Player Discussion Jake DeBrusk II

[loosemoose]

He doesn't deserve a long term contract yet. I like DeBrusk, but he gets to be a passenger on one of the best PP units on the league and still has a career high of 43 points. Needs to do a lot more to prove that he's a core player and you don't give 6 million dollars to a nice complimentary middle-six guy.

 

[bb74]

Could grow into a prime Eric Cole type player or stay at the current production and be a Michael Ryder type player. In any case he is a young, good middle 6 and that's something this team has needed for years.

 

[b in vancouver]

I've admittedly been a fan of Jake back to his junior days and wanted The Bruins to draft him as I really like DeBrusk and think he'll be wearing a letter on his sweater in a few years. Needs to be more consistent but love his skill-set, hockey IQ and work ethic. There's guys on this roster whom definitely outshine him but the kid is really good. He'll take a sweetheart deal like everyone on The Bruins does (and Biz can complain about it on Spittin) but him and Carlo are going to be the unheralded backbone of this team while Pasta and McAvoy get the press.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Haggs is bored as f*** and has nothing to write about.

Yesterday Tuukka Rask is only worth $5M, today Jake DeBrusk is worth 6M.

Just a monkey throwing darts at a board

Haggerty is horrid. How he continues to be employed when others in the media are not is astounding.

Debrusk will obviously get a standard bridge deal like many unproven RFAs his age.

 

[BruinDust]

Given the way the Bruins handled the 2nd contracts of Carlo and McAvoy, I'd be shocked if a long-term extension is in his future for his next deal. Makes no sense for the Bruins going into next season, and unless he has a massive playoff, I don't see how it makes sense for him either unless the Bruins massively overpay, which they won't and likely can't anyways.

 

[Smitty93]

I always wonder how tactful GMs are in negotiations with their own players. For example, with DeBrusk, my argument for his contract would be built around how he's been in the league for 3 years, but he's basically the same player as when he entered. I haven't seen much identifiable improvement. He's a good player, so it's not a big deal that he hasn't improved as much as I'd hoped, but the players who are getting big, long-term contracts are the ones showing growth from year-to-year.

He's a perfect candidate for a bridge deal because we need to figure out if this is the best we're going to get or if he's got more potential.

 

[member 96824]

A question I've been trying to grapple with in addition to whatever an extension may look like is if DeBrusk is more valuable on the trade market than he might be to the team? Is there a "sell high" potential here even after a down year?

For example, Jake DeBrusk for Noah Hanifin. I have zero idea if this would be on the table, I'm just spitballing ideas. We'd probably have to add some pieces but let's just say roster wise it's a 1 for 1 swap cause they have too many D and need forwards and we have too many forwards and need a stabilizing left side D for 2020-2021.

In the context of Krug probably being out, expansion draft looming, wing being a spot that we're pretty strong I do wonder if we can afford the risk of going into a year with a huge question mark around what the left side of our defense is. I don't know why but I assume Chara is retiring.

Bruins go into next year with:
Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak
Ritchie-Krejci-Kase
Bjork-Coyle-___
4th

Hanifin-McAvoy
Grzelcyk-Carlo
Lauzon-Clifton

Rask
Halak

That's a pretty interesting group and I think one that Sweeney and Cassidy would be much more comfortable with going into the year than Gryz, Lauzon, Vaak? Zboril? either way...yikes.

Your expansion draft list is: Top line, Krejci, Kase, Coyle, Bjork...Hanifin, McAvoy, Carlo, Rask. Say you lose Gryz to expansion, you slide Vaak up.

When I look at the roster, I can't help but think we're going to see some movement in the offseason whenever that is. I wonder if Jake has the highest market value relative to team value.

 

[Smitty93]

A question I've been trying to grapple with in addition to whatever an extension may look like is if DeBrusk is more valuable on the trade market than he might be to the team? Is there a "sell high" potential here even after a down year?

For example, Jake DeBrusk for Noah Hanifin. I have zero idea if this would be on the table, I'm just spitballing ideas. We'd probably have to add some pieces but let's just say roster wise it's a 1 for 1 swap cause they have too many D and need forwards and we have too many forwards and need a stabilizing left side D for 2020-2021.

In the context of Krug probably being out, expansion draft looming, wing being a spot that we're pretty strong I do wonder if we can afford the risk of going into a year with a huge question mark around what the left side of our defense is. I don't know why but I assume Chara is retiring.

Bruins go into next year with:
Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak
Ritchie-Krejci-Kase
Bjork-Coyle-___
4th

Hanifin-McAvoy
Grzelcyk-Carlo
Lauzon-Clifton

Rask
Halak

That's a pretty interesting group and I think one that Sweeney and Cassidy would be much more comfortable with going into the year than Gryz, Lauzon, Vaak? Zboril? either way...yikes.

Your expansion draft list is: Top line, Krejci, Kase, Coyle, Bjork...Hanifin, McAvoy, Carlo, Rask. Say you lose Gryz to expansion, you slide Vaak up.

