Player Discussion David Pastrnak VII

[Mainehockey33]

Seriously? How about respect? How about the team tells Pastrnak we're not paying you more than Marchand or Bergeron at this time,you have not earned it.

Because a goal scorers prime is his 20's. Pastrnak has produced since breaking into the league at 18, and just had a 70 point season.

This line of thinking is why we run most talented young players out of town.

 

[KrejciMVP]

I agreed with that in my response to Dom. Which is why I said if Pasta was not willing to sign until Draisaitl did, it's up to Sweeney to give him an incentive to do so.

What we know, by all accounts, is that earlier this off season, the B's and Pasta were moving forward with a 6x6 deal. Why that wasn't finalized is the question. If Sweeney delayed, shame on him. If Pasta balked at signing before the market was set, again, Sweeney needs to do something to make it worth it to Pasta to sign. Whether that's a few more dollars, or a longer term, so be it. Either way, what we do know is that Pasta hasn't signed, and he's obviously not going to for what Boston is hoping for. They're at an impasse because the Bruins don't want to give him what he's looking for. Which is this team's track record when dealing with skilled players. Here's the rub though, if Boston doesn't want to split the difference or give him fair market value, there are plenty of teams that would. It's only this franchise that is always trying to get a bargain at the RFA stage, and in reality, the way you get a bargain is to sign the guy to an extension before they hit RFA status. You offer them a bridge deal a year earlier for more money and you kick the can down the road a few years to see if the guy consistently becomes what you hoped for. Once he's done what you were hoping for even one time, it's too late.

There is no way Pasta is looking for a bridge deal. His time to cash in is now. If Boston doesn't get that by now, they've grossly misread the market and situation.

I can see it now, "It's Chia's Fault!" "Pasta's Fault" not Charlie and Donny!

 

[LSCII]

In a cap structure that simply can't be true. There are a limited amount of dollars that can be spent if they go to the top tier players the lower tier players have to take less, it simple math really.

Yes, and the lower tier players should take less, given that they are in fact, lower tier players. It's only a problem when the organization overvalues said lower tier players and signs redundant guys like McQuaid and Kevan Miller to deals that are over inflated. Instead of recognizing that fact though, this organization tries to continually nickel and dime the guys they should be rewarding because they overpay stiffs. It's the wrong way to go about it, IMO and it will cost them a good young player, if not now, at some point.

Someone else said here in the last Pasta thread. The problem isn't that Chia paid McDavid or Draisaitl what he did, it's that he grossly overpaid for Russell. Those are the deals that totally kill your cap. Not the ones where you pay market value for players that are deserving.

 

[LSCII]

I can see it now, "It's Chia's Fault!" "Pasta's Fault" not Charlie and Donny!

Yep. Already setting that narrative up. I can hardly wait for the Behind the B's scene where everyone goes around the table and calls Pasta greedy before reaching a consensus that they're hands are tied and they have to deal him. "If he'd have taken half of Marchand's money, we'd win the cup"...

 

[LSCII]

No, we don't know by all accounts. The insiders' gold glove champion Bob McKenzie was the first to report early this offseason that it was $6.5 million. This $6 million report came out two months later.

Hey, maybe it was $6 million. Hey, maybe Bobby Mac was also right and it moved to $6.5 million, thereby suggesting the Bruins have actually moved on their original offer. We choose to believe who we want to believe. Or who's comments best fit our narrative.

The fact is, we don't know how the negotiations started, how they've progressed, and who has moved from the original talks.

Everything is pure speculation. From Brad Marchand being upset, to the Bruins not wanting to pay more than Marchand makes, to who held up signing on the dotted line.

As fans not involved in the negotiations, we can only go by the accounts we hear and read in the media. And again, by all accounts, this is what we as fans have all heard. They were working on a deal, and they reached an impasse over lockout language. Now the market shifted and they don't like it. That screams Bruins front office **** up to me.

 

[JOKER 192]

Yes, and the lower tier players should take less, given that they are in fact, lower tier players. It's only a problem when the organization overvalues said lower tier players and signs redundant guys like McQuaid and Kevan Miller to deals that are over inflated. Instead of recognizing that fact though, this organization tries to continually nickel and dime the guys they should be rewarding because they overpay stiffs. It's the wrong way to go about it, IMO and it will cost them a good young player, if not now, at some point.

Someone else said here in the last Pasta thread. The problem isn't that Chia paid McDavid or Draisaitl what he did, it's that he grossly overpaid for Russell. Those are the deals that totally kill your cap. Not the ones where you pay market value for players that are deserving.

Wait a minute, that wasn't what I was arguing at all. I happen to agree with most of that. You said "it helps everyone in the union in the long run". How does it help the lower tier players, which makes up a much larger portion than the upper tier, if the upper tier is taking most of the limited allowable salary?

