Player Discussion Ryan Spooner VII

[amazingcrwns]

Is there any word on what length the bruins will be asking for in arbitration (one or two years)?

I have no idea, but that's a good question. Anybody know?

 

[DominicT]

Is there any word on what length the bruins will be asking for in arbitration (one or two years)?

I'm not sure when it will be made public, but the length will be in their written submission to the arbitrator which likely won't be submitted until early next week.

 

[amazingcrwns]

I agree on the premise that a Spooner deal is more likely post-arbitration, and like yourself don't see a long-term future for him in Boston and that moving forward JFK and Frederic will be better solutions (I don't want Spooner at center ice now).

But if they want to bring Stafford back they have the cap space to do so and retain Spooner.

Fact is, whether he gets 2.5 million or 3.5 million in arbitration, it's not a long-term commitment (likely 1 year, no more than 2), he's value isn't going to signifcantly decrease between now and next offseason, and he makes next year's team better, if for nothing more than his PP contributions alone.

If an arbitrator could award a 3-4-5 year deal, different story, but he can't. It's a short-term commitment whether it's 1 year or 2.

If things don't go Bostons way in arbitration and with Pasta (say 3.25 and 6.75), then you're really getting close to the ceiling. Capfriendly gives Boston $12.9 mil in room for 19 contracts. If you wanted Stafford too there's probably room, but I'd rather leave some space for potential needs mid-season.

 

[DominicT]

I agree on the premise that a Spooner deal is more likely post-arbitration, and like yourself don't see a long-term future for him in Boston and that moving forward JFK and Frederic will be better solutions (I don't want Spooner at center ice now).

But if they want to bring Stafford back they have the cap space to do so and retain Spooner.

Fact is, whether he gets 2.5 million or 3.5 million in arbitration, it's not a long-term commitment (likely 1 year, no more than 2), he's value isn't going to signifcantly decrease between now and next offseason, and he makes next year's team better, if for nothing more than his PP contributions alone.

If an arbitrator could award a 3-4-5 year deal, different story, but he can't. It's a short-term commitment whether it's 1 year or 2.

Or she.

My understanding is that there are 7 arbitrators this year and at least three are women. A fourth one could be as well but has one of those names that could be a man or a woman.

 

[twominute]

Funny, the Bruins used to be one of those teams.

Spooner definitely isn't the only reason the PP has been successful, but he was part of it.

Curious to see what direction this team goes... because I have no idea what they are doing besides just waiting for their prospects to develop.

Maybe waiting to see if McAvoy becomes their new PP qb, in which case Spooner really becomes expendable

 

[nfld77]

Or she.

My understanding is that there are 7 arbitrators this year and at least three are women. A fourth one could be as well but has one of those names that could be a man or a woman.

To be honest, I'm not rreally up on the rules of arbitration BUT I thought they only had the power to produce a one year deal. Why would they have the power to present a 2 year deal. Things very often change after one year, especially under an arbitrator's deal and how the player produces in year one has everything to do with what he should be paid in year 2. What if Spooner really has a down year and only has 25 points, how can anyone besides the Bruins determine what he gets paid after a year like that. And to defend the player, what if he has a monster year like Pastrnak had this past year??

The ruling that will come down in less than a week will be based on what Spooner did in 2016-17, it's based on something. What is his play in 2018-19 based on??

 

[nfld77]

Maybe waiting to see if McAvoy becomes their new PP qb, in which case Spooner really becomes expendable

Torey Krug even more..

 

[DominicT]

To be honest, I'm not rreally up on the rules of arbitration BUT I thought they only had the power to produce a one year deal. Why would they have the power to present a 2 year deal. Things very often change after one year, especially under an arbitrator's deal and how the player produces in year one has everything to do with what he should be paid in year 2. What if Spooner really has a down year and only has 25 points, how can anyone besides the Bruins determine what he gets paid after a year like that. And to defend the player, what if he has a monster year like Pastrnak had this past year??

The ruling that will come down in less than a week will be based on what Spooner did in 2016-17, it's based on something. What is his play in 2018-19 based on??

The side being taken to arbitration has the option of picking 1 or 2 years . Since Spooner took the Bruins to arbitration it's the Bruins choice. If they took Spooner to arbitration it would be his choice

 

[Mainehockey33]

Maybe waiting to see if McAvoy becomes their new PP qb, in which case Spooner really becomes expendable

Neither play the halfwall and our power play would get pretty predictable. Get puck to point, look for Pastrnak, rinse repeat.

 

[Brewins]

Neither play the halfwall and our power play would get pretty predictable. Get puck to point, look for Pastrnak, rinse repeat.

