Post-Game Talk: 10/6 - Preseason #6 - BRUINS 2 Columbus 1 F

[BruinDust]

And the asking price between the 2 may have been different, after all the amount Boychuk ended up getting was significantly more than what Seidenberg ended up getting

Not to mention Boychuk had the durability concerns at the time....not Seids

Boychuk got paid based on a very good 2014-15 season with NY.

Even if his asking price was higher (I don't think they even talked extension is my guess), still short-sighted to go with the older player if they are comparable.

Boychuk had durability concerns? He missed all of 16 games in the 3 previous seasons. Now your just making stuff up.

 

[Over the volcano]

And the asking price between the 2 may have been different, after all the amount Boychuk ended up getting was significantly more than what Seidenberg ended up getting

Not to mention Boychuk had the durability concerns at the time....not Seids

Think you have that flipped- Seidenberg blew out his knee the year before Boychuck was dealt.

 

[ODAAT]

I guess I know who the new whipping boy is going to be this year.

McQuaid has been shown much love here for years, the fact remains, last year he looked even slower than ever and the speed of this game appears to be, if even possible, getting quicker yearly and from what I saw last year (haven`t seen him this year), he struggles to keep up.

If it`s a board battle or in front of the net, the guy is golden, tough as they come

Sweeney has stated he wants a quicker tempo, that`s not in Quaider`s wheelhouse of comfort. It`s not necessarily in Z`s either but where he still is often successful is using that insane reach to help dig him out of jams, Quaider doesn`t have that.

If a kid has shown they are ready, they`ll play based on what DS has said, has little to do with Quaider being the new "whipping boy", but it`s a fair question to ask "can McQuaid even keep up in this NHL"?

 

[CDJ]

Think you have that flipped- Seidenberg blew out his knee the year before Boychuck was dealt.

Seidenberg signed his contract before he blew out his knee

And there you have the Monday morning QBing

 

[CDJ]

Boychuk got paid based on a very good 2014-15 season with NY.

Even if his asking price was higher (I don't think they even talked extension is my guess), still short-sighted to go with the older player if they are comparable.

Boychuk had durability concerns? He missed all of 16 games in the 3 previous seasons. Now your just making stuff up.

He has literally missed multiple games in every season he has played. Has he had a season where he's missed less than 5 games yet? He's only been around for like a decade.

Seidenberg literally missed less time over the 4 year arc before his deal was signed than Boychuk did in 2010

Not to mention Seidenberg was a much better skater (before the knee obviously, not the case now) and part of a monster playoff tandem.

 

[BruinDust]

He has literally missed multiple games in every season he has played.

So missing an average of 4-5 games a season constitutes a durability concern?

Seidenberg himself missed 2 regular season games and 4 playoff games in the season prior to his extension. Boychuk missed 4 games combined reg. season and playoffs that same year. So why would Boychuk's durability be a concern but not Seidenberg's?

 

[CDJ]

So missing an average of 4-5 games a season constitutes a durability concern?

Seidenberg himself missed 2 regular season games and 4 playoff games in the season prior to his extension. Boychuk missed 4 games combined reg. season and playoffs that same year. So why would Boychuk's durability be a concern but not Seidenberg's?

Wear and tear adds up. When you have a guy who kinda sucks at skating to begin with and he keeps suffering these nagging injuries, it can fall off a cliff in a hurry

And I literally already told you why. Seidenberg over that 4 year arc before his deal missed less time than Boychuk did in 1 of those years (and Boychuk missed time with injury in every subsequent year on top of that).

It's just Monday morning QBing. That's all. If Seidenberg didn't blow his knee out this isn't even a discussion. It sucks that it happened and it sucks that Boychuk was good with the Isles, but you can't really prepare for that knee injury. They had to make a choice which one to keep and they ended up going with the better skater, more durable, and overall better player (who has chemistry with the #1). I can't fault them for making that decision just because Boychuk is a little younger (especially when Seidenbergs game was more conducive to aging as compared with boychuk IMO)

 

[NeelyDan]

Chiarelli making that deal on the heels of the Hall trade would be career suicide, lol.

 

[DKH]

Wear and tear adds up. When you have a guy who kinda sucks at skating to begin with and he keeps suffering these nagging injuries, it can fall off a cliff in a hurry

And I literally already told you why. Seidenberg over that 4 year arc before his deal missed less time than Boychuk did in 1 of those years (and Boychuk missed time with injury in every subsequent year on top of that).

