Player Discussion Jake DeBrusk II

[Leaf Fans]

Not comparable unless you think GMs, Agents, etc. only look at things in the scope of one year.

Let's look at the entire ELC. I'm not knocking Kapanen or Johnsson, they're fine players...but Jake DeBrusk does not represent the same risk that they did at the time of expiration. Jake's significantly more established and posting better numbers than they were at the time of signing.

Jake DeBrusk: 203 games, 62 goals, 120 points
Kasperi Kapanen: 133 games, 28 goals, 54 points
Andreas Johnsson: 82 games, 22 goals, 46 points

Why shouldn't Jake DeBrusk get more?

Situation is totally different for all teams. No one can sell a rising cap. Besides, Boston has proven that they can get their rfas to consistentlybuy into the team. No other NHL team can say the same. I think most RFas will sign shorter term low money deals to have another chance in 2 perhaps 3 years.

 

[BruinsBtn]

they signed 3 and 4 year deals, were talking about a 7 year deal here. No way does DeBrusk sign a 7yr deal for under $3.5 million. DeBrusk over the last 3 years also has a better G/GP and P/GP

Why not 3/4 year deals then? That's an easy call for me. $3.4m/4 years is way better than $5.5m for 6.

 

[BruinsBtn]

Not comparable unless you think GMs, Agents, etc. only look at things in the scope of one year.

Let's look at the entire ELC. I'm not knocking Kapanen or Johnsson, they're fine players...but Jake DeBrusk does not represent the same risk that they did at the time of expiration. Jake's significantly more established and posting better numbers than they were at the time of signing.

Jake DeBrusk: 203 games, 62 goals, 120 points
Kasperi Kapanen: 133 games, 28 goals, 54 points
Andreas Johnsson: 82 games, 22 goals, 46 points

Why shouldn't Jake DeBrusk get more?

That's not how it works. Your production two years earlier is almost never factored in. You get paid based on what you are right now and he basically had identical seasons to those two guys going into contract. Now I'll agree that I would much rather have him, but you get paid for numbers. Jake also got loads of PP1 time this year too and if I remember correctly he got 1 single goal in that slot.

Like it or not, those are the comps, and they're fair.

 

[bearcountry17]

Debrusk is crazy underrated here. He’s already a very solid second line winger at age 23. If the team lets this guy go because of money they will regret it even worse than Reilly Smith. I would go anywhere between a two year bridge deal at 3.5m or a 8 year 5.25 if he would take that. This kid should be a career Bruin, I love the way he plays and he seems to have a great head on his shoulders.

 

[member 96824]

Yes, it is the lack of consistency that is holding him back IMO. Yup he can score 20- 25 goals a year. Great. But I'd much rather see that production spread out over 82 games than have him score 10 in 13 games and then do nothing the next 20. I realize players have cold stretches but with DeBrusk it seems a chronic issue so far in his career. If he can fix that fine, pay the man. Otherwise no.

I don't think that falls on Jake DeBrusk as much as it falls on you not really having a realistic outlook of what a 20-25 goal scorer looks like. Are there examples of players like that? Does it actually matter what games DeBrusk scores in? Which games count more and which ones count less?

I just dumped the game logs into excel so correct me if I'm wrong, but Jake had 2 multi-goal games this year, and the most games in a row he scored in was 3..once. This season Jake scored in 17 of the 65 games, so one every fourish. Last season he scored in 22 games, which is also one every fourish.

for a 20-25 goal player, that seems to be pretty evenly spread out. What is the expectation for more?

 

[ON3M4N]

Why not 3/4 year deals then? That's an easy call for me. $3.4m/4 years is way better than $5.5m for 6.

A 4yr deal walks him right into FA at 27yr old.

 

[ON3M4N]

I'm kind of curious what number people think qualifies as streaky. i.e. how many games (average) between goals or points qualifies as streaky. Is it 5 games? 8 games? 10 games?

 

[BruinsBtn]

A 4yr deal walks him right into FA at 27yr old.

So what? This isn't Winnipeg, it's Boston. If he wants to be here and he's worth the money, he'll stay. If he doesn't want to be in Boston and wants big money then, let him go. The team has a short window right now and I'm not paying him $2m extra a year when every dollar counts.

 

[BruinsBtn]

I'm kind of curious what number people think qualifies as streaky. i.e. how many games (average) between goals or points qualifies as streaky. Is it 5 games? 8 games? 10 games?

It's not the goals that are streaky to me, it's his play. There was a stretch last season when he was a crazy puck hound, feet moving all the time, forcing turnovers. Then there were long stretches this year where he would take two strides and coast. I just want to see consistency in the hustle.

 

[ON3M4N]

So what? This isn't Winnipeg, it's Boston. If he wants to be here and he's worth the money, he'll stay. If he doesn't want to be in Boston and wants big money then, let him go. The team has a short window right now and I'm not paying him $2m extra a year when every dollar counts.