Exactly, really hard to have a d-guy play the point, much more suited for spooner/pasta/DK/czarnik. A guy who can distribute from up top or down by the net if need be.

 

[ODAAT]

Torey Krug even more..

easy there, to have two D-men that Butch can roll out, either on same unit or split them onto both units is an absolute luxury most teams don`t have

 

[neelynugs]

The side being taken to arbitration has the option of picking 1 or 2 years . Since Spooner took the Bruins to arbitration it's the Bruins choice. If they took Spooner to arbitration it would be his choice

i'd be surprised if the bruins chose 2 years. then again, i'm surprised spooner is still a bruin.

 

[Over the volcano]

i'd be surprised if the bruins chose 2 years. then again, i'm surprised spooner is still a bruin.

Which would be more attractive for a team in a trade - a one year "show me" award or having him under contract for two years? I'd imagine one year would interest more teams, particularly if no one's shown enough interest to swing a deal yet.

 

[s3antana5757]

Which would be more attractive for a team in a trade - a one year "show me" award or having him under contract for two years? I'd imagine one year would interest more teams, particularly if no one's shown enough interest to swing a deal yet.

This is just my personal preference, but for someone his age, two years would be better for the team. You will know exactly what his salary will be. And it's not he's an unmovable asset. If you need to move the cap, you may not get a great return, but you can move him.

 

[DominicT]

Arbitration can be so much fun



This next one isn't too bad

 

[Mainehockey33]

Arbitration can be so much fun



This next one isn't too bad

Wow, what is Pittsburgh thinking? The guy played top pairing in the playoffs and you won a cup. Can the arbiter pick a number in between or is it one or the other? If so it was pretty stupid on their part going that low.

 

[Pia8988]

Inbetween

 

[DominicT]

Wow, what is Pittsburgh thinking? The guy played top pairing in the playoffs and you won a cup. Can the arbiter pick a number in between or is it one or the other? If so it was pretty stupid on their part going that low.

An arbitrator can choose any amount between the low and high numbers presented, but "usually" go with one or the other.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Ok so I guess there's nothing for them to lose by lowballing him, except for him wanting to play there. Dumolin is worth more then Spooner so it'll be interesting to see this play out.

 

[Johnny4778]

An arbitrator can choose any amount between the low and high numbers presented, but "usually" go with one or the other.

I thought that was changed in the "new" CBA that they have to go with one or the other?. Maybe it was just discussed and not implemented but I remember it being a topic of discussion. That way a player or teams won't come in with a ridiculous high or low number.

 

[DominicT]

I thought that was changed in the "new" CBA that they have to go with one or the other?. Maybe it was just discussed and not implemented but I remember it being a topic of discussion. That way a player or teams won't come in with a ridiculous high or low number.

2 years ago: Marcus Johansson sought $4.75 million in arbitration while the Caps countered with $3 million. The arbitrator settled on $3.75 million.

 

[DKH]

Arbitration can be so much fun



This next one isn't too bad

Looks like the Penguins want to pay him $3 M

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

Maybe waiting to see if McAvoy becomes their new PP qb, in which case Spooner really becomes expendable

Maybe he will. Hopefully he will.

Still don't need to discredit where credit is due, though. He's not magnificent. Hell, I'm not even gonna be sad to see him go, when he does eventually go. Hopefully someone can step into his role better than he does, but until then (as with many of the positions we have). No ones there yet.

 

[rocketdan9]

Bruins cant even find a trade partner for Spooner

he needs to go. Just way soft to be a Bruin

Bruins should just forget all of this , and have him become a UFA

 

[Gee Wally]

Ryan Spooner’s future with the Bruins may be in an arbitrator’s hands

For two straight seasons, Spooner has gone south at inopportune times. It’s possible that, in his third full NHL season, Spooner finds greater smoothness in his production curve. Whether the Bruins continue his employment at an elevated price remains to be seen. As of now, it may be in an arbitrator’s hands.

“You’d like to be able to find common ground that’s best for the player and team,†Sweeney said. “When you can’t and you have a difference of opinion on his value, thankfully you have a process you can go through where someone decides for you.â€

Some players do not prefer the hearing setting. Teams argue, sometimes without restraint, against their employees’ merits at their requested prices. Spooner has heard just about all of his bosses’ critiques on the bench, in off-ice chats, and during exit interviews. With a generous raise within reach, Spooner may be able to suffer further unfriendly analysis.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/b...rator-hands/FwzMDX5QRxWadDPY9E1TzN/story.html