SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Bruinsdiehard

Membre depuis
22 mai 2018
Équipe favorite
Bruins de Boston
Messages dans les forums
202
Messages par jour
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GM26 juin 2018 à 9 h 8
Sujet: shea weber
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GMTD</b></div><div>DUH!! I am an idiot!!! what do you think of this idea. Upgrade at center and defense.</div></div>

Well...quite honestly, I'm not a fan of your moves.

You have the most bitter rivalry in the NHL consummating a trade when the two teams haven't traded since 2001. Furthermore, that 2001 trade was a minor roster move, where your trade here is franchise altering. I couldn't, in a million years, see it ever happening. I also couldn't see Krejci waiving his NMC to go to Montreal when he's been on the Bruins side of the rivalry for his entire career.

So yes, would the move be considered an upgrade on defense? Sure. But it is just so unrealistic that it doesn't really merit much consideration from my end.

It did make me chuckle though, so there you go.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 juin 2018 à 8 h 56
Sujet: JT Realistic (and unfinished) 2019-2020
I intentionally left the roster unfinished because it's clear that at this point, the Bruins would have options regarding Krejci and Backes to make more cap space on their roster. Both will have modified NTCs. Backes could be traded against his will. Krejci could be bought out and the Bruins would save about 4.5M on the cap in that transaction. The point is, without really knowing what the Bruins would do in the 2019 offseason, I went as far as I needed to to prove that with JT, their 2019 offseason wouldn't be "doomed" like some people on here are predicting.

Bear in mind contracts are a year shorter because this is one year into the future.

2018-2019 Bruins roster would have been:

Marchand-Bergeron-Bjork
Donato-Tavares-Pastrnak
DeBrusk-Krejci-Heinen
Schaller-Kuraly-Backes
Acciari

Chara-McAvoy
Zboril-Carlo
Grzelcyk-Miller

Rask
Khudobin
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 16 h 29
Sujet: ENOUGH WITH THE KREJCI TRADES
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>
I also don't see the Krejci situation being all that much different than the Fleury situation. Krejci could definitely benefit from playing a 1st line role somewhere opposed to a 3rd line role. Lets say Tavares comes here, because really the need for him to waive hinges on Tavares. Krejci will have a much reduced role. He puts up 35-40 pts because he'll likely getting less Ice time and playing with less skilled/NHL ready players. No he won't completely disappear, but it would be pretty amazing if he still put up the 50-60pts. That would drastically effect his next contract. It's the difference between 3 years and 9m and 3 years and 15-18m. Good comparables will be Stastny and Bozak - Look at what Koivu got. In addition would you rather pay one of the two guys mentioned or even Thornton 5-6m for 4-5 years (less term for thornton) or 3@7.25 for Krejci. Teams, and good ones/contenders would be interested in him. I only used Carolina as a team because A) they need a #1 center and B) That's a team everyone was trading him too.
</div></div>

Really? You're going to compare being a backup goaltender (where you literally don't even see the ice 60/82 games) vs starter to being a 3C vs 2C? The two situations couldn't be less comparable? I don't understand why you're treating playing on the 3rd line as some sort of banishment or curse, or "phase out" as you later say, for Krejci. Didn't JVR score 30+ goals this year playing on the 3rd line? How many points has Kessel put up in his career in Pittsburgh playing on the 3rd line. CHRIS F***** KELLY scored 20 goals as a 3C, and he was utter garbage offensively! Nothing in your response considers the benefits to Krejci of playing on the 3rd line (better defensive matchups for example), and given the examples I just cited, I would absolutely expect a 50+ pts season from Krejci if he was playing 3C behind Tavares and Bergeron.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>
I think you are wrong about the leverage thing. 100%. They are pretty even. IF, Krejci wants to take a hard stance they simply ship him off to #15 on his list. in 11 months. I am not saying he says, sure trade me anywhere, but he might say, I'll waive for the right situation - can you try these 5 teams. Then he has a say. 15 teams is a lot. </div></div>

As I said in a previous post, all Krejci has to do if the Bruins try to trade him in the 2019 offseason is have his agent leak all over the place to the press that he plans on retiring if the Bruins trade him. Nobody in the league would touch him at that point. At best, the Bruins could only hope to beg a team to take the contract by offering some asset in return. In which case, the Bruins would be better served by simply buying out his contract.