It's just Monday morning QBing. That's all. If Seidenberg didn't blow his knee out this isn't even a discussion.

the Seidenberg contract at the time was a very good deal for Boston; unfortunately he blew out his knee but without the benefit of a crystal ball that was a damn good move by Chiarelli. Bleep happens folks this was one

The Boychuk deal by the Islanders was horrible. He's got 36 million left and was showing inconsistency and wear signs last year.

I love Johnny Drama- he was perfect for the Bruins and those Cup runs but he should have been more the Seidenberg 4/16 not 7/42

Seidenberg was B-E-T-T-E-R than Johnny and got 4 years $16 Million.....Boychuk getting $42 Million I don't care if it was for 42 years is insane, insane, insane, insane....infinity

by the way- I hated the Boychuk trade getting 2 seconds and I certainly would have let him walk if he asked for a penny over $4M but the Bruins did use the two picks on Carlo and Lindgren.

Carlo is on the cusp and Lindgren may be 4 years away but there is a heck of a lot to like about his game

 

[BruinDust]

Wear and tear adds up. When you have a guy who kinda sucks at skating to begin with and he keeps suffering these nagging injuries, it can fall off a cliff in a hurry

And I literally already told you why. Seidenberg over that 4 year arc before his deal missed less time than Boychuk did in 1 of those years (and Boychuk missed time with injury in every subsequent year on top of that).

It's just Monday morning QBing. That's all. If Seidenberg didn't blow his knee out this isn't even a discussion.

So did you include the season Seidenberg missed the entire playoff year. Oh wait that's right, going outside your "4 year arc" would damage your already weak argument.

You talk about wear and tear? So wouldn't the older player, whose played almost double the amount of NHL games at that point, have more "wear and tear".

Boychuk, in his Bruins career, did not miss one single playoff game from 2010 to 2014. Not one. So forgive me if I think your durability argument to not sign Boychuk and extend Seidenberg instead is frankly BS.

If you want to use other arguments to validate the choice they made, that's fine. I can understand that. But durability? C'mon man you can do better than that.

 

[CDJ]

So did you include the season Seidenberg missed the entire playoff year. Oh wait that's right, going outside your "4 year arc" would damage your already weak argument.

You talk about wear and tear? So wouldn't the older player, whose played almost double the amount of NHL games at that point, have more "wear and tear".

Boychuk, in his Bruins career, did not miss one single playoff game from 2010 to 2014. Not one. So forgive me if I think your durability argument to not sign Boychuk and extend Seidenberg instead is frankly BS.

If you want to use other arguments to validate the choice they made, that's fine. I can understand that. But durability? C'mon man you can do better than that.

No I can't. Sorry I'm right and used the years leading up to the contract being signed, that my bad. Too relevant of me

Get back to me when Boychuk can go a season without missing at least handful of games.


I won't hold my breath

(And don't get me wrong I love Johnny...I just also love calling out MMQBing)

Constant nagging injury after constant nagging injury catches up to you after awhile btw. Keep in mind Boychuk is a tough man so he's playing through it if he can....and he has still missed at least a handful of games every year

 

[CDJ]

the Seidenberg contract at the time was a very good deal for Boston; unfortunately he blew out his knee but without the benefit of a crystal ball that was a damn good move by Chiarelli. Bleep happens folks this was one

The Boychuk deal by the Islanders was horrible. He's got 36 million left and was showing inconsistency and wear signs last year.

I love Johnny Drama- he was perfect for the Bruins and those Cup runs but he should have been more the Seidenberg 4/16 not 7/42

Seidenberg was B-E-T-T-E-R than Johnny and got 4 years $16 Million.....Boychuk getting $42 Million I don't care if it was for 42 years is insane, insane, insane, insane....infinity

by the way- I hated the Boychuk trade getting 2 seconds and I certainly would have let him walk if he asked for a penny over $4M but the Bruins did use the two picks on Carlo and Lindgren.

