He's not saying it well because the narrative he always wants to push about Lucic doesn't happen to coincide with reality.FL4WL3SS said:
Bruins Offseason Moves
- Thread starter BoSoxFink
- Start date
Yeah, but it goes without saying that each of the LWs below him would increase their scoring by playing with Krejci.cshea said:
BoSoxFink said:
I copied your initial post and simply replaced Soderberg with Lucic. You missed it. The way you feel people are overreacting with the Soderberg splooge, I feel the same way with you and your overreaction to Lucic. I disagree with you completely.
If you would like, I'd be happy to define what trolling is as you surely have no idea what it means.
I loved your true hockey fans line, though.
PedroSpecialK said:
Is there a restriction on using the buyout on an "injured" player who should* recover before the start of the new season? Or am I completely misunderstanding the quoted portion of your post?
*I say should because I have no idea if he is supposed to or not. Backs are bad injuries. Thanks!
Exactly, if a player is injured during the buyout period, he cannot be bought out. Glen Murray for instance filed a grievance a couple of years back citing that he had an ankle issue that prevented him from playing at the time he was bought out. The team and Murray eventually reached a settlement if I remember correctly.
The problem is, only three of the 10 LW above Lucic get paid in the range Lucic does. (On mobile so no pretty graphs, but pulled up NHL.com for LW pts leaders and capgeek'd the 10 names above Looch). For his skillset his contract is a horrible use of cap space. He's getting paid similar to Patrick Sharp who had 20 more pts than Lucic. As has been said already in this thread, Lucic's cap hit can be better used elsewhere. He's probably at the top of my change of scenery list.cshea said:
ivanvamp said:
Without rehashing the whole debate (topic for another thread), I will merely note that he scored more goals in his 6 games than Krejci and Marchand combined in their 24.
Edit: To be clear, this is a statement about how very bad two of our top 6 were.
Yeah, criticizing his contract is certainly fair game. I was just pointing out that he does produce offensively.timlinin8th said:
Break up day today so we'll get some info trickling out from the players as the day goes on.
Thornton up first. Said he wasn't told either way if he'll be back, but hopes he is.
Thornton up first. Said he wasn't told either way if he'll be back, but hopes he is.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/are-we-witnessing-the-demise-of-the-boston-bruins---trending-topics-131559438.html
Chiarelli bet big and lost this year. He'll pay for it next year. And by then, the time to bet big again might be coming to a close. But he has to be smart going forward when re-equipping his team for another attempt at the Cup. He surely can't double down on his more recent mistakes and expect different results.
Chiarelli bet big and lost this year. He'll pay for it next year. And by then, the time to bet big again might be coming to a close. But he has to be smart going forward when re-equipping his team for another attempt at the Cup. He surely can't double down on his more recent mistakes and expect different results.
That was a terrible article that seemed to be written by a guy still hurting from the Tyler Seguin trade. The cap numbers seem to be neglecting the fact that the Bruins can put Savard on LTIR, so, while tight, the Bruins are hardly in the predicament that Chicago faced when they won the Cup against the Flyers.FelixMantilla said:
If Chiarelli is going to double down on picking up guys like Iginla and Ericsson, that doesn't seem like a problem to me.
It's Ryan Lambert. If you choose to take him seriously, a lot of his work is like reading from the mind of Jimmy Murphy and Dan Shaughnessy's love child.
He's a professional troll, which is pretty good work if you can get it.
He's a professional troll, which is pretty good work if you can get it.
That article has one of the most poorly written, incomprehensible paragraphs in recent memory:
"This is not, however, to say we're watching the demise of the Bruins. They're still going to be very good, perhaps even great, again next year. Probably the year after that as well. The window isn't closing, per se, but it isn't not-closing either. Making rash decisions about personnel, like the Seguin trade, isn't a reasonable approach at this time, but it's certainly the temptation. After all, we're now really having a discussion about whether Sidney Crosby is actually better than Jonathan Toews (and yes, of course he is), just to illustrate how far this kind of post-elimination mania can drive people."
"This is not, however, to say we're watching the demise of the Bruins. They're still going to be very good, perhaps even great, again next year. Probably the year after that as well. The window isn't closing, per se, but it isn't not-closing either. Making rash decisions about personnel, like the Seguin trade, isn't a reasonable approach at this time, but it's certainly the temptation. After all, we're now really having a discussion about whether Sidney Crosby is actually better than Jonathan Toews (and yes, of course he is), just to illustrate how far this kind of post-elimination mania can drive people."