You yourself pointed out Krejci spoke about returning to the Czech Republic in the context of having won one or more Cups with Boston. So again I ask you, why would he want to waive his NMC to leave a team he wants to win a Cup with for a team less likely to win the Cup? He's not cutting off anything. There is money to be made playing hockey besides just the NHL. Euros are a real currency lol. Whether he plays in the NHL or in Europe, he will still be paid a lot of money, so your argument about setting himself up for a better contract makes zero sense to me.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 15 h 8
Sujet: ENOUGH WITH THE KREJCI TRADES
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>The first link did not work. I did read it and clicked the hyperlink of DJ Bean and neither took me to the interview. After reading, I still don't think it's set in stone. "but no matter when or how, if I'll be 36 or 38 or 39,... 39 is four years after his current contract. Makes it seem like when he can't play in the NHL anymore.

As for the waiving for an expansion team. That is different, and I think the city makes a difference. Vegas WAS a tough sell. I viewed it as another desert team. They don't seem to be, but lets see where they are in a few years. Also, the major reason they were relevant? Fleury waived his NTC from a perennial Stanley cup team.

Would I bet everything? of course not, but would you have bet the Bruins would as relevant as they are after Julien's last two years, or Vegas would make it to the finals.

It's not ridiculous at all. There are reports the Bruins are looking to move them and the Bruins are on Tavares short list. I agree it probably won't happen, I think he stays in NY, but there is a fairly decent chance.

Arthur staple a writer for the atlantic and former NYI beat guy reported Bruins are on his list. There are also many reports about Krejci and Backes.

The number one reason you seem to not want to accept is his ability to dictate where he goes. Like he could say, fine, but I only want to go to... I would say they could make a deal with just about any team</div></div>

Sorry, I don't mean to keep harping on this, but another thing I just thought of that Krejci could do, if the Bruins tried to trade him next offseason to a team he doesn't want to go to - he could announce his retirement, take a nice little 2 year vacation to the Czech Republic and get paid a crapton of money to play there, then when he's 35, return to North America and seek out a new contract with whomever he wants.

My point is that with an NMC, a partial NTC, and his age, Krejci has all the leverage in the world and the Bruins have virtually none, and Krejci has never expressed anything other than a desire to play in Boston, and then go back to the Czech Republic. That's why I've always believed that if the Bruins were to part ways with Krejci after 2018-2019, they would do so via buyout. At least from that perspective it would look like the organization is doing him a favor by paying out some portion of that contract vs ramrodding him via trade to a team he doesn't want to go to and force him to retire.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 15 h 0
Sujet: ENOUGH WITH THE KREJCI TRADES
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>The first link did not work. I did read it and clicked the hyperlink of DJ Bean and neither took me to the interview. After reading, I still don't think it's set in stone. "but no matter when or how, if I'll be 36 or 38 or 39,... 39 is four years after his current contract. Makes it seem like when he can't play in the NHL anymore.

As for the waiving for an expansion team. That is different, and I think the city makes a difference. Vegas WAS a tough sell. I viewed it as another desert team. They don't seem to be, but lets see where they are in a few years. Also, the major reason they were relevant? Fleury waived his NTC from a perennial Stanley cup team.

Would I bet everything? of course not, but would you have bet the Bruins would as relevant as they are after Julien's last two years, or Vegas would make it to the finals.

It's not ridiculous at all. There are reports the Bruins are looking to move them and the Bruins are on Tavares short list. I agree it probably won't happen, I think he stays in NY, but there is a fairly decent chance.

Arthur staple a writer for the atlantic and former NYI beat guy reported Bruins are on his list. There are also many reports about Krejci and Backes.

The number one reason you seem to not want to accept is his ability to dictate where he goes. Like he could say, fine, but I only want to go to... I would say they could make a deal with just about any team</div></div>

Fleury waived his NTC to go to Vegas to be able to be a starter again. He was hardly doing anyone but himself a favor, and could position himself now for a lucrative contract extension - something that would never have happened if he remained backup to Murray. I don't think that example is applicable.

If you could find me a scenario (I've tried looking over the last hour, and couldn't find one), of a player waiving his NTC to be traded off of a Cup contending team (something I think we both agree the Bruins would be if they signed Tavares) to one that is not contending, then I'll concede the argument. Otherwise, all these "reports" are coming from people who haven't got a clue like Jimmy Murphy or like Andy Strickland, who sounds like a plant for Backes' camp; they all sound like BS. The Bruins must have another plan if they are actually going to sign Tavares (maybe moving Krug for picks/prospects), because I 100% do not believe either player would waive their NMC to be taken off the Bruins in that scenario.

