Player Discussion Rick Nash

[Kaoz]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/beleskey-to-boston-5-years-19m.1922339/
btw here's the thread from when Beleskey was signed. Kinda fun to go back and read years later. The vast majority of people liked the deal. @LSCII to his credit on the first page called it a huge risk and was beating the drum that he was a 1 hit wonder from the beginning. I thought Beleskey was pretty good in year 1 of the deal, but the term obviously was a mistake. that's the kind of player you go 2 years max IMO. just hadn't done enough to earn 5 years at that point.

Anyway @Brent Hughes tell us who you used to post as and I'll go see what you had to say about the signing back then...

I was being kind calling him Clarkson 2.0 lite.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

The price teams pay for UFAs on July 1 is always high. Always has been and always will be. Sign someone on July 1 or shortly after, you're paying a premium

The only time you get a good deal is on the players that price themselves out and sit for a month on the market. Those players usually have plenty of question marks, then end up signing a 1 year 1-2 million dollar deal. Sometimes those work out (Vanek, Dom Moore more than once, Oduya), most of the time they are put on waivers by mid season.

If you are getting someone on 7/1, you're paying a premium.

 

[Hali33]

I liked Nash more than most prior to the concussion. I thought his defensive play was outstanding and valuable even when he wasn’t producing. I think he struggled to get his game back after returning but there’s also the reputation he has for coming up small.

I wouldn’t look to resign him. I think an aging player with another concussion is the wrong move for a team who needs to get more durable and match the speed of their potential playoff opponents.

 

[Bruinsfolife]

I agree with most people here that are saying not to re-sign him. He is still probably going to ask for 4 or 5 million and just might get it, hopefully not from us. I was rooting for Nash and he did look good prior to the concussion and at some points during the playoffs but he is not as good as he once was. He was brought here to score goals and make that 2nd line better but he didn`t do such a great job.

It would be a mistake to re-sign him unless it's for MAX 2 million which he probably won't take. Even for 2, he will get injured or something will go wrong. Explore other options.

 

[bp13]

I appreciate you would have had respect for my hockey acumen enough for me to lose some.

I would have signed both Beleskey and Backes - I was proven wrong with Beleskey. I had even keyed on him live along with Palmieri during a 5-0 ? Ducks win here and he was relentless- I was impressed by his playoff run that got him 30 goals regular season and playoffs combined in under 82 games and I was on board.

Backes I’ve always loved the player although as Everett Mike cautioned me that day it’s to long a deal.

Again not trending in my favor but the last 2 years are at $4 M and he can be moved. He went through a lot including a concussion that can impact play reactions decisions etc

My hope is he adds what Callahan did to his overpay by Yzerman

......

Dan I am straight up BEGGING you to re-evaluate your defense of Sweeney on the Backes deal. And it wasn't just Everett Mike who "cautioned" you that it was too long of a deal...I did and tons of others did as well. It was an instantaneously bad contract. Only a fan's love of the player or the GM responsible for signing him could blind him to that reality, honestly. I'm just trying to look out for you as a fellow board compatriot...this is like me telling you your fly is down. I'm helping you out here. It was, and remains, a bad contract.

And like we discussed back then, IF it's a bad contract, the fact the cap hit is a little lower and he's technically "tradeable" doesn't really apply. It's the old Dennis Miller joke about KMart 2-for-1 sales..."if they really want to screw you they'll give you three!". If Backes is a guy we are desperate to unload, it's no concession that he's "tradeable". The terrible scenario of having to add value to get rid of a guy (Beleskey) is not a comforting fallback plan.

Anyway...I've grown to kinda like Backes the player/leader and I'm happy we have him on the team, in a vacuum. In the cap world with that contract? He's a disaster.

 

[wintersej]

I was super wrong on Nash and Beleksey.

Backes has fallen off the map faster than expected. It was expected honestly (by everyone I hope), but not right away! He was supposed to be a stabilizing force in the middle six to help bring along all these kids. That was a good plan in theory and he had just come off a very good playoff run.

But, at 5 on 5 only the 4th line guys have worse rate stats. Vatrano who was cold as all hell before he got dealt was scoring at a better 5 on 5 rate. At this point him playing as the 9th best forward is fine... but for 6 million bucks? Ouch.

That being said, after next year his real salary drops to 4 million. For a team that doesn't care about the cap and only about real money, that gets closer to being fair value for what he brings. I don't think he finishes his contract in a Boston uniform.

 

[JRull86]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/beleskey-to-boston-5-years-19m.1922339/
btw here's the thread from when Beleskey was signed. Kinda fun to go back and read years later. The vast majority of people liked the deal. @LSCII to his credit on the first page called it a huge risk and was beating the drum that he was a 1 hit wonder from the beginning. I thought Beleskey was pretty good in year 1 of the deal, but the term obviously was a mistake. that's the kind of player you go 2 years max IMO. just hadn't done enough to earn 5 years at that point.

Anyway @Brent Hughes tell us who you used to post as and I'll go see what you had to say about the signing back then...

Love reading old threads.

Have to pat myself on the back for this one..one of the few times I get something right.

"Even if he underperforms here, its still a very movable contract after year two if it ever came to that.
JRull86, Jul 1, 2015"

 

[JRull86]

I was super wrong on Nash and Beleksey.

Backes has fallen off the map faster than expected. It was expected honestly (by everyone I hope), but not right away! He was supposed to be a stabilizing force in the middle six to help bring along all these kids. That was a good plan in theory and he had just come off a very good playoff run.

But, at 5 on 5 only the 4th line guys have worse rate stats. Vatrano who was cold as all hell before he got dealt was scoring at a better 5 on 5 rate. At this point him playing as the 9th best forward is fine... but for 6 million bucks? Ouch.

That being said, after next year his real salary drops to 4 million. For a team that doesn't care about the cap and only about real money, that gets closer to being fair value for what he brings. I don't think he finishes his contract in a Boston uniform.

I'd bank on him retiring before being dealt honestly.

I get the easy thing to do is write the player off, and get on Sweeney for having a deal blow up in his face earlier than we all thought it would, but I'm willing to give Backes a pass on this season, because he never was able to really get it going with all the injuries. I think a full offseason of training and recovering will do him wonders.

 

[DKH]

Dan I am straight up BEGGING you to re-evaluate your defense of Sweeney on the Backes deal. And it wasn't just Everett Mike who "cautioned" you that it was too long of a deal...I did and tons of others did as well. It was an instantaneously bad contract. Only a fan's love of the player or the GM responsible for signing him could blind him to that reality, honestly. I'm just trying to look out for you as a fellow board compatriot...this is like me telling you your fly is down. I'm helping you out here. It was, and remains, a bad contract.

And like we discussed back then, IF it's a bad contract, the fact the cap hit is a little lower and he's technically "tradeable" doesn't really apply. It's the old Dennis Miller joke about KMart 2-for-1 sales..."if they really want to screw you they'll give you three!". If Backes is a guy we are desperate to unload, it's no concession that he's "tradeable". The terrible scenario of having to add value to get rid of a guy (Beleskey) is not a comforting fallback plan.

Anyway...I've grown to kinda like Backes the player/leader and I'm happy we have him on the team, in a vacuum. In the cap world with that contract? He's a disaster.

hindsight on my part says it hasn't worked out well, but he has value and I'm willing to see if a healthy Backes with a different performance plan works.

I would have done the deal so I don't want to pretend otherwise- but the 5th year I wasn't enamored with.

If this was the days for Scorin' Lee Goren and Troy Mallette this wouldn't be an issue (and not many would care) but it is a concern Backes probably blocks someone like Senyshyn as early as next season even if mid season.

I will give you and EM for calling this at the time but I really, really, really wanted him and as my late mother would attest eventually I got it even if it was 8 months later under the tree (probably why I ended up a spoiled brat). At the time the Bruins were on year two of missing the playoffs and confidence was an alltime low- heck they made it by the skin of their teeth last year and maybe Backes helped them get the extra point or two that they needed to save jobs. If it was in todays prospect rich roster it would not even be considered but then was a different climate.

I cant argue with you but Backes has a soft spot with me and sometimes we see with our heart not our head and I do think he is not a complete zombie like washout like Beleskey

 

[DKH]

Love reading old threads.

Have to pat myself on the back for this one..one of the few times I get something right.

"Even if he underperforms here, its still a very movable contract after year two if it ever came to that.
JRull86, Jul 1, 2015"

I wish I could dig up the 2003 Draft thread where I melt down faster then the Witch from the Wizard of Oz when OConnell passes on Zach Parise - that was the good

The bad was questioning the second round pick of Patrice Bergeron-Cleary who the hell is this!!!!. Kirk sent me a PM a few days later telling me he thought the Bruins may have really stolen one. Give him a chance

Worked out ok

Just to add I was so mad they passed on Parise and drafted this Tier 2 kid Bergeron I had never heard of I went to a kids birthday party later that afternoon and had to work on having fun

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

the thing about the Backes deal that has always killed me is they traded a younger Lucic because they didn't want to pay him long-term because they were worried his body wouldn't hold up due to style but then signed Backes to an identical contract despite being older and having the same concerns.

I mean I guess they got a nice return on Lucic so there's that, but I'd have traded Loui and kept Lucic.

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

the thing about the Backes deal that has always killed me is they traded a younger Lucic because they didn't want to pay him long-term because they were worried his body wouldn't hold up due to style but then signed Backes to an identical contract despite being older and having the same concerns.

I mean I guess they got a nice return on Lucic so there's that, but I'd have traded Loui and kept Lucic.

Not sure if it's a definite, but wasn't there a good chance Lucic was leaving regardless? I thought he wanted to go West because of his family.

