Toggle sidebar

Speculation: The Bruins and Jeremy Swayman are far apart in contract term (length) and dollar amount.

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothingbutglass said:
Lohrei, Poitras and Lysell could all start the year with the Bruins. I mean if guys actually make the NHL team does that lower their prospect rankings? The goal is to make it a short transition.
Click to expand...
I think many teams have a few of those level prospects making their teams. They are nice pieces but I don't believe they are the types you build around.

The Leafs have Cowan and Minten knocking on the door this year and last year had Knies, Robertson and Woll make the jump. Adding these five guys to our roster is not a rebuild or a re-tool, it just roster churn. We probably have three more next year.
 
conFABulator said:
I think many teams have a few of those level prospects making their teams. They are nice pieces but I don't believe they are the types you build around.

The Leafs have Cowan and Minten knocking on the door this year and last year had Knies, Robertson and Woll make the jump. Adding these five guys to our roster is not a rebuild or a re-tool, it just roster churn. We probably have three more next year.
Click to expand...
Lohrei broke out at the end of the last year. Leafs have no one on his level as a prospect. Minten at best is Beecher now. These prospects are not equal. You'd need to actually watch them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Horton Hears A Woo
Nothingbutglass said:
Lohrei broke out at the end of the last year. Leafs have no one on his level as a prospect. Minten at best is Beecher now. These prospects are not equal. You'd need to actually watch them.
Click to expand...

My point wasn't to compare Leafs to Bruins prospects it was to say that many teams have young players breaking into the lineup, these are not the same as having prospects you will plan to build your team around.

I would say that Knies is at least on Lohrei's level and almost two years younger. I would also say that Cowan is probably considered at Knies level. Lohrei is 23 already also.

Again, not knocking Lohrei or all that interested in comparing prospects across organizations, I just don't know why Lohrei would be considered a key piece in a re-tool or rebuild. He's a nice piece to have added to your core...just like Knies and Woll and Robertson were for the Leafs.
 
The Bruins haven't been in a true rebuild for a good 20 years at this point.

Anyone that understands the Bruins ownership knows that they will do anything possible to keep the team just competitive enough to justify the constant raising of ticket / concession prices etc. That typically means that even in the worst years, the team is at least near the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Horton Hears A Woo
conFABulator said:
My point wasn't to compare Leafs to Bruins prospects it was to say that many teams have young players breaking into the lineup, these are not the same as having prospects you will plan to build your team around.

I would say that Knies is at least on Lohrei's level and almost two years younger. I would also say that Cowan is probably considered at Knies level. Lohrei is 23 already also.

Again, not knocking Lohrei or all that interested in comparing prospects across organizations, I just don't know why Lohrei would be considered a key piece in a re-tool or rebuild. He's a nice piece to have added to your core...just like Knies and Woll and Robertson were for the Leafs.
Click to expand...
Lohrei can be a PP1 QB and top 4 D. Cowan and Knies can be 2LW on a team that has 2 of the highest paid W in the league. Im not sure why you are confused. Robertson has no value, but lets say Knies and Cowan hit. Is the plan to have the best wingers in the league and then ehn ELCS end how much cap do you want to spend on least vital position on a team?
 
Nothingbutglass said:
Lohrei can be a PP1 QB and top 4 D. Cowan and Knies can be 2LW on a team that has 2 of the highest paid W in the league. Im not sure why you are confused. Robertson has no value, but lets say Knies and Cowan hit. Is the plan to have the best wingers in the league and then ehn ELCS end how much cap do you want to spend on least vital position on a team?
Click to expand...

Ok, I guess you do want to compare the Leafs and Bruins prospects.

Having Knies and Cowan hit as wingers is exactly what a team needs. We have two of the top ten wingers in the NHL right now. Adding two more nice winger pieces on ELCs and bridges is exactly what we need.

Interestingly, you don't mention that Lohrei could be blocked as PP1 QB by McAvoy making 9.5M for the next five years? How does that work?

No, the plan is not to have only great wingers. We have Matthews, have you heard of him or are you going to compare him to Charlie Coyle now? I could see Nylander moving to C and resigning Tavares at a hometown discount on his next one. If not, maybe we move a winter for D or a C. Having valuable assets is always a good thing. Like Boston having to PP1 QBs.

This thread is being hijacked into a Leafs discussion and I don't want to do that to this thread. It's about Swayman and my initial comment was that it appears the days of Beantown discounts is over with Pastrnak, McAvoy and now/soon Swayman.
 
conFABulator said:
Ok, I guess you do want to compare the Leafs and Bruins prospects.

Having Knies and Cowan hit as wingers is exactly what a team needs. We have two of the top ten wingers in the NHL right now. Adding two more nice winger pieces on ELCs and bridges is exactly what we need.

Interestingly, you don't mention that Lohrei could be blocked as PP1 QB by McAvoy making 9.5M for the next five years? How does that work?

No, the plan is not to have only great wingers. We have Matthews, have you heard of him or are you going to compare him to Charlie Coyle now? I could see Nylander moving to C and resigning Tavares at a hometown discount on his next one. If not, maybe we move a winter for D or a C. Having valuable assets is always a good thing. Like Boston having to PP1 QBs.

This thread is being hijacked into a Leafs discussion and I don't want to do that to this thread. It's about Swayman and my initial comment was that it appears the days of Beantown discounts is over with Pastrnak, McAvoy and now/soon Swayman.
Click to expand...
ok. I agree. I'll ignore the stupid Coyle Matthews comment. I think Beantown discounts are a myth and an excuse for other teams that spent stupidly. McAvoy, Pasta et all are all at market rate.
 
Nothingbutglass said:
ok. I agree. I'll ignore the stupid Coyle Matthews comment. I think Beantown discounts are a myth and an excuse for other teams that spent stupidly. McAvoy, Pasta et all are all at market rate.
Click to expand...
Ok....but you did completely leave Matthews out suggesting we build around wingers.

I thought Bergeron, Krejci, Chara, Marchand and Rask all took less to stay in Boston than they could have got on the open market...maybe I am misremembering this, or it just turned out that way. MB and DK absolutely did this at the end of their careers.
 
conFABulator said:
Ok....but you did completely leave Matthews out suggesting we build around wingers.

I thought Bergeron, Krejci, Chara, Marchand and Rask all took less to stay in Boston than they could have got on the open market...maybe I am misremembering this, or it just turned out that way. MB and DK absolutely did this at the end of their careers.
Click to expand...
No. Matthews is the piece to build around. Paying Marner and Nylander all that cash and having Knies and Cowan as best prospects is not where you want to be. Have too many RHD prospects would be better. Im off-track again, sorry. Maybe a new thread would be better.
 
Nothingbutglass said:
No. Matthews is the piece to build around. Paying Marner and Nylander all that cash and having Knies and Cowan as best prospects is not where you want to be. Have too many RHD prospects would be better. Im off-track again, sorry. Maybe a new thread would be better.
Click to expand...


Ok, let's try to get this back on track. Boston having its three top paid players be a G, D, and F is pretty good (and better than the Leafs being so F heavy).

Assets are assets though and you can turn a surplus or strength in one area to useful parts in another area. It's the whole, Best Player Available strategy to drafting for example.

Even though the B's top paid players are spread out positionally it does feel like Boston used to always get more of a discount than these three have given. It doesn't matter what team you are but it is an advantage if you are getting top talent for below market value and it seems that advantage might be going away.

Swayman signing for $8M+ would be a proof point for this statement, he is a great goalie and probably worth that money, but there are no savings there you can apply to elsewhere in the roster.
 
conFABulator said:
Ok, let's try to get this back on track. Boston having its three top paid players be a G, D, and F is pretty good (and better than the Leafs being so F heavy).

Assets are assets though and you can turn a surplus or strength in one area to useful parts in another area. It's the whole, Best Player Available strategy to drafting for example.

Even though the B's top paid players are spread out positionally it does feel like Boston used to always get more of a discount than these three have given. It doesn't matter what team you are but it is an advantage if you are getting top talent for below market value and it seems that advantage might be going away.

Swayman signing for $8M+ would be a proof point for this statement, he is a great goalie and probably worth that money, but there are no savings there you can apply to elsewhere in the roster.
Click to expand...
Why would 8+ be proof of that statement? Term would certainly factor in for AAV no?
 
Nothingbutglass said:
Why would 8+ be proof of that statement? Term would certainly factor in for AAV no?
Click to expand...

Sure. $8M+ is fair market value right now and a deal later...if he is the goalie he appears to be. This is true of every star contract with the cap rising again.

Pasta may be considered good value in two or three years too. Right now it is marker value. The worse case for the B's would Swayman at 3 x $8M. Then you are paying fair market now and not appreciate the value he becomes as the cap rises.

Matthews has done this to the Leafs, though 4 and 4 years so not so bad.
 
conFABulator said:
Sure. $8M+ is fair market value right now and a deal later...if he is the goalie he appears to be. This is true of every star contract with the cap rising again.

Pasta may be considered good value in two or three years too. Right now it is marker value. The worse case for the B's would Swayman at 3 x $8M. Then you are paying fair market now and not appreciate the value he becomes as the cap rises.

Matthews has done this to the Leafs, though 4 and 4 years so not so bad.
Click to expand...
I agree. I dont want long term deal at top of pay scale. I would rather 4 at lower AAV and if he is top 3 G after that, then pay him top 3. Meanwhile, 3 years to find his replacement if we dont already have it.
 
Swayman resigns for 3 year contract with the Bs then signs with long term with the Avalanche :cool:.
 
Been reading a lot about how he is angling for 10 mill which is absurd. 7 mill or he can walk at this stage.

Ridiculous situation but trading their leverage in Ullmark was always playing into Swayman and his agent's game.

Always felt Swayman was a wolf in sheep's clothing i.e. self interested mercenary despite all the sound bites and the appearance he's a jolly nice guy and Bruin for life shtick.
 
I Hate Philadelphia said:
The Bruins haven't been in a true rebuild for a good 20 years at this point.

Anyone that understands the Bruins ownership knows that they will do anything possible to keep the team just competitive enough to justify the constant raising of ticket / concession prices etc. That typically means that even in the worst years, the team is at least near the playoffs.
Click to expand...
I mean, do you need to do a true rebuild if you have the pieces to constantly be between fairly competitive and top tier. It helps that when they find top end pieces those top end pieces seem to want to stay there. So ownership must be doing something right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RI.B FAN, FrankSidebottom and GirardSpinorama
Nothingbutglass said:
How much time does your "rebuild" take? You think teams have 6 year plans for this? Jobs dont last that long. Prospect rankings can change dramatically in a year and doesnt mean much. New guys every year!
Click to expand...

If by rebuild you mean blowing up the team and playing for top 5 picks.....your talking at least 7-8yrs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom