Boston Globe KPD: What will Don Sweeney do now with this Bruins roster?

[BruinsFanSince94]

I’m sold on McAvoy. Not yet sold on Carlo. People seem to frequently lump them together as though they’re equal.

They lump them together because going forward, they are our top two RHD for the future. What exactly aren't you sold on when it comes to Carlo?

Big minute defenseman? Check.
Shut down defenseman? Check.
Healthy? Check.

His offense is the only thing in question. He doesn't need to produce a ton though.

 

[TCB]

I’m sold on McAvoy. Not yet sold on Carlo. People seem to frequently lump them together as though they’re equal.

Why aren't you sold on Carlo?

You can't compare the two, but their both are going to be stalwarts on the bruins defense for years to come. Different players without a doubt as McAvoy has offensive skills galore and Carlo will never come close to them but he is already one of the top defensive defenseman in the game.

 

[Chief Nine]

I don't think know one underestimates how great Krug is on the PP and its not only on the PP he's one of the top offensive defenseman in the league and he's shown in this years playoffs that he's also very dependable in his own end and has a complete level that doesn't stop. Its far from a pipe dream that he'll get 8 mil per. It will be nice to to revisit this thread in his contract yea or when he re-signs.

As far as McAvoy, I guess the same thing goes there, because I see a future stud written all over him in every aspect of the game including being one of the top PP specialist in the league. As good as Krug maybe, maybe not, but he'll be dam good and his emergence along with Carlo's and the pipeline of defenseman on the way and the fact that I feel Krug will get 8 mil per or more,will make Krug a valuable asset to acquire some much needed forward help, preferably a center. Now if Krug is willing to sign for 6 mil or less, that would be great but I think that's more along the lines of an actual pipe dream

I’ll say it again:

There isn’t any way Torey Krug is a #1 defenseman in the National Hockey League on any team and he shouldn’t be paid like one.

If there’s a GM out there who wants to risk his job paying 8-10 million to Torey Krug (your numbers) then they’re playing with fire.

Someone will pay Erick Karlsson that kind of money, (which IMO is gonna be a huge mistake) but not Torey Krug.

Montreal already made that mistake with PK Subban (who isn’t a #1 D either) and Nashville now has buyer’s remorse and is supposedly looking to move him.

Here’s the top 20 highest paid D in the NHL:

1		Drew Doughty DEFENSEMAN	$11,000,000
2		P.K. Subban DEFENSEMAN	$9,000,000
3		Oliver Ekman-Larsson DEFENSEMAN	$8,250,000
4		John Carlson DEFENSEMAN	$8,000,000
		Brent Burns DEFENSEMAN	$8,000,000
6		Victor Hedman DEFENSEMAN	$7,875,000
7		Shea Weber DEFENSEMAN	$7,857,143
8		Dustin Byfuglien DEFENSEMAN	$7,600,000
9		Ryan Suter DEFENSEMAN	$7,538,462
10		Aaron Ekblad DEFENSEMAN	$7,500,000
11		Kris Letang DEFENSEMAN	$7,250,000
12		Marc-Edouard Vlasic DEFENSEMAN	$7,000,000
13		Brent Seabrook DEFENSEMAN	$6,875,000
14		Mark Giordano DEFENSEMAN	$6,750,000
		Ryan McDonagh DEFENSEMAN	$6,750,000
16		Kevin Shattenkirk DEFENSEMAN	$6,650,000
17		Cam Fowler DEFENSEMAN	$6,500,000
		Alex Pietrangelo DEFENSEMAN	$6,500,000
19		Keith Yandle DEFENSEMAN	$6,350,000
20		Ryan Ellis DEFENSEMAN	$6,250,000

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

There’s some really bad contracts there and some bargains like Giordano, Pietrangelo and Ryan Ellis.

But anyone who wants to pay Torey Krug on par with Subban, OEL, John Carlson and Brent Burns is nuts.

Hell, every one of those deals are stupid to me.

And you still haven’t told me who you’re trading Krug for

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

No chance Torey Krug gets 8M on the open market.

 

[burstnbloom]

Then you’re rebuilding

That's not true. You're trading one guy. If you make the decision that you're moving the player, you try to gain the most valuable asset possible. I don't see the RW everyone here is clamoring for on the market. Maybe you get a first and a RW prospect and you can use those assets to upgrade elsewhere. It just doens't seem like the easy fix that this board is asking for is out there.

 

[BruinDust]

I’m sold on McAvoy. Not yet sold on Carlo. People seem to frequently lump them together as though they’re equal.

Nobody here does this.