Very rarely do I email a writer of an article, but I had to in this case. His original argument;
Sure, that's a step down, aside from brainfarting about a 6'5 ginger. The article has been edited now to "a D corps of Zdeno Chara, Dougie Hamilton, Seidenberg, Johnny Boychuk, Bartkowski, Krug and Kevan Miller is a significant step down from what we're used to seeing from this team." which I would say is patently false... Most teams would have raging boners if they had that level of experience combined with promising youth.
"It's pretty obvious now that this was the Boston Bruins' “going for it” year."
Charelli is so bad at his job that in his "going for it" year, he didn't make any big moves at the trade deadline.
Charelli is so bad at his job that in his "going for it" year, he didn't make any big moves at the trade deadline.
That was also basically the D corps last year for a lot of the playoffs too minus a broken footed Ference and McQuaid.timlinin8th said:
Again, it's Lambert. Don't feed the troll.
Sorry guys, but at least we can continue venting against someone other than ourselves. :whistling:
Some trolling in the rest of the article, but I don't know why this is singled out. There are people crying to trade the best player in the game just because the bottom half of his team sucks and Lundquist played fantastic. Similarly, there are people crying to break up the President's Trophy winner because they had a ton of bad luck and Price played fantastic. Chara isn't going to be good or even around for much longer. The Seguin deal doesn't need to be re-hashed but calling it an overreaction to a string of bad luck is reasonable IMO. I mean, we know this in baseball and while playoff hockey emphasizes a few different things it's definitely more of a coinflip than most people seem to think.Mooch said:
The Bruins should:
1. Not overreact to bad luck over 5 games and then not showing up for two games, which is basically what happened in the MTL series. If any of a number of things go differently in game 1 they probably win it in 5. I don't know how you can look at that series and think major overhauls need to occur unless you're just looking for a reason to be grumpy. The first line shot something like 3% or something ridiculous, part of that is good goaltending but a lot is just bad luck. So you bring Iginla back if he will take a workable one-year deal, and your top 6 should be the same.
2. That said, the 4th line has been a zero for a while and there are issues with depth. Thornton has 7 points in 100 career postseason games and just one goal - I know that's not his job, but "his job" is also minimized in the playoffs and even moreso with the quicker game that the NHL is moving towards. I mean, he barely played when they were trailing this playoffs and only saw 3:28 in game 7 -- that's handicapping the team. Fortunately the fix is easy as they have a better, cheaper player than Campbell in Spooner and I liked what Florek showed as well. So you go into camp giving Spooner every chance to be your 4th line ctr and be willing to ditch Campbell. Then you can actually have a 4th line you're ok with "rolling" in a close game instead of avoiding it whenever possible. If the league is moving to be faster and more skilled, and I think it is, the easiest way for the Bruins to catch up would be to add skill where they can and not worry about hitting everyone (which the first three lines do, anyway).
3. There's not a lot of trade possibilities, really. Lucic isn't really worth his contract but I'm pretty sure the team sees him as untouchable. If they had the balls to see if someone would overpay for him, that would be interesting but it would "change their team identity" or whatever and it's not happening. Pretty much everyone else who has been mentioned as a trade possibility here or elsewhere is a good enough deal for their cap hit (Boychuk, Marchand) or is hurt and has low value right now (Seidenberg, Kelly). You could do some kind of challenge trade like Krejci for a similarly good player or players, but I'd be cautious, if that even comes up.
4. On defense, Chara, Boychuk, Seidenberg, Hamilton is an excellent top 4. Krug should be re-signed, obviously. Then Miller is perfectly fine as your #6. I would view Bartkowski as my 7th guy and hope he's not expensive. I would like them to pursue more depth at the deadline than they did this year, especially if there are any injuries, but I don't see any offseason moves as warranted here. Trading Seidenberg would be do-able if you needed the cap space, but again, not going to happen while he's hurt. I wouldn't even think about moving Boychuk.