And just to clarify, I know that the Bruins are on the list that Staple and LeBrun have reported on to meet with Tavares. I'm saying the prospect of signing JT is ridiculous. The Bruins seemingly have the least incentive of any of the teams he's meeting with to lure him away from Long Island.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 14 h 48
Sujet: pls tavares pls
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Willian_Cardoso</b></div><div>First of all. I'm not saying that Arizona WILL be a playoff team next few years. But when you look at their moves, it quite obvious that they intend to.
</div></div>

I wasn't lol-ing at you saying they would be a playoff team. It was directed at the idea you think they are building towards being a playoff team. What exactly are they doing to make you think that lol? Re-signing OEL? Wow...the one soon to be UFA on that team that's worth more than a bag of pucks. Yup, definitely building for the playoffs! I'd even call them a Cup contender at that point!! What's another move? Trading Domi for Galchenyuk? So they traded a middling player for a slightly-less middling player who's closer to UFA and can promptly leave the team lol? Gosh, why don't we just give them the Stanley Cup now?? I mean, what's the point lol!

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Willian_Cardoso</b></div><div>Second, there're so many better ways to be above cap ceiling than trade for Backes. </div></div>

Like what, sign a free agent? Lol, hmmm...did the Arizona Coyotes make John Tavares' list of teams to meet with? *checks* Why no, they didn't! How could that be?!? Doesn't Tavares know they are building for the playoffs!!!!

But wait...what team did make that list? *checks again* Oh, that's right, the Bruins did.

You couldn't blackmail a free agent to go to Arizona, so please, tell me what "better" ways they could be above the cap floor (not ceiling btw).

Maybe they could dig up the rotting corpse of Jean Beliveau and sign him to a contract instead? I bet even Jean would probably say "Non, merci" and ask to be put back in the ground.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 12 h 24
Sujet: ENOUGH WITH THE KREJCI TRADES
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div> I could be wrong, but Krejci only said anyhting about going back to CZECH republic to end his career once, and DJ Bean was referencing that.
</div></div>

I literally provided you with the links to BOTH times lol? So thanks for reading my post.

What you quoted was when he signed his contract in 2014. He spoke about it again to DJ Bean after the 2015-2016 season (AFTER he was married with a kid). Here is the link to that...........:
<a href="https://weei.radio.com/blogs/dj-bean/david-krejci-respects-pavel-datsyuks-decision-plans-finish-career-czech-republic" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://weei.radio.com/blogs/dj-bean/david-krejci-respects-pavel-datsyuks-decision-plans-finish-career-czech-republic</a>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>
You asked why, I gave you reasons. I am not saying it will happen, but it could. It's not that ridiculous.</div></div>

You did, and I'm saying your reason's are not convincing at all. Bottom line, if someone forced you to bet all you had that Krejci would waive his NMC this year if the Bruins sign JT, would you honestly bet yes? For me, it would be a hard no. And yes it is pretty ridiculous. Krejci waiving his NMC is more ridiculous to me than any of the scenarios floating around out there (including signing JT, which is also pretty ridiculous).

And one final point on this (even though THN sucks), it's interesting to recall how few players wanted to waive their NMCs during the expansion draft. That speaks volumes about how likely it is Krejci would waive his NMC.
<a href="http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/why-we-can-t-blame-players-who-refuse-to-waive-no-movement-clauses" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/why-we-can-t-blame-players-who-refuse-to-waive-no-movement-clauses</a>
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 12 h 8
Sujet: pls tavares pls
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Willian_Cardoso</b></div><div>Do you really think that carry a huge bad contract like Backes for "just" 3 years is not that bad? If you say "yes", then be ok keeping him for your team till the end of his contract.

PS: I'm not a Carolina fan.</div></div>

You said the Coyotes are looking to build a playoff team in 2-3 years max. The trade in this roster build has Backes going to Arizona. I said Backes contract will expire in 3 years (i.e. supposedly when the Coyotes will be ready to become a playoff team......lol), so what is the problem with them holding his contract until that time when they barely make the cap floor year after year.

Boston, unlike Arizona, hovers around the cap ceiling so no, asking Boston to hold onto his contract is not the same thing as asking Arizona to hold onto his contract.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 juin 2018 à 11 h 15
Sujet: ENOUGH WITH THE KREJCI TRADES
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>
- Nobody really wants to play where they are not wanted. Most guys who have NTC's end up waiving. Some don't, most do. Plus you know the team trading for you wants you. So Ego, pride, call it what you will.</div></div>

Yes, I agree, but this is somewhat different (certainly in Krejci's case) than telling a player "Hey, you suck, we hate you. Now waive your NTC so you can leave." Krejci doesn't suck, and the Bruins' message to him wouldn't be one of "We don't want you here." It's "We can't afford to have you here" which is ENTIRELY different. Why is it Krejci's responsibility to help the team out of cap mismanagement? He's spent more than a decade in this organization, and he'd be leaving to go to a team that likely wouldn't have nearly as good a chance of competing for the Cup as Boston would (if they sign JT).

