wintersej
Registered User
Get him a new longterm contract first, then get him on the PP.
And then let him have his Brad Marchand "late peak" as the net front on PP1.
Get him a new longterm contract first, then get him on the PP.
Oh that’s not coming close to getting it done if this is the new Trent and he stays like this. He’s on his bridge deal right now, I don’t see why he’d take another oneThinking 3years/$10m is a fair deal to something longer term, if this is the new Trent F (and is consistent).
You may be right. I am wary of handing the bag to the DeBrusks and Frederics. Theres a bit of a mixed bag there, in terms of consistency.Oh that’s not coming close to getting it done if this is the new Trent and he stays like this. He’s on his bridge deal right now, I don’t see why he’d take another one
Still hilarious?There are plenty of comps for him at $1.5. I gave like 4 of them in the other thread when Dom asked. You're just too close to this player for some reason and can't be objective about him in the least, which is hilarious to me.
I'm going 7/35 if he would do it. I honestly think you could play him on line 2 at either wing and he would produce very nicely.Thinking 3years/$10m is a fair deal to something longer term, if this is the new Trent F (and is consistent).
Even more so now.Still hilarious?
I'd jump on that in a heatbeat. Even though he's a physical forward, he doesn't have that kamikase style play that leads to injuries. People have said it before, and it's still true: projects really close to Charlie Coyle in style and substance as a Bruin with the added benefit of being able and willing to KO guys who cross the line. Getting that for 5 mil a year long term would be a steal and a rock to build around in the line up for the next generation of this club.I'm going 7/35 if he would do it. I honestly think you could play him on line 2 at either wing and he would produce very nicely.
When have I ever had an issue admitting I was wrong on something? I'm waiting until the end of the season to see how badly wrong I was, but he's certainly kicked my teeth in to this point...Still hilarious?
Oh that’s not coming close to getting it done if this is the new Trent and he stays like this. He’s on his bridge deal right now, I don’t see why he’d take another one
I'm going 7/35 if he would do it. I honestly think you could play him on line 2 at either wing and he would produce very nicely.
Im lining up right behind you. And I am doing so happily as well. Glad hes improving on last year.When have I ever had an issue admitting I was wrong on something? I'm waiting until the end of the season to see how badly wrong I was, but he's certainly kicked my teeth in to this point...
And you know what? I'm happy I was wrong because it makes the team better. I still want him to play with more of a strategic edge rather where he picks and choses his spots better, but I can't complain about his overall level of play. He's been great. I was wrong.
He's going to be a perennial 20+ goal guy IMO, that will score even more w PP time and 2nd line minutes... He's taken another leap like he did last year. I go with Pasta and he on the right, Zacha and Marchand on the left,. Coyle in the middle and sign someone for C2. I let Jake walk. Lock up Freddy.Really he's on his 2nd bridge deal. He's going to likely look for more term on his next deal as you point out.
Why in the world would you give a player Trent Frederic's caliber a 7-year deal? Massive overreaction to a guy on a 1-month heater basically.
He's going to be a perennial 20+ goal guy IMO, that will score even more w PP time and 2nd line minutes... He's taken another leap like he did last year. I go with Pasta and he on the right, Zacha and Marchand on the left,. Coyle in the middle and sign someone for C2. I let Jake walk. Lock up Freddy.
He def needs to step up in the playoffs he has not been good at allI'm not against extending him but cannot justify handing him a 6-7-8 year deal. Keeping in mind that if the Bruins give him term like that, now other Bruins his caliber and age will be wanting the same thing. Sets a bit of a precedent.
4 is the ideal term for him IMO. I don't think he'll accept 3-years after back-2-back two year deals. I can see him squeezing out a 5th year from them. 4-5 years at a reasonable cap hit would hit the mark pretty good provided he continues to perform now and most importantly in the playoffs.
He def needs to step up in the playoffs he has not been good at all
Are we really going to do this again?Why in the world would you give a player Trent Frederic's caliber a 7-year deal? Massive overreaction to a guy on a 1-month heater basically.
Are we really going to do this again?
I'm not against extending him but cannot justify handing him a 6-7-8 year deal. Keeping in mind that if the Bruins give him term like that, now other Bruins his caliber and age will be wanting the same thing. Sets a bit of a precedent.
4 is the ideal term for him IMO. I don't think he'll accept 3-years after back-2-back two year deals. I can see him squeezing out a 5th year from them. 4-5 years at a reasonable cap hit would hit the mark pretty good provided he continues to perform now and most importantly in the playoffs.
Why in God's name would you only want to lock him up for 4 when he's 25? The most valuable deals for the team are the last 3 in an escalating cap. Get those years!
Remember Marchand and company's long deals? Exactly. If a 25 year old is core enough for 4 years, he's core enough for 6-7.
He'll be 26 in less than a week and 27 when his current deal expires. Hockey DB is your friend.
Are you actually putting Frederic on the same level of Marchand at some point?
And like my post said about precedent. You hand over huge term to a player like Frederic and then other guys on your team who are at the same level with the same track-record will want the same treatment.
Grew up idolizing him so it makes sense (he’s from STL)He reminds me of David Backes tbh. Really wanted my Canucks to acquire this guy last off season.
And I say this because I had to watch Backes for 10+ years in the west and seeing Frederic play reminds me exactly of him.
A six year deal takes him to 32. You're worried about that? He doesn't play like a power forward, that's a perfectly good spot to take him to.
If he's a 20-25-30g guy depending on power play time, it's bananas to not do 6 years. The teams that wisely did that with their improving players make out like gangbusters.
And doesn't matter what the others want. The core only has so many players. Our core guys typically always got 6-8 year deals. Didn't matter.