5. They have been good at finding backup goalies, so whether it's CJ re-signed or someone else I won't worry about this.
The thing is, with a buyout potentially looming for someone, if the Bruins think Lucic's cap hit is too much for his skill set they don't need to find a taker at all. (I know most have Chris Kelly pegged as the likely buyout candidate, but just sayin') Matt Moulson and Jussi Jokinen, while a little older than Lucic, provided similar production to Lucic at HALF the cost and both are available as FA this season. It also seems like the league is transitioning towards faster players, and Lucic certainly won't get faster as he ages. It may mean changing the identity of the team somewhat but I put nothing past this management group to pull the trigger if they see fit to move in a different direction over the course of the next two seasons.Toe Nash said:
They may explore trades for Marchand but like you said, his cap hit isn't so egregious that they should buy him out. If they can't find a trade partner for Lucic to save $2-3 mil in cap space to replace his production (assuming small raises to Moulson or Jokinen if they signed them) I could see them buying him out, then burying Kelly on the 4th line as the "veteran presence" with Spooner at C to get him into the mix.
I would even examine having Soderberg as your first line C given how beast he was. David Krejci as your third line C is an embarrassment of riches.
Moulson/Jokinen-Soderberg/Krejci-Iginla
Marchand-Bergeron-Erikkson/Smith
Paille-Sod/Krej-Smith/Erikkson
Florek-Spooner-Kelly
Campbell
...assumes you resign Iginla, sign Moulson or Jokinen, sign RFAs Smith and Florek (odds are they do this regardless), and let Caron and Thornton walk. Rotate Campbell and Spooner as the 4th line C, depending on matchup (Spooner for an offensive 4th line, Campbell when you need his D/PK skills) and also gives you a good long look at Spooner so you can make some reasonable decisions on Krejci when his contract is up after next season. Saves you a couple mil right off the top for similar production, you essentially get Chris Kelly for free with the savings. This is assuming ZERO other moves, with new cap space to make improvements where necessary.
*edit forgot to include the (semi obvious) loss of Thornton but included for clarity*
Chiarelli post-mortem press conference:
- Too early to tell media his plans for the UFA's
- Said Thornton was up and down all year; plus fisticuffs down league wide. Told Thornton he'll get back to him in a few weeks.
- Marchand's antics get in the way.
- Didn't do enough at the deadline; may have overestimated their youth
- Chara one of many players who didn't play up to potential in the playoffs
- Playoffs were Dougie's break out moment. Real solid defensively.
- Not going to make too many changes, but there will be changes. Still a real good team.
- Too early to tell media his plans for the UFA's
- Said Thornton was up and down all year; plus fisticuffs down league wide. Told Thornton he'll get back to him in a few weeks.
- Marchand's antics get in the way.
- Didn't do enough at the deadline; may have overestimated their youth
- Chara one of many players who didn't play up to potential in the playoffs
- Playoffs were Dougie's break out moment. Real solid defensively.
- Not going to make too many changes, but there will be changes. Still a real good team.
Maybe they'd pull the trigger on moving a Seguin but I think they have always shown a tendency towards guys who are workmanlike and tough with offensive skill (the Power Forward), which deserved or not Lucic is seen as. Whether it's Neely's influence or they think it suits Julien's style or some combo, that's what they do. I mean, we saw on Behind the B they were devastated when they couldn't keep Horton and they have wanted Iginla forever as well. I would just be completely shocked if they moved Lucic.timlinin8th said:
I agree that they seem to love the "power forward" type, and it would be a BIG move if it involves Milan Lucic. That said, Chiarelli et. al. also strike me as being extremely cap-minded... If they can build a similar team while changing the cap structure of the team, I don't put it past them doing it. I think the cap was the big piece of the Seguin trade... They had given Tyler a big contract, regretted it, and found a way to replace his production while making the roster more cap-friendly. Moving on from Lucic would be a Big Deal, no doubt. But I could actually see them doing so.Toe Nash said:
I wouldn't be opposed to dangling Lucic or Marchand for a right handed top 6 forward. Their only 2 right handed wingers are Thornton and Iginla, and who knows if either will be back. In Thornton's case, his handedness doesn't make much of a difference either. They used to be symmetrical, but got away from that this year. I have no numbers to back this up, but I feel like they had a lot of wasted scoring opportunities where I thought to myself "if *insert player*'was the opposite hand, that's a goal." Loui in particular.
Toe Nash said:
The Seguin deal was a lot more than about his performance in the 2013 playoffs. Rehashing it as an overreaction is ridiculous.
The rest of your post shows a fairly solid and workable plan. It's hardly the disaster scenario that the mediot made it out to be.
Except the whole pieces about Seidenberg since he has a new contract kicking in this year with a NMC. And I take umbrage with the assertion that Spooner could easily slide into a fourth line center role. Everything about him screams top 9 forward.
