Boston Bruins Off Season Roster/ Cap Discussion

[quietbruinfan]

That's their prerogative. Funny enough Swayman's agent came out after Neely's comment and said that they were never offered $64 million. Was Neely lying? was Swayman's agent lying? we don't know and probably never will.

Personally I'm not bent out of shape like others about Swayman. He went into arbitration and got a first hand experience is the NHL being a business. There were fans that said he needed to toughen up and not take it personal. Fast forward to RFA negotiations and I think he took that advice. He took his personal feeling out of it and treated it like a business. He took time to better understand the business side of hockey. Which if you're going to be in a business you should probably know about the business. Interestingly enough those same fans that told him to not take it personal are now upset that he didn't let his personal feelings Sway him to take a discount and instead he treated it like a business.

Everyone is mad at Swayman for making $8.25 million, but if Neely's comment was true then the Bruins valued him at $8 million. With a cap that expects to keep increasing significantly, $250k really isn't a big deal.

With much respect, the expression is take it personally. As for Swayman, business does involve being able to re-invest in your product and Swayman screwed them out of a player with his opportunistic and sudden hardball.
He whined and whined and when Sweeney foolishly gave them the chance, he absolutely stuck it to them. Worse yet, he weakened, if not completely broke, a culture of financial unselfishness. From Marchand to Bergy to Pasta all of them took at least one or more discount contracts-not M.B.A. Sway. Marchand alluded to it. The players were not happy and it showed as they played noticeably harder for Korpi.

5way is not getting better and he is showing the same stamina/consistency problems as before. For both on ice and off ice reasons, Sway should go away.....

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I hope management is reading these negative posts concerning Swayman, just something else to worry about if he is not moved and gets off to a slow start, the fans will be very hard on him, and he might not react well to that with his thin skin. He is no "Bull Dog"

Seriously?

I certainly hope they are not.

 

[Hookslide]

Seriously?

I certainly hope they are not.

You not from around here.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You not from around here.

Where is here?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

A

Edmonton would be happy to trade Skinner for Swayman.

Isn't Skinner a UFA?

 

[Hookslide]

Isn't Skinner a UFA?

One more year, make the deal.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

One more year, make the deal.

Pretty sure it's no more years.

Wait a minute, what Skinner are we talking about, Jeff or Stuart?

 

[Hookslide]

Pretty sure it's no more years.

Wrong 2.6 mil one more season. I would jump on that chance to get rid of that Swayman contract.

 

[ON3M4N]

With much respect, the expression is take it personally. As for Swayman, business does involve being able to re-invest in your product and Swayman screwed them out of a player with his opportunistic and sudden hardball.
He whined and whined and when Sweeney foolishly gave them the chance, he absolutely stuck it to them. Worse yet, he weakened, if not completely broke, a culture of financial unselfishness. From Marchand to Bergy to Pasta all of them took at least one or more discount contracts-not M.B.A. Sway. Marchand alluded to it. The players were not happy and it showed as they played noticeably harder for Korpi.

5way is not getting better and he is showing the same stamina/consistency problems as before. For both on ice and off ice reasons, Sway should go away.....

Swayman didn't whine at all. He was invited to be on a podcast and answer questions honestly. Some fans didn't like the comments. I didn't have an issue with what he said, but again, to each their own. As for the rest.....

Marchand did not take a discount. He was paid around what he was worth at the time of the deal. He then proceeded to pop off and become one of the best LW's in the game. Had Marchand known he was going to turn into the player he did, he would have asked for more. Look at the numbers. Marchand signed his deal in September of 2016 (just before the 2016-2017 season). His 3 previous season he averaged out to a 30G/55P player. If you took his deal at today's cap #, It'd be a $7.1 million cap hit for a 30G/55P player.

Bergeron lets do the same thing. At the time Bergeron had hit 30+ goals once and 1 Selke. His 3 years prior to his new deal had him at essentially a 20G/60P player who was still fantastic in the dot. His salary in today's NHL would be $8.8 million. All things considered I think that's a pretty fair market deal based on what Bergeron had shown at the time. There was also the lingering concern that he was one big hit away from his career being over.

Pastrnak current deal certainly wasn't a discount as he's one of the top 10 highest paid players. With Pastrnak prior deal, he had a one season with 70pts & his 3yr average put him a 28G/58P guy, so lets just call it 30G/60P for Pastrnak. His deal by today's NHL cap would have been $7.8 million. That's a pretty good deal when you look at the body of work Pastrnak had going into negotiations.

I'd argue that non of these guys took discounts. They took fair market deals at the time and then proceeded to outproduce their contracts.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Wrong 2.6 mil one more season. I would jump on that chance to get rid of that Swayman contract.

My apologies, I thought we were talking about Jeff Skinner, not Stuart.

 

[jgatie]

Swayman didn't whine at all. He was invited to be on a podcast and answer questions honestly. Some fans didn't like the comments. I didn't have an issue with what he said, but again, to each their own. As for the rest.....

Marchand did not take a discount. He was paid around what he was worth at the time of the deal. He then proceeded to pop off and become one of the best LW's in the game. Had Marchand known he was going to turn into the player he did, he would have asked for more. Look at the numbers. Marchand signed his deal in September of 2016 (just before the 2016-2017 season). His 3 previous season he averaged out to a 30G/55P player. If you took his deal at today's cap #, Its be a $7.1 million cap hit for a 30G/55P player.

Bergeron lets do the same thing. At the time Bergeron had hit 30+ goals once and 1 Selke. His 3 years prior to his new deal had him at essentially a 20G/60P player who was still fantastic in the dot. His salary in today's NHL would be $8.8 million. All things considered I think that's a pretty fair market deal based on what Bergeron had shown at the time. There was also the lingering concern that he was one big hit away from his career being over.

Pastrnak current deal certainly wasn't a discount as he's one of the top 10 highest paid players. With Pastrnak prior deal, he had a one season with 70pts & his 3yr average put him a 28G/58P guy, so lets just call it 30G/60P for Pastrnak. His deal by today's NHL cap would have been $7.8 million. That's a pretty good deal when you look at the body of work Pastrnak had going into negotiations.

I'd argue that non of these guys took discounts. They took fair market deals at the time and then proceeded to outproduce their contracts.

Even if I agree with your analysis (Marchand, sort of, Bergeron and Pastrnak, no way), you have them taking "fair market deals" based on how they were performing. Swayman was never a number one, he never had the workload of a number one, and he asked to "set the market for goalies". The other 3 never asked to "set the market" for anyone, and I would 100% understand them being upset at the exorbitant contract Swayman got, given what Swayman "had shown at the time".

 

[Hookslide]

My apologies, I thought we were talking about Jeff Skinner, not Stuart.

I do that shit all the time, no problem

 

[ON3M4N]

Even if I agree with your analysis (Marchand, sort of, Bergeron and Pastrnak, no way), you have them taking "fair market deals" based on how they were performing. Swayman was never a number one, he never had the workload of a number one, and he asked to "set the market for goalies". The other 3 never asked to "set the market" for anyone, and I would 100% understand them being upset at the exorbitant contract Swayman got, given what Swayman "had shown at the time".

This is a different discussion then what my post is about. My post was in regard to someone saying Marchand, Pastrnak & Bergeron took discounts. Look objectively at it and not taking into a account how their careers went, I have a hard time seeing their deals as them "taking discounts".

Now for what you post is about. Swayman never said he wanted to set the market for goalies. He said he didn't want to ruin the market for guys that will be in his shoes down the line. People may not like it, but he's not wrong. We do it all the time where we look for comparable on a contract so we can figure out what a guys worth. Swayman knows that once he signs a deal it becomes a tool for teams and players to use in negotiations. That's just business 101 stuff.

As for what he had shown. His 3 previous season he had 72 wins / 2.41 GAA / .916 SV% / 10 SO. Those 3 years he ranked the following among his peers:

Starts - 25th
SV% - 6th
GAA - 4th
SO - 7th

Then add in that he was coming off a playoff run of 12 games with a 2.15 GAA / .933 SV% and led all goalies in Goals Saved Above Expected. You'd have been hard pressed to find someone at the start of this off-season that didn't have Swayman as a top 5 goalie in the NHL, and saying he's a franchise #1 goalie.

Not for nothing, but Swayman's number over those 3 seasons were pretty similar to Ilya Sorokin.....and his deal he signed in 2023 was for the same 8yr/$8.25 million per.

 

[quietbruinfan]

Swayman didn't whine at all. He was invited to be on a podcast and answer questions honestly. Some fans didn't like the comments. I didn't have an issue with what he said, but again, to each their own. As for the rest.....

Marchand did not take a discount. He was paid around what he was worth at the time of the deal. He then proceeded to pop off and become one of the best LW's in the game. Had Marchand known he was going to turn into the player he did, he would have asked for more. Look at the numbers. Marchand signed his deal in September of 2016 (just before the 2016-2017 season). His 3 previous season he averaged out to a 30G/55P player. If you took his deal at today's cap #, It'd be a $7.1 million cap hit for a 30G/55P player.

