Points is not the sole measure of a player. And Sanford gets almost every single one of his points at even strength. He almost never gets any PP time. The guys scored 15 goals in the last 43 games. I have no idea why you'd hurry to rush that off just as he's coming into his own, but I certainly am not.

And Bergy is a terrible comparison, they're nothing alike as players.

That's not all that great stats

https://hockeyviz.com/fixedImg/playerOverview/1920/STL/sanfoza94/

his 5v5 production go figure he's playing with David Perron almost non-stop, and Ryan O'Reilly the second most, and third most is Robert Thomas.

https://hockeyviz.com/fixedImg/wowy/1920/STL/sanfoza94/

This shows even more effect of players without him, and players that are effected by playing with him. If you really understood what I'm getting at that's the exact same thing that happened with Patrik Berglund. He brought players down on that 3rd line. It wasn't a good production by him. I don't see him coming into his own, he's being sheltered by skill.

Just off the top, I'm not a fan of the Evolving Hockey analytics & RAPM.

More to the main point, he has not brought down ROR (who struggled quite a bit with his own shooting this season) and Frenchy. His effectiveness playing on the boards skyrocketed this season, especially after the first 15 games. He's thinking the game much faster and has figured out how to find the right spots without the puck. As for his goals, have you not seen his finishes? Dude has potted a lot of real beauts. Of course, I don't need to remind anyone that he brought it big time in the Cup finals last year. Sanford is on the rise and that is not the time to ship him out, especially at his cap hit. We need cheap guys that contribute, and he definitely does that.

I understand where you are coming from But when it comes to our cap we have to see who is really worth it and who isn’t im willing to sacrifice Sanford with some other cap hits that get traded for a chance at Petro coming back

And I get what you're saying, but ditching Sanford barely helps that cause. I'd rather focus on Allen, Steen and Bozak, make lighter work of it. Even if Sanford goes, those guys will still need to go.

so Blais is just sitting out until 21-22, because clearly we dont need to think about this year and next, OHHH MY BADDD
lol nah, think about it logically please bro

not sure what you mean sitting out? if you looked at his other post he made for 20-21 he has blais playing 4th line with sundqvist and barbashev. and then we would be acquiring blais likely in the offseason of 21-22 with a 22 3rd. I dont think hes worth the 3rd but i like the player. Also, i am thinking logically. you posted the lines above to include krejci... so you are expecting him to re-sign after next season since his contract is up. I have thought a lot about it, and i have a number for krejci but i do think he can get more $$$ elsewhere.

The very simple confusing here is that he didnt make it clear in the slightest when the trade was happening lol. I just clicked the ACGM that had the bruins logo, and if he didnt describe when it happened, how am i (or anyone) supposed to know
In saying that. Chances are that the bruins try to resign Krejci for a decent amount less (and im willing to bet he signs too as he loves playing in Boston). So IF we are talking 2022 lines heres a better look

Marchy - Bergy - Pasta
Debrusk - Studnicka - Kase (or RW that they trade for using kase)
Bjork - Krejci (3/4 million) - Coyle
[kuraly/wagner/ritchie] - Frederick - Senyshyn

So again, the confusion on his part didnt help.
But bruins still wont need or want Blais

He said it in the first line of the team explanation that it was jumping off another one of his posts lol. that being said, i dont think krejci signs for anything less than 6m. even in a flat cap. I dont think the bruins should extend him on a 3 or 4 year deal at that hit at 35 years old though. Which is why is said i think theres a number for him, i just dont think its here.

Interesting yeah thats a hard one because nobody even has the slightest idea of what he could be asking lol
Again like I said at the END of NEXT YEAR, he could really be looking like a 3rd liner, and he will go for no more than 3-4 million for 1 or 2 years (which bruins would likely do for a solid 3rd liner)
OR he could keep playing well and prove to remain a 2nd liner in which case the bruins likely wouldnt be able to pay him (and would want Studnicka playing the 2nd line)

Then i guess the point is: its too early to say "oh yeah bruins accept", we cant think that unforunately because based on EVERYTHING right now, bruins absolutely do not need Blais.
That could change, but based on current projections, its a no

This is absolutely a discussion for a different thread... but Krejci was on pace for upper 50s if he players all 82. he missed 8 games or whatever which would have gotten him around the 50 point marker. If he replicates that again next year i think youre 3-4m offer is almost insulting the player he would still classify as a low end 2c. now it really depends on what he wants late in his career. does he want to keep trying to cups? does he want more financial security? sammy blais would fill the chris wagner role in 2021. buuuut again i dont think the bruins should trade a 3rd rounder for him in any scenario. value just isnt there.

