Proposal: Bruins Trade Proposals III

[McGarnagle]

Tanner Pearson is apparently on the block. Could be someone to keep tabs on.

 

[BruinDust]

what I hope was learnt was the correct lesson... competing with one another to hand out 6 and 7 year contracts to guys who will turn 34-35 {or older} before that contract is done is ludicrous. and it doesn't matter if you are doing this deal for some new shinny ufa or your own old experienced soldier

sure you can be happy occasionally with these deals and get yourself a Bergeron or marchand… perhaps even a chara would qualify as someone we were happy with on his last deal?

but for each of these success stories you end up with a krecji or a rask and definitely the occasional backes where you just don't feel too good about your results.

I wonder exactly where it was in the past that the 2 and 3 year deal was thrown out the door? even when we look at that 2016 season which I agree with you sets the example for worst ufa results of any class in recent memory... most those deals wouldn't have been so horrible if they were expiring this year.

sure backes was hurt for us... but would we feel ok with the gamble if this was his last year with us?

lucic actually had 1 pretty good year and just the 1 miserable year so far... would oiler fans be unhappy if he was an ufa this year?

ladd never did become the winger to keep Tavares happy... and he wasn't too good for the islanders but again... if he was an ufa this year would it really be anything worth complaining about?

gm's and their team management/ownership need to come to their senses... its ok for someone to pay wayne Simmonds 6 million dollars this fall but it would be idiot for anyone to give him more than a 3 year deal. and honestly other than the top 10% of players in the nhl… no one should be getting more than 3 year contracts.

even kids like pastrnak shouldn't be getting the long term deals. we got lucky with pastrnak and its looking like the contract will pay off rather nicely for us but would it have been so horrible to the player if he had been forced to take a 3 year deal at around 3-4 mill because that was what the norm was? if the next cba sets limits on second term players like it did on first term players... would that really be the most horrible thing in the world?

3 year limits on players that enter the league where most the big money is bonus money... and then maybe a 2 year term limit on second term players. perhaps... give them arbitration rights so that its fair for them but set the top end money at around whatever the 50th highest paid player in the league is making for first round picks... and less for lower drafted players. kind of a reward for marquee players but a restriction on other guys so that spending will get under control.

there is a certain logic to this in a cap league that is unionized. veteran players don't want all the cap money going to kids.

get the first 5 years under control with some cost certainity and then if you absolutely must give a guy a 6-7-8 year deal you are giving it to a 23-24 year old. really most teams only have 3-4 guys at any given time that should ever be given one of these types of contracts and it should happen in their early-mid 20s if at all

for almost 100 years the league got by just fine without handing out 6+ year contracts and I cant find any thing that I would say became better for anyone except the players when all that changed. sorry players but if you want to earn an average of 2 mill per year on your contracts to play hockey, maybe you have to live without job security until you retire in your mid 30s. the league is bigger and more important than your getting to chose which city you want to live in for the next 6 years

You make some good points here, except for the bolded.

Why in blue blazes should guys on their 2nd contract have term limits set below what they are now? Fact is, that group of players, guys on the 2nd contracts, comprise the vast majority of the best players in the league. That 2nd contract is their prime, the years of their best production. Why should they be limited, especially so the older declining players can get a bigger piece of the pie? It's ludicrous.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

You make some good points here, except for the bolded.

Why in blue blazes should guys on their 2nd contract have term limits set below what they are now? Fact is, that group of players, guys on the 2nd contracts, comprise the vast majority of the best players in the league. That 2nd contract is their prime, the years of their best production. Why should they be limited, especially so the older declining players can get a bigger piece of the pie? It's ludicrous.

it goes back to two logic points ive mentioned several times

one... hockey is entertainment. the ONLY reason they make money is because they are entertaining us. for better or worst people want to be farmilar with their entertainers. the best singer in the world might be some kid appearing on a talent show this year but they wont get paid. meanwhile the rolling stones or Madonna or u2 can put on a concert tour and make 50+ million dollars. a tv series that has a Nicholas cage or a demi moore attatched to it can get the green light because of the name value of its star. the next Stephen king book gets bought for millions of dollars before its ever written doesn't matter if its good or not... because people like farmilarity with their entertainment.

