KrejciMVP
Registered User
at the end of the day I don't see Sweeney and Neely paying Jake his market value after they let Bertuzzi walk. It would be a huge shock if they hitched their wagon to jake for 8 years.
Player Discussion Jake DeBrusk VII
- Thread starter smithformeragent
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Right and that is why #74 slots in at 6.25-6.5 per year and #73 is 9.
I think core definition is 1G, 2D and 4F. So in Boston's case this year, one of Ullmark\Swayman, McAvoy, Lindholm, Pastrnak, DeBrusk, Marchand and Zacha.
Last year at F it was Pastrnak, Bergeron, Marchand and DeBrusk.
Not at $6.5, perfectly reasonable. By year 4 that 6.5 is the equivalent of 5.8.
UncleRico
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 9,507
- 12,481
Ya see and that’s the beauty of it. Everyone can have different definitions of a core. For me the core right now is Marchand, Pasta, McAvoy and Lindholm. I’d only go to 4 right now(last year was obviously a larger core I just see this as a team currently in transition).
It really just matters what peoples definition of a core is.
Core to me is at least your top starting six plus 1. It's the equivalent of 1\3 of your skaters and one goalie. Every single playoff team in the league has at least 4-5 good players, so that's not enough to build sustained success.
Bruins teams that DNQ in 2007, 2015 and 2016 had a mix of Thomas(2007)\Rask, (2015,2016) , Chara (2007,2015,2016) Savard (2007), Bergeron (2007,2015, 2016), Krejci (2015,2016) and Marchand (2015\2016).
So that's 4 core in 2007 and 5 core in 2015, 2016, including 2 guaranteed HOF on all
3 DNQ and arguably 2 more in Marchand\Rask. So to me your core is 6 for certain and
7 for me.
MarchysNoseKnows
Big Hat No Cattle
- Feb 14, 2018
- 10,162
- 20,485
I see core a bit differently - and this is a semantic thing for sure. There is no right or wrong definition per se.
I look at a core as a group of important (top six/top 4/starting G with a notable exception here or there) players, in a similar age range, signed long term. A group you’re building around. We’ve seen the last core come to an end, with the exception of Marchand. But the new core has been built behind it.
McAvoy
Lindholm
Pastrnak
Carlo
Zacha
*Debrusk
*Swayman
All between 24 and 29 age wise. Marchand is “post-core” if you will. If Jake and Sway are signed long term, they fit right into that core. A Lohrei, or Lysell, or Merkulov, etc, could develop quickly and be part of it. And of course the Bruins could add to it, or trade Jake or Sway and subtract from it depending on return.
Three top-4 defensemen, one of the best goal scorers on the planet, two other top six forwards, and a netminder is a great core to build around, especially with an injection of cap space coming this offseason. It’s obvious what it’s lacking, but that doesn’t invalidate the core for what it is.
Can this core, with key additions and contributions from younger players, open a competitive window from 24-25 to say 28-29? That’s the challenge.
I get why others definition of “core” wouldn’t include Zacha, Carlo, or Jake. But if I was looking at Tampa’s core 5 years ago or so, I would absolutely be including Palat, as an example.
If Jake is locked up - and I think he will be - to me he’s a core player for sure.
I look at a core as a group of important (top six/top 4/starting G with a notable exception here or there) players, in a similar age range, signed long term. A group you’re building around. We’ve seen the last core come to an end, with the exception of Marchand. But the new core has been built behind it.
McAvoy
Lindholm
Pastrnak
Carlo
Zacha
*Debrusk
*Swayman
All between 24 and 29 age wise. Marchand is “post-core” if you will. If Jake and Sway are signed long term, they fit right into that core. A Lohrei, or Lysell, or Merkulov, etc, could develop quickly and be part of it. And of course the Bruins could add to it, or trade Jake or Sway and subtract from it depending on return.
Three top-4 defensemen, one of the best goal scorers on the planet, two other top six forwards, and a netminder is a great core to build around, especially with an injection of cap space coming this offseason. It’s obvious what it’s lacking, but that doesn’t invalidate the core for what it is.
Can this core, with key additions and contributions from younger players, open a competitive window from 24-25 to say 28-29? That’s the challenge.
I get why others definition of “core” wouldn’t include Zacha, Carlo, or Jake. But if I was looking at Tampa’s core 5 years ago or so, I would absolutely be including Palat, as an example.
If Jake is locked up - and I think he will be - to me he’s a core player for sure.
They wont trade jake debrusk because hes a 30 goal scorer who can score at 5v5, they would have traded him two years ago but they didnt get fair value offered. 2015 has nothing to do with it.
mjhfb
Easier from up here
My simple definition of a core is the group of players you want to keep long term and build around.
Debrusk plays a two way game with speed however which might give him the advantage over the "what if" with Bertuzzi.
