Player Discussion Jeremy Swayman -neither elect arbitration (page 16)

[PlayMakers]

I don't know if they tried to move him this summer, but that is what I was alluding to somewhat inartfully in my posts about this. I would have liked to see them move Ullmark (if that is the plan) this summer and paid Sway in dollars and term instead having to go through this all over again next summer.

I think that was the plan but the cap was too tight leaguewide and it was a tough goalie market. I think they’re biding their time now, and will move Ullmark by this time next year.

I’d love to see them move Ullmark at the deadline, even if they’re on pace for 105 points like projected. Get a premium for him.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Just as predicted.

@mouser re your question in the other thread, Friedman always announces when one party is seeking 2 years as opposed to one like he did with Frederic. Otherwise it's a one year deal.


The plan is to lock him up long term next season. Two-year deal did not work in their plan.

Interesting. So the thought would be that they could lock him up long-term for less if they negotiated that deal in the upcoming off-season rather than the one after?

Hope it pays off.

 

[DominicT]

Interesting. So the thought would be that they could lock him up long-term for less if they negotiated that deal in the upcoming off-season rather than the one after?

Hope it pays off.

My understanding is that they are working towards that. But they can't enter into a contract extension until January 1, 2024.

My understanding is also that the Swayman settlement is just short of what the Bruins were offering on a one-year deal in negotiations, so even though this went slightly towards the Swayman side, the Bruins ultimately won.

 

[JOKER 192]

Interesting. So the thought would be that they could lock him up long-term for less if they negotiated that deal in the upcoming off-season rather than the one after?

Hope it pays off.

Will include 2 years of RFA instead of one .

 

[neelynugs]

I think that was the plan but the cap was too tight leaguewide and it was a tough goalie market. I think they’re biding their time now, and will move Ullmark by this time next year.

I’d love to see them move Ullmark at the deadline, even if they’re on pace for 105 points like projected. Get a premium for him.

you don't see goalies move at the deadline very often. after ryan miller went to STL, he talked about
the transition for a goalie being a lot harder than it is for a skater.

 

[GordonHowe]

you don't see goalies move at the deadline very often. after ryan miller went to STL, he talked about
the transition for a goalie being a lot harder than it is for a skater.

Agree. I highly doubt they would move Linus at the deadline, which would be quite disruptive to the goaltending dynamics.

The time to move a goaltender is the off season, which allows them the necessary time to adjust and install another tender.

 

[Mad Dr Pepper]

Huzzah!

Adventure Awaits!

 

[HuskyBruinPride]

I can't remember how the rules work with these things - is he now unable to be traded for a period of time?

 

[Gee Wally]

I can't remember how the rules work with these things - is he now unable to be traded for a period of time?

nope. Nothing against trading.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

I don't know if they tried to move him this summer, but that is what I was alluding to somewhat inartfully in my posts about this. I would have liked to see them move Ullmark (if that is the plan) this summer and paid Sway in dollars and term instead having to go through this all over again next summer.

I think Sweeney was pretty keen to kick as many cans down the road as he could this summer, and for the most part not commit to many new multi-year deals. He's treading water. At present, the Bruins have 11 roster players who'll be FAs next year if not re-signed or traded by then, they'll get the overages and part of Reilly's buyout off the books, and they have a few very tradable guys like DeBrusk and Ullmark should they want to clear things out even more.

Next year the GM will have much more power and room to change and remould the roster as he sees fit, with a better knowledge of where exactly the team is at following the end of the 2010s/Bergeron era, and I think electing to offer Swayman only one year is part of that plan. Don's keeping his hands as free as possible to determine what he does in 2024.

 

[Oates2Neely]

nope. Nothing against trading.

I always thought the team could walk away from arbitration ruling, or agree to it and unable to trade player for one season. I’ve been known to be wrong often

 

[Dr Hook]

I always thought the team could walk away from arbitration ruling, or agree to it and unable to trade player for one season. I’ve been known to be wrong often

I believe they can walk away if the dollar amount meets a certain threshold- $4.5m /yr I think?

 

[DominicT]

I always thought the team could walk away from arbitration ruling, or agree to it and unable to trade player for one season. I’ve been known to be wrong often

That only applies to players claimed on waivers.

 

[Alicat]

Happy with it and glad our goalie tandem remains in tact.

 

[GordonHowe]

Conor Ryan,

Jeremy Swayman, Bruins settle on one-year, $3.475 million contract following arbitration hearing

The Bruins and Jeremy Swayman carved out the details on a new contract, with an arbitrator awarding the goalie a $3.475 million salary.

www.boston.com

 

[missingchicklet]

Bruins have the best goaltending depth in the league?

Indeed. And as it stands now they are going to need every bit of it.

 

[goldnblack]

Nice move to do just the one year. No feelings hurt, he's definitely the starter in 2024-25.

What's the next deal? 5x5?

 

[PlayMakers]

you don't see goalies move at the deadline very often. after ryan miller went to STL, he talked about
the transition for a goalie being a lot harder than it is for a skater.

Not unheard of though. Korpisalo and Quick got traded last year. And Marc Andre Fleury the year before (for a conditional 1st).

 

[bruinmann77]

I like to see what DS did signing guys to no more than 2 year deals and wait for the following season to make the changes and while giving rookies time to make their play

 

[OldScool]

What makes no sense is the Bruins had the option of signing him at that rate for 2 years and only opted for 1?

 

[Over the volcano]

What makes no sense is the Bruins had the option of signing him at that rate for 2 years and only opted for 1?

Keeps him an RFA next summer I think. Folks were speculating that's when they'd work out a long term deal

 

[TCB]

 

[Hamilton Brian]

SO consensus seems to be this was a good, reasonable deal for player and team?

Any negatives? Does this signal to Ullmark...keep on doing well but we're likely to shop you around prior to 24-25?

 

[22Brad Park]

When I see Donny pay Trent before Swayman arbitration ruling then it comes down and it fits ,I feel like Sweeney already knew the numbers .

 

[ON3M4N]

Nice move to do just the one year. No feelings hurt, he's definitely the starter in 2024-25.

What's the next deal? 5x5?

If he stays around his career average of a 2.24 GAA / .920 SV% / 3 SO next season, I could see him getting more than 5x5.