Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Jeremy Swayman III- still nothing

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
MarchysNoseKnows said:
You think if they went two, he’d just accept the QO and bail?
Click to expand...
Absolutely possible unless they came to the table with an agreeable offer, which is why right now they don't have the balls to offer him two years.

The fact people here think they didn't take two years because they were looking out for him and it wasn't a strategy has their head so far up managements ass they cant see straight.
 
Dr Quincy said:
A more defensible take than "Swayman should've accepted a 2 year deal at Vladar money "
Click to expand...
Who said he should have accepted a 2 year deal at Vladar money?

SwayHeyKid said:
Absolutely possible unless they came to the table with an agreeable offer, which is why right now they don't have the balls to offer him two years.

The fact people here think they didn't take two years because they were looking out for him and it wasn't a strategy has their head so far up managements ass they cant see straight.
Click to expand...
What? People have said over and over that they didn’t take two years because they didn’t want to alienate themselves from Swayman. It would have been in their best interest cap wise to take the two years but they didn’t.
 
SwayHeyKid said:
They did that because they weren't idiots. Choose two years then and it's a given he plays out his final season after and leaves. You really think they did it for his good?
Click to expand...

There are at least 32 givens every season in the NHL. If Swayman would have felt taking his team to arbitration and having that team pick two seasons instead of one would be some egregious slight that came out of nowhere, well, the Bruins would have to trade him during the summer of 2025.

Their inability to get good value on trades would probably make the above a nightmare. That'd be a real problem, unlike nailing down an RFA contract for your backup goalie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SwayHeyKid
MarchysNoseKnows said:
Who said he should have accepted a 2 year deal at Vladar money?


What? People have said over and over that they didn’t take two years because they didn’t want to alienate themselves from Swayman. It would have been in their best interest cap wise to take the two years but they didn’t.
Click to expand...
It would have been in their best interest cap wise last year to extend him then, but they were horrible with the cap, so they didn't have enough money. Guessing 6.5 or 7 per would easily have gotten it done.
 
EverettMike said:
No, I'm not, because the point is that for all their regular season success they apparently wouldn't have had under Cassidy, it ultimately didn't matter because they choked in the same exact post-season where Bruce Cassidy led his team to a championship.
Click to expand...
To quote you:

"The Bruins, after a record-setting NHL regular season, would have beaten Florida two years ago if Bruce Cassidy were still the coach because he wouldn't have waited until Game 7 to put Swayman in. Instead they choked."

My point was that was highly unlikely because Cassidy had lost the room. That has nothing to do with Cassidy winning a Cup with a different team.

Donnie Shulzhoffer said:
No he isn’t
Click to expand...

Yes, he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBruins and Grimey
SwayHeyKid said:
It would have been in their best interest cap wise last year to extend him then, but they were horrible with the cap, so they didn't have enough money. Guessing 6.5 or 7 per would easily have gotten it done.
Click to expand...
Ok. And? They couldn’t have done that without dumping Hampus Lindholm or Charlie Coyle. And they had 3 more years of control of the player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grimey
Dennis Bonvie said:
To quote you:

"The Bruins, after a record-setting NHL regular season, would have beaten Florida two years ago if Bruce Cassidy were still the coach because he wouldn't have waited until Game 7 to put Swayman in. Instead they choked."

My point was that was highly unlikely because Cassidy had lost the room. That has nothing to do with Cassidy winning a Cup with a different team.



Yes, he is.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize you were focused on the semantics and not the actual point. My bad.
 
SwayHeyKid said:
Because the Bruins would have chosen one year? Is this a serious question? Why didn't the Bruins? Oh I know, because he would have chosen 2 and left after.


Didn't they have a 3-1 series lead or was that a fever dream?
Click to expand...
No? I also said we should be giving Florida credit. If Boston overcame a 3-1 series lead and went on to go 8-1 in the next two rounds would you just shit on the other team or would you also give Boston credit?

Some of you need to spend a couple minutes outside
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlayMakers
Grimey said:
No? I also said we should be giving Florida credit. If Boston overcame a 3-1 series lead and went on to go 8-1 in the next two rounds would you just shit on the other team or would you also give Boston credit?

Some of you need to spend a couple minutes outside
Click to expand...
I would shit on the greatest regular season team ever that blew a 3-1 lead. I don’t care what the other team does after
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Quincy and EverettMike
Dennis Bonvie said:
By semantics do you mean what you actually said?
Click to expand...

Cassidy was pretty notorious for never changing his lineup once he fell in love with it ( which is why the Blues could load up against Perfection ) although he did give Ullmark the hook after Carolina blew him up in the 21 playoffs against Carolina.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigGoalBrad
MarchysNoseKnows said:
Who said he should have accepted a 2 year deal at Vladar money?
Click to expand...
I'm talking before arbitration. Do you think they were only offering him a 1 year deal the whole time they were negotiating last May and June?
MarchysNoseKnows said:
What? People have said over and over that they didn’t take two years because they didn’t want to alienate themselves from Swayman. It would have been in their best interest cap wise to take the two years but they didn’t.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

Because when I made that point that it was a mistake not to go 2 years, you said it was wrong, not because of "Swayman's feelings" but for other reasons.

But hey, at least now we know that you agree that Sweeney botched last year's handling of the arbitration case. Glad we are on the same page.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom