TSN: What should Bruins do with Milan Lucic?

[BB88]

I'm looking at it less from a production standpoint and more from a durability and style of play. Lucic is fighting less which is a constant yo-yo of discussion from us fans as to whether or not that's a good thing or bad but maintaining a high amount of body contact. I think it's WAY too early to be talking about him breaking down. He's 27 for crying out loud and some of you are worried about things that are 7-8 years down the road

Well if you are not then it's crazy, Lucic would be very difficult to trade with that contract if things turn ugly. This team can't go all in now and use that as a reason to accept Lucic's new contract. I like that let's sign everyone and overpay them and worry about things 5 years from now, like we don't have enough questions already towards few contracts.
I'd like us to have a team that can contend for a long time and not sell every year due to rubbish contracts.

So why do we pay 7M for a player who is a 50 point man if we take his style of play out of it?
Lucic needs to be physical beast if he gets that 7M from us, because his points certainly won't make him worth that much.

 

[Bruwinz37]

Just pick a player and look for yourself. Joe Thornton used to be a physical player early on and missed games all the time. He change from that and has been healthy for the most part ever since. Or look at someone like Bill Guerin who never changed and broke down really quickly in his 30's.

Bill Guerin may have been called a power forward but he never came close to playing a real power forward game. Perimeter guy, great shot, fought occasionally...usually if he knew he would win.

 

[LouJersey]

Quick question for those of you that think Lucic isn't worth it . If you don't then why would you think you'd get anything of real value back for a UFA to be that will command 7 mil
Per?

 

[Lost Horizons]

For all we know $7 million might be a bargain for Lucic by 2021-22. Who the heck knows where the cap will be by then.

$7 mill in a few years is a lot of money the b's won't have space for. Bergeron,Rask,Krecji,Chara are still on the books for years to come. Hamilton cap hit is going to go way up. Same with Marchand. Both of who's cap hits are easily going to be in the $6 mill range in 2 years time. another $7mill in space is too much.

Two guys (Toews/Kane) are about to crack the 10 million mark. I can predict that by 2021-22 they won't be the last.

and look what that's doing to their team right now. Kruger and Saad are in danger of being offersheeted and Sharp has to be moved.

And for that matter who the heck knows how good Lucic will be by then. There is no way any of us can predict that. And their is no evidence to support that prediction. Citing past player examples is pointless because every player is different, every situation is different. All I know is at 27 when he moves his feet he's a heck of a hockey player and can impact the game in a manner that few can.

I'd rather take the chance of him declining then him getting better in his 30's and deal him and used that money to make he team better in the long term by using it to lock up the Hamilton,Spooners,Pasternak of the world. The cap isn't always going to go up.

 

[Mpasta]

Yet there's examples of power guys playing into their 30's and still performing at a high clip as well as being durable, ie: Iginla, Chara, Shanahan, Getzlaf is 30 and still a physical beast and playing at a high clip, AO will be 30 when the season starts and he's still a durable player while performing at a high clip and being physical.

The difference between Iginla, Shanahan, AO, and Getzlaf is that they were more talented before they were 30 than Lucic ever has been.

Your argument is that a few players who are/were some of the best in the NHL were also good when they were 30? You're grasping at straws.

 

[Bruwinz37]

Quick question for those of you that think Lucic isn't worth it . If you don't then why would you think you'd get anything of real value back for a UFA to be that will command 7 mil
Per?

Lou- because the appeal is still there. Teams will take a chance that he will rebound because when healthy he can be worth it. Teams that feel that he will put them over the top or a team like Vancouver (home town).

I will respond with this....what happens if he has another down season next year?

 

[BB88]

Quick question for those of you that think Lucic isn't worth it . If you don't then why would you think you'd get anything of real value back for a UFA to be that will command 7 mil
Per?

There are lots of teams in different situations, we are not a team that can afford it. All in teams, contenders, teams with strong prospect pools, desperate teams, team gm's who are in love with the idea of finding their own Lucic type of player.

Then you could explain to me how is a 50 point guy worth 7M for us?
Especially if he is not a physical beast.

What if he has a tough year next year? we signed him to a huge contract, value drops or we didn't sign him and his value is low low low, what then?

 

[Lost Horizons]

So he had one down year (at age 35) and followed that up with a very good year. Between the ages of 30 to 36 he was at a 35-40 goal pace all except that one year.

Seems to me his physical style didn't have any impact on his production. Matter of fact Guerin's most productive year's were in his 30s, further weakening your argument using an example you yourself cited. Good job!

Look at Owen Nolan,Eric Lindros, Clark Gillies,Terry O'Reilly etc. They all drop off in their 30's

 

[Lost Horizons]

Quick question for those of you that think Lucic isn't worth it . If you don't then why would you think you'd get anything of real value back for a UFA to be that will command 7 mil
Per?

I look at moving Lucic as prepping for the future and having the space 2 years from now when Spooner and Pasternak are up

 

[LouJersey]

Lou- because the appeal is still there. Teams will take a chance that he will rebound because when healthy he can be worth it. Teams that feel that he will put them over the top or a team like Vancouver (home town).

I will respond with this....what happens if he has another down season next year?

I let him start the season last year of his deal . If he plays well I pony up . If not I deal him . I think they sign him before July is out

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

I absolutely agree. He's a player that Sweeney said he loved, a power forward who when he's on, is one of our top scorers. Remember 2011 he had more than 30 goals? I'm not asking for that out of him, but at least more than last year. He did play well with Spoons and Pasta, I want a vet right shot with him that isn't Krejci, maybe sign Justin Willims to play with him. He did so well with Iggy, but we can't get him back so that's a good option. We would be sorry to lose him.

That was 5 seasons ago and he didn't have more than 30 goals.

He had 30 (including 5 empty netters).

In the last 3 seasons, he's averaging 19.4 goals per 82 games (17.0 excluding empty netters).

 

[BruinDust]

$7 mill in a few years is a lot of money the b's won't have space for. Bergeron,Rask,Krecji,Chara are still on the books for years to come. Hamilton cap hit is going to go way up. Same with Marchand. Both of who's cap hits are easily going to be in the $6 mill range in 2 years time. another $7mill in space is two much.



and look what that's doing to their team right now. Kruger and Saad are in danger of being offersheeted and Sharp has to be moved.




I'd rather take the chance of him declining then him getting better in his 30's and deal him and used that money to make he team better in the long term by using it to lock up the Hamilton,Spooners,Pasternak of the world. The cap isn't always going to go up.

I don't think anyone is looking at those Toews/Kane contracts as mistakes. Pretty sure every GM in the league would of given them 10.5 million if that's what it took to secure their franchise players.

They got this thing, it's called a Stanley Cup. I don't think they are worried about losing Sharp. Saad will be a Blackhawk next season, no question. If some team wants to overpay with an offer sheet for Kruger the Hawks will gladly say thanks but see you later Kruger. They didn't build their multiple championship team by over-paying for 3rd/4th line guys.

Chara has two years left of a big cap hit, and is only on the books for 3 more years. So if even if they gave Lucic 8 years they only overlap for 2.

Where do you see Marchand's cap hit going? He's at 4.5 million now. Another couple 20-25 goal seasons I can see him getting 6, but that's a small 1.5 mil raise. Who says he's not the guy to let walk or trade in two years to make room for Pastrnak and Spooner's new deals? I know I can find a replacement for Marchand a lot easier than I do Lucic. Everyone balks at giving Lucic an 8 year extension at age 28, but would they give Marchand a 8 year deal at 6 million per at 29?

Oh yeah I forgot his playing style is supposedly different so I guess that changes everything.

 

[BB88]

I let him start the season last year of his deal . If he plays well I pony up . If not I deal him .

and if he plays for that huge contract then the re-signing price just goes up and if he doesn't then the trade return gets weaker, also I don't want 2016 picks for Lucic.

 

[Number8]

Just pick a player and look for yourself. Joe Thornton used to be a physical player early on and missed games all the time. He change from that and has been healthy for the most part ever since. Or look at someone like Bill Guerin who never changed and broke down really quickly in his 30's.

Two words tell you all you need to know why Jumbo Joe changed from the nasty mean streaked player he was: Lindros/Haymaker.

Sadly it was a wild punch that landed because Joe lost his balance and fell onto it. Doesn't matter though, it did the trick.

 

[PB37]

The difference between Iginla, Shanahan, AO, and Getzlaf is that they were more talented before they were 30 than Lucic ever has been.

Your argument is that a few players who are/were some of the best in the NHL were also good when they were 30? You're grasping at straws.

I think the real straw grasping is

1. Making a determination a player at 26's dip in production is due to his style of play by using production charts that show no context

2. Saying 7 million is too much for a player in his early 30's producing around 50 points when we don't even know what the salary cap will be in 5 years.

3. Assuming Lucic won't have a bounce back year at 27 and continue to enjoy that success until his next contract, whenever that will be.

 

[BruinDust]

Look at Owen Nolan,Eric Lindros, Clark Gillies,Terry O'Reilly etc. They all drop off in their 30's

I don't think you can even use Gillies and O'Reilly as examples. Training, nutrition, medical tech, were light years behind what they are today. That era is so far back citing them as examples is irrelevant.

Lindros was felled by serious concussions, mostly by cutting across the blue-line with his head down. Nothing to do with wear and tear.