when a dad in st louis is planning to buy his kid Christmas gift tickets to go see a hockey game hes not thinking Sebastian ahola is a really good young player for Columbus or that elias Peterson is looking like a fantastic rookie in Vancouver. he remembers that his kid has posters of johnaton toews and Patrick kane hanging on the wall and owns a Duncan keith jersey and buys the ticket for the Chicago game. in entertainment, the well known brand names generate revenue.

second reason... for better or worst nhl is a unionized business. unions have been very consistent in their behavior since their inception. they protect the jobs of their vetern members first. unions always bargain stronger for their senior members. guys that built the union gets its support.

so all this matter gets settled in cba. the owners/gms who face situations like nylander in Toronto have had a decade to watch this mess unfold. it hasn't worked to their interest. add up all the money paid out in buyouts and the owners are not going to be too happy about it. gms who thought it would save their jobs are still being fired. it didn't help. but theres no way to stop doing it without the charges of collusion unless the cba gets changed. the owners need the players to agree

meanwhile the players are getting really upset losing 10-15% and more of their money to the escrow so that these new guys can get contracts that really aren't that necessary. sure the players are entitled to 50% hrr, but right now the gms have handed out around 60% of hrr to the players and that money is never going to be paid.

not only are veterns losing their jobs at unprecedented rates to the kids... but now they are losing their paydays as well.

you can argue logic all you want... that everyone should be paid according to the work they do. but when you drive past the road construction you see 6 guys watching another guy shovling and trust me those 6 guys are being paid more. when you go to any unionized job site the hardest working guy isn't the guy getting paid the most.

and you can go to a bar and listen to a band tonight and think they are the greatest undiscovered secret in the world... but they wont be getting paid as much as that old time band playing at the big venue in your city. doesn't matter if the old guys are a fraction of what they were 3 years ago... that's just human nature combind with real business when it comes to entertainment world

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Tanner Pearson is apparently on the block. Could be someone to keep tabs on.

tanner pearson is what we have in Heinen, Bjork, possibly debrusk and donato…

nice little player that got a lot of credit for being decent when he was on an elc contract and a member of a very good team. then of course he got paid like he deserves in the world of the nhl. guys with arbitration get paid whatever the going rate is.

now hes on a cap crunch team that is struggling. he was never good enough to be a guy that is of much use to a struggling team. he had just enough talent to fit in on a very good team... but on a struggling team hes going to always be one of those guys that you point your finger at and say lets trade him because hes not good enough to help us. someone out there will still remember that he had a good reputation a couple years ago and trade us something for him.

at his cap hit hes exactly the type of guy a team points to and says... we got to get rid of this guy and get something better.

these type of guys will always find a home but it will be on bad teams that don't win a lot of games. maybe he will be known as a ray whiteney type when his career is finished and end up with more than 1000 games. 8 different teams thought whitney was worth picking up. its not so horrible.

if we were totally desperate for a soft 40 point guy at 3.5 million dollar cap hit and didn't really care of we had the middle of our lineup filled with overpaid plugs... I could get behind a deal like this

but I think we got like 4 of those type of guys all on elc contracts and maybe another 4 ready to join the team as early as next year. why in heavens name would we want to take on this ugly cap hit for a guy that we have zero use for?

 

[GloryDaze4877]

tanner pearson is what we have in Heinen, Bjork, possibly debrusk and donato…

nice little player that got a lot of credit for being decent when he was on an elc contract and a member of a very good team. then of course he got paid like he deserves in the world of the nhl. guys with arbitration get paid whatever the going rate is.

now hes on a cap crunch team that is struggling. he was never good enough to be a guy that is of much use to a struggling team. he had just enough talent to fit in on a very good team... but on a struggling team hes going to always be one of those guys that you point your finger at and say lets trade him because hes not good enough to help us. someone out there will still remember that he had a good reputation a couple years ago and trade us something for him.

