Former Bruins Jake DeBrusk - gone to Nucks

[KillerMillerTime]

Being legit top 6 players does not translate to "star" status. You're nitpicking, threading the needle and trying to find the hole in what I am saying in traditional HF argumentative fashion.

To me, a 7 yr contract is reserved for hard to find players, players with a guaranteed skill set who bring it every game. JDB is not any of those things, his contributions can be easily replaced with another player which is what I mean by "run of the mill". Those players are all around the league. This does not diminish being a top 6 guy and please don't conflate those two different meanings.

Signing a player because he had a couple of series is not justification for a 7 yr deal, at least not for me. Honestly, you can throw out last year because just about every Bruin player had career years in terms of points. JDB is a 20 goal guy and 40 pt overall with potential to hit 25 and 50. I agree his money value is spot on, 5.5 million seems about right but at 7 yrs with a limited NTC.....no way Jose.

I'm not threading anything. That term is compensated by his price. What's hard to understand?

 

[Ladyfan]

Why fight about him....He is gone

 

[KillerMillerTime]

Why fight about him....He is gone

It is a DeBrusk thread and Barnums description of DeBrusk PO production along with his "run of the mill" description aren't accurate and I responded. Its no big deal but I don't think its fair to DeBrusk.

 

[chizzler]

Kid changed his game after that concussion. He became hesitant. He did get better towards the end. Term would be huge here because we know of his ups and downs. To go through that for 5+ years again makes people say shit. Kid is a good player that needed a change of scenery. No need to crap on him here. Good luck Jake!

 

[Trizz617]

Why fight about him....He is gone

This!!!!^^ Poof

 

[LSCII]

My take on the JDB deal is this: Good for him for locking it up long term. I personally found him too streaky, but he has value. What I will also say is that quite a few of the folks here saying they wouldn't want him back at that term would also be saying how reasonable a deal it was had it been with Boston. I think those same people are playing up the importance of Lindholm over JDB without admitting that they've simply shuffled the hole at C to RW, and still go into the year with a glaring issue in their top 6. Maybe C is more important than a scoring RW or maybe not.

 

[Bocephus86]

It was a reasonable contract (maybe too long, but that seems to be a trend in this NHL), I like the player, but his inconsistency put him firmly in my 'eh' camp. I'm sure I'll miss him at times, but I won't miss wondering which Jake would show up to the game. I wish him nothing but success and good fortune on his new team. There is also a feeling in the back of my mind (based on nothing really) that if we signed him for 7 years, we'd get 7 years of the mostly missing Jake. Somewhere deep down it felt like he was done with Boston.

 

[LSCII]

To me, if you don’t eat Korpisalo’s money in the Ullmark trade and you don’t eat the money in the Peeke trade, you’d have that cash to back fill the loss of JDB with a pretty good player. But hey, it’s only flier Sweeney took, and those guys will be great next year, right?

 

[UncleRico]

Would you have rathered

Debrusk/branstrom/bussi

Or

Lysell/peeke/korpisalo

Or whoever you believe will fill the empty wing slot between lysell/meruklov

 

[LSCII]

Would you have rathered

Debrusk/branstrom/bussi

Or

Lysell/peeke/korpisalo

Or whoever you believe will fill the empty wing slot between lysell/meruklov

I don't have faith in either of those AHL guys, TBH. I'm guessing they slot Geekie up, which leaves me feeling pretty depressed, actually.

 

[UncleRico]

I don't have faith in either of those AHL guys, TBH. I'm guessing they slot Geekie up, which leaves me feeling pretty depressed, actually.

I think they test out lysell or merkulov until the trade deadline and if those guys are slacking they just go find one

 

[DKH]

This board: 27-year-old Jake's seven year deal is too long, but 29-year-old Elias Lindholm's is good.

They both are 35 last season

DeBrusk 7 years is to long to 6 or over but 5.5 is the figure that locks me in

DeBrusk deal was good

Lindholm was offered 8/72 in October

They got 7/54 ~ works for me

Been to many funerals when I heard wonderful things I never heard or thought of when person alive

Human nature unless you are Kyrie

 

[DKH]

I don't have faith in either of those AHL guys, TBH. I'm guessing they slot Geekie up, which leaves me feeling pretty depressed, actually.

