News Article: Jimmy Hayes, Matt Beleskey embrace challenge of coming to Bruins

[PB37]

Real links with figures, otherwise it's all rumours and conjecture. Again, maybe some teams offered more money per year, but not term. We also gave this guy a NMC for two years. Unless there is somewhere that can show the other rumoured contract offers, rumours mean zero. We do know the Ducks offered 4X4, but 3.8X5 is better.

It's been reported on and discussed, not rumors. Google is your friend.

 

[jgatie]

Real links with figures, otherwise it's all rumours and conjecture. Again, maybe some teams offered more money per year, but not term. We also gave this guy a NMC for two years. Unless there is somewhere that can show the other rumoured contract offers, rumours mean zero. We do know the Ducks offered 4X4, but 3.8X5 is better.

Wouldn't citing the NMC pretty much negate your theory that "It's all about the money"?

 

[EverettMike]

I think it matters to management after losing a top young player like Hamilton. IMO, that's why Sweeney has been very clear about drafting and pursuing players that want to be here.

1) Can a guy play?
2) Does he like to play?

That's really all that matters. If a guy would give more effort for one city/team over another he probably isn't a hard "yes" to number 2. Do you think Patrice Bergeron would give less effort if he had been drafted by another organization? Why did Nathan Horton disappear for stretches in Florida and Boston?

Did anyone love playing for Boston more than Shawn Thornton? Did he just stop caring his last season here?

Again, it is all just meaningless ultimately. A guy might be excited/thrilled/pumped in July to go to a certain team, but when the games start they are just games, and he either gives a **** about his performance on the ice or not. I bet winning, a good coach, good teammates, etc matter a million times more than the city the team plays in 50% of the time.

Do we think it is a compliment or insult to suggest a guy would try harder here than he did in his last stop simply because Boston is a better city? Was anyone a bigger piece of **** from a purely professional standpoint than Vince Carter, who intentionally sandbagged the Raptors?

(Since some will miss my first post, this isn't about Beleskey and Hayes, I am not even calling their sincerity into question, just commenting on team building and the type of players to pursue.)

 

[BB88]

Real links with figures, otherwise it's all rumours and conjecture. Again, maybe some teams offered more money per year, but not term. We also gave this guy a NMC for two years. Unless there is somewhere that can show the other rumoured contract offers, rumours mean zero. We do know the Ducks offered 4X4, but 3.8X5 is better.

Again when even Bob says on the same day that beleskey signed with us that the minimun he signs for
is 5/5(he had multiple offers on the table before Sweeney gave his) it's pretty telling and I'm sorry but I go with Bob over your thinking.
+ every Boston reporter was saying it's clear he left money on the table.

 

[Artemis]

It's nice to live in that world, but in reality, when it comes to athletes, its always about the money.

If you can pull out that one or two times a player at the end of his career took a little less money to play for a contender, I'll show you thousands of times where athletes took the money over anything else.

And I don't blame them one bit.

Isn't it a double-edged sword, though? The problem with a ridiculously huge contract is that if a player doesn't deliver, his life can become pretty miserable.

Of course no athlete is going to turn down millions and take the league minimum because they like a certain city or want a championship, but nobody's insinuating that.

I also recall Dustin Pedroia taking much less to play in Boston on his last contract. And Patrice Bergeron would have had one hell of a payday if he'd decided to go FA.

 

[PB37]

1) Can a guy play?
2) Does he like to play?

That's really all that matters. If a guy would give more effort for one city/team over another he probably isn't a hard "yes" to number 2. Do you think Patrice Bergeron would give less effort if he had been drafted by another organization? Why did Nathan Horton disappear for stretches in Florida and Boston?

Did anyone love playing for Boston more than Shawn Thornton? Did he just stop caring his last season here?

Again, it is all just meaningless ultimately. A guy might be excited/thrilled/pumped in July to go to a certain team, but when the games start they are just games, and he either gives a **** about his performance on the ice or not. I bet winning, a good coach, good teammates, etc matter a million times more than the city the team plays in 50% of the time.

Do we think it is a compliment or insult to suggest a guy would try harder here than he did in his last stop simply because Boston is a better city? Was anyone a bigger piece of **** from a purely professional standpoint than Vince Carter, who intentionally sandbagged the Raptors?

(Since some will miss my first post, this isn't about Beleskey and Hayes, I am not even calling their sincerity into question, just commenting on team building and the type of players to pursue.)

I think it matters in terms of resigning and team unity. Our new GM just saw what happens when our best young player left town because of a disconnect between he and the vets on the team ( and possibly other issues ) and ultimately did not want to resign here.

The Boston lockerrrom has been cited by outsiders as the best, most closely knit room during our SC runs. We had leaders and guys who loved playing here... guys like Ference and Thornton and Recchi. We've since displaced them not because of a lack of effort but because it was time to move on as their on ice contributions diminished with age. But their team unity skills, which a huge part of that comes from a wanting to play here, have never been replaced. The Bruins on ice product has been very spotty in passion ever since.

 

[finchster]

It's been reported on and discussed, not rumors. Google is your friend.

No it hasn't, no real figures just guys spit-balling on twitter on what they think. Here is the only thing that is close to reporting anything.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...---19-million-deal-with-bruins-001909875.html

The answer clearly wasn't wads of money. The Ducks offered Beleskey a $16-million contract for four years; annual value of $4-million. With the Bruins, he gets the extra year and a little less annually. We all know in today's NHL there are GMs willing to throw wads of cash at the best available free agent. It makes you wonder what the six to eight other suitors were offering that Beleskey didn't like.

Eric Stephens of the OC Register tweeted the big sticking point from the beginning between Anaheim and Beleskey was the no movement clause. The Ducks weren't willing to add that in and the Bruins did, for the first two years. Pure speculation here, but it's likely they were holding back in order to protect themselves from carrying a big contract for a player that had one outstanding season after many mediocre ones.
......

Beleskey wanted some security in his career with a NMC, for players that's pretty valuable. So again you can sit in fantasy land, but with all things considered Beleskey took the offer he felt was best for his career. Money and extras included.

Wouldn't citing the NMC pretty much negate your theory that "It's all about the money"?

A NMC is pretty valuable, it enables a player to decide where they want to play should the relationship between them and the team breaks down. A NMC is not a, "I love this city so much I want to stay forever and ever clause". It's a, "my career is in my control, not Don Sweeney's control."

 

[EverettMike]

I think it matters in terms of resigning and team unity. Our new GM just saw what happens when our best young player left town because of a disconnect between he and the vets on the team ( and possibly other issues ) and ultimately did not want to resign here.

The Boston lockerrrom has been cited by outsiders as the best, most closely knit room during our SC runs. We had leaders and guys who loved playing here... guys like Ference and Thornton and Recchi. We've since displaced them not because of a lack of effort but because it was time to move on as their on ice contributions diminished with age. But their team unity skills, which a huge part of that comes from a wanting to play here, has been missing. The Bruins on ice product has been very spotty in passion ever since.

The Blaine Lacher Bruins were a ridiculously close-knit team. That story was pushed over and over again. It didn't matter.

If they are winning team unity will be great, and if they are losing it won't. But even then, it doesn't matter if everyone loves Boston. I even said a good coach and good teammates matter a million times more. I love Boston, but I don't think it has magical powers to get more out of hockey players. It is just as likely to beat a guy down (some thrive in a big market with passionate fans, some wilter).

Oh, and did Dougie Hamilton ever come across as not trying? Wanting to be here or not wanting to be here doesn't necessarily indicate effort given on the ice. It has nothing to do with wanting to play here, it has everything to do with wanting to play, at least when the on ice product actually begins in earnest.

Maybe it matters in July when guys sign deals, but they don't play any games in July.

(The Bruins effort has been spotty the entire time Claude Julien has been coach, even during 2011 they went through spells. 2013's team drove me nuts during the regular season and almost blew a 3-1 lead to a ****** Toronto team because they just stopped trying until 10 minutes left to go in the 3rd. These narratives about unity are written after the fact.)

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

The Blaine Lacher Bruins were a ridiculously close-knit team. That story was pushed over and over again. It didn't matter.

If they are winning team unity will be great, and if they are losing it won't. But even then, it doesn't matter if everyone loves Boston. I even said a good coach and good teammates matter a million times more. I love Boston, but I don't think it has magical powers to get more out of hockey players. It is just as likely to beat a guy down (some thrive in a big market with passionate fans, some wilter).

Oh, and did Dougie Hamilton ever come across as not trying? Wanting to be here or not wanting to be here doesn't necessarily indicate effort given on the ice. It has nothing to do with wanting to play here, it has everything to do with wanting to play, at least when the on ice product actually begins in earnest.

Maybe it matters in July when guys sign deals, but they don't play any games in July.