They get brought up together because they are both RFA, both right-shots, and both roughly the same age. I've yet to see anyone suggest Carlo is a valuable as McAvoy or that they will be paid approx. the same amount of money.

 

[Chief Nine]

That's not true. You're trading one guy. If you make the decision that you're moving the player, you try to gain the most valuable asset possible. I don't see the RW everyone here is clamoring for on the market. Maybe you get a first and a RW prospect and you can use those assets to upgrade elsewhere. It just doens't seem like the easy fix that this board is asking for is out there.

What you’re describing right there is a rebuild. You’re trading an elite offensive puck moving defenseman for futures and not replacing him or his production on the roster.

You also point out that there isn’t a top 6 RW out there available for a trade, so why so you give up one of your best players (incidentally a type of player that everyone wants) for futures?

How is that helping a team that just went the distance? To me that’s folding the tent

 

[SanDogBrewin]

Why aren't you sold on Carlo?

You can't compare the two, but their both are going to be stalwarts on the bruins defense for years to come. Different players without a doubt as McAvoy has offensive skills galore and Carlo will never come close to them but he is already one of the top defensive defenseman in the game.

Bruins don’t get past Columbus without Carlo.

 

[BruinDust]

Bruins don’t get past Columbus without Carlo.

I don't think they even get past TO.

I've said this before but I thought Krug's struggles in 2018 playoffs had a lot to do with losing Carlo as his partner. Now he had to be the puck-carrier far more often with a more limited D-man with the puck like Miller on his other side.

I don't think it's any coincidence whatsoever that Krug just came off a monster playoffs in 2019 with Carlo as his running mate. Less fatigue meant a fresher Krug which meant a much better Krug.

 

[BruinDust]

But anyone who wants to pay Torey Krug on par with Subban, OEL, John Carlson and Brent Burns is nuts.

Hell, every one of those deals are stupid to me.

And you still haven’t told me who you’re trading Krug for

I'm not so sure there is much of a gap between Carlson and Krug. The difference is one is big and the other is small. Carlson is a strong offensive D-man but defensively he's average despite his size. That run with the Caps it was Orlov and Niskanen who got all the tough assignments, leaving Carlson in pretty much the same spot as Krug was, manning the No.1 PP while getting 2nd pairing assignments with Kempny.

Then I look at a more defensive defender like Vlasic, whose making 7 million per.

Now you could argue both of those deals are asinine. But if were comparing Krug to the rest of the marketplace, he's somewhere between 7 and 8 million a year with a salary cap likely at 83 million this off-season and probably around 85 million when Krug is a UFA.

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

I think Carlo is only effective when he’s playing tough. When he’s not, he wilts, plays tentatively and softly, not capitalizing on his size, giving up on pursuit, often resulting in failed clearing attempts and some poor passes.

Never said people here say they should be paid the same but it seems a fait a compli that the both of them are locks. I only see McAvoy as a lock at this point.

 

[TCB]

I’ll say it again:

There isn’t any way Torey Krug is a #1 defenseman in the National Hockey League on any team and he shouldn’t be paid like one.

If there’s a GM out there who wants to risk his job paying 8-10 million to Torey Krug (your numbers) then they’re playing with fire.

Someone will pay Erick Karlsson that kind of money, (which IMO is gonna be a huge mistake) but not Torey Krug.

Montreal already made that mistake with PK Subban (who isn’t a #1 D either) and Nashville now has buyer’s remorse and is supposedly looking to move him.

Here’s the top 20 highest paid D in the NHL:

1		Drew Doughty DEFENSEMAN	$11,000,000
2		P.K. Subban DEFENSEMAN	$9,000,000
3		Oliver Ekman-Larsson DEFENSEMAN	$8,250,000
4		John Carlson DEFENSEMAN	$8,000,000
		Brent Burns DEFENSEMAN	$8,000,000
6		Victor Hedman DEFENSEMAN	$7,875,000
7		Shea Weber DEFENSEMAN	$7,857,143
8		Dustin Byfuglien DEFENSEMAN	$7,600,000
9		Ryan Suter DEFENSEMAN	$7,538,462
10		Aaron Ekblad DEFENSEMAN	$7,500,000
11		Kris Letang DEFENSEMAN	$7,250,000
12		Marc-Edouard Vlasic DEFENSEMAN	$7,000,000
13		Brent Seabrook DEFENSEMAN	$6,875,000
14		Mark Giordano DEFENSEMAN	$6,750,000
		Ryan McDonagh DEFENSEMAN	$6,750,000
16		Kevin Shattenkirk DEFENSEMAN	$6,650,000
17		Cam Fowler DEFENSEMAN	$6,500,000
		Alex Pietrangelo DEFENSEMAN	$6,500,000
19		Keith Yandle DEFENSEMAN	$6,350,000
20		Ryan Ellis DEFENSEMAN	$6,250,000

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

There’s some really bad contracts there and some bargains like Giordano, Pietrangelo and Ryan Ellis.

