2022 Offseason

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
I just don't see how they could pull that off. They don't have many tradeable assets that would return a mid/late first round pick. DeBrusk is really the only player that have that may make sense, but looks like he is staying now. Maybe someone who is in love with Grzelcyk? I think the most likely scenario is a trade up where they move #54 plus something to get into the late first.

Elsewhere, the Sens bought out Colin White.

View: https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/1544351017155829762?s=20&t=SKqpz4I9IZIBVleDgZg_NQ


25-year old center from Boston, went to BC. I'd imagine a flier here is right in Sweeney's wheelhouse. His best season was 41 points in 71 games back in 18/19. He signed a big extension that the Sens are currently buying out as his play has dipped. Might be worth a look-see on a cheap, show-me deal.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
11,097
Between here and everywhere.
Ullmark+ to EDM could net you 29 - which you could then package with 54 to move up to the late teens/early 20's, I'd think.

Perhaps they get back their first from Anaheim and go after Owen Beck - who sounds like a mini Bergeron.

Beck is also a tremendous 200-foot player. His defensive conscience is high end for such a young player. No question part of his defensive excellence comes from his intelligence. Beck was even awarded the Bobby Smith award as the OHL Top Scholastic Player in 2022. However, Beck also brings a relentless motor that causes a lot of discomfort to opposing players.
https://www.coppernblue.com/2022/7/3/23193383/2022-nhl-draft-profile-owen-beck-edmonton-oilers-mississauga-steelheads
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
46,101
Why don't they just use the 54th pick to take the player they are trying to trade up for?

(sorry, couldn't resist)
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Ullmark+ to EDM could net you 29 - which you could then package with 54 to move up to the late teens/early 20's, I'd think.

Perhaps they get back their first from Anaheim and go after Owen Beck - who sounds like a mini Bergeron.



https://www.coppernblue.com/2022/7/3/23193383/2022-nhl-draft-profile-owen-beck-edmonton-oilers-mississauga-steelheads
The problem with trading Ullmark is A) he has a full no-movement clause and B) the Bruins don't have internal options to replace him. They only have Keyser and Bussi. The UFA goalie market is pretty bad. It's Campbell, Kuemper, Fleury, Ville Husso. All those guys will cost more than they're paying Ullmark and probably won't be any better (maybe Fleury would be). Behind them you've got the older dudes like Greiss, Halak, Jones and Braden Holtby. Maybe one of them would be serviceable as a backup but that's putting a log of eggs in Swayman's basket. The Bruins like to have a 50/50ish split among goalies, and relying on those types for half the season is dicey. On the trade market, I guess they could try one of the RFA's like Samsonov or Georgiev but they'd have to fork over assets to acquire one and then also pay them. Binnington has been rumored to be on the trade block if STL signs Husso, but Binnington has 5-years left at $6 million per and lost his job.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see an Ullmark trade this offseason. I think next offseason is much more likely. His NMC relaxes to a 16-team no-trade. Additionally, Swayman will have another year under his belt and entering restricted free agency so he'll need a new deal. That would seem to present more of an opportunity to make a move in net.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
21,988
Alamogordo
Why don't they just use the 54th pick to take the player they are trying to trade up for?

(sorry, couldn't resist)
I laughed.

I tend to agree wish cshea on Ullmark, but if I were Ullmark (Narrator: Clearly, he isn't) I think Edmonton is a team I would happily waive my NTC to go to.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
11,097
Between here and everywhere.
The problem with trading Ullmark is A) he has a full no-movement clause and B) the Bruins don't have internal options to replace him. They only have Keyser and Bussi. The UFA goalie market is pretty bad. It's Campbell, Kuemper, Fleury, Ville Husso. All those guys will cost more than they're paying Ullmark and probably won't be any better (maybe Fleury would be). Behind them you've got the older dudes like Greiss, Halak, Jones and Braden Holtby. Maybe one of them would be serviceable as a backup but that's putting a log of eggs in Swayman's basket. The Bruins like to have a 50/50ish split among goalies, and relying on those types for half the season is dicey. On the trade market, I guess they could try one of the RFA's like Samsonov or Georgiev but they'd have to fork over assets to acquire one and then also pay them. Binnington has been rumored to be on the trade block if STL signs Husso, but Binnington has 5-years left at $6 million per and lost his job.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see an Ullmark trade this offseason. I think next offseason is much more likely. His NMC relaxes to a 16-team no-trade. Additionally, Swayman will have another year under his belt and entering restricted free agency so he'll need a new deal. That would seem to present more of an opportunity to make a move in net.
Braden Holtby will only be 33 going into the season, and is the ideal kind of guy to bring in. One who knows he isn't going to be the main focus. Can spell Swaygod for 25-30 games with competent results, and isn't going to break the bank (only made 2 million last season.).