(The Bruins effort has been spotty the entire time Claude Julien has been coach, even during 2011 they went through spells. 2013's team drove me nuts during the regular season and almost blew a 3-1 lead to a ****** Toronto team because they just stopped trying until 10 minutes left to go in the 3rd. These narratives about unity are written after the fact.)

To piggyback on this... the 2 prior teams Claude coached cited having situations where it seemed like Claude lost the room. Claude is a good coach, but all coaches have a shelf life with each team. I think he's going to be on a shorter leash; and could easily be coaching somewhere else next year at this time should the Bruins have a shaky start/season.

 

[finchster]

To piggyback on this... the 2 prior teams Claude coached cited having situations where it seemed like Claude lost the room. Claude is a good coach, but all coaches have a shelf life with each team. I think he's going to be on a shorter leash; and could easily be coaching somewhere else next year at this time should the Bruins have a shaky start/season.

They kept Claude to blame him when this dumpster fire of a team plays terrible.

 

[jgatie]

A NMC is pretty valuable, it enables a player to decide where they want to play should the relationship between them and the team breaks down. A NMC is not a, "I love this city so much I want to stay forever and ever clause". It's a, "my career is in my control, not Don Sweeney's control."

Call the reasoning behind a NMC whatever you want; it's still not money, and therefore it's not "all about the money".

 

[PB37]

The Blaine Lacher Bruins were a ridiculously close-knit team. That story was pushed over and over again. It didn't matter.

If they are winning team unity will be great, and if they are losing it won't. But even then, it doesn't matter if everyone loves Boston. I even said a good coach and good teammates matter a million times more. I love Boston, but I don't think it has magical powers to get more out of hockey players. It is just as likely to beat a guy down (some thrive in a big market with passionate fans, some wilter).

I think you're downplaying the effects of team chemistry by a lot. We're not professional athletes so we'll never really know, but all I can do is try to correlate my own experience with having a team that I work in and I can tell you that when I have guys who genuinely like to work with each other, have good leaders in place, and like the company, they produce better results.

Oh, and did Dougie Hamilton ever come across as not trying? Wanting to be here or not wanting to be here doesn't necessarily indicate effort given on the ice. It has nothing to do with wanting to play here, it has everything to do with wanting to play, at least when the on ice product actually begins in earnest.

Maybe it matters in July when guys sign deals, but they don't play any games in July.

(The Bruins effort has been spotty the entire time Claude Julien has been coach, even during 2011 they went through spells. 2013's team drove me nuts during the regular season and almost blew a 3-1 lead to a ****** Toronto team because they just stopped trying until 10 minutes left to go in the 3rd. These narratives about unity are written after the fact.)

And in the end, when Dougie got his chance, he left. He wanted to play, but he didn't want to play here. To the Bruins who had invested a lot in him, that stings and they're looking to not make that mistake again.

Every team in the history of forever goes thru downward spells. It still doesn't displace team chemistry as an important factor to it's success.

 

[PB37]

No it hasn't, no real figures just guys spit-balling on twitter on what they think. Here is the only thing that is close to reporting anything.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...---19-million-deal-with-bruins-001909875.html

Beleskey wanted some security in his career with a NMC, for players that's pretty valuable. So again you can sit in fantasy land, but with all things considered Beleskey took the offer he felt was best for his career. Money and extras included.


A NMC is pretty valuable, it enables a player to decide where they want to play should the relationship between them and the team breaks down. A NMC is not a, "I love this city so much I want to stay forever and ever clause". It's a, "my career is in my control, not Don Sweeney's control."

Keep looking. You'll see that it was less about the money and more about where he wanted to go. You can keep pretending like it's not true despite the reports and signs; that's fine I guess.

 

[finchster]

Keep looking. You'll see that it was less about the money and more about where he wanted to go. You can keep pretending like it's not true despite the reports and signs; that's fine I guess.

Find real reports with real offers not just conjecture or tweets, then we will talk. Otherwise it's all a load of non-sense. I had a real report to back up my argument.

 

[EverettMike]

I think you're downplaying the effects of team chemistry by a lot. We're not professional athletes so we'll never really know, but all I can do is try to correlate my own experience with having a team that I work in and I can tell you that when I have guys who genuinely like to work with each other, have good leaders in place, and like the company produce better results.



And in the end, when Dougie got his chance, he left. He wanted to play, but he didn't want to play here. To the Bruins who had invested a lot in him, that stings and they're looking to not make that mistake again.