Its just unheard of for a team to sign a player that walks the right to UFA status. You either sign the to a year less or a few years more. DeBrusk has also been a better producer than the two guys mentioned and would probably take more like $4 million on a 4 yr deal. If you think every dollar counts now, wait till you have to sign guys like Pasta, McAvoy and Carlo to new deals. Rask won't be cheap either to bring and if you sign DeBrusk to a bridge and he hits 30G a few times, he's going to cost more than $5-$5.5 and that's more dollars to worry about.

Its always a balancing act and sometimes you have to take calculated gambles. DeBrusk at $5 million is fine as long as his goal scorer doesn't just fall off. Teams will always be willing to add 25+ goal scorers.

 

[ON3M4N]

It's not the goals that are streaky to me, it's his play. There was a stretch last season when he was a crazy puck hound, feet moving all the time, forcing turnovers. Then there were long stretches this year where he would take two strides and coast. I just want to see consistency in the hustle.

Maybe he was playing through something, we don't know. What I do know is last year:

Avg GP between goals = 3.6
Avg GP between pts = 2.4

He also tends to play better when he is matched with guys that play a north/south game and force him to skate. Krejci's east/west game is more slow and methodical which doesn't help DeBrusk.

 

[member 96824]

That's not how it works. Your production two years earlier is almost never factored in. You get paid based on what you are right now and he basically had identical seasons to those two guys going into contract. Now I'll agree that I would much rather have him, but you get paid for numbers. Jake also got loads of PP1 time this year too and if I remember correctly he got 1 single goal in that slot.

Like it or not, those are the comps, and they're fair.

According to who?

If you're trying to assess future value and not factoring in results and trajectory to assess that risk and just look at one static year to say "okay well I guess that's what he is" you should be fired from your job immediately.

Even in the arbitration rules it very clearly states the player and agent can bring statistics, length of service, and overall contribution to success from previous seasons to the table. Tell me why would a player and agent not do that?

So again, tell me why DeBrusk isn't worth more.

 

[BruinsBtn]

Its just unheard of for a team to sign a player that walks the right to UFA status. You either sign the to a year less or a few years more. DeBrusk has also been a better producer than the two guys mentioned and would probably take more like $4 million on a 4 yr deal. If you think every dollar counts now, wait till you have to sign guys like Pasta, McAvoy and Carlo to new deals. Rask won't be cheap either to bring and if you sign DeBrusk to a bridge and he hits 30G a few times, he's going to cost more than $5-$5.5 and that's more dollars to worry about.

Its always a balancing act and sometimes you have to take calculated gambles. DeBrusk at $5 million is fine as long as his goal scorer doesn't just fall off. Teams will always be willing to add 25+ goal scorers.

I literally just gave you two examples of it from a season ago. Timo Meier is another one. Matthew Tkachuk also did 3 years.

Yet you want to pay Debrusk almost as much as Meier? Who was coming off a 30-goal, 36-assist season and a monster playoffs? In an offseason with a flat cap? That's a haaaaaard no.

In any case, we can all see how the Bruins do business. Guaranteed it's a 2-3 year contract around $3m. Don loves to bridge.

 

[TwineTickler]

It's not the goals that are streaky to me, it's his play. There was a stretch last season when he was a crazy puck hound, feet moving all the time, forcing turnovers. Then there were long stretches this year where he would take two strides and coast. I just want to see consistency in the hustle.

When he's got it going, he's a beast. I think a lot of might pertain to is personality and the fact his maturity hasn't fully formed yet (not judging just my opinion). I'd like to think as he continues to develop both personally and professionally we will start to see more consistency in his game.

 

[BruinsBtn]

According to who?

If you're trying to assess future value and not factoring in results and trajectory to assess that risk and just look at one static year to say "okay well I guess that's what he is" you should be fired from your job immediately.

Even in the arbitration rules it very clearly states the player and agent can bring statistics, length of service, and overall contribution to success from previous seasons to the table. Tell me why would a player and agent not do that?

So again, tell me why DeBrusk isn't worth more.

Says the entire history of all contracts.

And your trajectory argument works against you.

 

[BruinsBtn]

When he's got it going, he's a beast. I think a lot of might pertain to is personality and the fact his maturity hasn't fully formed yet (not judging just my opinion). I'd like to think as he continues to develop both personally and professionally we will start to see more consistency in his game.

I agree with you. Or at least I hope so. I thought we'd see more of it this year though but it really wasn't there for long stretches.

It reminds me a lot of Lucic. When his feet were moving he was such a beast in Boston but it always came and went and instead of getting better, after about age 25 it just seemed to leave for good. Kuraly is another guy like that. He played so hard for the past two years and then most of this year he just couldn't find it, to the point where he was getting scratched and bounced around the lineup.

Again, that all argues for a bridge contract.

 

[member 96824]

Says the entire history of all contracts.

And your trajectory argument works against you.

I'll ask a third time.

Why wouldn't DeBrusk, as a more established player(less risk) at the time of expiration and better production be worth more than the two leafs examples you brought up?

 

[member 96824]

Let's toss a trade thread up.

Jake DeBrusk for Andreas Johnsson. Who says no?

This board is very funny.

