Toggle sidebar

Matt Irwin

Status
Not open for further replies.
BB88

BB88

Registered User
Jan 19, 2015
40,887
20,511
Trap Jesus said:
I think people are being too tough on Seids. He started to look better towards the end of the year, so maybe his recovery was tougher on him. He might not completely regain his form, but he's still definitely a legit top 4 guy IMO.
Click to expand...

I watched Seids videos and tried to find news about his recovery and he truly looks like a tank, in last septembers interview his upper body was in top shape, if he can get his lower body back to normal then he could very well do well next season.
 
Sturm

Sturm

Registered User
Jun 25, 2015
878
0
Virginia
Fans crave another top 4 Dman, yet they want to trade an established top 4 D in Seidenberg, makes no sense. Your'e not gonna get much for him now anyway. Let him play and then trade him at the deadline if the team is in the tank.
 
ODAAT

ODAAT

Registered User
Oct 17, 2006
52,283
20,511
Victoria BC
Sturm said:
Fans crave another top 4 Dman, yet they want to trade an established top 4 D in Seidenberg, makes no sense. Your'e not gonna get much for him now anyway. Let him play and then trade him at the deadline if the team is in the tank.
Click to expand...


I`m confused, in one sentence you are saying fans want to trade "an established top 4 D" yet in the next sentence you say "not gonna get much for him now anyway" so....which is it?

I am one of the few here who liked the way Seids finished the year in the last 10-12 games, saw plenty of signs he was finally feeling stronger on the blades and was playing with more confidence, too bad the rest of the troops weren`t playing the same
 
Sturm

Sturm

Registered User
Jun 25, 2015
878
0
Virginia
ODAAT said:
I`m confused, in one sentence you are saying fans want to trade "an established top 4 D" yet in the next sentence you say "not gonna get much for him now anyway" so....which is it?

I am one of the few here who liked the way Seids finished the year in the last 10-12 games, saw plenty of signs he was finally feeling stronger on the blades and was playing with more confidence, too bad the rest of the troops weren`t playing the same
Click to expand...

Fans want to add another Top 4 Dman to the roster via FA because its a glaring issue, but then want to trade Seidenberg. Makes no sense to subtract a top 4D when you actually need to add another.
 

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
Sturm said:
Fans crave another top 4 Dman, yet they want to trade an established top 4 D in Seidenberg, makes no sense. Your'e not gonna get much for him now anyway. Let him play and then trade him at the deadline if the team is in the tank.
Click to expand...

I have been one of the loudest voices in the "trade Seidenberg" crew. I've detailed my rationale on a number of occasions so I won't go through it all again, but in short it comes down to the following:

Age 34, 3 years left on a deal paying him $4M per, had a horrendous season coming off knee surgery when he was supposedly days from playing in the prior season's Cup finals, one of multiple "top 6" Bruin defensemen who lack quickness and speed (Chara, McQuaid).

Put simply...if he was a free agent coming off last season, with a still unproven knee, would he fetch $3M today? I say no way. Not at age 34 with those miles. So why should we be happy paying him $4M per season until he's 37 years old? It's bad business.

I love the guy but PC signed him to a bad deal (shocking) and the injury made it much worse. If you can find a team who'll take him for nothing I do it in a second.
 

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
Sturm said:
Fans want to add another Top 4 Dman to the roster via FA because its a glaring issue, but then want to trade Seidenberg. Makes no sense to subtract a top 4D when you actually need to add another.
Click to expand...

Except he's not a top 4D. That's the difference.

Just because he was a top 4 defenseman at age 32 before knee surgery doesn't mean you get to call him a top 4 D man now. He was horrendous last season. ALL season. At this point he's a bottom pairing d-man on a quality defense until he proves otherwise.

Now add on that our ex-GM somehow signed him to a deal that pays him $4M for three more years with a NTC. He's the Chris Kelly of our defense.
 
Sturm

Sturm

Registered User
Jun 25, 2015
878
0
Virginia
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that recovering from the knee injury effected him more than was thought.

My point is let him see if he can get back to health and trade him at the deadline if you have to.
 
PatriceBergeronFan

PatriceBergeronFan

Registered User
Jul 15, 2011
59,965
37,720
USA
bp13 said:
Except he's not a top 4D. That's the difference.

Just because he was a top 4 defenseman at age 32 before knee surgery doesn't mean you get to call him a top 4 D man now. He was horrendous last season. ALL season. At this point he's a bottom pairing d-man on a quality defense until he proves otherwise.

Now add on that our ex-GM somehow signed him to a deal that pays him $4M for three more years with a NTC. He's the Chris Kelly of our defense.
Click to expand...

He was not horrendous ALL season. And even horrendous Seids is at worst a #4. He is absolutely not the Kelly of our defense as even a #4 is worth his $4,000,000 currently. Without a bounce back he is obviously not #2 but to call him worse than a #4 is an insult to him. His contract itself is a bargain as well!
 
GoBs

GoBs

Registered User
Nov 21, 2009
7,978
3,759
USA
PatriceBergeronFan said:
He was not horrendous ALL season. And even horrendous Seids is at worst a #4. He is absolutely not the Kelly of our defense as even a #4 is worth his $4,000,000 currently. Without a bounce back he is obviously not #2 but to call him worse than a #4 is an insult to him. His contract itself is a bargain as well!
Click to expand...

Krug will be traded before Seidenberg. Bruins can't afford his pay raise next season.
 

DoubleAAAA

Registered User
Jun 5, 2009
4,757
201
JMiller said:
They can't afford to let him go. He's exactly what they need on the back end.
Click to expand...

I think it hinges on him establishing himself in the top 4. I personally think he's capable if he's given enough opportunity. If he disappoints or doesn't get the opportunity I could see the team moving on.
 
zaYG

zaYG

Nerevarine
Jun 29, 2012
3,487
752
Santa Cruz, CA
PatriceBergeronFan said:
He was not horrendous ALL season. And even horrendous Seids is at worst a #4. He is absolutely not the Kelly of our defense as even a #4 is worth his $4,000,000 currently. Without a bounce back he is obviously not #2 but to call him worse than a #4 is an insult to him. His contract itself is a bargain as well!
Click to expand...

Seids last season was among the absolute worst defensemen in the entire league when you look at the numbers.
 
Estlin

Estlin

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
5,169
3,990
New York City
JMiller said:
They can't afford to let him go. He's exactly what they need on the back end.
Click to expand...

It's not proven that he can handle top-four duties. The Bruins also have a guy like Joe Morrow waiting in the wings, and he has the potential to do what Krug can—and hhe has the size to be in the top four.
 
Pia8988

Pia8988

Registered User
May 26, 2014
14,375
8,799
The Bruins can absolutely afford Krug. They have almost 6 million coming off the books just in Kelly and Lucic. That's such an absurd statement.
 
JOKER 192

JOKER 192

Blow it up
Sponsor
Jun 14, 2010
20,071
19,290
Montreal,Canada
Pia8988 said:
The Bruins can absolutely afford Krug. They have almost 6 million coming off the books just in Kelly and Lucic. That's such an absurd statement.
Click to expand...

And you can add the 3.4 Krug is making this year as well. The issue will be if he can play top 4 though. Which he will likely have to prove this year. If he can't take a top4 role and continues to need shelter, then he becomes a very expensive 3rd liner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom