader had 7 fights last year. Fighting once every 12 games isn't a lack of toughness in today's NHL. His 69 hits were tied for 5th on the team and he accumulated those playing less than 10 minutes a night. I think there is a great argument that he plays a role that is increasingly less valuable in the NHL and that having a guy around for toughness isn't needed. But he absolutely provided the toughness he was expected to bring.

I would like to have him as a 14th forward, but I wouldn't rate that preference high enough to let it impact other decisions. I wouldn't drag out a Thomas contract in order to have enough space for Clifford and I don't think he would be claimed on waivers. If he did get claimed then so be it. But if we can make the roster work with him on it, I like him as a guy who is scratched 75% of the time but can be inserted onto the 4th line occasionally. I'd rather have him sitting in the press box than Kostin, so if the battle for 14th forward comes down to those 2 then I'd give it to Clifford.

I guess that is an objective analysis of his toughness relative to stats. But, the eye test shows that he didn’t bring enough toughness that it mattered. He often chased hits behind the play, which to me is relatively worthless when you don’t add any real value on the ice in any other way. His hits weren’t entirely impactful. He looked like he was belly bumping half the time. So if you are chasing plays and not imparting fear, what’s the point. Toughness for the sake of toughness?

On top of all that, he wasn’t good offensively. He wasn’t good defensively. People weren’t scared of him. I am not sure what that toughness did for us.

I frequently see traits posed as some positive in a vacuum, but ultimately you can have a trait and it not be valuable because you don’t strategically use it. To me Clifford didn’t use it effectively.

I see the same issues with traits like speed, stick handling, shooting, etc.

(I don’t mean this to sound like I am calling you out Brian, this post is not pointed at you)

 

[joe galiba]

Clifford sort of reminds me of Twist
not how good he is at fighting
someone like Probert would intimidate other teams, they would not take liberties because you never knew what he would do or who he would go after
Twist only intimidated other enforcers, no one on the other teams were scared to take liberties because he only went after other goon types
Clifford is simply not someone the other teams even think about, a complete non factor

 

[bleedblue1223]

Those bonuses are definitely structured in a way to guarantee Bozak a bigger contract, and buy Army time to make a move, since he wouldn't want to get hit with the bonus penalty for next season.

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

Those bonuses are definitely structured in a way to guarantee Bozak a bigger contract, and buy Army time to make a move, since he wouldn't want to get hit with the bonus penalty for next season.

LTIR visits are essentially inevitable. I know a team can't count on them as part of their planning processes, but that's life in the NHL.

In what I see as the best case scenario - the team is cooking and fully healthy, Vladi has a change of heart and wants to keep the Note on his chest, and there is no reason you'd want to trade Tyler Bozak - I would hope the move is Sanford to whomever for the highest pick they're willing to part with. Or, hell, the 22 man roster that Brian talked about the other day. This will work out just fine.

 

[Brian39]

I guess that is an objective analysis of his toughness relative to stats. But, the eye test shows that he didn’t bring enough toughness that it mattered. He often chased hits behind the play, which to me is relatively worthless when you don’t add any real value on the ice in any other way. His hits weren’t entirely impactful. He looked like he was belly bumping half the time. So if you are chasing plays and not imparting fear, what’s the point. Toughness for the sake of toughness?

On top of all that, he wasn’t good offensively. He wasn’t good defensively. People weren’t scared of him. I am not sure what that toughness did for us.

I frequently see traits posed as some positive in a vacuum, but ultimately you can have a trait and it not be valuable because you don’t strategically use it. To me Clifford didn’t use it effectively.

I see the same issues with traits like speed, stick handling, shooting, etc.

(I don’t mean this to sound like I am calling you out Brian, this post is not pointed at you)

I don't disagree with any of this, but I view it as an argument that having a guy just for toughness is irrelevant in the NHL rather than an argument that Clifford didn't provide the toughness we expected.

Tony Twist and Kelly Chase wouldn't make a roster in today's NHL. They were certainly tough enough, but the lack of other skills would have made them useless in today's game. That's pretty much how I feel about Clifford right now. I think his shot and hockey sense is still good enough to merit being a 14th forward that gets used occasionally as a deterrent in games that are clearly going to boil over. But that's it.

 

[Stealth JD]

I'm not even sure Clifford is a deterrent at this point. There were a couple of instances last year when I was expecting him to stand up for a teammate and he skated the other way. I personally thought he did a lousy actually enforcing anything, but played decently enough to be a part-time 4th liner when a fresh set of legs are needed. Maybe he being on the bench is enough to make his teammates each feel two inches taller; but he certainly picks and chooses his spots when to make his presence known, and not always at the right times.

 

[Celtic Note]

I don't disagree with any of this, but I view it as an argument that having a guy just for toughness is irrelevant in the NHL rather than an argument that Clifford didn't provide the toughness we expected.

Tony Twist and Kelly Chase wouldn't make a roster in today's NHL. They were certainly tough enough, but the lack of other skills would have made them useless in today's game. That's pretty much how I feel about Clifford right now. I think his shot and hockey sense is still good enough to merit being a 14th forward that gets used occasionally as a deterrent in games that are clearly going to boil over. But that's it.

Fair points all around