Toss a player in a trade proposal and it's like "oh no he's worth way more than that!" but then when it comes to paying that player we discount the f*** out of them.

 

[ON3M4N]

I literally just gave you two examples of it from a season ago. Timo Meier is another one. Matthew Tkachuk also did 3 years.

Yet you want to pay Debrusk almost as much as Meier? Who was coming off a 30-goal, 36-assist season and a monster playoffs? In an offseason with a flat cap? That's a haaaaaard no.

In any case, we can all see how the Bruins do business. Guaranteed it's a 2-3 year contract around $3m. Don loves to bridge.

I must have missed that post because I don't see the two you're talking about. Tkachuk did 3 years because it only give him 6 years of service and he's still an RFA after his contract expires. CF also shows Timo expiring and still an RFA. Also where did I say $6 million for DeBrusk? I didn't, I've been saying $5mil for 7yr lol. Hell I'm not even saying to do a long-term deal, but I wouldn't rule one out if the price was right.

 

[BruinsBtn]

I'll ask a third time.

Why wouldn't DeBrusk, as a more established player(less risk) at the time of expiration and better production be worth more than the two leafs examples you brought up?

I'll repeat a third time.

His production in his contract year is the same as those two guys. Moreover, Jake had 166 minutes on the PP this year and Kapanenen had 61m, Johnsson 115m.

And if you can't negotiate better than Dubas, then you might as well hang 'em up as a GM.

Or take Anthony Mantha. 24 goals, 24 assists. Two years at $3.3m.

 

[BruinsBtn]

I must have missed that post because I don't see the two you're talking about. Tkachuk did 3 years because it only give him 6 years of service and he's still an RFA after his contract expires. CF also shows Timo expiring and still an RFA. Also where did I say $6 million for DeBrusk? I didn't, I've been saying $5mil for 7yr lol. Hell I'm not even saying to do a long-term deal, but I wouldn't rule one out if the price was right.

You must have missed a lot of posts. Go back and read the thread. You kept interjecting where I was writing about 3/4 year contracts. So I gave 3/4 year contract comps. I also explained why the Bruins shouldn't worry about 4 year contract that walks him into UFA.

Get back to me once you're read up. lol.

 

[member 96824]

I'll repeat a third time.

His production in his contract year is the same as those two guys. Moreover, Jake had 166 minutes on the PP this year and Kapanenen had 61m, Johnsson 115m.

And if you can't negotiate better than Dubas, then you might as well hang 'em up as a GM.

Or take Anthony Mantha. 24 goals, 24 assists. Two years at $3.3m.

Exactly my point. Dubas is a moron and should be fired on the spot if he's giving out contracts based on one year of production.

Mantha is actually a solid comp for a 2 year deal though. If I'm the B's, that's the one I'm probably hitting home on if they want to go bridge.

I guess we just disagree...You think contracts are handed out without any context outside of one singular season, I think agents and GMs look at the whole picture.

 

[ON3M4N]

You must have missed a lot of posts. Go back and read the thread. You kept interjecting where I was writing about 3/4 year contracts. So I gave 3/4 year contract comps. I also explained why the Bruins shouldn't worry about 4 year contract that walks him into UFA.

Get back to me once you're read up. lol.

Ya I'm not going back, especially if your talking about the leafs boys. Kap shows expiring as an RFA and Johnsson a UFA because he'll be past 27yr old (he'll be 29yr old when his deal is up). Feel free to go back yourself though and see my bridge deal comp (spoiler its $3.35 million).

 

[BruinsBtn]

Let's toss a trade thread up.

Jake DeBrusk for Andreas Johnsson. Who says no?

This board is very funny.

Toss a player in a trade proposal and it's like "oh no he's worth way more than that!" but then when it comes to paying that player we discount the f*** out of them.

How about Charlie McAvoy for Auston Matthews? Or Pasta for Nylander?

I'll take McAvoy and Pasta every day but if you want to beat the Leafs on the ice, you need to beat them at the negotiating table. And not just the Leafs, every team in the league.

It starts right from draft day and the Bruins have been building around character for years and part of that character is taking a discount to be on a competitive team. I think that's what they expected when they drafted Jake.

The reality is you get paid for numbers.
Johnsson contract year: 73 games, 20 goals, 23 assists (0.58 ppg)
Debrusk contract year: 65 games, 19 goals, 16 assists (0.53 ppg)

Kapanen was also 0.56 ppg.

Jake had triple the amount of PP time as Kapanen too.

To be honest, I'll be disappointed with Sweeney if Debrusk isn't paid less than those two.

 

[TwineTickler]

I'm kind of curious what number people think qualifies as streaky. i.e. how many games (average) between goals or points qualifies as streaky. Is it 5 games? 8 games? 10 games?

His last two months of the season.

January 7th to February 8th
- 7 goals 7 assists 14 points in 13 GP

February 9th through March 10th
- 1 goal 1 point in 14 GP

Absolutely on fire, and then he disappears. I didn't really look back much further because when I went to his game log that slapped me right in the face... but he's definitely got streaks like that throughout his first 3 years.