Confirmed with Link: Borowiecki signs three-year extension

[Karl Cowensson]

I'm still in the WTF camp with the timing of this signing and the term, but the Sens are paying Boro almost league minimum to be a spare part. Not a bad contract, just seems like something that could have waited until some other steps were taken to clear out the log jam on D.

 

[sebas85]

Meanwhile, much of the blogging community, the only group worth following for Sens news and analysis given the quality of the Sun and much of the Citizen, are largely scratching their heads over this move. And for good reason: it makes little to no sense.

I actually burst out laughing when I read this. The blogging community doesnt know ****. If Travis friggin Yost knew HALF as much as he tries to convince himself he does, he wouldnt be banging out redundant pieces about numbers and advanced stats. He would be working for a real hockey team, making real money. So get out of here with that blogging community ********. They know exactly as much as you, me or any other fan out there. They just have the free time and inflated self opinion of themselves to make a website to go with it.

Maybe, just maybe, Borowiecki is valued slightly higher than you give him credit for. Maybe other GMs have been asking about him. Maybe Ottawa projects him higher than the AHL fodder your blogging community is so convinced that he will be. Maybe other teams project him higher also. Maybe his coaches in Binghamton who see him play night in and night out see him as being on the cusp of becoming an NHLer. But hey who cares about all of that...Yost showed me a graph once

 

[Smash88]

I actually burst out laughing when I read this. The blogging community doesnt know ****. If Travis friggin Yost knew HALF as much as he tries to convince himself he does, he wouldnt be banging out redundant pieces about numbers and advanced stats. He would be working for a real hockey team, making real money. So get out of here with that blogging community ********. They know exactly as much as you, me or any other fan out there. They just have the free time and inflated self opinion of themselves to make a website to go with it.

Maybe, just maybe, Borowiecki is valued slightly higher than you give him credit for. Maybe other GMs have been asking about him. Maybe Ottawa projects him higher than the AHL fodder your blogging community is so convinced that he will be. Maybe other teams project him higher also. Maybe his coaches in Binghamton who see him play night in and night out see him as being on the cusp of becoming an NHLer. But hey who cares about all of that...Yost showed me a graph once

Geez did he sleep with your sister or something?

 

[leftwinglocker]

I actually burst out laughing when I read this. The blogging community doesnt know ****. If Travis friggin Yost knew HALF as much as he tries to convince himself he does, he wouldnt be banging out redundant pieces about numbers and advanced stats. He would be working for a real hockey team, making real money. So get out of here with that blogging community ********. They know exactly as much as you, me or any other fan out there. They just have the free time and inflated self opinion of themselves to make a website to go with it.

Maybe, just maybe, Borowiecki is valued slightly higher than you give him credit for. Maybe other GMs have been asking about him. Maybe Ottawa projects him higher than the AHL fodder your blogging community is so convinced that he will be. Maybe other teams project him higher also. Maybe his coaches in Binghamton who see him play night in and night out see him as being on the cusp of becoming an NHLer. But hey who cares about all of that...Yost showed me a graph once

Best. Post. Ever.

 

[FlyingJ]

Geez did he sleep with your sister or something?

It's not surprising. Bloggers often tweet about how ridiculous HF Boards can be, and how posters here overvalue prospects to the nth degree. They laugh at HF consistently and it's bound to create some hard feelings among some posters here. I imagine the "Wiercioch is hardly more proven than Borowiecki" would give them a hearty laugh.

 

[FlyingJ]

I actually burst out laughing when I read this. The blogging community doesnt know ****. If Travis friggin Yost knew HALF as much as he tries to convince himself he does, he wouldnt be banging out redundant pieces about numbers and advanced stats. He would be working for a real hockey team, making real money. So get out of here with that blogging community ********. They know exactly as much as you, me or any other fan out there. They just have the free time and inflated self opinion of themselves to make a website to go with it.

Given the number of hirings of advanced stats guys by NHL teams recently, you never know, he might just. Doubt it will be Ottawa though given that little Ukrainian hacking incident of his site.

And ya, all the blogging community tends to do is apply critical thinking to teams, as opposed to others who simply say "I like that guy! He has heart! Screw stats and facts!"

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

Given the number of hirings of advanced stats guys by NHL teams recently, you never know, he might just. Doubt it will be Ottawa though given that little Ukrainian hacking incident of his site.

And ya, all the blogging community tends to do is apply critical thinking to teams, as opposed to others who simply say "I like that guy! He has heart! Screw stats and facts!"

What are the facts on Boro?

 

[Kickabrat]

I would like to ask all those posters, who believe Borowiecki is basically a slug with no hockey skills to speak of and therefore does not deserve an extension, to answer a simple question for me.