If you can trade Ullmark and his remaining 3 years / 15 million - and save 2.5 to 3 million on the cap per year, now is as good of a time as any. Ullmark is healthy, and just came off a great season. There's no guarantee his value is as high as it is now, especially with one less year on his deal.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Braden Holtby will only be 33 going into the season, and is the ideal kind of guy to bring in. One who knows he isn't going to be the main focus. Can spell Swaygod for 25-30 games with competent results, and isn't going to break the bank (only made 2 million last season.).

If you can trade Ullmark and his remaining 3 years / 15 million - and save 2.5 to 3 million on the cap per year, now is as good of a time as any. Ullmark is healthy, and just came off a great season. There's no guarantee his value is as high as it is now, especially with one less year on his deal.
I just don't think they're ready to give the net to Swayman full time as the starter. I think they want competition and a viable safety net if Swayman struggles. Holtby or the others in his class of UFA probably can't provide that type of competition and coverage. The reason I think next offseason makes more sense is because they'll have an extra year of data on Swayman, who will be an RFA with arb rights. Right nowm with Swayman on his ELC, they're paying $5.925 AAV for one of the better goalie tandems in the league. If Swayman really is the guy, then his next contract will be for starter money in which case there's more of a pressure point to move one of them.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
7,933
South of North
I just don't think they're ready to give the net to Swayman full time as the starter. I think they want competition and a viable safety net if Swayman struggles. Holtby or the others in his class of UFA probably can't provide that type of competition and coverage. The reason I think next offseason makes more sense is because they'll have an extra year of data on Swayman, who will be an RFA with arb rights. Right nowm with Swayman on his ELC, they're paying $5.925 AAV for one of the better goalie tandems in the league. If Swayman really is the guy, then his next contract will be for starter money in which case there's more of a pressure point to move one of them.
The bolded caught my attention, as it didn't "seem" to be accurate to me just based on the feels. Looking at the data, it's hard to say whether the goalies are good, the system/skaters was/were good, or if it's a combination.

To wit, the Bruins were 9th in save percentage at .908. Tied with the Lightning, .005 behind the Avs, and .012 off the league-leading Rangers. Howeva, Bruins netminders faced the third least amount of shots on the season, with only the Canes and Kings facing fewer. The Bolts are again very close to Boston, but the Avs goalies faced significantly more shots and were about league average.

In sum, I have no idea whether your statement is accurate--I was just curious. And upon further consideration, I think your focus on the roster management perspective (i.e. getting more data on Swayman, keeping a viable 1B to push him, reviewing the rest of the market, etc.) is more important anyway.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
System certainly plays a role and the Bruins were the best defensive team in hockey last year. That obviously helps the goalies.

In all situations, Swayman had a expected goals against of 92 and he allowed 95 goals. Ullmark 94 expected, allowed 95. They both basically make the save you'd expect them to make, but you'd want more "big" saves. The main culprit was the penalty kill, both had bad high danger save percentates while shorthanded. NYR probably has the best overall statistics but it's because Shesterkin was a monster. Ditto Tampa and Vasilevsky. In both those cases, if the star goes down they are likely screwed (especially NYR). Swayman and Ullmark aren't Vezina guys but they're capable starters. Rotate them around and I think it's among the most solid duos in the league.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
I can't imagine Krejci returns to the NHL but plays elsewhere, especially if playing with Hall and Pasta full time is on the table. Money could be a problem, the Bruins have none, but I cna't imaginge he's going to tell Boston to fuck off so he can play with Svech and an unsighed Necas in Carolina.

Also, more importantly, the Pasta extension talks are on the agenda in MTL.

View: https://twitter.com/NHLBruins/status/1544714699174039552?s=20&t=5Zz2ezeyx_K7CeJEILpFpw
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,936
The back of your computer
Boston Bruins
@NHLBruins

2m

Don Sweeney, after the #NHLDraft, on David Pastrnak: "Our meeting with [his agents] went well...we haven’t exchanged numbers, we’re just talking, being aggressive, saying we’d like David to be a lifelong Bruin – strongly indicated to him we’d like him to be a lifelong Bruin."

Boston Bruins
@NHLBruins

2m

Sweeney on David Krejci: "David is a little more of a wait and see...Krech is just deciding what’s best for him. But there’s no positive indication, it just hasn't gotten to the point where I’m comfortable to say if it’s going to happen.”

Boston Bruins
@NHLBruins

3m

Sweeney on if he thinks assistant coaches Joe Sacco, Chris Kelly, and Bob Essensa will return: “I do...Monty has had really good discussions with all three of them and I think those are in a really good place...he’s excited to work with them, and they are as well."
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
7,933
South of North
Just spitballing here, but is there a deadline for when to use the LTI? From what I understand, the LTIR allows a team to spend beyond the cap and "stash" players who can be reactivated in the playoffs when the cap goes the way of the unicorn and Loch Ness Monster. The downside to this is that the ownership has to be willing to actually spend this money, as LTIR players are still paid during the regular season. IOW, is there a chance ownership is giving a red light on LTIR until a few months in when the club can assess whether going into LTIR spending might be able to make them a bona fide contender?
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
14,927
Tuukka's refugee camp
The biggest downside is the Bruins LTIR folks are going to come back in the regular season (and they need them to come back). So for any money they go above the cap when accounting for LTIR, they'll have to clear it to activate Marchand, McAvoy, Gryz, etc. Hypothetically they could stash them to the postseason but (1) they don't have the same depth Tampa did to do so with Kucherov and (2) 2021 was a shortened season due to Covid. So no use stashing for the postseason if you don't actually make the postseason.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Just spitballing here, but is there a deadline for when to use the LTI? From what I understand, the LTIR allows a team to spend beyond the cap and "stash" players who can be reactivated in the playoffs when the cap goes the way of the unicorn and Loch Ness Monster. The downside to this is that the ownership has to be willing to actually spend this money, as LTIR players are still paid during the regular season. IOW, is there a chance ownership is giving a red light on LTIR until a few months in when the club can assess whether going into LTIR spending might be able to make them a bona fide contender?
There's no LTI deadline. The problem with using it is you can't bank the space for future use. It's only available while the player is unable to play. Essentially, when a player goes on LTI, the team is allowed to exceed the salary cap by that player or players salary while the player is injured. When the injured player is healthy, the LTI goes away and you need to be cap compliant to activate the player. In the Bruins case, they can put McAvoy, Marchand and Grzelyck on LTI to begin the season, but all 3 are projected to be back sometime before January. So if the Bruins use their LTI space (roughly $19 million combined) they would need to have $19 million in salary cap space available to activate those 3 when they are ready.

The teams that go into LTI for the year either have year long injuries (Tampa with Kucherov in 2021) or just collect a bunch of contracts of guys who are unofficially retired and use those contracts to raise their cap ceiling (Tampa, Toronto, Montreal, Vegas are the most prominent examples).

I think it's plausible they dip into it by a few million, but they aren't going full plunge. If they go into it by $2-$3 million, that's a more manageable number to work with in-season.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
7,933
South of North
There's no LTI deadline. The problem with using it is you can't bank the space for future use. It's only available while the player is unable to play. Essentially, when a player goes on LTI, the team is allowed to exceed the salary cap by that player or players salary while the player is injured. When the injured player is healthy, the LTI goes away and you need to be cap compliant to activate the player. In the Bruins case, they can put McAvoy, Marchand and Grzelyck on LTI to begin the season, but all 3 are projected to be back sometime before January. So if the Bruins use their LTI space (roughly $19 million combined) they would need to have $19 million in salary cap space available to activate those 3 when they are ready.

The teams that go into LTI for the year either have year long injuries (Tampa with Kucherov in 2021) or just collect a bunch of contracts of guys who are unofficially retired and use those contracts to raise their cap ceiling (Tampa, Toronto, Montreal, Vegas are the most prominent examples).