 

[BadBruins]

I would have to think Marchand would not be fan of Pasta making more than he.

He took 1-1.5 less than he could have if he had gone to UFA . We are talking a player who has paid his dues here. He left money on the table and more importantly cap space, only to have it gobbled up by a player who hasn't paid his dues, coming off a ELC, after 1 break-out season all because some twit out in western Canada wants to overpay anyone he can.

I don't believe this for a second. The UFA market was set that summer with guys like Lucic (55 Points), Okposo (64 points), Eriksson (63 points), and Backes (45 Points) settling for $6M. I don't believe Marchand signing an extension for $6.1M was some kind of favor or hometown discount. They only favor may have been not dragging it out.

 

[DKH]

As fans not involved in the negotiations, we can only go by the accounts we hear and read in the media. And again, by all accounts, this is what we as fans have all heard. They were working on a deal, and they reached an impasse over lockout language. Now the market shifted and they don't like it. That screams Bruins front office **** up to me.

He's getting minimum $6 and max $8 if you go by here do logic says $7 M

In 8 years $7 M may be like $5 today

His agent should shoot for 6 years and Bruins 8 for this reason

Bruins need to keep bonus money minimal

8/56 and $1 M per year bonus

NMC

 

[BNHL]

Because a goal scorers prime is his 20's. Pastrnak has produced since breaking into the league at 18, and just had a 70 point season.

This line of thinking is why we run most talented young players out of town.

Prime time is historically seasons 6-9,with some peaking in season 4-11. Like I said yesterday,he had 19 goals in his first 26 games and then 15 in his last 49. He also had a 17 game no goal drought. So what is he? Well,so far,he's inconsistent. I believe he will get more consistent,but I'm not paying before he does,because I've been wrong before.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Prime time is historically seasons 6-9,with some peaking in season 4-11. Like I said yesterday,he had 19 goals in his first 26 games and then 15 in his last 49. He also had a 17 game no goal drought. So what is he? Well,so far,he's inconsistent. I believe he will get more consistent,but I'm not paying before he does,because I've been wrong before.

He was coming off elbow surgery so I can see why his shot was off for awhile, he still racked up assists.

Do you think if he's paid $7M per for 8 seasons, he won't be worth it by the end of the contract?

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Prime time is historically seasons 6-9,with some peaking in season 4-11. Like I said yesterday,he had 19 goals in his first 26 games and then 15 in his last 49. He also had a 17 game no goal drought. So what is he? Well,so far,he's inconsistent. I believe he will get more consistent,but I'm not paying before he does,because I've been wrong before.

Kessel used to go through 20 game goal-less streaks annually and he's turned out OK.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Here are some comparisons of young stars coming off ELC's, what they'd make if they signed this deals today.

Hall - $6.975M

Stamkos - $8.775M

Kessel - $7.2M

Guys that show Star potential get paid, always have.

 

[JOKER 192]

Here are some comparisons of young stars coming off ELC's, what they'd make if they signed this deals today.

Hall - $6.975M

Stamkos - $8.775M

Kessel - $7.2M

Guys that show Star potential get paid, always have.

Where are all the GM's that signed those deals now?

 

[Mainehockey33]

Where are all the GM's that signed those deals now?

You mean Steve Yzerman, one of the best GM's in the league today or Brian Burke, President of Hockey Ops for Calgary?

 

[JOKER 192]

Here are some comparisons of young stars coming off ELC's, what they'd make if they signed this deals today.

Hall - $6.975M

Stamkos - $8.775M

Kessel - $7.2M

Guys that show Star potential get paid, always have.

Your comparing Pasta to Stammer? Stammer had almost 250 points in his 1st 3 seasons. Comparable to McDavid actually. See what happens when it isn't Chia doing the bidding? And Drisital who achieved way less made just under Stammer. What's wrong with this picture? These are your examples not mine.

 

[riverhawkey91]

Can't believe we're still on this "Pastrnak shouldn't make more than Marchand" thing.

Marchand will be 37 when his deal ends; Pastrnak won't even be 30. Marchand's salary literally halves between now and then -- you don't even have to be good at math to know what effect that would have on his cap hit. That's something that just isn't going to happen with Pastrnak.

Barring maybe the most sweetheart, undervalued deal in history, the Bruins are not getting Pastrnak in for below Marchard, and Marchand really has no right to be mad about that fact. Now if they give Pastrnak a matching (or more) $8M salary...then he can complain. But for the cap hit? No way.

You can see the exact same thing when comparing Krejci and Bergeron's contracts as well.