Carlo is on the cusp and Lindgren may be 4 years away but there is a heck of a lot to like about his game

My thoughts exactly dkh


But we're baseball guys after all

 

[Healthy Wrap]

the Seidenberg contract at the time was a very good deal for Boston; unfortunately he blew out his knee but without the benefit of a crystal ball that was a damn good move by Chiarelli. Bleep happens folks this was one

The Boychuk deal by the Islanders was horrible. He's got 36 million left and was showing inconsistency and wear signs last year.

I love Johnny Drama- he was perfect for the Bruins and those Cup runs but he should have been more the Seidenberg 4/16 not 7/42

Seidenberg was B-E-T-T-E-R than Johnny and got 4 years $16 Million.....Boychuk getting $42 Million I don't care if it was for 42 years is insane, insane, insane, insane....infinity

Exactly. By all accounts, Boychuk had an underwhelming year with the Islanders, certainly not the kind of season you want from a $6 million player. And in the end, he landed us Carlo and Lindgren, so I don't think the Bruins choosing Seids over him was as awful a move as people are making it out to be

 

[GloryDaze4877]

I don't think the durability thing was a huge issue for either player at the time. IMO, it came down to how much Sides was going to sign for and what he was going to give you, versus what it would cost to sign JB55 and what he was going to give you, plain and simple.

Sides deal kicked in at the age of 33 (signed extension when he was 32) for 4 years at $4m, which was only a $750k raise after some very good play for the B's. Boychuk turned 30 his last year in Boston and was going to be 32 during the season his new deal would kick in. The B's had to have an idea of what JB55 was going to cost to keep? Let's say it was $5.5m over 6 years. That would mean that they would have their Top 3 D all 32 or older, all on long term deals for relatively large $$$ (roughly $15m per).

Both Sides and JB55 played a strong defensive game, with JB55 having a better shot and giving you a little more offense (not a lot). Sides was good for 15-20 points, JB55 20-25. I believe that when Sides agreed to that $4m deal, the B's pretty much made up their minds that he was their guy based on the value of the deal (remember this was pre-injury). It was definitely debatable at the time over which D they should keep, but I don't think it was a bad decision. In hindsight it's easy to second guess the deal because of Side's knee issue, but the B's didn't have a crystal ball.

I liked JB55 quite a bit, but IMO the Isles drastically overpaid him. They gave a guy that was going to be 32 in the first year of a deal a 7 year contract worth $6m per (based on several good years with the B's and one very good year with them). Last year, JB55 looked very average and the Isles are on the hook for six more years and $36m, while the B's had to buy out Side's last two years. The silver lining was that the B's appeared to have drafted two very good D-men with the picks they acquired for JB55.

 

[Over the volcano]

I don't think the durability thing was a huge issue for either player at the time. IMO, it came down to how much Sides was going to sign for and what he was going to give you, versus what it would cost to sign JB55 and what he was going to give you, plain and simple.

Sides deal kicked in at the age of 33 (signed extension when he was 32) for 4 years at $4m, which was only a $750k raise after some very good play for the B's. Boychuk turned 30 his last year in Boston and was going to be 32 during the season his new deal would kick in. The B's had to have an idea of what JB55 was going to cost to keep? Let's say it was $5.5m over 6 years. That would mean that they would have their Top 3 D all 32 or older, all on long term deals for relatively large $$$ (roughly $15m per).

Both Sides and JB55 played a strong defensive game, with JB55 having a better shot and giving you a little more offense (not a lot). Sides was good for 15-20 points, JB55 20-25. I believe that when Sides agreed to that $4m deal, the B's pretty much made up their minds that he was their guy based on the value of the deal (remember this was pre-injury). It was definitely debatable at the time over which D they should keep, but I don't think it was a bad decision. In hindsight it's easy to second guess the deal because of Side's knee issue, but the B's didn't have a crystal ball.

I liked JB55 quite a bit, but IMO the Isles drastically overpaid him. They gave a guy that was going to be 32 in the first year of a deal a 7 year contract worth $6m per (based on several good years with the B's and one very good year with them). Last year, JB55 looked very average and the Isles are on the hook for six more years and $36m, while the B's had to buy out Side's last two years. The silver lining was that the B's appeared to have drafted two very good D-men with the picks they acquired for JB55.

This makes a ton of sense.

Also, I don't think Boychuch would have sniffed 5 mil had he finished his last contract in Boston. He was #4 on the depth chart here and would not have had the opportunity to shine as bright as he did for the Islanders that year.