What makes you think you know more about Borowiecki's game than a group of experienced NHL management types who have dozen of years of experience? Tell me what qualifications you have that makes you a better judge of talent than AGM Pierre Dorion et. al. Because some of the comments I've read would suggest the Sens have made a huge colossal mistake with this player and if these comments are indeed accurate, these guys should be replaced, perhaps even by some of the eagle eye evaluators on this very board by the sounds of it.

I want to know so I can: a) continue to read what you write with a new found respect; or b) just ignore your posts. Thanks.

 

[Indrew]

It's reasonable to think that Boro hasn't proven enough in the NHL to receive a 3 year one-way extension on top of this year.

It's also reasonable to assume a group of NHL executives knows a lot more than me about these kinds of things.

NHL executives make mistakes though. So do I.

To err is human.

 

[FlyingJ]

It's reasonable to think that Boro hasn't proven enough in the NHL to receive a 3 year one-way extension on top of this year.

It's also reasonable to assume a group of NHL executives knows a lot more than me about these kinds of things.

NHL executives make mistakes though. So do I.

To err is human.

This.

 

[jbeck5]

What are the facts on Boro?

I don't think many stats favour boro...

 

[Micklebot]

It's not surprising. Bloggers often tweet about how ridiculous HF Boards can be, and how posters here overvalue prospects to the nth degree. They laugh at HF consistently and it's bound to create some hard feelings among some posters here. I imagine the "Wiercioch is hardly more proven than Borowiecki" would give them a hearty laugh.

You list Yost as a blogger who's opinion is worth listening to, but he commited one of the simplest mistakes when evaluaing Boroweicki; he used a very small sample. Not only that, but he used a sample that was half of which was prior to a pretty substantial shift in Boroweicki's play (at both the AHL and NHL level).

The reality is, this contract was signed based primarily off his AHL play, but everyone wants to judge it based of a small sample of his NHL play. The org likely has a much better read on how he will transition than those around here basing it on how his name appears on the score sheet.

I agree with everyone that the timing is odd but I think they've gambled that he doesn't bust; the upside is probably about a 400-900k potential discount over the duration of the contract, while the downside is overpaying him about 500K for the duration of the contract and being stuck with it regarless of where he plays.

 

[jbeck5]

I would like to ask all those posters, who believe Borowiecki is basically a slug with no hockey skills to speak of and therefore does not deserve an extension, to answer a simple question for me.

What makes you think you know more about Borowiecki's game than a group of experienced NHL management types who have dozen of years of experience? Tell me what qualifications you have that makes you a better judge of talent than AGM Pierre Dorion et. al. Because some of the comments I've read would suggest the Sens have made a huge colossal mistake with this player and if these comments are indeed accurate, these guys should be replaced, perhaps even by some of the eagle eye evaluators on this very board by the sounds of it.

I want to know so I can: a) continue to read what you write with a new found respect; or b) just ignore your posts. Thanks.

I hate these types of posts. Having an NHL management job does not without a doubt mean they have more knowledge than someone who doesn't have an NHL management job. Its not proof in any way. Its luck of the draw in who you know. Such a cop out of an argument.

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

It's not surprising. Bloggers often tweet about how ridiculous HF Boards can be, and how posters here overvalue prospects to the nth degree. They laugh at HF consistently and it's bound to create some hard feelings among some posters here. I imagine the "Wiercioch is hardly more proven than Borowiecki" would give them a hearty laugh.

Either one of them could be out of the league within 3 years. To me, thats hardly more proven. Neither has cemented themselves as an everyday NHL player and there's no denying that. Not to mention he wasn't trashing Travis Yost, simply stating the truth - that he's no more in the know than you or I, at least as far as information beyond the simple eye test.

 

[FlyingJ]

You list Yost as a blogger who's opinion is worth listening to, but he commited one of the simplest mistakes when evaluaing Boroweicki; he used a very small sample. Not only that, but he used a sample that was half of which was prior to a pretty substantial shift in Boroweicki's play (at both the AHL and NHL level).

He used what information was available, which was little because Borowiecki has yet to crack an NHL roster as anything more than a call-up. And as you've mentioned, these stats aren't so available for the AHL.

If he'd looked at Borowiecki's NHL play for just this year, the sample would have been even smaller. And again, he wasn't able to stick on the roster here as a 24 year old presumably much further along in his development than other younger defencemen in the organization. And in the 13 games he did play last year, his stats in any regard were not going to make anyone's eyes bulge.

 

[Kickabrat]

I hate these types of posts. Having an NHL management job does not without a doubt mean they have more knowledge than someone who doesn't have an NHL management job. Its not proof in any way. Its luck of the draw in who you know. Such a cop out of an argument.