Gotta start him somewhere. At this moment in time he displaces none of Krejci, Soderberg, or Bergeron. Wean him in on the 4th, and if he shows he's worth it you let Krejci walk after the season is over and move Spooner up to top 9 status.kenneycb said:
Marchand started on the 4th line while Paille was on the 3rd and Marchand worked his way up to the 2nd line with Bergeron. Nothing wrong with 4th line minutes on your way to earning more.
One way or another, this summer is decision time for Spooner. They need to either commit to him and find space in the lineup, or move him. I don't think another year of riding the shuttle is in both Spooner and the organization's best interest.
Ultimately, I think he gets moved. His game isn't suited for bottom 9 duty, and they don't have a top 9 center spot open. The only way to create space for him would be by moving Soderberg to the wing, and they seem pretty intent on keeping Soderberg in the middle.
Ultimately, I think he gets moved. His game isn't suited for bottom 9 duty, and they don't have a top 9 center spot open. The only way to create space for him would be by moving Soderberg to the wing, and they seem pretty intent on keeping Soderberg in the middle.
Wing and center are vastly different positions. Wingers are easy to break in. Center is a completely different animal. See: Seguin, Tyler.AMcGhie said:
timlinin8th said:
This totally ignores what Milans' game is all about. If you're just looking at points, then of course Lucic isn't gonna be your guy. His game is about his physical presence and wearing out the opponents defense.
I'm not a huge fan of the hits stat, but this difference is kinda hard to ignore.
This season
Jokinen 34 hits
Moulson 46 hits
Lucic 240 hits
I'd bet my house any team in the league coming in to face the Bruins would much rather see Jokinen/Moulson in the lineup instead of Lucic.
Weird to me that most people want a tough team that's hard to play against(and has worked pretty well here), are always looking to move their toughest guy because he also doesn't have great hands.
I think if the Neely comparisons stopped, and people just accepted him as a Shane Doan/Dustin Brown type, this wouldn't pop up so often.
Lucic and Marchand can have their moments where it's tough to root for them, but they're both very unique players that are extremely valuable to this team. I don't want to see either traded for anything less than even value. Either way, I'd like to see a major line re-shuffling, spreading some of the speed and physicality out. Assuming they keep Iggy, I'd start the season with:
Soderberg-Bergeron-Eriksson
Marchand-Krejci-Iginla
Lucic-Spooner-Smith
Paille-Kelly-Campbell
The 1st line is something I've been wanting to see 5 on 5 for a while, the Swedes have great chemistry, as did Bergeron and Eriksson earlier in the season, and they've all been very good on the PP together ever since Eriksson came back.
Marchand would give Krejci and Iginla some much needed speed and quickness, a "deep threat", if you will. Montreal pressed the shit out of Krejci's line with a lot of success, and teams will copy than next year if they're together.
The 3rd line is just the leftover guys, I have no specific reason to think they'd play well together but it'd give Spooner two legitimate top 6 forwards to play with. And I think he deserves an extended look on a real NHL line. Half his minutes this season were with Matt Fraser.
The 4th line is a huge uprade over this years' just by replacing Thornton with Kelly.
I'm also very high on Florek as a future bottom 6 forward. If it was possible to get rid of Kelly and his salary, a Paille-Campbell-Florek 4th line would be pretty solid too.
edit: not a knock on Lucic putting him on the 3rd line. This team has 8 "top 6" forwards IMO, and spreading the talent across 3 lines gives them a big advantage over a lot of teams.
Soderberg-Bergeron-Eriksson
Marchand-Krejci-Iginla
Lucic-Spooner-Smith
Paille-Kelly-Campbell
The 1st line is something I've been wanting to see 5 on 5 for a while, the Swedes have great chemistry, as did Bergeron and Eriksson earlier in the season, and they've all been very good on the PP together ever since Eriksson came back.
Marchand would give Krejci and Iginla some much needed speed and quickness, a "deep threat", if you will. Montreal pressed the shit out of Krejci's line with a lot of success, and teams will copy than next year if they're together.
The 3rd line is just the leftover guys, I have no specific reason to think they'd play well together but it'd give Spooner two legitimate top 6 forwards to play with. And I think he deserves an extended look on a real NHL line. Half his minutes this season were with Matt Fraser.
The 4th line is a huge uprade over this years' just by replacing Thornton with Kelly.
