Player Discussion Jeremy Swayman IV - even more nothing

[Bad Hat Harry]

No they didn’t. And it doesn’t help us. Even 500,000 less makes a difference.

Bums. Should have accepted league minimum if they really cared.

 

[EverettMike]

Bums. Should have accepted league minimum if they really cared.

Every player should sign for the minimum, that way they both help the team and don't make any other player feel badly.

 

[Cronuss]

So you're saying this past season he was great and the season before he was just good?

He was great last season, and split time with a goalie, was not the #1 all year. Previous year he was good, but hit slumps, and was splitting time with another goalie and not the #1, and was NOT the goalie selected to lead the playoff push.

These are facts

 

[ON3M4N]

Should probably pay Swayman for an imaginary Vezina while paying for the imaginary Cup.

Kind of like how we pay McAvoy for an imaginary Norris & Pastrank for an imaginary Hart.....to go along with their imaginary cups.

He was great last season, and split time with a goalie, was not the #1 all year. Previous year he was good, but hit slumps, and was splitting time with another goalie and not the #1, and was NOT the goalie selected to lead the playoff push.

These are facts

His number last year were down from the previous year across the board and those are facts. If he was great last year then he was great the year before too

 

[ON3M4N]

How much less should Pasta have taken

I didn't say he should have taken less.

 

[Eddie Munson]

You want to punish Swayman and his value for factors outside of his control. He doesn't control his own playing time. The Bruins are being two faced about this. Trade Ullmark signaling Swayman is the de-facto #1. Then try to point back to the playing time the organization instituted to pay him less longer term.

Huh? Teams factor in things all the time that are out of a players hands i.e. market value, cap increases, system strength, injuries, etc. For instance, you don't pay a guy as a 50 goal scorer when they've only scored 35 in a season but you're slotting them up the lineup this season.

That's why the argument that he's been platooned isn't disingenuous, it provides context as to how people value what he's done versus what they think he can do. Since college, he's never played more than 44 games in a season. It's a fair argument to say that he may not be able to handle a huge workload. If he can't handle that workload, then paying him 8-10m+ means you now have a platoon guy being paid as a top-3, 60+ GS, Vezina caliber goalie and now you'll be spending 12-14m+ on goal tending. That's not the end of the world as Florida just won a cup with that type of cap tied into their goalies.

I do think Swayman could be the defacto #1 who can start 60+ games. But his body of work at this time doesn't guarantee that so I get the Bruins trying the thread the needle here.

 

[Bodit9]

Who picks the comps? When a team is picking their comps, are they doing so in favor of the player or one that suits their purposes? Now when a player picks a comp, is he picking one that favors the team or himself? The process is biased because both sides pick ones that are favorable to their claim, which makes the comps useless. Especially in a case like this where there's not even an arbitrator to decide.

Yeah, both sides pick the comps to try to argue their case. For Sway, it's comparable goalie contracts at age 25. He might point to Vasilevskiy in 2020 who signed an 8 year deal for $9.5M AAV. Of course, he also just won a Vezina and had become a bonifide #1 for several years. Sweeney will look at the other goalies and point to their contracts. And then they negotiate. Sway's been a good goalie but he doesn't have a Cup or a Vezina. He's had 3 good years but isn't a perennial Vezina contender yet. Should he get a good contract? Absolutely. Should he be paid as a top 5 goalie? I'd argue not yet.

 

[Over the volcano]

What about on Cup contenders that have a chance of leading their teams to the Cup?

So we've moved from pay him like he's a #1 in the league to pay him like he's one of the top 5 or 6 goalies in the league?

What teams do you think are contenders? We can look at each.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Kind of like how we pay McAvoy for an imaginary Norris & Pastrank for an imaginary Hart.....to go along with their imaginary cups.

I won't argue with your point about McAvoy, but Pastrnak was paid for the Rocket he actually won. Wingers don't take home the Hart very often.

 

[jgatie]

Kind of like how we pay McAvoy for an imaginary Norris & Pastrank for an imaginary Hart.....to go along with their imaginary cups.

