The Search for a number 1 center

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
266
The list of free agent goalies this year is, to say the least, underwhelming and I can't imagine NJ sees any of them as their potential #1.
If they are looking to trade for a #1, the available list can't be much longer than Ullmark, Markstrom and Saros.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
266
AFP Analytics (https://afpanalytics.com/) published their UFA and RFA contract projections for the upcoming year.
If you download the Google doc you can sort and filter.

Current Bruins:

Swayman - 5 x $6.4M
DeBrusk - 5 x $5.8M
Grzelcyk - 3 x $3.2M
Heinen - 3 x $2.9M
Boquist - 2 x $1.5M
Shattenkirk - 1 x $1.5
Forbert - 1 x $1.3M
JVR - 1 x $1.2M
Maroon - 1 x $1.2M

Some players of interest (> $5M AAV):
Reinhart - 8 x $11.3
Necas - (7 x $7.5) or (3 x $6.2)
Lindholm - 5 x $6.8
Marchessault - 3 x $6.3M
Stamkos - 3 x $6.1M
Toffoli - 4 x $6M
Monahan - 4 x $5.3M
Bertuzzi - 4 x $5.3M
Teräväinen - 4 x $5.2M
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
9,410
South of North
What would it realistically take to get that pick? Is Ullmark enough? If not, what else can the Bs throw in (I'm assuming there's cap/salary issues to take into account)? Is there a centerman eligible for the draft and possibly available at 10 that makes this worth it? Even if the answer is no, getting the #10 pick strikes me as a decent use of Ullmark thru the lens of asset optimization.

But I don't follow the league that closely, so I don't state that position with much confidence.
 

bsl394

New Member
May 17, 2022
522
AFP Analytics (https://afpanalytics.com/) published their UFA and RFA contract projections for the upcoming year.
If you download the Google doc you can sort and filter.

Current Bruins:
Swayman - 5 x $6.4M
DeBrusk - 5 x $5.8M
Grzelcyk - 3 x $3.2M
Heinen - 3 x $2.9M
Boquist - 2 x $1.5M
Shattenkirk - 1 x $1.5
Forbert - 1 x $1.3M
JVR - 1 x $1.2M
Maroon - 1 x $1.2M

Some players of interest (> $5M AAV):
Reinhart - 8 x $11.3
Necas - (7 x $7.5) or (3 x $6.2)
Lindholm - 5 x $6.8
Marchessault - 3 x $6.3M
Stamkos - 3 x $6.1M
Toffoli - 4 x $6M
Monahan - 4 x $5.3M
Bertuzzi - 4 x $5.3M
Teräväinen - 4 x $5.2M
What are everyone’s thoughts on Stamkos? I like him at 3 x 6 and I think he would fit in well with the Boston culture.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
15,204
Gallows Hill
What are everyone’s thoughts on Stamkos? I like him at 3 x 6 and I think he would fit in well with the Boston culture.
I would like him to come here, I just don’t see it happening. I could see him taking less to stay with Tampa and not uproot his family. He’s like their Bergeron. He’s either playing there or retiring IMO.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,399
Falmouth
I know that I like Lindholm but think the price tag is absurd...talk of him getting 7x8m which is outrageous.

Tij Iginla is projected to go around #10...
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,849
306, row 14
What would it realistically take to get that pick? Is Ullmark enough? If not, what else can the Bs throw in (I'm assuming there's cap/salary issues to take into account)? Is there a centerman eligible for the draft and possibly available at 10 that makes this worth it? Even if the answer is no, getting the #10 pick strikes me as a decent use of Ullmark thru the lens of asset optimization.

But I don't follow the league that closely, so I don't state that position with much confidence.
I don't think you're going to get to #10 with Ullmark.

The Cap Friendly trade filter doesn't let me filter by position so I'm kinda going off the top of my head but you typically don't see goalies moved for first round draft picks. The last goalie traded for a top 10 pick was Corey Schneider, 11 years ago. Schenider, IIRC, was 27 and under contract for a few years whereas Ullmark is 30 and set to be a UFA after next year.

The best comp for Ullmark, IMO, is Darcy Kuemper who was traded from Arizona to Colorado as he was entering the final year of his contract in 2021. That deal was Kuemper at 22.2% retained for a Conditional 2022 first (top 10 protected), Connor TImmins (former high draft pick who had been an AAAA type at that point) and another conditional 3rd (if the Avs won the cup and Kuemper played 50% of the playoff games, the pick went to Arizona).