When I look at the roster, I can't help but think we're going to see some movement in the offseason whenever that is. I wonder if Jake has the highest market value relative to team value.

The tough thing with trading DeBrusk is that we've already talked so much about how they need another top 6 forward. I like Kase, but I'd put him as a middle-6, and Ritchie is a 3rd line forward to me. I also think based on their style of play, offensive talent is a bit more important than defensive talent. I'd love to get my hands on Hanifin, but I don't know if trading DeBrusk for him makes you better. There are already so many concerns about a lack of goal-scorers on the team.

As for Chara, he had an interview back in March where he said he planned on continuing to play, but it's possible COVID has changed things for him.

I do wonder how this weird offseason will go. I'd think we'd see less movement, but so many teams will be looking to move salary that we could see a barrage of trades. The problem is there's not a whole lot of cap space, and a team like Ottawa that has a ton might want to stay closer to the minimum.

 

[slim399]

3 years 10mill total is my prediction

Rest of the signings I predict

Krug 6 years 40Mill
Gryz 5 years 13.75Mill
Bjork 2 years 3.5Mill
Chara 1 year 2Mill
Zboril 2 years 1.65Mill
Senyshyn 2 years 1.6Mill

Next year

Carlo 5 years 24.25Mill
Rask 3 years 15Mill
Krejci 3 years 15Mill

 

[Mathews28]

I am thinking go $9.5 for 3 years for debrusk. Gets him to $3+per year. Decent player but not lighting the world on fire. Keeps him happy and keeps him moveable.

I also wouldn’t discount moving him in the right deal.

 

[TD Charlie]

2 years, 8, maybe 8.5 mil.

If we are paying for potential then it’s gonna burn, but i don’t see him as the type of player you take that risk on. Love the kid and the heart that he wears on the spoked B, but i would aim to keep the aav under 4.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

2 years, 8, maybe 8.5 mil.

If we are paying for potential then it’s gonna burn, but i don’t see him as the type of player you take that risk on. Love the kid and the heart that he wears on the spoked B, but i would aim to keep the aav under 4.

I agree, Jake’s best bet in Boston is a bridging deal of a couple of years getting somewhere shy of $4 mil p.a. He’s talented, works reasonably hard and clearly has good goal-scoring touch when he’s in form, but I certainly wouldn’t say he’s taken that next step and really broken out yet and established himself as a genuine consistent top-6 forward. He’s only 23 and he may well still achieve that, but it’s not a given. So I’d say he receives similar treatment to McAvoy – give him a couple of years to prove he’s worth that big, long-term, career-defining contract.

If another team is willing to offer him more money and/or a longer term then if I were Sweeney I wouldn’t fight it much. I’d be prepared to let him go if that’s what he wants. I like DeBrusk and hope he stays and turns into the player we’d all like to see, but I’m not confident enough in that occurring to overpay for him based on potential, and I don’t consider him indispensable. How hard a bargain he and his agent can drive really depends a lot on what happens with Krug and Chara in particular. If Big Z stays on for another bargain year (highly likely at this point) and Krug either re-signs for a team-friendly amount or leaves, then Sweeney should have more cash to play with and confidence that the Bs can replace Jake with a suitable top-6 forward if needed – Hoffman, Dadonov and Toffoli may all be on the market for a start. If things go the other way then the cap probably starts to get tight and DeBrusk can probably push for that bit extra because the Bruins can’t afford to be left with the prospect of having no proven 2nd line winger for next year. Could be a really interesting off-season, once it finally arrives, although everyone may get cagey around the cap potentially staying flat and not much happens at all.

 

[member 96824]

If another team is willing to offer him more money and/or a longer term then if I were Sweeney I wouldn’t fight it much. I’d be prepared to let him go if that’s what he wants

I disagree here. I don’t think a 2021 1st and 3rd do anything for the Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, Marchand window. I’d look to trade him before just letting him walk and accepting an offer sheet.

 

[Durnberg]

I disagree here. I don’t think a 2021 1st and 3rd do anything for the Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, Marchand window. I’d look to trade him before just letting him walk and accepting an offer sheet.

Unless you trade those picks for someone

 

[Aussie Bruin]

I disagree here. I don’t think a 2021 1st and 3rd do anything for the Bergeron, Krejci, Rask, Marchand window. I’d look to trade him before just letting him walk and accepting an offer sheet.

Sorry I wasn't clear here. I just meant that I wouldn't pay him much more than I thought he was worth just to hang on to him. By all means trade him if it comes to that and a good deal can be done - I agree that would be more advantageous to us than letting him accept an offer. That said, if he wants too much AND a suitable trade can't be made, then I still wouldn't go too far to counter any other offers. Partly it comes down to attitude. If he's got genuine interest from elsewhere but is keen to stay in Boston for just a little more than you'd ideally pay, then you strongly consider that. But if he's really just wanting to go to the highest bidder, as is his right, then you probably just let him go.

 

[ON3M4N]

2 years, 8, maybe 8.5 mil.