I don't care, I do not care, here's the deal. I know this site gerneally has people not think throught trades adn I know most of the time finding a team to line up the needs is a vital part of proposing the trade and figuring the right return. This is an exception Blais for a 3rd is cheap and valuable enough that lost of teams would take it, in what I presume from looking over the teams in a way I did do, Boston belongs in the group of teams that would want him for that (Krejci pricing himself out of town and aging factored into this) and out of that group I arbitrarily picked them. if you don't think they belong in that group or just emotionally cannot stand them being the arbitrary choice out of that group, fine, imagine the trade is with another team. This is a Blues focused post and a rare time where the trade partner is not a vital detail in the trade, make yourself happy

this is a post about 2021-2022

i wouldnt say a 3rd is cheap for him. I get what he brings to the table. he has 20 points in 83 careen nhl games. his atoi this year was in the 12s. I like the player but a 3rd rounder for a 4th liner minutes wise? idk man thats asking a bit on the high side for a guy whos basically a checking machine.

If you look at most ACGMs including my own, there is a simple phrase that fixes that: "ANY TEAM"
That easy. If you meant any team, say any team. If you meant the bruins, im telling you: they reject

That simple lol

huh? The 5v5 part of this has Sanford with all postive (mostly strong positive) marks, only xGA which is barely negative ding him and he has such positive xGF that his xG% is still good. Why would we separate the total product (additionally you really need to not split for and against for defense anyway is it gives you a total possession picture, and I love evolving hockey but they draw the conclusion that since zone faceoffs are difficult to quantify and not as big of a deal as narrative says that they don't matter, which I think is an overstatement but can get on board with if you are looking at total possession (say xG% instead of just xGA) but if you are splitting up shot for and against whether it's attempts or quality of whatever you also need to look at what zones a player takes faceoffs in, while it's ahrd to find faceoffs because they mostly get tracked for centers, we know that Sanford is on O'Reilly's line most of the time, if you look at his face offs last year ROR had 584 D zone face offs to 567 offensive zone, or over 50% https://www.puckbase.com/stats/player-faceoff-splits?player=ryan-o~reilly, imply Sanford is the same way, that's gonna sag a minimizing shots against stat. Sanford is not a bad or good defensive player, he is a good possession player by shots which is the best we have besides the "eye test" to measure defensive prowess in hockey)

there is no "any team" in the drop down. I'm glad you think the Bruins will have zero needs in the next 3 years, I thought they were a fit form what I looked at but again I don't care stick another team in there I'm worried about the Blues side here and Blais for a 3rd isn't like trading Allen or Steen where you need a viable landing spot, someone will want him for a 3rd

that's fair, my understanding is he's highly thought of in the league and I thought a 3rd was fine but it's really clearing a few hundred thousand for other players so Blais for a pick even if it's a lower pick is cool

There is a "trade description" section where you WRITE: "ANY TEAM". bro dont be a robot lol

"I'm glad you think the Bruins will have zero needs in the next 3 years" - never said that. They need a solid 2RW lol

Both of your statements just now were so weird dude

dont get me wrong, his value could also easily skyrocket next year. if they use him more. i just think if he has another year similar to this one you maybe get a late 3rd but its probably some 4th + 7th or maybe even a 4th alone. depending on how next year goes.

ok this is responding to two people so please be patient with the "I didn't say that, that was [the other person I QTd here]"