But anyone who wants to pay Torey Krug on par with Subban, OEL, John Carlson and Brent Burns is nuts.

Hell, every one of those deals are stupid to me.

And you still haven’t told me who you’re trading Krug for

The market isn't going down it goes up every year you can't judge a salary on what a player like Pietrangelo signed 2013 or Kris Letang signed in 2014, too what Torey Krug is going to sign in 2020.

If you compare Krug to letang as their very similar players, and I'd prefer Krug.

Letang signs for 7.25 in 2014, in 2020 6 years later if you don't think Krug will be signing for near the 8 mil or more per, I don't know what to tell you.

Guys on that list like Yandle, Shattenkirk,Fowler, Seabrook, couldn't hold Krug jock strap. Your basically proving Krug deserves to get paid more than them, I also would prefer him over OEL and Ellis.

 

[Chief Nine]

I'm not so sure there is much of a gap between Carlson and Krug. The difference is one is big and the other is small. Carlson is a strong offensive D-man but defensively he's average despite his size. That run with the Caps it was Orlov and Niskanen who got all the tough assignments, leaving Carlson in pretty much the same spot as Krug was, manning the No.1 PP while getting 2nd pairing assignments with Kempny.

Then I look at a more defensive defender like Vlasic, whose making 7 million per.

Now you could argue both of those deals are asinine. But if were comparing Krug to the rest of the marketplace, he's somewhere between 7 and 8 million a year with a salary cap likely at 83 million this off-season and probably around 85 million when Krug is a UFA.

I agree about your comparison with John Carlson, but either way it was an overpay. But the Caps just came off a Cup win and they weren’t gonna let him walk so they had to pay him.

OEL is Arizona’s franchise player so that’s why he’s up there, which again to me is a massive overpay.

For San Jose to have that much money tied up with Burns and Vlasic is nuts too and they have to make a decision on Karlsson as well. Which they’re likely going to let him walk.

But Krug being paid anywhere north of 8 million by a team is crazy

 

[BruinDust]

I agree about your comparison with John Carlson, but either way it was an overpay. But the Caps just came off a Cup win and they weren’t gonna let him walk so they had to pay him.

OEL is Arizona’s franchise player so that’s why he’s up there, which again to me is a massive overpay.

For San Jose to have that much money tied up with Burns and Vlasic is nuts too and they have to make a decision on Karlsson as well. Which they’re likely going to let him walk.

But Krug being paid anywhere north of 8 million by a team is crazy

I'm comfortable with Krug in between 7-8.

All that being said, when I see a marketplace that pays a player like Jack Eichel 10 million a year, a 30 goal center basically, north of 8 million might not be so crazy.

 

[burstnbloom]

What you’re describing right there is a rebuild. You’re trading an elite offensive puck moving defenseman for futures and not replacing him or his production on the roster.

You also point out that there isn’t a top 6 RW out there available for a trade, so why so you give up one of your best players (incidentally a type of player that everyone wants) for futures?

How is that helping a team that just went the distance? To me that’s folding the tent

This is a very narrow minded view. I'm not advocating for trading Krug, I'm just saying, if you do, you get the most valuable package. Krug is going to be 29 when he signs his next contract. Players like him have not aged well at all and the Bruins best organizational depth is at LHD. The power play without Krug was also very good. He'd be a loss, sure, but I can see the argument for moving that value around. You're not rebuilding or folding the tent by trading a guy who has value but you don't see in the mix going forward. You're certainly not rebuilding if you're keeping multiple other 30+ players to make a run.

I certainly wouldn't just trade him for a RW to make a run when there isn't any good RW to trade for at this time. That is terrible asset management.

 

[KrejciMVP]

I like Krug at his #, perhaps getting a slight pay raise. 6×4 years seems fair. Hope hes not traded bc they have to pay that 6 mill to Backes

 

[Chief Nine]

The market isn't going down it goes up every year you can't judge a salary on what a player like Pietrangelo signed 2013 or Kris Letang signed in 2014, too what Torey Krug is going to sign in 2020.

If you compare Krug to letang as their very similar players, and I'd prefer Krug. Letang signs for 7.25 in 2014 in 2020, Krug 6 years later will be signing near the 8 mil or more per.