If we are paying for potential then it’s gonna burn, but i don’t see him as the type of player you take that risk on. Love the kid and the heart that he wears on the spoked B, but i would aim to keep the aav under 4.

Seems a touch high. Looking at production over the last 3 years:

Bridge = Jakbu Vrana - 2yr/$3.35 mil
Long Term = Alex Tuch - 7yr/$4.86 mil

 

[BMC]

He disappears for long stretches at a time. He needs to improve his consistency before getting a huge pay day.

 

[TD Charlie]

Seems a touch high. Looking at production over the last 3 years:

Bridge = Jakbu Vrana - 2yr/$3.35 mil
Long Term = Alex Tuch - 7yr/$4.86 mil

if they can swing either of those deals i would be surprised. The Vrana deal seems fine to me, but i just have a feeling that JDB ends up higher

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

He doesn't deserve a long term contract yet. I like DeBrusk, but he gets to be a passenger on one of the best PP units on the league and still has a career high of 43 points. Needs to do a lot more to prove that he's a core player and you don't give 6 million dollars to a nice complimentary middle-six guy.

Not a huge fan of giving him a high AAV long term contract, and I don't think he will be given one as DS has shown to be very good negotiating solid deals with second contract players. That said, I think you're selling DeBrusk a bit short here. His career high of 43 points (16G/27) came in 70 games, his rookie year... Over an 82 game season his stat line was projected to look like:

2017-2018:

82 games -- 19G -- 32A -- 51 Points

**And if we take it a step further, here's how he projected the following seasons (including this one)**

2018-2019:

68 games -- 27G -- 15A -- 42 Points
82 games -- 33G -- 18A -- 51 Points

2019-2020:

65 games -- 19G -- 16A -- 35 Points
82 games -- 24G -- 21A -- 45 Points

This kid has shown he can produce at a 25-30 goal, 50+ point pace as a 2nd line winger who can play the net front on the PP. Not every player in the Top 6 can be a 30+ goal, 60+ point player. It's just not realistic. Even with DeBrusk's consistency issue, he's still proven to be a 20+ goal scorer. I'll take that every day as my 2nd line winger. If DeBrusk can find consistency, look out. Definitely not worth 6M right now. If he has a consistent season, there's an argument. He's only 23 years old and just eclipsed the 200 game mark.

He's the type of player I'd love to see signed on a Alex Tuch type contract that @OneManIsNoMan showed above. Honestly think DeBrusk has proven more than Tuch, and I'd be comfortable with a 5/6Y, 5-5.25M AAV deal with him.

 

[Estlin]

I am thinking go $8.4 for 3 years for debrusk. Gets him to $2.8 per year. Decent player but not lighting the world on fire. Keeps him happy and keeps him moveable.

I also wouldn’t discount moving him in the right deal.

Sweeney should go back to the well with Anaheim and propose a hockey trade: Jake Debrusk for Rickard Rakell.

 

[ON3M4N]

Sweeney should go back to the well with Anaheim and propose a hockey trade: Jake Debrusk for Rickard Rakell.

Kind of a lateral move, no?

 

[kdog82]

Kind of a lateral move, no?

Rakell is the better player.

 

[ON3M4N]

Rakell is the better player.

Is he though? Lets look at them at a per 60 rate playing 5v5 hockey over the last 3 years.

Player​

G/60​

A/60​

Pts/60​

IPP​

Shots/60​

SH%​

ixG/60​

iSCF/60​

iHDCF/60​

Rush/60​

Reb/60​

PIMD/60​

GvA/60​

TkA/60​

Hits/60​

Blk/60​

Jake DeBrusk

1.01​

0.94​

1.95​

70.34​

8.68​

11.65​

0.73​

8.13​

3.67​

0.75​

0.85​

0.92​

1.48​

2.12​

3.32​

1.46​

Rickard Rakell

0.81​

0.96​

1.77​

66.19​

8.49​

9.55​

0.78​

9.08​

4.17​

0.44​

0.87​

0.58​

2.60​

1.52​

4.73​

1.72​

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Based on this DeBrusk is a better goal scorer and point producer. He generates more shots and has a better shooting% than Rakell. From a chances standpoint their close, but Rakell slightly edges DeBrusk out. DeBrusk generates more rush attempts while being right there with Rakell on rebounds generated. DeBrusk draws more penalties from opponents, gives the puck up less and takes it away more. Rakell throws more hits and is a slightly better shot blocker.

Now of course the kicker in all this is DeBrusk is 23yr old and not in his prime while Rakell is 27yr old and in his prime.

 

[Estlin]

Kind of a lateral move, no?

Anaheim gets the younger (and more cost-controlled) player, while Boston gets the better and more proven, albeit older (by four years) player. Rakell is also a right shot.

 

[ON3M4N]

Anaheim gets the younger (and more cost-controlled) player, while Boston gets the better and more proven, albeit older (by four years) player. Rakell is also a right shot.

Look at my previous post comparing DeBrusk and Rakell over the last 3 years.