So basically you're saying you can do as a good a job as an NHL executive with dozens of years of scouting experience because it's all luck.. Yeah right. Do NHL managers make mistakes, sure they do, but their mistakes are based on their experience of having watched, scouted, and comparing tens of thousands of players. it is not the luck of the draw. It is a decision based on a whole bunch of factors weighing the pros and cons. So pardon me if I give those guys a bit more credibility in their judgement than some guy who relies on luck of the draw.

 

[The Fuhr*]

I look at Boro as the 7D for the next four years... His contract is fine in that role and if he can be a regular, on the bottom pair then that's a bonus

 

[FlyingJ]

So basically you're saying you can do as a good a job as an NHL executive with dozens of years of scouting experience because it's all luck.. Yeah right. Do NHL managers make mistakes, sure they do, but their mistakes are based on their experience of having watched, scouted, and comparing tens of thousands of players. it is not the luck of the draw. It is a decision based on a whole bunch of factors weighing the pros and cons. So pardon me if I give those guys a bit more credibility in their judgement than some guy who relies on luck of the draw.

Given the number of draftees who become regular NHLers outside the first round, it's bordering on pure luck. Take a look at this article looking at Vancouver's draft record under Mike Gillis. Basically, for all his and his staff's evaluations, taking players based purely on point totals in previous leagues would have given them better results than what they got.

And while none of us here may work for NHL teams, it doesn't mean we as fans don't have a right to analyze and critique moves by teams based on the info available and our own perceptions.

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

You list Yost as a blogger who's opinion is worth listening to, but he commited one of the simplest mistakes when evaluaing Boroweicki; he used a very small sample. Not only that, but he used a sample that was half of which was prior to a pretty substantial shift in Boroweicki's play (at both the AHL and NHL level).

The reality is, this contract was signed based primarily off his AHL play, but everyone wants to judge it based of a small sample of his NHL play. The org likely has a much better read on how he will transition than those around here basing it on how his name appears on the score sheet.

I agree with everyone that the timing is odd but I think they've gambled that he doesn't bust; the upside is probably about a 400-900k potential discount over the duration of the contract, while the downside is overpaying him about 500K for the duration of the contract and being stuck with it regarless of where he plays.

I agree with this one hundred percent, Boro's NHL stats mean very little. What can a few sporadic games played over two season in a limited role truely tell us. I love stats but i dont think they are a good indicator when used in such a small sample size. If we could bring up his AHL advanced stats and they showed he was a poor defensemen then i'd be a bit more worried but the fact is Boro was our best AHL dmen and one of the hardest workers in the organization if not the hardest.

 

[Micklebot]

I don't think many stats favour boro...

Here's an article on the BSens that includes some GF% (graph only), QOC and QOT estimates. Boro ranked well in all three. He was clearly the teams go to guy for defensive mins and the team likely thinks it will translate to the NHL.

Boro has produced pts at a similar level to Gryba (a touch better), and is probably pretty similar when it comes to puck skills. He's more physical, but smaller, and a bit better skater imo.

My guess is the team see's him as transitioning similarly to Gryba, and that likey comes primarily from Richardson's opinion.

 

[Micklebot]

He used what information was available, which was little because Borowiecki has yet to crack an NHL roster as anything more than a call-up. And as you've mentioned, these stats aren't so available for the AHL.

If he'd looked at Borowiecki's NHL play for just this year, the sample would have been even smaller. And again, he wasn't able to stick on the roster here as a 24 year old presumably much further along in his development than other younger defencemen in the organization. And in the 13 games he did play last year, his stats in any regard were not going to make anyone's eyes bulge.

He used a very limited set of data and then used it to justify his conclusions; sounds like he doesn't know much about the player, and is guessing. If he doesn't know enough to come to an informed conclusion, why post a blog about his opinion on the matter?

Given the number of draftees who become regular NHLers outside the first round, it's bordering on pure luck. Take a look at this article looking at Vancouver's draft record under Mike Gillis. Basically, for all his and his staff's evaluations, taking players based purely on point totals in previous leagues would have given them better results than what they got.

And while none of us here may work for NHL teams, it doesn't mean we as fans don't have a right to analyze and critique moves by teams based on the info available and our own perceptions.

There is a big difference between getting projections wrong with physically imature 17 year olds who hjave a lot of developing left to do watching them agains uneven competition in the juniors and watching hundreds of pro games at the AHL level and projecting how they'll do in the NHL.

 

[Quo]

The bottom line is the bottom line though innit? We're paying the guy what counts for peanuts nowadays any way you slice it. Paying him to fill a minor role which, no matter what the diverging opinion of Boro's ceiling might be, I think most would agree that he's shown to be able to fill adequately enough: that of a seventh or eighth defensemen. If he's more than that, spectacular, if not, well he'll keep filling in as much as possible and I doubt we'll be the worse for it. I'm not that attached to him myself but for what he’s getting, I frankly don't give a hoot.