at his cap hit hes exactly the type of guy a team points to and says... we got to get rid of this guy and get something better.

these type of guys will always find a home but it will be on bad teams that don't win a lot of games. maybe he will be known as a ray whiteney type when his career is finished and end up with more than 1000 games. 8 different teams thought whitney was worth picking up. its not so horrible.

if we were totally desperate for a soft 40 point guy at 3.5 million dollar cap hit and didn't really care of we had the middle of our lineup filled with overpaid plugs... I could get behind a deal like this

but I think we got like 4 of those type of guys all on elc contracts and maybe another 4 ready to join the team as early as next year. why in heavens name would we want to take on this ugly cap hit for a guy that we have zero use for?

Pearson is slightly overpaid for what he gave the Kings last year (after going 24g/20a in his contract year in 16/17), but his contract is not horrible by any stretch.

He has some size (6’1” 200+) and is a good skater. While he doesn’t have a lot of PIM’s, he’s averaged 1.4 hits per game in his career. For comparison’s sake, that’s less than Andreoff (1.6), but more than Carter, Kopitar (1.0), and Toffoli (.9).

I’m not saying he’s what the B’s need, but I wouldn’t call him soft and I wouldn’t call his contract “ugly” (he’s 345/748 as far as $ per point goes).

 

[Gordoff]

Tanner Pearson, a left shot left wing... Why?

 

[Colt.45Orr]

Bruins need to make a call on Zykov to see what the price is.

LW/RW who is a big body (225pds) and can be lightning in a bottle with Krejci (who has a history of success with big wingers) --he has not meshed well with his new coach this year but had 7pts in 10 games last year and would likely be acquired for cheap(ish).

I mean.... we have Nordstrom on our 2nd line, for God's sake.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Bruins need to make a call on Zykov to see what the price is.

LW/RW who is a big body (225pds) and can be lightning in a bottle with Krejci (who has a history of success with big wingers) --he has not meshed well with his new coach this year but had 7pts in 10 games last year and would likely be acquired for cheap(ish).

I mean.... we have Nordstrom on our 2nd line, for God's sake.

interesting name... I had to look him up as I knew nothing about him. seems to like to play his off wing like a lot of Russians do. if he has his heart set on playing lw, sort of takes him off our radar

doesn't really strike me with confidence that a team was willing to give him up in a trade for Kris versteeg… sort of shows me that everyone has thought of this kid as quite a project. and now you are telling me hes out of favor with his coach after scoring 7 points in 10 games last year?

as you said... it doesn't hurt to ask what the price is, but im probably just as happy to give some time to a guy like ceharik as go after someone of this ilk

 

[Pia8988]

Could be a good add. Only real issue is skating, but great hands in tight.

 

[ON3M4N]

True. But if it's a Ferrari, you'd probably find a way to make it work regardless.

If you have enough money for a Ferrari then you can just buy a new car. I'm not sure what that had to do with my post though.

 

[Dizzay]

If we are going to be stuck with David Backes this season, the entire season, then we need to come to terms that he's not our 3c for two major reasons. One, he's got little to no offensive game left and can carry a line. Two, his health issues are a major risk and by counting on him to be the 3C going into the playoffs is very risky. If he gets hit, we're looking at Kuraly or Nordstrom there and that's less than ideal. So, I feel he's best suited for 3RW or 4RW. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and slot him in the 3RW.

Unless they break out like madmen, Bjork/Heinen/Donato do not belong in the top 6 which means we need a 2RW for Krejci and Debrusk. Rick Nash would be nice because he's cheap(sign him) but we dont know if we're getting healthy Rick Nash or over weight Rick Nash who's been eating pizza and playing video games. I'd overpay for Josh Anderson because he's a perfect fit for what this team is lacking and Krejci has historically played very well with big bodied wingers (Looch,Iggy,Horton,Wheeler)

3C might be the position that's killing us the most right now. I believe Krejci will eventually turn that 2nd line around but our 3rd line is a black hole currently. Here's where I suggest we go out and get Jeff Carter, Brayden Schenn, RNH, or someone of that elk. I believe with our current D depth, our amazing goaltending tandem, and Bergy-Marshy-Pasta, we can come out of the East with a contributing 3rd line. Maybe I picked the wrong 3 guys here for the 3C job, maybe its more of a Charlie Coyle, but we need someone, and we them fast (preferably before Saturday's and sunday's game as I'll be there watching)

 

[Fenian24]

I just looked this up but the only book that I found by him with that title was written in 1989? Are you sure of the author and/or title?

I believe that is the one, I wonder about the publication date because he talks about his time as the special assistant to the GM of teh Sharks in it (Wilson) . I know it was Fergusons book not sure if he wrote another one. Will go digging through the boxes of hockey books when I get a chance to make sure.

 

[bbfan419]

Tanner Pearson is apparently on the block. Could be someone to keep tabs on.

Pearson is ok, but kind of meh what we already have in guys like Heinen, only way I go out of my way to trade for Pearson is if Backes is part of the deal going back without $ retention.

 

[bbfan419]

If we are going to be stuck with David Backes this season, the entire season, then we need to come to terms that he's not our 3c for two major reasons. One, he's got little to no offensive game left and can carry a line. Two, his health issues are a major risk and by counting on him to be the 3C going into the playoffs is very risky. If he gets hit, we're looking at Kuraly or Nordstrom there and that's less than ideal. So, I feel he's best suited for 3RW or 4RW. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and slot him in the 3RW.

Unless they break out like madmen, Bjork/Heinen/Donato do not belong in the top 6 which means we need a 2RW for Krejci and Debrusk. Rick Nash would be nice because he's cheap(sign him) but we dont know if we're getting healthy Rick Nash or over weight Rick Nash who's been eating pizza and playing video games. I'd overpay for Josh Anderson because he's a perfect fit for what this team is lacking and Krejci has historically played very well with big bodied wingers (Looch,Iggy,Horton,Wheeler)

3C might be the position that's killing us the most right now. I believe Krejci will eventually turn that 2nd line around but our 3rd line is a black hole currently. Here's where I suggest we go out and get Jeff Carter, Brayden Schenn, RNH, or someone of that elk. I believe with our current D depth, our amazing goaltending tandem, and Bergy-Marshy-Pasta, we can come out of the East with a contributing 3rd line. Maybe I picked the wrong 3 guys here for the 3C job, maybe its more of a Charlie Coyle, but we need someone, and we them fast (preferably before Saturday's and sunday's game as I'll be there watching)

I would be ok with Carter I guess Backes would need to be part going back, Schenn I would love to have, if they became Bruins though Krejci is most likely the #3C. RNH just never cared for the guy that much, I would take him if the deal favoured the Bruins, but not going out to target him. Coyle is vastly overrated probably because he is a Mass. guy, but I don't see him being anything more than a Kuraly/Nordstrom type.

 

[DominicT]

interesting name... I had to look him up as I knew nothing about him. seems to like to play his off wing like a lot of Russians do. if he has his heart set on playing lw, sort of takes him off our radar

doesn't really strike me with confidence that a team was willing to give him up in a trade for Kris versteeg… sort of shows me that everyone has thought of this kid as quite a project. and now you are telling me hes out of favor with his coach after scoring 7 points in 10 games last year?

as you said... it doesn't hurt to ask what the price is, but im probably just as happy to give some time to a guy like ceharik as go after someone of this ilk

Love the guy and think he will be a player. I have him in our SIM league and as @LouJersey will tell you, I would not part with him.

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

Bruins need to make a call on Zykov to see what the price is.

LW/RW who is a big body (225pds) and can be lightning in a bottle with Krejci (who has a history of success with big wingers) --he has not meshed well with his new coach this year but had 7pts in 10 games last year and would likely be acquired for cheap(ish).

I mean.... we have Nordstrom on our 2nd line, for God's sake.

Wouldb't Zykov just fall into what we already have? Why not give Bjork or even Cehlarik a look there instead of giving up assets for Zykov?

 

[Gee Wally]

please continue here:

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/bruins-trade-proposals-iv.2565571/