Guys on that list like Yandle, Shattenkirk,Fowler, Seabrook, couldn't hold Krug jock strap. Your basically proving Krug deserves to get paid more than them, I also would prefer him over OEL and Ellis.

Letang was the Pens #1 defenseman which is why he got what he got.

Yandle, Shattenkirk (who are comparables to Krug for better or worse) and to a much lesser extent, Seabrook all prove my point:

You don’t overpay players who aren’t #1 defensemen top tier money

 

[Chief Nine]

This is a very narrow minded view. I'm not advocating for trading Krug, I'm just saying, if you do, you get the most valuable package. Krug is going to be 29 when he signs his next contract. Players like him have not aged well at all and the Bruins best organizational depth is at LHD. The power play without Krug was also very good. He'd be a loss, sure, but I can see the argument for moving that value around. You're not rebuilding or folding the tent by trading a guy who has value but you don't see in the mix going forward. You're certainly not rebuilding if you're keeping multiple other 30+ players to make a run.

I certainly wouldn't just trade him for a RW to make a run when there isn't any good RW to trade for at this time. That is terrible asset management.

Well I’m sorry we don’t see eye to eye here and I’m so narrow minded .

Who’s saying he’s “a guy who has value but you don’t see in the mix going forward”? I don’t get any indications from the Bruins or Krug that he’s out of their future plans.

If you’re making a run with the other 30+ players why on earth do you trade your best offensive defenseman for players who won’t help you now?

Isn’t going for another run the way to go with Torey Krug given where they are right now? They have him under contract for one more year. If they win it all next year and he wants crazy money then you have to make a decision but they’re better off with him right now than without him going into next season

 

[Chief Nine]

I'm comfortable with Krug in between 7-8.

All that being said, when I see a marketplace that pays a player like Jack Eichel 10 million a year, a 30 goal center basically, north of 8 million might not be so crazy.

Yeah but Buffalo had to sign Eichel for big bucks. He’s a #2 overall pick and their franchise player.

Depends on the term of course and where the cap is, it’s a tough call with Krug right now. I’d say if the Bruins can sign him for 7-8 for 4 years then that’s ok but I doubt he bites for that term. You still have McAvoy and Carlo to sign as well

 

[TCB]

Letang was the Pens #1 defenseman which is why he got what he got.

Yandle, Shattenkirk (who are comparables to Krug for better or worse) and to a much lesser extent, Seabrook all prove my point:

You don’t overpay players who aren’t #1 defensemen top tier money

Yandle signed for 6.35 in 2016, and if you really feel Krug isn't going to be able to get paid around 8 mil per 4 years later, I don't know what to tell you. I guess only that, time will tell.

There'll be a lot of teams looking for a puck moving defenseman like Krug. Add to that the need for GMs to strike it big in the free agency market, which ends up creating a bidding war and escalating prices.

Shattenkirk on the other hand shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Krug, he's absolute horrendous in his own end and the fact that the rangers gave him 6.6 mil per in 17-18, should tell you that a team would be more than willing to pay Torey Krug much more, who is by far the better defenseman offensively and defensively.

 

[BruinDust]

Yeah but Buffalo had to sign Eichel for big bucks. He’s a #2 overall pick and their franchise player.

Depends on the term of course and where the cap is, it’s a tough call with Krug right now. I’d say if the Bruins can sign him for 7-8 for 4 years then that’s ok but I doubt he bites for that term. You still have McAvoy and Carlo to sign as well

When signing guys for the age 29 and onward seasons, I'm much more worried about term than I am AAV. I'd rather concede more money over a shorter term than less AAV but stretch out the term of the contract. It's funny to think that a decade ago it was all about super-long term to get the AAV down and GMs were praised for signing guys to super long-term deals well into their late 30s and even early 40s. Now with the league getting faster and younger each year, it's starting to trend the opposite way, and GMs want to keep the term down even if it means the AAV will be a bit higher and don't want to commit to guys in years of age 34-35-36-37.

You make a good point about Eichel and it's also about his value to Buffalo as much or more than what he should truly be getting in the marketplace. I guess in a way Krug is the opposite. If extended, he'll be signing with a team that has 2 very good young RD, a bevy of quality left-shot guys in the system. So he's not the only fish in the sea so to speak among Bruin D-men, whereas a guy like Eichel is "the man" in Buffalo because the rest of the roster isn't all that strong.

 

[DKH]

The only problem with that, is Krugs camp knows he'll get 8- 10 on the open market.