Nolan had on of his better seasons production wise as a 36 year old with the Minnesota Wild. Outside of one really good year with San Jose in 1999-2000 where he got 44 goals his production was fairly consistent and not all that great.

I can do this all day bud, using past examples of so-called "Power Forwards" to generate an argument for trading Lucic due his near-future decline is pointless.

 

[BB88]

I think the real straw grasping is

1. Making a determination a player at 26's dip in production is due to his style of play by using production charts that show no context

2. Saying 7 million is too much for a player in his early 30's producing around 50 points when we don't even know what the salary cap will be in 5 years.

3. Assuming Lucic won't have a bounce back year at 27 and continue to enjoy that success until his next contract, whenever that will be.

7M already is too much for Lucic, he hasn't been worth this contract so why on earth should we give him a raise?

Lucic is a powerforward with limited offensive talent, if he's not a physical beast then he isn't bringing enough on the table to be worth huge money, hitters can be had for much less money.

You make it sound like Lucic is Iginla with these comments.

But let's continue this path we have been, sell players for nothing and keep all the overpaid players, great plan. Cap problems every year, not a chance to make new signings to improve the team, or when we would like to trade these overpaid guys they don't have high value and have trade protections while not getting the top draft picks.

 

[Oates2Neely]

That was 5 seasons ago and he didn't have more than 30 goals.

He had 30 (including 5 empty netters).

In the last 3 seasons, he's averaging 19.4 goals per 82 games (17.0 excluding empty netters).

Why is this always mentioned when discussing Lucic? Do Crosby Ovechkin Stamkos Malkin Benn etc.... NOT score empty net goals? Do they have the same asterisk beside their names that some Bruins fans here place on Lucic? It's so easy to pick out the anti-Lucic agenda pushers here..."bbbbbbut 5 of those goals were empty netters"...

 

[PB37]

7M already is too much for Lucic, he hasn't been worth this contract so why on earth should we give him a raise?

Lucic is a powerforward with limited offensive talent, if he's not a physical beast then he isn't bringing enough on the table to be worth huge money, hitters can be had for much less money.

You make it sound like Lucic is Iginla with these comments.

But let's continue this path we have been, sell players for nothing and keep all the overpaid players, great plan. Cap problems every year, not a chance to make new signings to improve the team, or when we would like to trade these overpaid guys they don't have high value and have trade protections while not getting the top draft picks.

That's what happens when you have a team that's seen the success level the Bruins have had for 7 seasons now. To me, Lucic is a core player that you spend money on to keep, especially when he's still in his prime years. You feel differently.

 

[BB88]

That's what happens when you have a team that's seen the success level the Bruins have had for 7 seasons now. To me, Lucic is a core player that you spend money on to keep, especially when he's still in his prime years. You feel differently.

The problem to me is that he is 28y when that contract kicks in, that scares me a lot.

Like I said before I'd like us to keep Lucic and be able to keep Lucic but his rfa contract and our cap issues makes it very difficult for us, we'd atleast need to move up in the draft and try to get the best impact player we can to balance that cap hit in the future, to allow Lucic to be that physical beast with less demands/expectations on him. But him as a top6 guy with 7M creates huge expectations towards him and I don't see that going well if we have weak lw side to support him.

Zacha elc/rfa contract
Marchand 5.5M contract
Lucic 6.5-7M.

So if there were no cap problems I'd love him to be a 3rd line playoff beast lw for us if we had players like Zacha making damage/getting the pressure(regular season) in the top6. But this is a cap world and we have holes in the lineup and probably won't get a zacha type of player from this years draft.

 

[BruinDust]

The problem to me is that he is 28y when that contract kicks in, that scares me a lot.

Like I said before I'd like us to keep Lucic and be able to keep Lucic but his rfa contract and our cap issues makes it very difficult for us, we'd atleast need to move up in the draft and try to get the best impact player we can to balance that cap hit in the future, to allow Lucic to be that physical beast with less demands/expectations on him. But him as a top6 guy with 7M creates huge expectations towards him and I don't see that going well if we have weak lw side to support him.

Zacha elc/rfa contract
Marchand 5.5M contract
Lucic 6.5-7M.

So if there were no cap problems I'd love him to be a 3rd line playoff beast lw for us if we had players like Zacha making damage/getting the pressure(regular season) in the top6. But this is a cap world and we have holes in the lineup and probably won't get a zacha type of player from this years draft.

Probably not. But all the more reason to keep Lucic. Bruins young depth at LW is very thin, even if Smith eventually becomes a LW. They have no one in the system that looks like they will become a Top 6 LW. Given that lack of depth at LW, I don't see how the Bruins can trade away a true Top 6 left winger like Lucic in his prime.

