Player Discussion Jeremy Swayman III- still nothing

[PB37]

Rask 26. Swayman 25. Both thought of as the future

Most starts in a season. Rask 39. Swayman 43

Rask Vezina placing 5, Swayman 7

Rask 3.5 mil one year deal was his deal before, Swayman 3,475.000 last year

Rask 67 career wins. Swayman 79
Rask 126 starts. Swayman 125 starts

Rask out of this world two rounds in the playoffs , Swayman 1

Rask played on a team that won the Stanley cup 2 springs earlier

Swayman played on a team that was a 7 seed 2 springs earlier

seems like a no brainer to give him the same type deal no? Especially considering Rask played on a serious cup contender and Swayman played on the “infamous HF bridge year”

- Rask started the majority of the games as the #1 starter ( strike shortened season ). Swayman has not had the reigns as the #1 guy just yet

- Rask's 4th contract was his big one while Swayman is looking for his big payday in his 3rd. And this is probably where the point of contention is - Bruins want to see at least one year where he's the main guy and not part of a platoon and the main reason why I don't see these as comparable. I don't know how far back agents use contracts to drive home their points but it would seem to me going back 12 years seems like reaching.

 

[PB37]

Using the 2013 season as a starter is a but disingenuous. It was a shortened season where his starter load was only 34 games (out of 48), same as Swayman's load.

Rask had a 5th place finish and Swayman has a 7th, the difference is a handful of votes at that point.

How is it disingenuous? He was the #1 guy and started 71 percent of the available games. It being a 48 game season vs 82 game season looked like it was irrelevant in negotiations - either the agent convinced the Bruins or the Bruins had seen enough to think Rask could handle being the #1 guy. Rask's signing happened in early July as well, so it looks like there wasn't much convincing that needed to be done. Swayman has never had to work 71 percent of the workload.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

- Rask started the majority of the games as the #1 starter ( strike shortened season ). Swayman has not had the reigns as the #1 guy just yet

- Rask's 4th contract was his big one while Swayman is looking for his big payday in his 3rd. And this is probably where the point of contention is - Bruins want to see at least one year where he's the main guy and not part of a platoon and the main reason why I don't see these as comparable. I don't know how far back agents use contracts to drive home their points but it would seem to me going back 12 years seems like reaching.

Rasks third contract was more than Swayman got paid last year and that was ten years ago

Bruins bet on Swayman being the guy when they traded Ullmark. They should have chosen two years in arbitration if they wanted to see him carry they load but they obviously know he would have played out next year and left

Swayman is and can be the guy and they know it they just want to pay him what they want to pay him

 

[PB37]

Rasks third contract was more than Swayman got paid last year and that was ten years ago

Bruins bet on Swayman being the guy when they traded Ullmark. They should have chosen two years in arbitration if they wanted to see him carry they load but they obviously know he would have played out next year and left

Swayman is and can be the guy and they know it they just want to pay him what they want to pay him

Rask signed that bridge contract with the intention he would be the #1 starter, seeing as Khudobin was inexperienced and unknown what he could do in the NHL at that point.

 

[HustleB]

- Rask started the majority of the games as the #1 starter ( strike shortened season ). Swayman has not had the reigns as the #1 guy just yet

- Rask's 4th contract was his big one while Swayman is looking for his big payday in his 3rd. And this is probably where the point of contention is - Bruins want to see at least one year where he's the main guy and not part of a platoon and the main reason why I don't see these as comparable. I don't know how far back agents use contracts to drive home their points but it would seem to me going back 12 years seems like reaching.

I don't disagree, but this is an argument for a short term 3rd deal, possibly 2 seasons. Then, I factor in the expected pay rate increase due to building additional value by playing well and by inflation of th cap. It seems clear that we are going to be near 12 million to sign this guy as a FA. I believe signing the long-term deal now, is the best value long term even at 8.5-9.5.

 

[PB37]

I don't disagree, but this is an argument for a short term 3rd deal, possibly 2 seasons. Then, I factor in the expected pay rate increase due to building additional value by playing well and by inflation of th cap. It seems clear that we are going to be near 12 million to sign this guy as a FA. I believe signing the long-term deal now, is the best value long term even at 8.5-9.5.

12 million... AAV?

 

[analyser]

In the NHL it happens quite frequently to double your salary or more

This does not usually happen with 132 games experience. The only viable option might be to trade him, not ideal but it could happen.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

This does not usually happen with 132 games experience. The only viable option might be to trade him, not ideal but it could happen.