 

[DKH]

the thing about the Backes deal that has always killed me is they traded a younger Lucic because they didn't want to pay him long-term because they were worried his body wouldn't hold up due to style but then signed Backes to an identical contract despite being older and having the same concerns.

I mean I guess they got a nice return on Lucic so there's that, but I'd have traded Loui and kept Lucic.

the Lucic Return Tree is

Frederic
Zboril
Kuraly
Colin Miller

C Miller was the sacrificial lamb that allowed you to keep K Miller

I’m a Kevin Miller guy so that works for me

Lucic is probably top 10 single worst active contracts and closer to 1 then 10

In 5 years this deal likely looks like a Grand Slam for Donny ‘Swing’n a long fly....’ Sweeney

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

the Lucic Return Tree is

Frederic
Zboril
Kuraly
Colin Miller

C Miller was the sacrificial lamb that allowed you to keep K Miller

I’m a Kevin Miller guy so that works for me

Lucic is probably top 10 single worst active contracts and closer to 1 then 10

In 5 years this deal likely looks like a Grand Slam for Donny ‘Swing’n a long fly....’ Sweeney

you know what, this is totally fair...I always forget how much term Lucic has and think he & Backes end their deals at the same time. They end at the same age, but Lucic has 2 more years than Backes...that is brutal given the season he just had.

Lucic is a good guy tho and I think he's gonna work on his skating this summer and bounce back, though I'm not sure if he'll bounce back to the tune of being worth 6 million bucks.

 

[DKH]

I understand a few Bruins fans may have struggled with a class or two so when the Sweeney trades get complex that involve the ability to reason it’s easier to default to Zac Rinaldo

The return for Lucic a sad colossal bust and Dougie Hamilton who is rumored to be a potential trade piece is

Frederic
Kuraly
Senyshyn
JFK
Colin Miller
Lauzon
Zboril

It’s probably still years away from evaluating but is starting to take shape to astute hockey evaluators as ‘omg Sweeney’

 

[Otherworld]

I posted earlier in this thread that Evander Kane was the forward we should have gone after. Looks like San Jose is very happy with him as it looks like they want to sign him to a 7 year extension.

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

I posted earlier in this thread that Evander Kane was the forward we should have gone after. Looks like San Jose is very happy with him as it looks like they want to sign him to a 7 year extension.

That rumored extension is absurd

They’re going to regret that

 

[BruinDust]

I posted earlier in this thread that Evander Kane was the forward we should have gone after. Looks like San Jose is very happy with him as it looks like they want to sign him to a 7 year extension.

Well looks like the Sharks have a bigger need for a scoring LWer short and long term than the Bruins do.

Seriously the Bruins have Marchand, Debrusk, Donato, Heinen and Bjork. Now granted, it appears at least two of them (Heinen and Bjork) can play the off-wing.

But what need did a pure LWer like Evander Kane solve for the Bruins? And why would they sink a pile of cap space to add to what is their deepest position (left-shot wingers)?

 

[Otherworld]

That rumored extension is absurd

They’re going to regret that

It seems lengthy, but they seem to be happy with the player they got....

 

[Otherworld]

Well looks like the Sharks have a bigger need for a scoring LWer short and long term than the Bruins do.

Seriously the Bruins have Marchand, Debrusk, Donato, Heinen and Bjork. Now granted, it appears at least two of them (Heinen and Bjork) can play the off-wing.

But what need did a pure LWer like Evander Kane solve for the Bruins? And why would they sink a pile of cap space to add to what is their deepest position (left-shot wingers)?

IMO Kane is the type of player the Bruins need. No matter what wing he plays now.

 

[Rubber Biscuit]

It seems lengthy, but they seem to be happy with the player they got....

It’s lengthy and expensive. He’s not worth that much money or term.

I don’t think them being happy should be used to prove you were right. If the B’s re-sign Rick Nash, does that prove you wrong?

 

[Dr Hook]

It’s lengthy and expensive. He’s not worth that much money or term.

I don’t think them being happy should be used to prove you were right. If the B’s re-sign Rick Nash, does that prove you wrong?

If the 7x7 for Kane is legit, then it kind of makes the Backes deal look good

 

[Otherworld]

It’s lengthy and expensive. He’s not worth that much money or term.

I don’t think them being happy should be used to prove you were right. If the B’s re-sign Rick Nash, does that prove you wrong?

We both know the Bruins will not sign Nash, but they could have had the option to with Kane. Missed opportunity IMO.

 

[compan]

We both know the Bruins will not sign Nash, but they could have had the option to with Kane. Missed opportunity IMO.

With 7x7 the only missed opportunity is 7 years of complaining here about that being an awful contract.

 

[Dr Hook]

We both know the Bruins will not sign Nash, but they could have had the option to with Kane. Missed opportunity IMO.

Would you have given him the 7x7 had we brought him in at the deadline? Even if his attitude and work ethic etc. has changed, this is a guy with a pretty poor injury history being signed into his mid-30s at a pretty high cost.