Anyway, yeah I get that but I come from a baseball background looking at analytics (and form what I read on hockeygraphs they look to Tango et all) and transferring lessons from there it's best IMO to use an all encompassing stat as a shorthand most of the time, but if you remotely have the time at all look at the breakdown of that stat and put that ahead, like way way ahead, of the all encompassing stat, unless you are getting to like career levels of big enough sample.
For example looking at baseball and WAR lets say for hitters, a guy has a 7 WAR season, maybe because his UZR, which takes about 3600 innings or nearly 3 years to become a useful sample, is crazy high. Is that real? what if we adjust his defense for a 3 year rolling average by adding the UZR for the year before and year after (or 2 years before if you have no future data yet) and divide it by 3 then look at the WAR? but nobody does that& the player did in fact create those outs even if they are not indicative of that players talent going forward. What about a player whose hitting, their wRC+, jumped up? Was it a flukey BABIP? are they a high BABIP guy? was it more ISO? was that ISO more BABIP because stuff was landing in gaps instead of gloves, was it an elevated HR/FB%? Will that go down? or maybe it was an elevated HR/FB% but their LD% spiked up because they are hitting the snot out of the ball? Maybe their LD% was down but their HR/FB% are both up because they are hitting the ball hard and LDs are being misclassified as FB? Maybe it was just a few flukey FBs down the line? If you just look at WAR you don't see any of these things

additionally in baseball there is a lot of easy filtering of results from individual battles, hockey there is a lot of moving parts so we need to loot at globs of data and adjust for our controls, but even our controls (like a player changing teams ) have a lot of unquantifiable variables (worse linemates, coaching schemes that are good but don't fit the player, coaching schemes that are bad, coaching schemes that are good and make a player look better than before etc.). We've drawn some good conclusions (primary points are indicative of scoring prowess but secondary assists are mostly noise, 5v5 better shows a players prowess unless we are looking at goalies in which case we should be looking at all shots faces with 5 defenders in front - i.e. include PK, etc.) but we don't know say how to quantify primary points vs possession for total value
Also some attempts at adjusting this stuff away (level of competition,,etc) can actually add back in SSS noise instead of alleviate it. I don't see any specific weight calculations in GAR, I see that they encpass loosely defined things like EVO & EVD which sound right but I have no idea how much pull say primary assists or shot location vs shot volume factor in - or more importantly why what weight was used, maybe I haven't found the magic link with the formula. I love how available the individual stats (like xGF/60 for example) are and how well they explain stuff in general but I haven't seen taht last link adn I wonder if I will agree with it.
This is probably why I think I value Sanford far more and Blais far less looking over Corsi% (which tbf should probably be Fenwick because how valuable are blocked shots to telling us possession but then again I'm weighing that in tandem with...)xG%, primary points, and realize that guys sustaining it over 80 games is going to be a bit more valuable than a guy who has done it for 40 that we've extrapolated. IN that sense, sure Blais's possession is fine, but Sanford's is a bit better 5v5 from what I see, he's sustained it for longer, and he has more scoring to go with it. That's also why I think Barbie with noticeably worse possession stats than Blais last year but better possession stats over his career and last year was a bit of a down year, who also scores more and plays center, is more valuable.

All in all we are asking which cheap 4th line/throw to the left of O'Reilly guy is better or more worth keeping in the 1.5-3M range 2 years from now and my answer like both you, start with "hopefully all of them" but then moves on to a radically different Sanford (who I think of as more of a middle 6 guy) > Barbashev > Blais and in this exercise of trying to realistically manage a roster & keep Pietrangelo (who moves the needle in a way I think we all agree on) and with Seattle taking Perron (because IMO that's the realistic take as ideal as them taking Faulk would be), I ran up against the cap, over by <600k and had to get rid of 1 of them to stay under the min.
Just team fit alone I think having another 4C behind Sundqvist in the event he goes down, let alone if he moves up so Thomas or Schenn can play wing, as well as having the better player and fit playing to teh left of O'Reilly if Thomas doesn't move up or Schwartz does walk or again someone gets hurt, all means more than Blais, and he's 3rd on my list so he went. that's all.

So they need a wing but they don't need a wing? I don't understand you or why you are making this so difficult

yeah that's probably fair and Id take that, I think he gets more playing time with Steen shipping out (see the next year scenario linked in the description) and plays well and gets that 3rd but that's all speculation

They need a TOP 6 RIGHT WINGER

not a BOTTOM 6 LW/C (who can maybe play rw also but nobody has actually said that)

Like are you trying to play dumb or do you really not understand?

to answer bruins need quality scoring 2nd line winger... whether kase fills that or bjork/senyshyn fills that maybe studnicka comes in at 2rw or 3c and coyle moves up to 2rw. That is a different story but i dont think after that kase trade we are looking outside the organization to fill that role. now 2 years from now who knows if kase re-signs, or how players develop next year. theres alot of different scenarios here that can work out. I am almost positive they wouldnt be looking at acquiring sammy blais but i understand the thought process on the fit.