 

[jbeck5]

So basically you're saying you can do as a good a job as an NHL executive with dozens of years of scouting experience because it's all luck.. Yeah right. Do NHL managers make mistakes, sure they do, but their mistakes are based on their experience of having watched, scouted, and comparing tens of thousands of players. it is not the luck of the draw. It is a decision based on a whole bunch of factors weighing the pros and cons. So pardon me if I give those guys a bit more credibility in their judgement than some guy who relies on luck of the draw.

No. What I'm saying is using "they obviously know better" to someone who says something against management is weak sauce.

Counter his specific points.

I'm not saying I know better than NHL management. I'm saying NHL management isn't proof that you know everything...which is why people discuss moves and give their opinion. Some are right. Some are wrong.

NHL management isn't like NHL players. I can't just start GMing in lower leagues as a kid and get scouted and work up the ranks.

There are a lot of talented potential GMs that will never be discovered...players get discovered no matter what.

 

[Busboy]

I haven't seen him shutting anyone down in the NHL yet. Some nice hits, but very unreliable defensive play.

That's not to say he can't do it, though... but that's the point I've been saying all along: he hasn't proven a damned thing yet at this level. The people here who are defending the contract are saying that there is more left that Boro hasn't shown us yet. I think there might be a BIT more, but he's basically at WYSIWYG territory for me, and should be, until he actually proves it in the NHL. I'm not going to sit here and play the "prospect projection" game with a 25 year old the same way that I would an 18 year old that we just drafted. I think there's a bit of room for improvement due to increasing familiarity with the speed of the NHL game and getting more accustomed to the kind of stuff you can't get away with at the NHL level that you can at the AHL level, but skill wise... that's it. There's not much left that he hasn't shown us, IMO. A bit, but not enough for me to say he's a sure-thing.

My argument isn't that he CAN'T be an NHL regular, but that he HASN'T YET SHOWN he can be. Is it wrong to want a guy to prove he belongs in the NHL before he gets a 3-year pass? If he's SO good that it's a foregone conclusion, then it shouldn't be a big deal that the team waits until January to make that call. I mean, 3 months of NHL time would TRIPLE his current GP.

For me at least, this has always been about the precedent set by giving an unproven 25 year old player a 3-year, 1-way deal. HOPEFULLY Murray is right about him, HOPEFULLY Boro projects as well as BMurr thinks he will... but I'm just saying that Boro was still going to be an RFA after this season. There was no reason whatsoever to give him 3 years now. There is almost no advantage at all. Why? Does anyone think he'll outplay enough guys ahead of him on the depth chart this year and cement his spot as a legit 2nd pairing guy? I doubt it. So you let him play out this year - a realistic best-case scenario is he proves himself to be a dependable 5/6th defenceman, and you offer him that 3-year deal once he's proven himself. By giving it to him now, it's all risk. The chances of ending up "ahead" on this deal, compared to the deal he would have signed NEXT offseason, is minuscule compared to the risk you take in giving it to him now.

Whatever, though. It's a silly argument to be having, because absolutely nobody is going to know one way or the other until like November, at the earliest. I think it was completely unnecessary risk. Others disagree. That's the argument in a nutshell - not much we can do now except wait.

Precedent was already set when Greening and Condra were extended after being mid season call ups. Both went on to provide play that exceeded their contracts in value.

I think you've also presented an alternative scenario for signing him at end of next season which ignores certain realities. If he trends up this season and plays well, then he wouldn't be looking to sign for three extra years since he would know his stock is rising. He would instead ask for a one year contract, probably at or around 1 million with the expectation of deserving a hefty raise based on continued improvement.

 

[StefanW]

So basically you're saying you can do as a good a job as an NHL executive with dozens of years of scouting experience because it's all luck.. Yeah right. Do NHL managers make mistakes, sure they do, but their mistakes are based on their experience of having watched, scouted, and comparing tens of thousands of players. it is not the luck of the draw. It is a decision based on a whole bunch of factors weighing the pros and cons. So pardon me if I give those guys a bit more credibility in their judgement than some guy who relies on luck of the draw.

I believe he argued that putting out that an NHL exec automatically has the best answers is a crap argument. He is right. By your logic no one should question Kevin Lowe or MacT in Edmonton because they have loads of NHL experience.

The argument that we have no right to question management because they have more experience is just so much crap on a shingle. It honestly has no place in a discussion forum. If you honestly believe that no one has the right to question a signing because we aren't experienced enough perhaps a better place for you is the Ottawa Senators home page. There you can read about all of the signings and transactions without all of that pesky opinion stuff that has you up in arms.