Why do all your posts end with actually?

I’ve always wanted to ask you , actually

 

[chizzler]

My take on the JDB deal is this: Good for him for locking it up long term. I personally found him too streaky, but he has value. What I will also say is that quite a few of the folks here saying they wouldn't want him back at that term would also be saying how reasonable a deal it was had it been with Boston. I think those same people are playing up the importance of Lindholm over JDB without admitting that they've simply shuffled the hole at C to RW, and still go into the year with a glaring issue in their top 6. Maybe C is more important than a scoring RW or maybe not.

Agree. I wouldn’t want to deal with his streakiness for 7 years though. It would drive me nuts. I’m thinking they as a team can come up with 18 goals to cover his absence. You could be right that Lindholm could be the same. I would say they needed a center more than a winger because they’re missing two. Good for DB.

 

[NDiesel]

Agree. I wouldn’t want to deal with his streakiness for 7 years though. It would drive me nuts. I’m thinking they as a team can come up with 18 goals to cover his absence. You could be right that Lindholm could be the same. I would say they needed a center more than a winger because they’re missing two. Good for DB.

I mean Geekie just about covered those numbers last year, if he can do it again for half the price then it isn't a big deal. Just need someone to replace Geekie on line 3 now.

 

[sooshii]

Why do all your posts end with actually?

I’ve always wanted to ask you , actually

Why do NHL players constantly say “obviously”?

 

[Mione134]

Agree. I wouldn’t want to deal with his streakiness for 7 years though. It would drive me nuts. I’m thinking they as a team can come up with 18 goals to cover his absence. You could be right that Lindholm could be the same. I would say they needed a center more than a winger because they’re missing two. Good for DB.

Someone will have to step up in the playoffs because Jake was money and clutch.

Looking forward to see who does

 

[LSCII]

Why do all your posts end with actually?

I’ve always wanted to ask you , actually

I don’t know,actually…

 

[LSCII]

Why do NHL players constantly say “obviously”?

I think it’s pretty obvious, obviously…

I mean Geekie just about covered those numbers last year, if he can do it again for half the price then it isn't a big deal. Just need someone to replace Geekie on line 3 now.

What if Geekie thrived because of that role and the easier matchups based on it? It’s not a given that a guy coming off a career tear will equal or better it. I hope he does but it’s a question mark until he does.

 

[NDiesel]

I think it’s pretty obvious, obviously…


What if Geekie thrived because of that role and the easier matchups based on it? It’s not a given that a guy coming off a career tear will equal or better it. I hope he does but it’s a question mark until he does.

Could be why he did so well. He has also trended in the right direction in back to back seasons with increased roles each time.

Think it's worth the risk this season to see what he (or someone else) can bring, rather than committing another 7 years to a streaky Debrusk.

That said, as you and probably everyone else agree, I'd obviously prefer an upgrade to push Geekie back to line 3 so that we don't have another season of guys slotted above where they should be.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

He is gone and I still don’t really care if he stayed either way.

The man just overthinks it

 

[Bruins4Lifer]

My take on the JDB deal is this: Good for him for locking it up long term. I personally found him too streaky, but he has value. What I will also say is that quite a few of the folks here saying they wouldn't want him back at that term would also be saying how reasonable a deal it was had it been with Boston. I think those same people are playing up the importance of Lindholm over JDB without admitting that they've simply shuffled the hole at C to RW, and still go into the year with a glaring issue in their top 6. Maybe C is more important than a scoring RW or maybe not.

Is it really a question that C is more important than RW? Seems pretty obvious. I agree with certain criticisms of Sweeney but I'm glad he made the decision to get Lindholm at the expense of Debrusk. He upgraded at C and at wing (Zacha > Debrusk).

There's certainly a hole in the 2RW spot right now, but it's a much easier and cheaper spot to fill at the trade deadline than getting a top 6 C.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Why do NHL players constantly say “obviously”?

Why do Canadians constantly say "for sure", eh?

 

[caz16]

Why do Canadians constantly say "for sure", eh?

I don't know, mate!

 

[Sevendust]

Someone will have to step up in the playoffs because Jake was money and clutch.

Looking forward to see who does

Playoff performer Jake is one of the biggest myth since the end of playoffs. Wasn't there already a poster who dismissed this claim?