Player Discussion Jeremy Swayman III- still nothing

[NDiesel]

Not the greatest source, but Wkipedia states:

"On 28 June 2012, Rask re-signed with the Bruins to a one-year, $3.5 million contract. Prior to the declaration of the 2012–13 lockout, Rask was named as the starting goaltender for the Bruins, replacing Tim Thomas, who would eventually be traded to the New York Islanders on 7 February 2013.[24] During the lockout, which ended on 6 January 2013, Rask played for HC Plzeň, which won the Czech Extraliga that year. After the NHL resumed play, Rask led the Bruins to their second Stanley Cup finals in three seasons in the 2013 playoffs. In the third round of the playoffs against the top seeded Pittsburgh Penguins, Rask faced 136 shots in four games played, allowing two goals while making 134 saves for a 0.50 GAA and a .985 save percentage. In the Stanley Cup Finals, the Bruins were defeated in six games by the Presidents’ Trophy-winning Chicago Blackhawks, as Rask registered a .932 save percentage. [25] On 10 July 2013, the Bruins re-signed Rask to an eight-year, $56 million contract."

Yeah I was wrong, my bad

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Ooooh, cup losers makes it all better for you, does it? LOFL

This is what’s wrong with Bruins fans. They’ve been gaslit by constant praises from management about how great just making the playoffs is versus being cup driven.

One. Cup. In. 52. Years.

The same old stupid take.

A poor excuse to rag on management no matter what.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

The same old stupid take.

A poor excuse to rag on management no matter what.

So 1 cup in 52 years is reflective of good management?

 

[NDiesel]

So 1 cup in 52 years is reflective of good management?

It's just a narrow minded view on things. What constitutes good management? Is it only cups? If we had 4 cups in 52 years instead but missed the playoffs in 48 out of 52 years would you consider that better management? What if the other extreme happened and we made 52 straight cup finals and lost them all, is that worse management because of the 0 cups?

 

[Fenian24]

It's just a narrow minded view on things. What constitutes good management? Is it only cups? If we had 4 cups in 52 years instead but missed the playoffs in 48 out of 52 years would you consider that better management? What if the other extreme happened and we made 52 straight cup finals and lost, is that worse management?

Yes it is only Cups. Period.

 

[NDiesel]

Yes it is only Cups. Period.

In the context of success sure, but in the context of good management I don't think it's that simple.

 

[Fenian24]

In the context of success sure, but in the context of good management I don't think it's that simple.

Especially in Boston where for decades the only measure of success was profit. A Cup was not nearly as important as saving a few hundred thousand and having one or two gaping holes on the team in the Sinden years. Good enough for the playoffs, not good enough to really do any damage when they got there.

Losing in the finals is still losing, even if Emperor Jacobs made more money.

 

[EverettMike]

I mean I maybe liked that post, but you could have just about chose anyone of yours in that thread instead and gotten the point that you were overreacting.

Regardless my point is it's funny to see the same people complain when a signing happens, give the GM no props for it when they're wrong and then complain about getting assets for a signing they got for free, that they hated in the first place! It's almost like it's the person at GM you have an issue with and not the individual moves or that people dont actually watch the player they complain about. Nothing easier than being an armchair GM

I'm sorry you were counting on me doubling down and can't adjust to me admitting the Ullmark signing was great and I was wrong when it happened.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

So 1 cup in 52 years is reflective of good management?

Not if your only criteria is winning the Cup.

But over those 52 years the Bruins have the 2nd highest winning percentage in the NHL. Only Vegas is better because they've only played 537 games. Compared to the Bruins doing it over 4,036 games.

I would say that reflects excellent management over a very long period of time.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

In the context of success sure, but in the context of good management I don't think it's that simple.

I'm sure all the owners would consider that 52 year stretch a success.

 

[SPV]

I actually think 6.2 is a good start from the team; The ideal number should be about 8. If Swayman is legit at 10, he's just as off the mark as the 6.2

I think most of the fan base would be pleased with an 8x8 contract; I personally think that's a little high, but it's a gamble I'd take

 

[Absurdity]

Who does everyone think starts Game 1?

 

[LSCII]

The same old stupid take.

A poor excuse to rag on management no matter what.

So their track record of success isn't judged on championships? Laughable.

The fans acceptance of mediocrity is the problem and one of the biggest reasons they've won so few cups in 50+ years. They stopped going and the organization went out and spent money on Chara and Savard, which lead them to their only Cup win. Pretty amazing that fact is lost on you.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Who does everyone think starts Game 1?

Antti Raanta.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

So their track record of success isn't judged on championships? Laughable.

The fans acceptance of mediocrity is the problem and one of the biggest reasons they've won so few cups in 50+ years. They stopped going and the organization went out and spent money on Chara and Savard, which lead them to their only Cup win. Pretty amazing that fact is lost on you.

So you believe there is a champion and all the rest of the teams are mediocre?

They signed Chara and Savard because they had plenty of room under the Cap to do so. The Bruins still missed the playoffs with Chara and Savard the next year. Signing Claude Julien turned the team around. And Savard was not part of the Cup win.

By the way, all excellent moves by management.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

I'm sure all the owners would consider that 52 year stretch a success.

Owners are in it for money,. Fans for cups.

 

[nORRis8]

the Bruins is they’re able to keep his starts at 55 or under.

Then he's not worth what he's (reported) asking .
Going from 4.5 to 8-9 a year to see if he has it in him to play 10 more games.....hmmmmm.

What would be hilarious is we give him say 8+ for x amount of years and Sorokin equals his stats or even out plays him.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Owners are in it for money,. Fans for cups.

Correct.

Owners put up the money.

Fans just in it for kicks.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Then he's not worth what he's (reported) asking .
Going from 4.5 to 8-9 a year to see if he has it in him to play 10 more games.....hmmmmm.

What would be hilarious is we give him say 8+ for x amount of years and Sorokin equals his stats or even out plays him.

So what would you say Shesterkin is worth playing 55 games a year?

 

[SwayHeyKid]

It's just a narrow minded view on things. What constitutes good management? Is it only cups? If we had 4 cups in 52 years instead but missed the playoffs in 48 out of 52 years would you consider that better management? What if the other extreme happened and we made 52 straight cup finals and lost them all, is that worse management because of the 0 cups?

1 cup in 52 years and having the second best winning percentage pretty much is indicitive of a group who couldn't put a true winner together. It's like being great in the qualifying runs for positioning in auto racing, getting a front row spot many times and not winning the race.

as far as # of cups, they really should have had another 2 or 3 but spit the bit IMO.

 

[Fenian24]

Who does everyone think starts Game 1?

Bussi

 

[dangermike]

So what would you say Shesterkin is worth playing 55 games a year?

i mean he has done is 3 straight years where sway hasnt... JS should be a clear tier below him contract wise

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

i mean he has done is 3 straight years where sway hasnt... JS should be a clear tier below him contract wise

Obviously. But that doesn’t seem to be the point the OP was making.

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

Correct.

Owners put up the money.

Fans just in it for kicks.

Tell that to season ticket holders.

 

[dangermike]

Obviously. But that doesn’t seem to be the point the OP was making.

This goalie situation in general is very odd tbh. One backup has zero NHL games and the other was the worst starting goalie in the league.

And then Sway looked pretty lost for 2 weeks last season right before the playoffs and the team was bailed out by Ullmark...

There's a very real scenario where this team needs Sway to play 60ish games this season and he hasn't shown that he can handle that workload.

...On top of stretches where he's lost his game the past 2 years - something you can't afford without a reliable backup.