Bergeron lets do the same thing. At the time Bergeron had hit 30+ goals once and 1 Selke. His 3 years prior to his new deal had him at essentially a 20G/60P player who was still fantastic in the dot. His salary in today's NHL would be $8.8 million. All things considered I think that's a pretty fair market deal based on what Bergeron had shown at the time. There was also the lingering concern that he was one big hit away from his career being over.

Pastrnak current deal certainly wasn't a discount as he's one of the top 10 highest paid players. With Pastrnak prior deal, he had a one season with 70pts & his 3yr average put him a 28G/58P guy, so lets just call it 30G/60P for Pastrnak. His deal by today's NHL cap would have been $7.8 million. That's a pretty good deal when you look at the body of work Pastrnak had going into negotiations.

I'd argue that non of these guys took discounts. They took fair market deals at the time and then proceeded to outproduce their contracts.

It is about Market value not overperformance. Marchand could have gotten Seven million plus in his last contract easily. He took 6.1. He is on record saying Boston is a place were you take less to win. ....
Pasta's market value is probably about what he is paid now. Bergy I don't even want to think about, Krejci too. None of them did what Swayman did. ...

 

[ON3M4N]

It is about Market value not overperformance. Marchand could have gotten Seven million plus in his last contract easily. He took 6.1. He is on record saying Boston is a place were you take less to win. ....
Pasta's market value is probably about what he is paid now. Bergy I don't even want to think about, Krejci too. None of them did what Swayman did. ...

Based off of what? give me the supporting evidence of it. His comments about taking less to win (from what I could find online) were 2-3 years ago.....not back when he signed his deal. If you have a link to something else, please share because I didn't find anything in my quick search.

 

[GordonHowe]

Maybe a trade? If he's a distraction they need to trade him before next year and Sweeny should get some GMs intersted in Sway, Red Wings, Oilers etc...

If they can do it, great.

Obviously, the contract is a problem.

At this point I would get rid of him yesterday. Jeremy is not a bad person, in my opinion, but he is immature and a distraction.

He's not a guy I want in my locker room rebuilding the vaunted Bruins culture. That's not who he is.

Get what you can, and bring up Dipietro and Busse. Inexpensive, talented, apparently ready. Both of them. Let them be the tandem that can actually split an 82-game schedule. Instead of this ridiculous foolishness that is persisted since Omar was here. Get rid of corpus hollow I don't care what you got to do. Maybe you do buy them out. F"ck it. Get rid of all this foolishness.

"Speech to text,"

 

[jgatie]

This is a different discussion then what my post is about. My post was in regard to someone saying Marchand, Pastrnak & Bergeron took discounts. Look objectively at it and not taking into a account how their careers went, I have a hard time seeing their deals as them "taking discounts".

Now for what you post is about. Swayman never said he wanted to set the market for goalies. He said he didn't want to ruin the market for guys that will be in his shoes down the line. People may not like it, but he's not wrong. We do it all the time where we look for comparable on a contract so we can figure out what a guys worth. Swayman knows that once he signs a deal it becomes a tool for teams and players to use in negotiations. That's just business 101 stuff.

As for what he had shown. His 3 previous season he had 72 wins / 2.41 GAA / .916 SV% / 10 SO. Those 3 years he ranked the following among his peers:

Starts - 25th
SV% - 6th
GAA - 4th
SO - 7th

Then add in that he was coming off a playoff run of 12 games with a 2.15 GAA / .933 SV% and led all goalies in Goals Saved Above Expected. You'd have been hard pressed to find someone at the start of this off-season that didn't have Swayman as a top 5 goalie in the NHL, and saying he's a franchise #1 goalie.

Not for nothing, but Swayman's number over those 3 seasons were pretty similar to Ilya Sorokin.....and his deal he signed in 2023 was for the same 8yr/$8.25 million per.

"Pretty similar"?

Ilya Sorokin :
21-22 - 52 Starts
22-23 - 62 Starts
23-24 - 56 Starts

Jeremy Swayman
21-22 - 41 Starts
22-23 - 37 Starts
23-24 - 44 Starts

A difference of 44 starts, or an average of 16 starts a year.

Considering my entire argument was "Swayman was never a number one, he never had the workload of a number one", I don't find those numbers "Pretty similar" at all. Nor do I find them indicative of anyone who should be taking up the cause to "not ruin the market" either, regardless of the semantical arguments.

 

[ON3M4N]

"Pretty similar"?