After what he showed in this years playoffs teams are going to be lining up to get him. I'd love for him too stay, love him as a player and a person but-it'll be hard fitting him in. I just don't see it happening, Bruins need to get younger at the center position and with their depth behind the blue-line, Krug just maybe the bargaining piece to bring in that top young Center this team so badly needs heading forward.

Krug wants to stay here he will take a home town discount

If I’m the GM

Unless I get such a ridiculous proposition I’m not trading this guy

My window on Bergeron & Krejci is 2 years - I got Chara and Krug atleast for one more

I’m not taking one step backwards after what I just went thru

Expansion is the wild card here

Without it I’m offering him $6 + for 5 years

If he doesn’t want it I play it out

Bottom Line is win the Cup 2020

Sole focus

One thing Don Sweeney Knows is Torey Krug has another level in the playoffs

I personally don’t give a flying duck about trading him at the deadline with the fear of losing him for nothing

What is your top focus ?

A. Winning the Cup
B getting value at deadline

ALERT: the team getting Krug is doing so to ‘win the Cup’ at the Bruins expense

He wants to stay that is legit and the word on the street is he will be extremely fair - what he wants is logical NMC as the tradeoff

Me? I want him hear minimum another year plus 5 more

 

[Chief Nine]

Yandle signed for 6.35 in 2016, and if you really feel Krug isn't going to be able to get paid around 8 mil per 4 years later, I don't know what to tell you. I guess only that, time will tell.

There'll be a lot of teams looking for a puck moving defenseman like Krug. Add to that the need for GMs to strike it big in the free agency market, which ends up creating a bidding war and escalating prices.

Shattenkirk on the other hand shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Krug, he's absolute horrendous in his own end and the fact that the rangers gave him 6.6 mil per in 17-18, should tell you that a team would be more than willing to pay Torey Krug much more, who is by far the better defenseman offensively and defensively.

Maybe GMs will start to wake up and realize that striking it big in the free agent market isn’t the best way to go.

Just because someone is stupid enough to pay that kind of money doesn’t set the market for everyone else. Look at the deals that Pastrnak and Marchand signed. Right there are two prime examples of a GM saying he’s not paying stupid money.

The Rangers should have taken notice of the Caps when they knew Shattenkirk wasn’t the answer to their problems. Now they’re stuck with that contract and he not getting any younger or better.

I doubt that Krug would get more than 8 in the open market. He’s simply not a franchise type player. The Bruins might have Krug in his best years right now and next season. If someone wants to pay him 8-10 million at his age when he’s a free agent good luck to them

 

[TCB]

Krug wants to stay here he will take a home town discount

If I’m the GM

Unless I get such a ridiculous proposition I’m not trading this guy

My window on Bergeron & Krejci is 2 years - I got Chara and Krug atleast for one more

I’m not taking one step backwards after what I just went thru

Expansion is the wild card here

Without it I’m offering him $6 + for 5 years

If he doesn’t want it I play it out

Bottom Line is win the Cup 2020

Sole focus

One thing Don Sweeney Knows is Torey Krug has another level in the playoffs

I personally don’t give a flying duck about trading him at the deadline with the fear of losing him for nothing

What is your top focus ?

A. Winning the Cup
B getting value at deadline

ALERT: the team getting Krug is doing so to ‘win the Cup’ at the Bruins expense

He wants to stay that is legit and the word on the street is he will be extremely fair - what he wants is logical NMC as the tradeoff

Me? I want him hear minimum another year plus 5 more

I hope your right but the only way I see him staying is if he does take that home town discount and Im pretty sure Sweeney will have all his cards in place and he won't wait till the deadline if he's going to trade him it'll be this off season ala Lucic, and If Krug is willing to sign a team friendly deal, and leave millions on the table that would be awesome.

 

[TCB]

Maybe GMs will start to wake up and realize that striking it big in the free agent market isn’t the best way to go.

Just because someone is stupid enough to pay that kind of money doesn’t set the market for everyone else. Look at the deals that Pastrnak and Marchand signed. Right there are two prime examples of a GM saying he’s not paying stupid money.

The Rangers should have taken notice of the Caps when they knew Shattenkirk wasn’t the answer to their problems. Now they’re stuck with that contract and he not getting any younger or better.

I doubt that Krug would get more than 8 in the open market. He’s simply not a franchise type player. The Bruins might have Krug in his best years right now and next season. If someone wants to pay him 8-10 million at his age when he’s a free agent good luck to them

Stupidity never ends when it comes to a GM and free agency. Pasta and Marchand never hit the open market or they would of received a much bigger pay day and hopefully Krug won't hit the market either.