 

[JOKER 192]

You mean Steve Yzerman, one of the best GM's in the league today or Brian Burke, President of Hockey Ops for Calgary?

Burke, he's president of Hockey Oops, sounds glamorous.

 

[Mainehockey33]

It wasn't Yzerman who signed Stammer coming out of his ELC. And as for Burke, he's president of Hockey Oops, sounds glamorous.

Yzerman was GM at the time.

Of course Stamkos deserves more, never said he didn't. That's why Pastrnak will make around $7M.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Your comparing Pasta to Stammer? Stammer had almost 250 points in his 1st 3 seasons. Comparable to McDavid actually. See what happens when it isn't Chia doing the bidding? And Drisital who achieved way less made just under Stammer. What's wrong with this picture? These are your examples not mine.

I'm saying Stars get paid at a young age. Exact dollar amount isn't important. This isn't new, if you put up 70 points in your third year, you're going to make more money than Backes, it's that simple.

 

[Dellstrom]

Marchand's contract can be a negotiation point I suppose, but there's no reason why that should be a firm holding point.

You can't punish a young player bordering elite status because Marchand signed when he did, and took a pretty big discount on top of that. Before this year, Marchand's career high was 61 points. Pasta got 70 while missing quite a few games and playing injured... In his third year. Marchand barely even had a cup of coffee in the NHL when he was 21.

It should be considered that Bergeron and Marchand both make less than 7m even though they've been core pieces on this team, including a Cup run. You can say "yeah, no chance you're getting Draisaitl's contract". But then how do you explain Krejci and Backes' contracts? It's just flawed logic. The cap differs year to year. If you sign an extension the year before you have a career year, that's your fault.

Riverhawkey also made a very good point. MArchand is an absolute bargain right now, but he's going into his first year of the deal as a 29 year old. That's not old by any means, but that contract might drop off around year 5-6. Pasta is 21. Even if he gets 8 years, he'll be 29 by the END of it. He's going to get better every year for another 2-4 years and then he'll be in his prime for the remainder. You're getting all prime years from him whereas you're most likely getting 3-4 out of Marchand's.

 

[JOKER 192]

I'm saying Stars get paid at a young age. Exact dollar amount isn't important. This isn't new, if you put up 70 points in your third year, you're going to make more money than Backes, it's that simple.

Well if that was true we wouldn't be having this discussion. This is all about the dollar amounts.

Not even sure how Drisital is even a comparison for Pastrnak . Two totally different players.

The only thing they have in common is age and draft year.

 

[Baddkarma]

I know people are tired of hearing how Chia f****d team and now to a some extent the NHL RFA salary structure but its true. He simply has a history of conferring super-star deals to players who are not and should not have the leverage to bargain such a deal.

Draisaitl is the latest example and now the Bruins are in a spot. It will be interesting to see how the Bruins respond. I am not sure it will end well, again...

 

[Mainehockey33]

Well if that was true we wouldn't be having this discussion. This is all about the dollar amounts.

Not even sure how Drisital is even a comparison for Pastrnak . Two totally different players.

The only thing they have in common is age and draft year.

And point totals up to this point, offensive potential. They scored about the same last year, with Pastrnak scoring more goals.

If Pastrnak's AAV is anywhere near Backes', he should fire his manager on the spot.

As for the exact dollar amount, that's why Pastrnak will make relatively less then both Stammer and LD. $7M. He's getting paid.

 

[HumBucker]

Trying to equate regular working world conditions, salaries, etc with those of professional sports only goes so far. Sure, everyone wants to be paid and compensated commensurate to the value/experience they bring to the "team", but there are major differences that need to be accounted for. I think most players today understand the way the market works and the way contracts are negotiated means that there may be scenarios where a less experienced, perhaps less overall accomplished player is in a position to negotiate a better contract than one's own. That's just the way the biz works.

Do you think Marchand will be upset if Pasta ends up making more than him? Probably not if Pasta continues his growth into one of the most dynamic scoring young wingers in the game.

If the B's didn't have Pasta and had to go out and sign a UFA RW to replace his 30-40 goal potential, don't you think that player would likely get more $ than Marchand too? Don't you think Brad knows this? It's his business after all.

 

[JOKER 192]

And point totals up to this point, offensive potential. They scored about the same last year, with Pastrnak scoring more goals.

If Pastrnak's AAV is anywhere near Backes', he should fire his manager on the spot.

As for the exact dollar amount, that's why Pastrnak will make relatively less then both Stammer and LD. $7M. He's getting paid.

Well no one is expecting him to get out of this with less than 6/7M , which isn't chump change.

What many are arguing is that it's not right, he hasn't paid his dues and while he's an excellent player and shows all kinds of potential one breakout season doesn't guarantee anything. He's not flawless.