I think it's plausible they dip into it by a few million, but they aren't going full plunge. If they go into it by $2-$3 million, that's a more manageable number to work with in-season.
Thanks for the response. The bolded makes a ton of sense and is what I expect as well.

One thing I don't quite understand is the paragraph before the bolded. Take Tampa last season for example. They have the Seabrook LTIR on the books for $6.8M, so they have to pay that to him, but it doesn't have to count it towards the cap. If the player has no intention of returning ("unofficially retired" as you put it), why is this considered a competitive "asset"? IOW, Kucherov's 2021 playoff run makes it clear why it CAN be a competitive asset, but if a player is "unofficially retired", having them on the LTI doesn't help. Or am I missing something?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Thanks for the response. The bolded makes a ton of sense and is what I expect as well.

One thing I don't quite understand is the paragraph before the bolded. Take Tampa last season for example. They have the Seabrook LTIR on the books for $6.8M, so they have to pay that to him, but it doesn't have to count it towards the cap. If the player has no intention of returning ("unofficially retired" as you put it), why is this considered a competitive "asset"? IOW, Kucherov's 2021 playoff run makes it clear why it CAN be a competitive asset, but if a player is "unofficially retired", having them on the LTI doesn't help. Or am I missing something?
Seabrook does count towards the cap. Tampa is up against it, so they put him on LTIR and then are able to exceed the cap by his $6.8 million AAV. Since he's retired, they can use that cap space for the entire season because he's not coming back. With Seabrook, Tampa's cap ceiling becomes $89.3 million instead of $82.5 million. Vegas just acquired Shea Weber's contract for the exact same purpose.

The Bruins for many years used LTIR with Marc Savard's contract.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,646
Thanks for the response. The bolded makes a ton of sense and is what I expect as well.

One thing I don't quite understand is the paragraph before the bolded. Take Tampa last season for example. They have the Seabrook LTIR on the books for $6.8M, so they have to pay that to him, but it doesn't have to count it towards the cap. If the player has no intention of returning ("unofficially retired" as you put it), why is this considered a competitive "asset"? IOW, Kucherov's 2021 playoff run makes it clear why it CAN be a competitive asset, but if a player is "unofficially retired", having them on the LTI doesn't help. Or am I missing something?
It's because they put Seabrook on their balance sheet, then stash him on LTIR. They can recover his contract's worth of cap space. So having a player like Seabrook allows them to go over the cap by $6.8m
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Noted hockey insider, Lou Merloni!

It's probably the right move in terms of building the best team for 2022, but I'd also like to see them take fliers on some youngish options like Dylan Strome and Colin White. I just don't see how that's possible if Bergeron and Krejci are back.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
11,097
Between here and everywhere.
Krejci potentially coming back, Bergeron coming back, DeBrusk rescinding his trade request.

Maybe Bruce wasn’t as liked as it seemed?

Either way. If Krejci is back, it really looks like next season or two may be the Bruins going all in for one last Cup with this core. Honestly? I’d be ok with completely selling out the next 7-10 years if it means this group, particularly Bergeron, gets to raise the Cup one more time.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
21,830
Either way. If Krejci is back, it really looks like next season or two may be the Bruins going all in for one last Cup with this core. Honestly? I’d be ok with completely selling out the next 7-10 years if it means this group, particularly Bergeron, gets to raise the Cup one more time.
This is where I'm at too. And I know that this is not going to be great for the Bruins going forward after next year, but I don't care, I like this group of players and I'd love for them to make another run--the future be damned*.

* This, among a billion other reasons, is why I'd make a shitty GM in any sport; I listen to my heart more than I do my brain.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
I have no idea how they are going to make this all work cap wise.

Marchand - XXX - DeBrusk
Hall - Haula - Pastrnak
Frederic - Coyle - Smith
Foligno - Nosek - Wagner

Lindholm - McAvoy
Grzelyck - Carlo
Forbort - Clifton
Reilly - Zboril

Ullmark
Swayman

That roster of 22 is $2.3 million under the cap. That doesn't include the 2 RFA's that need to be signed, Studnicka and Ahcan. Those two probably take up the entire $2.3 million and can't be sent to Providence without waivers. In Ahcan's case, they're probably going to need him on the roster to start the year due to injuries. That's before we even get to Bergeron, Krejci and any additional moves. They can sign Bergeron and Krejci to 35+ deals and push the bonus money to next season but that's not ideal.