I'm also very high on Florek as a future bottom 6 forward. If it was possible to get rid of Kelly and his salary, a Paille-Campbell-Florek 4th line would be pretty solid too.
edit: not a knock on Lucic putting him on the 3rd line. This team has 8 "top 6" forwards IMO, and spreading the talent across 3 lines gives them a big advantage over a lot of teams.
I just don't know how you can justify moving Soderberg off center given the quantum leap forward he took when he moved there late in the season.
Chuck Z said:
Agreed. No way Yeti is not playing centre next year. I think you can make a case for moving him and Loui up to the first or second line, but you'd have to add a winger to that mix.
Edit: But it is a discussion that needs to be made if for no other reason to figure out who they should be paired with. Going to find a veteran with a similar style might not be a bad idea, especially if they really want to win a cup.
Chuck Z said:
To follow up on this I think one could make a pretty compelling case if anything Soderberg should be moving up to the first line to get more minutes out of him. Him and Bergeron were about the only one's in the top 6 who weren't a unmitigated disaster against Montreal.
I agree with all this. However I don't think that difference is worth ~ 3M. I'm not bashing Milan's skillset, its more his contract that is the killer and you can get close to his pt production for FAR less $. As many hits as he had, how many times does he seem to get reined in because the Bruins can't afford to lose him to the penalty box? Pay your hit guys like hit guys, and skill guys for skill work. Milan lives somewhere in between and gets paid too much to do so. It's more about dollars and cents with him for me.mcpickl said:
I really wish there were some better options on the FA market this year, because while part of me would love to have Vanek on this team, part of me thinks his lazy reputation is probably earned and wouldn't be a great fit here. Having said that, I think my ideal lines next year would look something like this:
Lucic-Krejci-Iginla
Vanek-Soderberg-Eriksson
Fraser-Bergeron-Smith
Paille-Spooner-Campbell
I think the combination of Lucic's value probably being pretty low right now and the fact that I think he is salvageable means he is on the team next year. I look to move Marchand and Kelly to free up the cap space to bring on Vanek, and take my chances with a couple young guys in Fraser and Spooner to see what they can do for 20 games. If you can get a relatively cheap ($2-2.5M) upgrade to Fraser, you do that. I don't think Fraser is going to be a stud, but I'd like to see what he could do on a decent line for an extended period of time. And no, I'm not suggesting Bergeron is a third-line center, but I think if you can somehow swing around to this, you have three top lines that are pretty equivalent when it's all said and done.
Lucic-Krejci-Iginla
Vanek-Soderberg-Eriksson
Fraser-Bergeron-Smith
Paille-Spooner-Campbell
I think the combination of Lucic's value probably being pretty low right now and the fact that I think he is salvageable means he is on the team next year. I look to move Marchand and Kelly to free up the cap space to bring on Vanek, and take my chances with a couple young guys in Fraser and Spooner to see what they can do for 20 games. If you can get a relatively cheap ($2-2.5M) upgrade to Fraser, you do that. I don't think Fraser is going to be a stud, but I'd like to see what he could do on a decent line for an extended period of time. And no, I'm not suggesting Bergeron is a third-line center, but I think if you can somehow swing around to this, you have three top lines that are pretty equivalent when it's all said and done.
This probably describes the old school hockey argument that is why I don't think the Bruins would consider trading Lucic. This is also how I imagine some GMs outside of Boston see him, which is why I think they could get a nice piece back in trade. But I mostly disagree with it:mcpickl said:
1. Hit stats are suspect as you note and home bias has been recorded. I'd imagine that could also extend towards guys who are already known as hitters as well. Certainly Lucic makes a lot more hits than Moulson or Jokinen but there's a chance his numbers could be inflated due to rep.
2. You can't hit if you have the puck and there's no guarantee a hit in and of itself is a good play. So teams and players on lines that have better possession stats are going to have fewer hits. As we saw in the Montreal series a lot of times when a Bruin would go for a hit it didn't get them the puck back. Ahead of Lucic on the hit standings for the regular season are some good players like Dustin Brown but also noted mediocre players like Luke Schenn, Tanner Glass and Steve Ott. Top ten teams in hits this year: LA, Columbus, Toronto, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Philly, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, NYI, Colorado (Boston was 12th). So it's LA, but can you discern much of a pattern with the rest?
3. Even ignoring the hit stat, "tough to play against" is a cliche that really doesn't mean much. I buy that someone like Scott Stevens was scary as hell to play against because he would try to concuss you. But you can't do that anymore. I mean, I wouldn't want to get speared by Lucic but he should have gotten a penalty for that. At times I buy that teams have gotten intimidated but Montreal certainly doesn't and Chicago didn't last year. They just take the hit and move the puck or avoid the hit entirely. The Maple Leafs signed Clarkson, try to hit people a bunch (third in the league), and run Colton Orr out there all the time to fight people, but they mostly suck at actually playing hockey so no one is worried about facing them. They may be worried about Kessel and JvR though, because they are two of the best players in the league.
The Bruins are tough to play against because they are big and strong but also because they can cycle and keep the puck, have a great goaltender, the best Dman in hockey, and a good amount of offensive skill. The goal is to win, not to win a toughness contest.
4. As noted, Lucic is overpaid which is my and others' main gripe. (Also that he's largely immune from criticism by the media and most fans, but that's a separate topic). For $4m he'd be fine to have around and I won't ague that at his best he's a very good player, but when you're up against the cap and he's your 3rd-highest paid skater, he really needs to be better and more consistent.
What are you getting for Marchand? Picks and prospects? How much do you think Vanek will sign for?Chuck Z said:
Marchand had 25 goals this year while getting barely any PP time (just 1 goal on the PP). Vanek had just 19 non-PP goals this year, 11 last year in the shortened season, and 16 the year before in a full season. Vanek is excellent on the PP but I'm not sure the Bruins need the help there.
I think a big reason Soderberg / Eriksson were so good was seeing weaker matchups and while I'd be interested to see if he could handle it, I'm not sure you want to count on Soderberg being as good in your top 6.
Chuck Z said:
What is it about Vanek that makes you think he's a $3m upgrade over Marchand?? I don't see him as an upgrade at all, nevermind one I'd want to spend an extra 3m of cap space on. Vanek is soft, a terrible two way player, absolutely does not fit on this team. He destroys the possession numbers of every line he's even played on. I can't see giving that kind of money to a guy who was a PP specialist in the playoffs for long stretches.
My guess is you get a Reilly Smith-type prospect and a 2nd or 3rd rounder, neither of which make a big impact next year. From everything I've read, Vanek wants somewhere in the $7-8M a year range, which is exactly the salary you're clearing with Kelly and Marchand. Again, I'm not a huge Vanek fan and I wish there was someone who was a better fit for the team, but I think he's a clear upgrade over Marchand. Or maybe I've just watched him against the Bruins too many times. If you can find a trade partner that will give you someone who is a better fit, I'm all in favor of it, but from a pure FA perspective, he's the guy out there who makes sense.Toe Nash said:
See above.veritas said:
So, he's the best FA out there, which means they should trade away a top 6 guy in order to make him (at 31 years old) their highest paid player. Good reasoning.
You really need to provide more evidence that he is a "clear upgrade" over Marchand. I could maybe buy it if you thought they needed help on the PP, but they have a lot of weapons there and it improved a ton this year.
Great point about possession, veritas. For as long as Marchand has been with Bergeron that line has been one of the best possession lines in the league (whether with Seguin, Jagr, Smith or whoever on the other wing). Vanek on the other hand has been slightly below average.
Marchand's points per 60 min at even strength last three seasons: 2.40, 2.63, 2.29. Vanek: 2.13, 2.51, 2.56
I get that Marchand's "antics" can be frustrating but he also draws a lot of penalties. For the past three years, including the playoffs, he has drawn 94 penalties and taken 89. A net positive, and I'd also expect part of what he does is at the request of the coaching staff.
I don't understand letting Marchand go in the first place, but especially not to clear space for Vanek. Plus, Kelly's injury status makes clearing that space really difficult.
You really need to provide more evidence that he is a "clear upgrade" over Marchand. I could maybe buy it if you thought they needed help on the PP, but they have a lot of weapons there and it improved a ton this year.
Great point about possession, veritas. For as long as Marchand has been with Bergeron that line has been one of the best possession lines in the league (whether with Seguin, Jagr, Smith or whoever on the other wing). Vanek on the other hand has been slightly below average.
Marchand's points per 60 min at even strength last three seasons: 2.40, 2.63, 2.29. Vanek: 2.13, 2.51, 2.56
I get that Marchand's "antics" can be frustrating but he also draws a lot of penalties. For the past three years, including the playoffs, he has drawn 94 penalties and taken 89. A net positive, and I'd also expect part of what he does is at the request of the coaching staff.
I don't understand letting Marchand go in the first place, but especially not to clear space for Vanek. Plus, Kelly's injury status makes clearing that space really difficult.
timlinin8th said:
But the two "hit guys" I compared him to that I think are similar to him in Dustin Brown and Shane Doan make in the same ballpark Lucic does.
It's not like Lucic just runs people over and has no skill. He just doesn't have elite skill and never will. I think having a guy that's one of the most physical forwards in the league that still has enough skill to play in a top 6 role is extremely valuable.
He's expensive, but I don't necessarily think overpaid. I think his contract is right around market value.
If the Bruins were to put him on waivers, would he get claimed? I'd bet yes. If so, his deal is at market rate or less.
I think Sodeberg is perfect and a huge mismatch in the Bruins' favor right where he is as a 3rd line C. He is not a #1.Toe Nash said:
What is the infatuation with Eriksson? He was a poor fit this year, even accommodating for injuries. He didn't produce. He is fine as a bottom 6 forward on this team, but I don't think he deserves top 6 consideration.
I absolutely love Bergeron, but he was skating in cement over the last 3 games against Montreal. He is the quintessential Bruin and heart and soul of the team. But pairing him with Eriksson, who doesn't possess enough functional speed for an evolving game, would be a problem moving forward, IMO.
The B's need to re-think the first and fourth lines, and figure out a better set up on the back end (either via improvement from a couple of the kids or the infusion of new talent.). I like Boychuk more than McQuaid if the $$ can be accommodated, so I think Adam should be moved. Krug is a luxury item as an offense defenseman and should be retained, but he is a nightmare defensively, and needs a really strong partner to protect him.
Ericksson was a much better player after the Olympics and was one of their best wingers in the Montreal series. Maybe he doesn't work with Bergeron, but he and Soderberg seemed to have good chemistry.
Krug improved as the season went on, as did Hamilton. These guys got a lot of minutes due to the Seidenberg injury, but long term that should benefit the team. Krug's skills are some of the most difficult to find, and it would be a shame to see him ditched off for a Jordan Caron replacement.
McQuaid has zero trade value right now and will come back cheaply. I agree Boychuk is by far the better player, but affording everyone in the back end will be a challenge.
As to Lucic, there is still plenty of value in the game he plays. While not the fastest skater, he does have a strong stride which allows him to get to the puck on the offensive zone, he's got a strong shot, and his size makes him a dominating net front presence. The problem against Montreal is that he never was that net front presence; some of that was due to the play of his teammates, but some of that was on him. While I'm not convinced he will become a consistent 30-35 goal scorer, which is where he needs to be to justify his contract, the overpay here is not killing them. And while I was rooting for him to be traded in the aftermath of the Montreal series, his skill set is not that easy to replace
Upgrading the 4th line will be easier, and probably a bigger priority. That line was simply terrible in the playoffs, which only put more pressure on the top 9 forwards.
Krug improved as the season went on, as did Hamilton. These guys got a lot of minutes due to the Seidenberg injury, but long term that should benefit the team. Krug's skills are some of the most difficult to find, and it would be a shame to see him ditched off for a Jordan Caron replacement.
McQuaid has zero trade value right now and will come back cheaply. I agree Boychuk is by far the better player, but affording everyone in the back end will be a challenge.
As to Lucic, there is still plenty of value in the game he plays. While not the fastest skater, he does have a strong stride which allows him to get to the puck on the offensive zone, he's got a strong shot, and his size makes him a dominating net front presence. The problem against Montreal is that he never was that net front presence; some of that was due to the play of his teammates, but some of that was on him. While I'm not convinced he will become a consistent 30-35 goal scorer, which is where he needs to be to justify his contract, the overpay here is not killing them. And while I was rooting for him to be traded in the aftermath of the Montreal series, his skill set is not that easy to replace
Upgrading the 4th line will be easier, and probably a bigger priority. That line was simply terrible in the playoffs, which only put more pressure on the top 9 forwards.
FWIW, Cam says today that the team would like to figure something out with Jarome Iginla.
The issue is going to be term. I don't believe you can use bonus' to massage the cap on multi-year deals. It's a hard hit.
Edit: The other item of note is Cam said they haven't talked about using buyouts.
The issue is going to be term. I don't believe you can use bonus' to massage the cap on multi-year deals. It's a hard hit.
Edit: The other item of note is Cam said they haven't talked about using buyouts.