Happens all the time with RFAs. All over the place. And way more significantly than doubling - i.e. Brock Faber 9x his salary with 84 career games.

 

[PlayMakers]

How is it disingenuous? He was the #1 guy and started 71 percent of the available games. It being a 48 game season vs 82 game season looked like it was irrelevant in negotiations - either the agent convinced the Bruins or the Bruins had seen enough to think Rask could handle being the #1 guy. Rask's signing happened in early July as well, so it looks like there wasn't much convincing that needed to be done. Swayman has never had to work 71 percent of the workload.

IIRC, Rask also played 45 games in 2010. I think that's the year the Bruins upset Buffalo in the first round. Miro the hero?

And in 2013 Rask carried the Bruins to a Cup Final, posting an identical save percent as Tim Thomas (.940). So he had an upset series win and a Cup Final run under his belt when he signed his big deal in July. Rask was probably the comp Vasilevsky used for his deal.

 

[UncleRico]

This does not usually happen with 132 games experience. The only viable option might be to trade him, not ideal but it could happen.

Jake oettinger 3x his salary after 77 games

 

[analyser]

Pastrnak and McAvoy had much more NHL experience when they signed their big contract. Maybe some teams will put out the big money with limited experience but that is not in the Bruins DNA.

 

[LSCII]

Are we still clinging to the belief that Sway should sign for $6.5 x 4?

 

[UncleRico]

Pastrnak and McAvoy had much more NHL experience when they signed their big contract. Maybe some teams will put out the big money with limited experience but that is not in the Bruins DNA.

Pastrnak and McAvoy both played 3 season before they 4x or more their salary.

If the bruins were going to take the same route with swayman they should have given him a deal last year before swayman took them to arbitration

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

Pastrnak and McAvoy had much more NHL experience when they signed their big contract. Maybe some teams will put out the big money with limited experience but that is not in the Bruins DNA.

Of course they had more games being a defenseman and forward since they play every game which a goalie does not. But the experience level is relatively the same.

 

[analyser]

Pastrnak and McAvoy both played 3 season before they 4x or more their salary.

If the bruins were going to take the same route with swayman they should have given him a deal last year before swayman took them to arbitration

That would of been a smart move.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Pastrnak and McAvoy both played 3 season before they 4x or more their salary.

If the bruins were going to take the same route with swayman they should have given him a deal last year before swayman took them to arbitration

They couldn’t because of cap constraints though. That was the reason for the one year deal.

 

[4ORRBRUIN]

Are we still clinging to the belief that Sway should sign for $6.5 x 4?

Give us your number he signs at, just curious.

My guess is he would have signed already if it was going to be that low. I personally think that's in the ballpark. I say it will come in below the 8M mark per

 

[ON3M4N]

Pastrnak and McAvoy had much more NHL experience when they signed their big contract. Maybe some teams will put out the big money with limited experience but that is not in the Bruins DNA.

This management group has literally done it before

 

[Fenian24]

Give us your number he signs at, just curious.

My guess is he would have signed already if it was going to be that low. I personally think that's in the ballpark. I say it will come in below the 8M mark per

8x9 or 2x7. The two year would have to come with a full NMC

 

[UncleRico]

They couldn’t because of cap constraints though. That was the reason for the one year deal.

Oh I know I was just trying to point out how the situations aren’t similar

 

[BlackFrancis]

8x9 or 2x7. The two year would have to come with a full NMC

It cannot, per the CBA. The 8 year contract could have 6 years worth of NMC clauses, but not the first two. Neither of the two year seasons would be eligible.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

It cannot, per the CBA. The 8 year contract could have 6 years worth of NMC clauses, but not the first two. Neither of the two year seasons would be eligible.

Yep.

And any GM except maybe Grier (now that Chuck Fletcher is no longer a GM) would know to either give a 1 year or at least 4. A two year deal is a disaster.

 

[LSCII]

Give us your number he signs at, just curious.

My guess is he would have signed already if it was going to be that low. I personally think that's in the ballpark. I say it will come in below the 8M mark per

I'd be fine with an 8-8.5 x 4 if they could get that kind of deal done. It doesn't look like that's possible given the rumors of their low offers and his higher ask.

 

[BamBamCam]

Let him sit out a year then sign him for 9 M when the cap goes up again.
Maybe Swayman would learn he doesn't have all the leverage.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Let him sit out a year then sign him for 9 M when the cap goes up again.
Maybe Swayman would learn he doesn't have all the leverage.

Seems like a savvy move. What could go wrong?