Every team in the history of forever goes thru downward spells. It still doesn't displace team chemistry as an important factor to it's success.

I don't even really understand what you are arguing here. You keep citing liking your teammates, and I already said that matters, twice. I feel like we are having two different arguments here. I'll try to address what you are talking about as I see it.

The fact that Beleskey "wants to be" in Boston is totally meaningless come October. What will matter is if he 1) can play and 2) actually cares about playing. We aren't going to get a special magical version of a player because he wants to be here. If his teammates suck and the team sucks and the coach sucks that July excitement will never be cited again. If he takes night's off not one fan will care that he "wants to be here."

As far as "chemistry," a vague and ever-shfting term in sports, winning breeds chemistry way more often than chemistry breeds winning.

 

[DKH]

the 2011 Bruins were close knit and they started bringing in players without considering style, mindset, and how they would fit into the room

Chiarelli got away from it and all he did was lose his job

Sweeney is in the process of cleaning it up

I commend him and when the ridiculous pie in the sky accusations were being tossed about what a joke it was; Laughingstock???? what a bunch of ass clowns. Regardless, I'm still liking the Hamilton deal for the way it went down and what he got back- now in arguably one of the best drafts since the 1979 blockbuster- and better than the projected compensation. I'd take Dougie on that Calgary deal but doesn't mean I didn't think he had sketchy hockey sense that experience could correct- but his family didn't want him here and he's gone. Good riddance. Fine line between love and hate and I never loved Dougie and I never hated him, but if I had to pick one screw him. I'm amazed how many don't see him for what he is. Also, love that Chiarelli plan backfired and he had to use his Dougie money to overpay on Sekera. Love that he went to Calgary as well.

glad to see Don building a team considering character and mental toughness and not just who can skate well

 

[DitClapper]

the 2011 Bruins were close knit and they started bringing in players without considering style, mindset, and how they would fit into the room

Chiarelli got away from it and all he did was lose his job

Sweeney is in the process of cleaning it up

I commend him and when the ridiculous pie in the sky accusations were being tossed about what a joke it was

glad to see Don building a team considering character and mental toughness and not just who can skate well

Agreed. Haggs touched on that today:
http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins/boston-bruins-making-a-powerful-roster-overhaul

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

the wishful thinker in me is hoping Hayes can have kind of a Glen Murray-like explosion of goals around the age of 26.

His goals per 60 was very good last year...wondering if he's a guy who can put up some good numbers if he gets more minutes with better linemates.

 

[DKH]

Agreed. Haggs touched on that today:
http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins/boston-bruins-making-a-powerful-roster-overhaul

I had a spike in rage while waiting to pick up my dog- added some good venum to my original post. Where was this energy when I blew off the gym to take a nap at 1

 

[DKH]

the wishful thinker in me is hoping Hayes can have kind of a Glen Murray-like explosion of goals around the age of 26.

His goals per 60 was very good last year...wondering if he's a guy who can put up some good numbers if he gets more minutes with better linemates.

Murray was a stud- if Hayes is a good soldier that bangs in 20 I'm good

 

[ODAAT]

Murray was a stud- if Hayes is a good soldier that bangs in 20 I'm good

yep, me too, like to see Beleskey pop about 25

Either way, haven`t seen a ton of either, but what I have seen are two guys who`s highlights I have watched as being guys who seemingly have no issues planting their arse in front of the net, stand there and try and make life miserable for the opposing goalie, that itself will be refreshing

 

[EverettMike]

The 2011 Bruins traded Mark Stuart. Who personified the things we are talking about more?

Peter Chiarelli openly talked about loyalty to guys that won him a lot of games. Chris Kelly was never moved. He is still here. Chiarelli valued character over talent too much. That's why he is gone. He created an old team lacking in skill.

We can praise or rip Sweeney, but to say Chiarelli didn't value character is a lie. I watched Gregory Campbell hold his roster spot all year. I saw Max ****ing Talbot traded for.

1) Can you play?
2) Do you want to play?

Only things that matter. Will and grit only gets you so far. You need talent too. Belesky can want to be here more than anything in the world, won't matter if he scores eleven goals.

 

[LouJersey]

They kept Claude to blame him when this dumpster fire of a team plays terrible.

This team has been awful since game 5 . Round 2 vs the Habs .

 

[LouJersey]

Btw love pointing the leadership problem out summer of 2014 and being told that's overrated and the GM knows best

 

[DitClapper]

http://video.bruins.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=662&id=832006&lang=en