Among the rumored teams I think the plausible picks that could be in play for Ullmark are LA at 21, Ottawa at 25 (the Bruins pick), Carolina at 27 are probably more in range.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Not having any picks in the first 3 rounds kind of makes trades this time of year a bit more difficult. They could add next year's first rounder to Ullmark and maybe that would be enough to get the #10 pick?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,849
306, row 14
That's just kind of kicking the can down the line. I wouldn't go chasing picks just to get a few back. They have an asset in Ullmark they can move for a pick or multiple picks. but I don't think adding pieces or future picks or whatever to pump the pick from mid-20's to 10 is really worth it. I admittedly don't know a ton about this years draft class beyond Macklin Celebrini but in generally it's kind of a crapshoot and the difference between 10 and 25 is probably not work whatever extra they'd have to give up to get there.

And to be honest if they get a first it wouldn't surprise me to see them trade down anyway to accumlate more volume.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,462
Mainly because this teams biggest strength is the tandem, and in general Goalies don't get teams much back in trade. BUT you might be able to leverage more at the deadline for a team with an injury or looking for consistent goaltending, and Ully should be more willing to move if his playing time is reduced because Swayman was playing well with a starters workload.
That was definitely the team's biggest strength in 23-24. That situation was, in part, due to the cap crunch neutering their ability to strengthen other parts of the team. Given that, the FO leaned into the goalie tandem strength to great effect. But with more money available this year, Ullmark's highest and best use seems to be as a trade asset to strengthen areas that need it. I dont think they can keep the tandem *and* strengthen the rest of the team as much as is needed.
 

mikeford

woolwich!
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2006
30,255
St John's, NL
Fascinating to see you all feel like you'd need to give Ullmark+ to get that 10th pick.

Every Devils fan on earth, myself included, would happily straight swap the pick for Ullmark at this juncture.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
266
I figure any trade would come with some kind of extension attached but you're right that it would drive down the value if there's no term.
The problem is that the draft is on June 28 and extensions can’t be done until July 1 (unless they have a “gentlemen’s agreement” in place)
 

mikeford

woolwich!
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2006
30,255
St John's, NL
The problem is that the draft is on June 28 and extensions can’t be done until July 1 (unless they have a “gentlemen’s agreement” in place)
Given that Ullmark would have to waive a NTC to come to NJ (and he reportedly did not want to do that at the deadline), I feel like you could get the handshake on the extension and wait 3 days to put it on paper.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,849
306, row 14
Given that Ullmark would have to waive a NTC to come to NJ (and he reportedly did not want to do that at the deadline), I feel like you could get the handshake on the extension and wait 3 days to put it on paper.
Ullmark has a 16-team no trade. We don’t know if NJ is on it. The reporting was that he nixed a deal to LA at the deadline.

New Jersey reportedly has a deal done for Jacob Markstron who also has a no-trade. The traded was agreed to, Markstrom agreed to waive, but something fell apart. The rumor is Calgary’s ownership killed it over salary retention.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
266
If Ullmark isn’t traded by July 1st, does he just drop one team from his no-trade list, or does he get to submit an entire new list of 15 teams?
 

mikeford

woolwich!
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2006
30,255
St John's, NL
Ullmark has a 16-team no trade. We don’t know if NJ is on it. The reporting was that he nixed a deal to LA at the deadline.
I think we do know NJ is on it, actually

Garrioch writes, “The [Ottawa] Senators, Los Angeles Kings, and New Jersey Devils were among several teams that made a push for the 30-year-old Ullmark before the deadline. The indications are Ullmark refused to change his 15-team no-trade list, which meant a possible deal to the Devils was scuttled.”
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,849
306, row 14
I think we do know NJ is on it, actually
There's conflicting reports. Seravalli says it was LA.

https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/trade-targets-decision-time-looms-for-maple-leafs-and-mitch-marner

The Bruins very nearly traded Ullmark to Los Angeles during deadline week, agreeing to a deal with the Kings that the reigning Vezina winner nixed with his ‘no-trade’ clause. GM Don Sweeney wasn’t thrilled at the time, but said last week: “You guys do a hell of a job figuring those things out, piecing them together.”
Edit: Certainly possible both LA and NJ are on it.