Sweeney has signaled a quiet offseason is coming but I think they're going to have to get creative and try and move out some combination of Smith, Haula, Foligno, Nosek, Wagner, Reilly, Forbort. Those 7 players take up over 20% of the cap space. Maybe add Ullmark in there, but I think that's a real long shot and they've also already missed the goalie market. I think it's possible they dip into available LTI, but not more than a couple million.

Basically, to run it back with just Bergy and Krejci, Sweeney needs to undue a large portion of last offseason.
 

4 6 3 DP

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2001
2,165
Im thrilled they are making one more run with this core. Three questions:

1. Is the consensus here that Swayman is enough in net to win playoff series? Ullmark was lights out for 6 weeks as the season ended and then went back to being a pumpkin as soon as playoffs started, so I assume (perhaps poorly) he's an excellent #2 who shouldn't start playoff games.

2. Taylor Hall looks like a different guy under playoff intensity than regular season - PPG drops 30%, while I know +/- is limited he's been minus in every playoff series he's ever played, and while +26 in 97 regular season games with the Bruins, he's -8 in 18 playoff games. I know that's as much an indictment of his line as it is him specifically, but how do you unlock him in the playoffs?

2a. Is there a way within the cap to have a second line that can credibly play 15-18 minutes a night in the playoffs and be a scoring threat? I guess I'm asking how do we get a 2nd line center onto this team. I suppose it's hope one comes up at the deadline and throw another first rounder at them. Just the last couple years it feels like when 63 and 37 aren't on the ice in the playoffs, the Bruins aren't scoring.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
26,769
Cambridge, MA
Ahcan and Filipe are also arb-eligible RFAs. I can see them letting one / both of those stay at a standstill to leverage the second buyout window on Foligno.

Glad they dumped $7.6m on him - and not for nothing, but for a coach who reportedly was a hard-ass who favored the old guys, Butch sure seemed to not jell with Beleskey, Backes, or Foligno all that much.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
An interesting name is potentially hitting the UFA market, Henrik Borgstrom.

View: https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/1546525232462184458?s=20&t=2ejDNwe2T5EXe1sbUp8xeg


He's 24, plays center, and was former first round bick by FLA in 2016. He has not gained any NHL traction yet. I mention him because he played for Montgomery at Denver and put up 95 points in 77 games. I don't think he's an answer by any means but could be an interesting reclamation project, especially if there's a real connection with Montgomery.

I'm not exactly sure why Chicago is buying him out. He's hasn't been good but he was only on the books for $1 million and seems like the exact type of player they'd like to fill out the roster with and see if he has anything. He also could be stashed in the AHL with no cap consequence, so it doesn't really add up to a buyout.

Also, might as well mention Heinen who is reportedly not being QO'd by Pittsburgh. He had a real nice year with the Penguins and like Borgstrom, played for Montgomery at Denver. He made $1.1 million last year. With Butch gone and Monty in, maybe a reunion works?
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
46,101
To make the Run It Back Bruins truly competitive they are going to need to ship out a lot of draft picks, yes? They seemingly need to dump cap to make it work while still retaining enough to allow them to make more-or-less salary-balanced trades but to really beef up this roster it's going to take quite a bit of draft capital pain.

I mean, I think we all agree they should have already done this last season but now it seems to be a bit more complicated under the cap.

There's no point to it if we don't get more guys who can provide offense in the playoffs.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,646
The injuries really hurt them. Moving 2 of Reilly, Forbort, Carlo or Gryz would have been pretty easy if half the D core wasn't recovering from surgery. I'm with @cshea that it's really hard to see how any of the things being speculated on are possible under the cap. I'm a little worried Sweeney will heavily incentivize Bergeron and Krejci's contracts if they come back and then end up with $8m in dead cap next year.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
26,769
Cambridge, MA
They are going to be heavily on the downside next year if Bergeron's done regardless, this is the last shot, and everyone else under contract that's tradeable / not a cornerstone piece will move to give way to ELCs / NCAA UDFAs - a significant cap overage for '23-'24 doesn't matter much IMO
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Some roster type notes from the Monty press conference

Sweeney says they've had numerous discussions with Krejci, a decision could come soon, and they hope it's them. On the Bergy front, they all hedged that it's not offical, but everyone talked about him as if he's coming back. Monty said his first call after being hired was to Bergy. He kinda skipped over the how they'll figure out the cap thing but said it's on him to make the pieces fit.

As far as FA goes on Wednesday, Sweeney said they'll look to make some changes but notes they essentially have a whole roster signed. Would have to make a significant trade to be a player on Wednesday.

Finally, Charlie has no appetite for a rebuild post-Bergeron. He says he didn't think it'd sell in this market with these fans.

View: https://twitter.com/_TyAnderson/status/1546569976018083848?s=20&t=2ejDNwe2T5EXe1sbUp8xeg
 

Reardons Beard

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2005
3,506
Cambridge
Wonder if 88's tentative extension is less this year on account of cap to accommodate competitive roster. But larger guarantee signing bonus and bigger salary in subsequent years.
 

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
7,419
The Island
Yeah, that’s not how it works in the NHL. For starters, whatever he does or doesn’t sign, his 2022-23 cap hit will be based off his current contract (6 yrs, $40m signed back in 2017). As far as how his cap hit will be determined, it’s total value of contract divided by term. Unlike the NFL, there’s no ability to tinker or renegotiate a contract.

Charlie’s statement bugs me. A lot. I mean, in fairness, he’s right that they’ve been a cap team since the cap started. But it’s a cap league, too. What does he expect Sweeney to do when Bergeron, Krejci, and Marchand are done, especially with a bottom-quarter prospect pool that isn’t likely to be seriously reinforced anytime soon?
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
14,927
Tuukka's refugee camp
What do you expect him to say? Given the B’s are still in compete now mode he shouldn’t be talking about tearing it down until push comes to shove.
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
16,703
As a season ticket holder I wouldn't mind if the Bruins did what the Rangers did and write a letter to fans telling them they are in full rebuild mode. I would be ok with that.
 

Murby

lurker
Mar 16, 2006
843
Boston Metro
Charlie’s statement bugs me. A lot. I mean, in fairness, he’s right that they’ve been a cap team since the cap started. But it’s a cap league, too. What does he expect Sweeney to do when Bergeron, Krejci, and Marchand are done, especially with a bottom-quarter prospect pool that isn’t likely to be seriously reinforced anytime soon?
This right here. Spending to the cap for spending to the caps sake isn’t good management. Sometimes it’s prudent to do a rebuild.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
14,927
Tuukka's refugee camp
As a season ticket holder I wouldn't mind if the Bruins did what the Rangers did and write a letter to fans telling them they are in full rebuild mode. I would be ok with that.
That would be dumb assuming you’re signing Bergeron and Krejci in the coming days / weeks.

He can’t just say, right before free agency mind you, “Hey we’ve got a good team this year but we’re in a bit of a bind cap and prospect wise so this is probably going to be our last competitive year before we blow things up.” It would be idiotic, the players would hate him, and put him in a shit negotiating position with other teams. It may be the truth but you can’t say that publicly at this point. Shit happens and things change.
 

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
7,419
The Island
What do you expect him to say? Given the B’s are still in compete now mode he shouldn’t be talking about tearing it down until push comes to shove.
Besides nothing, if he has to say anything, make it vague, something along the lines of, “right now, we’re looking forward to 2022-23, but for the future, I have full trust in Cam and Don’s vision, and what they do to achieve it.” I get that no one wants him to say, “Well, we have this season, then barring a miracle, we’re fucked,” but he didn’t have to say that either.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,741
Gallows Hill
Wonder if 88's tentative extension is less this year on account of cap to accommodate competitive roster. But larger guarantee signing bonus and bigger salary in subsequent years.
Pastrnak’s new contract would start in 23-24. He is under contract for $6.66 this year, and that does not change with an extension. There are no NFL style renegotiated contracts I’m the NHL.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
Today is the final day of the first buyout window. Early in the offseason Sweeney had said no buyouts, but we'll see if something gives with Foligno. A buyout would save them ~$1.9 million in cap space this season and add ~$900K to next years cap. With Krejci and Bergeron reportedly back, this would seem like an easy way to free up some cap space. We'll see.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
31,698
306, row 14
The cshea prediction for the day:

Bergeron, Krejci, a new Lazar, a new Josh Brown, a vet goalie for Providence.