 

[LouJersey]

Why is this always mentioned when discussing Lucic? Do Crosby Ovechkin Stamkos Malkin Benn etc.... NOT score empty net goals? Do they have the same asterisk beside their names that some Bruins fans here place on Lucic? It's so easy to pick out the anti-Lucic agenda pushers here..."bbbbbbut 5 of those goals were empty netters"...

Bergeron had a ****load of them but nobody ever mentions that either .

What people ignorantly ignore vs other forwards is Lucics lack of shots in this system . Only one forward had more than 200 .

 

[BadBruins]

The average is 28 and has Lucic gotten better or worse these past few years?

I honestly thought 13/14 was his best regular season in the NHL. I'd put it slightly ahead of his 42 point 08/09 season. That was probably his best combination of power and skill playing with Savard and Kessel though IMO.

Even his down regular season in the lockout year, he was a beast in the playoffs. 27 points in 47 regular season games. Then 19 in 22 playoff games. A good season as a whole IMO. Then followed it up with his very good 13/14 playing with Krejci and Iginla.

Only Pastrnak (46 GP), Bergeron, and Marchand averaged more G/60 5 on 5 last season. He was actually right around his career normals at 0.85/60. Marchand lead the team with 0.96/60. He's right around their zone when it comes to P/60 as well. A team wide decline.

2014/15 was reminiscent of 2009/2010. It was another season where the Bruins had just 4 players break the 40 point barrier. One 20 goal scorer (Sturm). Barely squeaked into playoffs. Don't want to see an overreaction.

 

[Lost Horizons]

I don't think anyone is looking at those Toews/Kane contracts as mistakes. Pretty sure every GM in the league would of given them 10.5 million if that's what it took to secure their franchise players.

And those contracts kick in after this year and look at the bind the Blackhawks are in.

They got this thing, it's called a Stanley Cup. I don't think they are worried about losing Sharp. Saad will be a Blackhawk next season, no question. If some team wants to overpay with an offer sheet for Kruger the Hawks will gladly say thanks but see you later Kruger. They didn't build their multiple championship team by over-paying for 3rd/4th line guys.

and in order to win the cup the Blackhawks dealt off "core" pieces like Byfuglien, Leddy,Brouwer,Campbell,Ladd etc They didn't hold on to everyone and they drafted well. The Bruins drafted like crap. If Lucic were a Hawk he would have been gone. The Hawks are in deep cap trouble and keeping Saad is going to be extremly hard to keep.

Chara has two years left of a big cap hit, and is only on the books for 3 more years. So if even if they gave Lucic 8 years they only overlap for 2.

You've got to look at the long term picture. You can't be paying a player like Lucic $7+ mill when he's 35 which is what he'll be when his next contract is done.

Where do you see Marchand's cap hit going? He's at 4.5 million now. Another couple 20-25 goal seasons I can see him getting 6, but that's a small 1.5 mil raise. Who says he's not the guy to let walk or trade in two years to make room for Pastrnak and Spooner's new deals?

Marchand brings more value to the table then a player like Lucic because you get 20+ goals constantly and you get a damn good penalty killer. When Lucic decides not to try most nights he brings nothing. I hate to uses the PAtriots term but who brings more value Marchand at 6 or Lucic at 7+?

I know I can find a replacement for Marchand a lot easier than I do Lucic. Everyone balks at giving Lucic an 8 year extension at age 28, but would they give Marchand a 8 year deal at 6 million per at 29?

They won't give Marchand an 8 year deal and they'd be nuts to.

Oh yeah I forgot his playing style is supposedly different so I guess that changes everything.

who brings more to the table each night: Marchand or Lucic?

 

[Lost Horizons]

I don't think you can even use Gillies and O'Reilly as examples. Training, nutrition, medical tech, were light years behind what they are today. That era is so far back citing them as examples is irrelevant.

NHL players playing into their mid 30's is really rare and giving someone a contract that will run until their 35 is nuts.

Lindros was felled by serious concussions, mostly by cutting across the blue-line with his head down. Nothing to do with wear and tear.

Lindros had far more injuries then just concussions including a collapsed lung that almost killed him

Nolan had on of his better seasons production wise as a 36 year old with the Minnesota Wild. Outside of one really good year with San Jose in 1999-2000 where he got 44 goals his production was fairly consistent and not all that great.

nolan was .81ppg player before the age of 30 and a .59 ppg player after the age of 30. and he was a far better player then Lucic is. In fact Nolan's .59ppg average in his 30's is the same as a mid 20's lucic .60ppg

I can do this all day bud, using past examples of so-called "Power Forwards" to generate an argument for trading Lucic due his near-future decline is pointless.

and I can keep going too and I can also point out that only 7 players over 32 are in the top 50 in scoring and all of whom are better then lucic: Sedin,Sedin,Zetterberg,Thornton,Datsyuk,Ribero,Hossa. Lucic will be in the 4th year of his new contract when he hits 32.