I'll give you McAvoy, but Pastrnak has a Rocket, finished second for the Rocket another time, 4 All-Star appearances (one an MVP) and is proven to be a top 5 winger in the league.

 

[ON3M4N]

I'll give you McAvoy, but Pastrnak has a Rocket, finished second for the Rocket another time, 4 All-Star appearances (one an MVP) and is proven to be a top 5 winger in the league.

I'm fine with all of this, but I put zero value on all-star appearances.

 

[jgatie]

I'm fine with all of this, but I put zero value on all-star appearances.

Whatever. He was still undoubtedly a top 5 winger in the game when he signed his contract, and compared to the clownshow contracts on the lovable, laughable Leafs, he's actually underpaid.

 

[GordonHowe]

FWIW, I just consulted with my little birdie.

The little birdie does not sit in on negotiations. The little birdie speaks regularly with a principal and his father.

The little birdie *believes* the deal will get done, possibly 8 X 8.2.

8 X 8 was my original guess.

Again, FWIW.

 

[Over the volcano]

Three years ago Shesterkin had the biggest second contract in league history for a goalie at the time. He was an RFA, 25 years old and signed a 4 year deal. Adjusted for the rising cap would put it at 6.1mil per year today.

 

[GordonHowe]

To be fair, this whole species is a bit like that

To be fair, I'm not a bit like that.

 

[GordonHowe]

Huh? Teams factor in things all the time that are out of a players hands i.e. market value, cap increases, system strength, injuries, etc. For instance, you don't pay a guy as a 50 goal scorer when they've only scored 35 in a season but you're slotting them up the lineup this season.

That's why the argument that he's been platooned isn't disingenuous, it provides context as to how people value what he's done versus what they think he can do. Since college, he's never played more than 44 games in a season. It's a fair argument to say that he may not be able to handle a huge workload. If he can't handle that workload, then paying him 8-10m+ means you now have a platoon guy being paid as a top-3, 60+ GS, Vezina caliber goalie and now you'll be spending 12-14m+ on goal tending. That's not the end of the world as Florida just won a cup with that type of cap tied into their goalies.

I do think Swayman could be the defacto #1 who can start 60+ games. But his body of work at this time doesn't guarantee that so I get the Bruins trying the thread the needle here.

Excellent post. Thank you.

 

[Carl Hungus]

I'd love for someone to find me a platooned goalie who has never started more than 43 games a year who is an RFA that signed a contract that is the equivalent to 12.5% of the cap. They find that comp and I'll sign Swayman's 10m contract myself (I'll have to scrounge together a few nickles I find in my couch but I'll make it work).

Folks like me..... namely me, are saying pay the kid 7-7.5m. Not what Sweeney offered. I've even said I wouldn't cry if they gave him 8-8.5m. It's the 10m, "setting the market" talk that irks me. It's also setting a new precedent and there are probably a handful of players who were more deserving of that over the last 2 decades than Swayman.

But we're getting into this weird realm where we can't look at other goalies that have nearly identical situations at Swayman and can't say "that's the most direct comp" without people saying "well that's just your opinion man." How is stating someones age, stats, GP numbers, and contract status, term, length an opinion or preference?

Also, if comps are bullshit and don't matter, then how does arbitration work? I'm honestly asking because I'd love to know how they randomly come to a "fair" number then.

If you intend to bring up irrational fake things like "comps", just be prepared for the little laughy face emoji's you're gonna get

 

[SwayHeyKid]

FWIW, I just consulted with my little birdie.

The little birdie does not sit in on negotiations. The little birdie speaks regularly with a principal and his father.

The little birdie *believes* the deal will get done, possibly 8 X 8.2.

8 X 8 was my original guess.

Again, FWIW.

Seems like all the little birdies that fly in here with rumors wind up flying into a pane of glass.

 

[TD Charlie]

Are there folks here actually trying to argue that nobody ever gets paid for potential? It absolutely happens. All sports. All positions. Hell, even in other professions you get paid for what you know not what you do

The dilemma comes in when deciding which guys to pay for potential. If you wanna argue that Swayman doesn’t meet the criteria then fine, I’ll listen. I disagree, but that’s just opinion.

 

[SwayHeyKid]

Correct, so the platooned argument cuts both ways. Can't pay him as a platooned goalie when you traded 1/2 the platoon away and expect him to be the defacto #1 AND don't ask for money like you started 70% percent of the starts or have ever played more than 44 games in a regular season. Doesn't make it disingenuous.

Again, this is why I go to the Saros comp. Extremely similar stats in year 25. I tack on extra money though for what Swayman likely lost on the one year arbitration deal.

Saros comp from 2021?

 

[ON3M4N]

Whatever. He was still undoubtedly a top 5 winger in the game when he signed his contract, and compared to the clownshow contracts on the lovable, laughable Leafs, he's actually underpaid.

I wasn't disputing that. Here's my question, is Swayman a top 5 goalie? top 3 goalie? how many guys would you rather have than Swayman?

 

[SwayHeyKid]

Huh? Teams factor in things all the time that are out of a players hands i.e. market value, cap increases, system strength, injuries, etc. For instance, you don't pay a guy as a 50 goal scorer when they've only scored 35 in a season but you're slotting them up the lineup this season.

That's why the argument that he's been platooned isn't disingenuous, it provides context as to how people value what he's done versus what they think he can do. Since college, he's never played more than 44 games in a season. It's a fair argument to say that he may not be able to handle a huge workload. If he can't handle that workload, then paying him 8-10m+ means you now have a platoon guy being paid as a top-3, 60+ GS, Vezina caliber goalie and now you'll be spending 12-14m+ on goal tending. That's not the end of the world as Florida just won a cup with that type of cap tied into their goalies.

I do think Swayman could be the defacto #1 who can start 60+ games. But his body of work at this time doesn't guarantee that so I get the Bruins trying the thread the needle here.

Does 37 pt Matty Beniers deserve 7.5 mil? Brock Faber 84 games in his NHL career deserve 8.5 per? Lucas Raymond scored 31 goals this year and his next playoff game will be his first...worth a 64 million dollar contract?

 

[ON3M4N]

FWIW, I just consulted with my little birdie.

The little birdie does not sit in on negotiations. The little birdie speaks regularly with a principal and his father.

The little birdie *believes* the deal will get done, possibly 8 X 8.2.

8 X 8 was my original guess.

Again, FWIW.

If this end up being the eventual deal, I'm fine with it

 

[Pia8988]

Huh? Teams factor in things all the time that are out of a players hands i.e. market value, cap increases, system strength, injuries, etc. For instance, you don't pay a guy as a 50 goal scorer when they've only scored 35 in a season but you're slotting them up the lineup this season.

That's why the argument that he's been platooned isn't disingenuous, it provides context as to how people value what he's done versus what they think he can do. Since college, he's never played more than 44 games in a season. It's a fair argument to say that he may not be able to handle a huge workload. If he can't handle that workload, then paying him 8-10m+ means you now have a platoon guy being paid as a top-3, 60+ GS, Vezina caliber goalie and now you'll be spending 12-14m+ on goal tending. That's not the end of the world as Florida just won a cup with that type of cap tied into their goalies.

I do think Swayman could be the defacto #1 who can start 60+ games. But his body of work at this time doesn't guarantee that so I get the Bruins trying the thread the needle here.

It is when the team is directly responsible for it. It's a bullshit negotiating tactic.

You didn't play enough games!!

Swayman had 0 control over that. To expect him to give the bruins a discount based on a bruin set policy is laughable, hence disingenuous.

It's getting around the bullshit NHL mindset of paying for expected value and not current.

 

[jgatie]

I wasn't disputing that. Here's my question, is Swayman a top 5 goalie? top 3 goalie? how many guys would you rather have than Swayman?

That depends. There are certainly a few who have more hardware. Vasi. Shesterkin. Hellebuyck. Bob. Even Ullmark. There are also a few that are wayyyyyy more proven in the playoffs.

It's also a bad comparison. There are 256 wing slots in the NHL. Top 5 of that is the top 2%. There are 64 goal positions. Top 5 is 8%. In order for him to be Pastrnak quality %, he'd have to be top 2 (actually 1.28, and he's definitely not top 2).