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>
- Krejci's NMC goes to half the teams next off season. I am certain there are teams on that list he would not want to go to under any circumstance. Let's say there are 10 cities he would actually want to play in. From a very outside point of view The Original 6 and then 4 more of personal preference. That leaves 5 places he cannot eliminate, that he has no desire to go to. That might not be a risk he is willing to take. If they agree to deal him somewhere he wants to go opposed to somewhere he cannot eliminate. </div></div>

So clearly this is all speculation on your part about where he would or wouldn't want to go. The idea that he would waive his NMC to go "where he wants" assumes that the team he'd want to go to would also actually want him, and would be able to make a deal for him.

The problem with all this is that Krejci has already said where he wants to go:
<a href="http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20140908/BLOGS/140907114" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20140908/BLOGS/140907114</a>

Twice.

<a href="https://www.masslive.com/bruins/index.ssf/2016/04/boston_bruins_injuries_david_krejci_to_have_hip_surgery_plans_to_return_to_czech_republic_after_cont.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.masslive.com/bruins/index.ssf/2016/04/boston_bruins_injuries_david_krejci_to_have_hip_surgery_plans_to_return_to_czech_republic_after_cont.html</a>

He wants to stay in Boston, and then when his contract is up he wants to go home to the Czech Republic. There is no way he is waiving his NMC to go anywhere and upset the comfortable life he's got in Boston. As for the following season, yes, he could block a trade to half the league. He could still really screw with the Bruins plans to trade him with that kind of power. He could announce to any team trying to trade him that he would retire if they did trade for him. You think teams would even dare risking assets in a trade for him at that point? Either way, spending 2 years vs 3 in a new city is a better proposition no matter how you slice it, so the Bruins will undoubtedly have to wait until next year to trade him.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>
- Backes - Same deal, although his is more limited. He seems like a pride guy though &amp; also has to know he would be a buyout candidate.
</div></div>

THE BRUINS CANNOT BUYOUT DAVID BACKES' CONTRACT. Please! Go and use the buyout calculator on this site and see what would happen if they did. They would get better relief from burying him in the minors at that rate.

And as unlikely a scenario it would be for Krejci to waive his NMC this year, it seems even more unlikely that Backes would waive his to leave a Stanley Cup favorite (if they sign JT) when he has never even competed for the Cup in his career! I don't actually believe he would waive his NMC to go back to St. Louis (or Minnesota, as others have suggested). And he certainly wouldn't be waiving it to go to some crapbag team that would take him on as a salary dump. I do agree that the "pride" thing plays a bigger role with Backes than Krejci, because it seems crystal clear Backes hasn't lived up to his contract with the Bruins. And there is more of an argument to be made that he "sucks" than there is with Krejci.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Propeller09</b></div><div>

IF they were to sign Tavares, Krejci would be gone next off season to clear money to sign kids. There is almost no scenario which he wouldn't be gone.</div></div>

I generally agree, although I would rather they make that decision a year from now instead of right this very moment. Maybe one of Donato, Heinen, McAvoy, Carlo etc have a really bad season that tanks their value and the Bruins come away with a cheaper contract than we are thinking right now. If they sign Tavares, keep Krejci this year, and do the Backes trade I suggested, they would have 15M in cap space going into the 2019 offseason. That also assumes the cap stays where it, which is highly unlikely. The Bruins also have leverage with all of those players in that they are all RFAs, none of whom have arbitration rights. Look at what the Lightning did with Kucherov in his last contract. They force fed him an AAV that made him end up being a real steal, only because they literally had no more money left to give after re-signing Stamkos. But nobody talks about Kucherov being a malcontent because of it. He's just looking to maximize his value on his next contract. So why wouldn't the Bruins be able to do something like that? The way people talk, it's like they think the Bruins will be obligated to pay Donato and Heinen 5M each or something. I'd be shocked if they got more than 3M AAV in their next contracts, and even that would be generous for a guy like Donato who would have only had 1.25 years in the league.

If the Bruins do find themselves in the 2019 offseason still with Krejci on the books and needing cap space, they could buyout Krejci's contract. When you're done looking at the Backes scenario, check that one out too. That is way more financially feasible.
Forum: Armchair-GM22 juin 2018 à 8 h 6