Ilya Sorokin :
21-22 - 52 Starts
22-23 - 62 Starts
23-24 - 56 Starts

Jeremy Swayman
21-22 - 41 Starts
22-23 - 37 Starts
23-24 - 44 Starts

A difference of 44 starts, or an average of 16 starts a year.

Considering my entire argument was "Swayman was never a number one, he never had the workload of a number one", I don't find those numbers "Pretty similar" at all. Nor do I find them indicative of anyone who should be taking up the cause to "not ruin the market" either, regardless of the semantical arguments.

If you're just looking at starts then no. The reality is though the #1 label isn't solely dependent on how many starts you make. Out of curiosity, what do you consider a #1 workload?

 

[Sheppy]

If you're just looking at starts then no. The reality is though the #1 label isn't solely dependent on how many starts you make. Out of curiosity, what do you consider a #1 workload?

When you're getting over $8M, 55-65 is reasonable.

Vasi - 60,52,63
Bob - 50, 58, 54 - I believe he had a few injuries
Helle - 64-60-63

 

[ON3M4N]

When you're getting over $8M, 58-65 is reasonable.

Vasi - 60,52,63
Bob - 50, 58, 54 - I believe he had a few injuries
Helle - 64-60-63

So at minimum 168 starts over a 3 years span would be considered a #1 workload. So if we look at the 3 seasons prior to this, there were 4 goalies who had #1 workloads.

 

[Sheppy]

So at minimum 168 starts over a 3 years span would be considered a #1 workload. So if we look at the 3 seasons prior to this, there were 4 goalies who had #1 workloads.

Yep, and look at their salaries. They're paid big money to play in a lot of games for their team, or at least should be. There might have been more in there playing a higher amount of games, but those are the guys who are making $8m+

Oettinger played 62, 54, 58 as well.
Saros played 64, 64, 58

 

[BruinDust]

The last goalie to play 60+ regular season games and win the cup in the same year was 13 years ago (Quick in 2012).

Looking at the guys with the heaviest workloads this past season, it doesn't appear to be a recipe for success over a long season + 4 rounds of playoffs.

Vasilevsky - 63 starts - currently down 2-1 in his series
Hellebuyck - 63 starts - tied in his series, pulled 2 straight games
Shesterkin - 61 - DNQ
Montembault - 60 - down 3-1, currently injured.
Sorokin - 60 - DNQ
Gustavsson - 58 - Tied 2-2
Oettinger - 58 - Tied 2-2, pulled last game.
Saros - 58 - DNQ
Swayman - 58 - DNQ
Vejmelka - 55 - DNQ
Daccord - 55 - DNQ
UPL - 55 - DNQ


That's an awful lot of DNQs for the guys who played 55+.

Maybe the optimal number of starts is closer to 50 than it is 60.

 

[Sheppy]

The last goalie to play 60+ regular season games and win the cup in the same year was 13 years ago (Quick in 2012).

Looking at the guys with the heaviest workloads this past season, it doesn't appear to be a recipe for success over a long season + 4 rounds of playoffs.

Vasilevsky - 63 starts - currently down 2-1 in his series
Hellebuyck - 63 starts - tied in his series, pulled 2 straight games
Shesterkin - 61 - DNQ
Montembault - 60 - down 3-1, currently injured.
Sorokin - 60 - DNQ
Gustavsson - 58 - Tied 2-2
Oettinger - 58 - Tied 2-2, pulled last game.
Saros - 58 - DNQ
Swayman - 58 - DNQ
Vejmelka - 55 - DNQ
Daccord - 55 - DNQ
UPL - 55 - DNQ


That's an awful lot of DNQs for the guys who played 55+.

Maybe the optimal number of starts is closer to 50 than it is 60.

It's possible, and Swaymans optimal salary is closer to $6M than it is $8.25M.

 

[BruinDust]

It's possible, and Swaymans optimal salary is closer to $6M than it is $8.25M.

Is the goal to win a cup? Or count how many games the goalie starts?

I'm fine paying Swayman 8.25 for 40 starts in the regular season + playoffs if it resulted in championship parade in June.

 

[Sheppy]

Is the goal to win a cup? Or count how many games the goalie starts?

I'm fine paying Swayman 8.25 for 40 starts in the regular season + playoffs if it resulted in championship parade in June.

I'm not.

That's a complete hindsight situation. Swayman was lucky if he had 20 good starts this past season. I'm sorry, if you're making $8.25M, you shouldn't be playing half the season, and if by chance that's what happens, you better be the best goaltender in the NHL during those 40 games.

Obviously the goal is always to win a cup, but if the game plan is for him to play half a season while making top 5 goalie money, I'd rather they pay him $6M and spend $2+ elsewhere to help win a cup.