I mean Bertuzzi was a FA in an offseason where we had basically zero cap space and would've had to give players away for free, or paid assets to do so, in order to keep him. Jake will be a FA in an offseason where we'll have like 20+ mil in cap space. Not exactly comparable situations. That being said, I don't think Jake is a player that will be getting 8 years on his next deal, unless the bruins use that to leverage getting him at a much lower AAV.
Debrusk needs to be resigned, this is a no-brainer, very good player who can play both RW, LW, scores goals and kills penalties. Furthermore he hasn't hit his peak yet, just get it done Sweeney.
MarchysNoseKnows
Big Hat No Cattle
- Feb 14, 2018
- 10,162
- 20,485
Why? He’s signed for 7 more years and is only 29. And he was a Norris contender last year.
PlayMakers
Registered User
Well said. And that's why I don't think the Bruins will "rebuild" regardless of the season they have.
They have a really good core in place, and they're all in their prime. Yes, it's missing that one important piece, but I think it's a lot easier and simpler to try to get that one piece than to sell all these guys off and hope you can draft and develop 8 more just like them.
missingchicklet
Registered User
- Jan 24, 2010
- 36,589
- 34,464
The Bs have lost a ton of offensive firepower with Bergy, Krejci, and Hall gone. A reliable well-rounded 25+ goal scorer is not someone the Bs can afford to lose in addition to what has already gone out the door. Throw in Marchy ain't getting any younger. His offense when he is gone will be very hard to replace. The Bs absolutely need to re-sign Jake to a long-term deal.
Those people thinking that $6.5-7M is too much need to realize that if Jake leaves the Bs will be in the position of needing to pay a good free agent winger just as much if not more. Trading Jake for a pick would be silly since picks are a big time gamble. Signing a FA in the $6.5-7M range is a gamble as well. Good luck for that price getting someone as well-rounded as Jake, at his age, and who has the skill set that melds with the team as well as Jake's. Barring some catastrophic injury he is a known quantity with ceiling left.
Complete no-brainer to sign Jake long-term as long as he not asking for something stupid high. Thus far based on comments from the Bs brass and from Jake a deal is likely and Jake will be a B for a long time to come. Really hoping DS can get him locked up sooner rather than later. Jake is on the cusp of taking his game to another level and turning more heads. Don't want that price going up too much before he is re-signed.
Those people thinking that $6.5-7M is too much need to realize that if Jake leaves the Bs will be in the position of needing to pay a good free agent winger just as much if not more. Trading Jake for a pick would be silly since picks are a big time gamble. Signing a FA in the $6.5-7M range is a gamble as well. Good luck for that price getting someone as well-rounded as Jake, at his age, and who has the skill set that melds with the team as well as Jake's. Barring some catastrophic injury he is a known quantity with ceiling left.
Complete no-brainer to sign Jake long-term as long as he not asking for something stupid high. Thus far based on comments from the Bs brass and from Jake a deal is likely and Jake will be a B for a long time to come. Really hoping DS can get him locked up sooner rather than later. Jake is on the cusp of taking his game to another level and turning more heads. Don't want that price going up too much before he is re-signed.
UncleRico
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 9,507
- 12,481
Ya core players are borderline untouchable guys for me. On this roster that is only pastrnak, McAvoy, and Lindholm, where I would have to be completely blown away to move them.
Then there’s exceptions to both our definitions like Marchand where he’s definitely not a long term player at his age but he’s obviously a core player
Does anybody really think Lindholm would be putting up these numbers without Carlo as his linemate
DKH
Worst Poster/Awful Takes
- Feb 27, 2002
- 77,535
- 59,270
DKH
Worst Poster/Awful Takes
- Feb 27, 2002
- 77,535
- 59,270
The Bruins have the same defense and goaltending that led the league less Clifton who Monty benched
The Fantasy offensive mentality has crept into the views of this team
Bruins will be younger and faster - and with Looch tougher
HustleB
Cautiously Optimistic
I will take the next 5-8 years of DeBrusk over Bertuzzi all day. I don’t think it’s particularly close either.
WhalerTurnedBruin55
Fading out, thanks for the times.
- Oct 31, 2008
- 11,347
- 6,720
He's a 30 goal scorer that has never scored 30.
I like Debrusk, but I hate projected numbers being used when he simply hasn't made it there yet.
Can he? Those projections say he COULD, but he hasn't put together a full season and to be honest, an 8 year deal for a guy that hasn't played a full season yet into 6 years after his draft year? Call me cynical, but not the guy I'm paying market value+ to stay here. The number is right? Great, let's keep him. But if we overpay him for a contract he could grow into, I'm skeptical.
That said letting him walk is also pretty awful. Sweeneys return for roster players hasn't really been impressive either.
So at this point, I kinda feel damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Last edited:
JOKER 192
Blow it up
- Status