 

[pierre gagnon*]

Just my uninformed opinion, but I wonder how well Yakupov fit into the Oilers room. Not saying he's a bad guy by any means, I just wonder if he would be better suited to a more veteran room where the off-ice activities are, shall we say, more family-oriented.

He may well be the Hamilton of that room but in reverse. A young guy with a mature attitude surrounded by youthful exuberance. Coming in as a #1 pick and the pressure by not performing like one and seeing all these other guys taking his limelight. He could be a good fit here for cheap and show that he still wants it. That said rangers should take a chance on him with thier shallow prospect pool. McQuaid, Morrow and or Hayes can be cut away from us easily for him.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

No I can't. Sorry I'm right and used the years leading up to the contract being signed, that my bad. Too relevant of me

Get back to me when Boychuk can go a season without missing at least handful of games.


I won't hold my breath

(And don't get me wrong I love Johnny...I just also love calling out MMQBing)

Constant nagging injury after constant nagging injury catches up to you after awhile btw. Keep in mind Boychuk is a tough man so he's playing through it if he can....and he has still missed at least a handful of games every year

Here's the thing. You're not "right". You're extolling an opinion. That's all it is...an opinion. It's pretty clear that if one player had "durability concerns" then so did the other, based on similar amounts of games missed. Missing a handful of games does not equal "durability concerns". Or if it does, then there was no difference in those concerns between the two players.

FWIW, I think your opinion is less accurate than Volcanoe's and BruinsDust's. But then, well... that's my opinion too.

 

[DKH]

My thoughts exactly dkh


But we're baseball guys after all

I love baseball- I'm going to swing by Kowloon and grab some Chinese food around noon and then watch baseball all day around a few dog walks

It's a tough life but I'm ready for the challenge

 

[BruinDust]

No I can't. Sorry I'm right and used the years leading up to the contract being signed, that my bad. Too relevant of me

Get back to me when Boychuk can go a season without missing at least handful of games.


I won't hold my breath

(And don't get me wrong I love Johnny...I just also love calling out MMQBing)

Constant nagging injury after constant nagging injury catches up to you after awhile btw. Keep in mind Boychuk is a tough man so he's playing through it if he can....and he has still missed at least a handful of games every year

If 4-5 games missed a season on average is a durability issue, than I'd say well over half of the players in the NHL have durability issues if not more.

And I like calling out posters who use inaccurate arguments to put spin on their little tale.

To each his own.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

This makes a ton of sense.

Also, I don't think Boychuch would have sniffed 5 mil had he finished his last contract in Boston. He was #4 on the depth chart here and would not have had the opportunity to shine as bright as he did for the Islanders that year.

I think he absolutely would have gotten $5m minimum. I'm sure his agents would have sold it to the B's that he was a couple of years younger than Sides and would soon be taking over that 1st pair RD position, and they probably would not have been wrong.

 

[CDJ]

If 4-5 games missed a season on average is a durability issue, than I'd say well over half of the players in the NHL have durability issues if not more.

And I like calling out posters who use inaccurate arguments to put spin on their little tale.

To each his own.

Not literally every year of their near decade long career

But you're right. To each his own.

 

[JCRO]

Well this thread took a wrong turn at albuquerque

 

[CDJ]

Here's the thing. You're not "right". You're extolling an opinion. That's all it is...an opinion. It's pretty clear that if one player had "durability concerns" then so did the other, based on similar amounts of games missed. Missing a handful of games does not equal "durability concerns". Or if it does, then there was no difference in those concerns between the two players.

FWIW, I think your opinion is less accurate than Volcanoe's and BruinsDust's. But then, well... that's my opinion too.

Missing at least a handful of games with injury every single year of your near decade long career means you have a pretty significant injury history. That's a laundry list, fact not opinion. Those players break down completely after awhile and start to play poorly.

It's Almost like its started to happen to Boychuk this year. Hmmmm


Weird how that works.

 

[Fenian24]

 

[Estlin]

To be honest I think he's been told.

That's my sense of the situation, too. Julien has probably been told that the kids are to be given a fair chance and that, if they outplay veterans in the preseason, then they're on the team.

Chiarelli making that deal on the heels of the Hall trade would be career suicide, lol.

Yakupov doesn't hold much value anymore. I think that a deal for him with McQuaid and another part going the other way would be good. The Oilers need someone like him on their defense.