Ty, a little off the topic of this article, but what is the chatter you're hearing around the B's when it comes to Vessey? Has the ship sailed on that one? I know he and Eichel are good buds and the idea of playing with him, in a top 6 role, has to be a strong selling point to sign in Buffalo. What are you hearing?
- DCurnew

I'm not Ty, but the last I have read is that he still plans to test free agency and explore all of his options. Barring any unexpected changes, the bruins should at least have a shot at signing him when he becomes a free agent on August 15th

You want to trade Marchard to keep Loui? That is crazy to me.
- Mahewman

No, I want to trade Marchand in order to sign Loui AND acquire Shattenkirk WITHOUT losing anything else.

Let's look at it this way. If Marchand puts up the same, or better production next year, he is probably looking for a raise to about 7 million and a long term deal. If that's the case, he is most likely a million-1.25 million dollars more expensive than Loui (Ideally I'd sign him for 5.75 for 4 or 5 years, wouldn't offer 6 million for more than 3 years). This saves money to give to Spooner, and resign Shattenkirk (with the help of Chara's contract decreasing by 3 million). It also protects our draft picks.

I'm not saying I want to dump Marchand, but like the title of the blog says, we have to give something to get something. Maybe St Louis would even have to throw in a third pick or something. The only reason we have to send Marchand instead of Eriksson is because Eriksson isn't signed. If we could trade his rights for Shattenkirk straight up, then we do it to keep Marchand instead. The problem is we can't afford to resign Eriksson AND Spooner, Marchand and Shattenkirk the following season. One has to go, and if it is Marchand, we don't lose any prospects or picks. If we give up Eriksson, we also have to give up whatever we trade as well.

That was verbal diarrhea, and I apologize. Hard to explain myself...

Couple of questions...

PK Subban could be available... do the Bruins go after him?

Rumors are that Columbus is looking to trade the 3rd overall pick to try and add a #1 center.... Would you guys trade Krecji in a deal to Columbus for that #3 pick?

Couple of questions...

PK Subban could be available... do the Bruins go after him?

Rumors are that Columbus is looking to trade the 3rd overall pick to try and add a #1 center.... Would you guys trade Krecji in a deal to Columbus for that #3 pick?
- mixturebill

I think it has been like 40 years or something since Boston and Montreal have actually completed a trade involving players. If Subban is available, he wont come to boston just because its boston.


What are you thinking for #3? Krejci + 14 + prospect? They are going to want the world and then some for that pick.

I think it has been like 40 years or something since Boston and Montreal have actually completed a trade involving players. If Subban is available, he wont come to boston just because its boston.


What are you thinking for #3? Krejci + 14 + prospect? They are going to want the world and then some for that pick.
- dothedougie

I don't think they should give more than krejci for the #3. Not a chance.

I don't think they should give more than krejci for the #3. Not a chance.
- Videoj

Oh I agree, but they will get a better offer than krejci for #3

Oh I agree, but they will get a better offer than krejci for #3
- dothedougie

Then honestly let it slide. These picks are seen as way too valuable. Too many players are busts or don't live up to the hype. Even top picks. Would you have traded krejci to draft any of the following?

Drouin
Galchenyuck
Huberdeau
Gudbranson
Duchene
Bogosian
Turris
Toews
Jack Johnson
Cam barker
Horton
Bouwmeester
Svitov
Gaborik

Those are the 3rd overall picks from 2000-2013. The only name id trade him for is toews, maybe bogosian.
You go back to 1980 and only H sedin and Scott niedermayer impress me.

I don't care what people say about krej's injuries, he's a number one and is still only 30. A solid 5 more years outta him beats a chance at drafting a potential 1st liner

Then honestly let it slide. These picks are seen as way too valuable. Too many players are busts or don't live up to the hype. Even top picks. Would you have traded krejci to draft any of the following?

Drouin
Galchenyuck
Huberdeau
Gudbranson
Duchene
Bogosian
Turris
Toews
Jack Johnson
Cam barker
Horton
Bouwmeester
Svitov
Gaborik

Those are the 3rd overall picks from 2000-2013. The only name id trade him for is toews, maybe bogosian.
You go back to 1980 and only H sedin and Scott niedermayer impress me.

I don't care what people say about krej's injuries, he's a number one and is still only 30. A solid 5 more years outta him beats a chance at drafting a potential 1st liner
- Videoj

True. As of right now I wouldn't trade krejci for any one of those guys. Ask me again in two years and a few of those guys will probably get a hell yes.

Giving up any of our young forwards for shattenkirk would be ludicrous. Krejci should be prime trade bait

Giving up any of our young forwards for shattenkirk would be ludicrous. Krejci should be prime trade bait
- TylerSeguin19

Alright, so instead of Marchand for shattenkirk as I suggested, what about krejci instead? This has the same affect as my previous verbose comment.

Trade away krejci for shat, save 4 million, sign eriksson, keep our picks and prospects.
Next year Chara's contract drops, frees up some space, able to resign Marchand, shat, and spooner.

Moving forward, we will maintain a top 6 of

Bergeron spooner eriksson Marchand pasta and vatrano.
Third line of Connolly, belesky and hopefully czarnik

Oh and ps. Get rid of Hayes somehow

Alright, so instead of Marchand for shattenkirk as I suggested, what about krejci instead? This has the same affect as my previous verbose comment.

Trade away krejci for shat, save 4 million, sign eriksson, keep our picks and prospects.
Next year Chara's contract drops, frees up some space, able to resign Marchand, shat, and spooner.

Moving forward, we will maintain a top 6 of

Bergeron spooner eriksson Marchand pasta and vatrano.
Third line of Connolly, belesky and hopefully czarnik

Oh and ps. Get rid of Hayes somehow
- Videoj

I believe the actual salary owed to chara drops, but his cap hit will still be the same at 6.917M

After seeing what Yandle got from florida, I'm glad Sweeney didn't get a chance to go for him. Seven-year contract worth $44.45 million with a 6 year full NMC. Wow.

Calling it. Sweeney gives up on the shats and ends up sending the 29th overall pick for Jason garrison in TB, then Pat's himself on the back for a job well done and gets himself a hooker and some quality blow......leaving bruins nation extremely disappointed once again.
- dothedougie

This is pretty much whats happening. That or Luca Sbisa.

I believe the actual salary owed to chara drops, but his cap hit will still be the same at 6.917M
- dothedougie

Incorrect. Because the contract was given prior to the new CBA, it is grandfathered in, and therefore his actual salary is the cap hit.

I believe the actual salary owed to chara drops, but his cap hit will still be the same at 6.917M
- dothedougie

I don't think that's how it works...

I think that once he's over 40 his cap hit drops to whatever his actual salary is. So his contract was structured so that he's only being paid $4 million when he's 40, so that's what the Bruins will pay him, and that's what his cap hit will be.

After seeing what Yandle got from florida, I'm glad Sweeney didn't get a chance to go for him. Seven-year contract worth $44.45 million with a 6 year full NMC. Wow.
- HandsomeRalph

That's what Florida gave him (which sounds insane IMO), but that doesn't necessarily mean that's what he would have signed in Boston for.

After seeing what Yandle got from florida, I'm glad Sweeney didn't get a chance to go for him. Seven-year contract worth $44.45 million with a 6 year full NMC. Wow.
- HandsomeRalph

That's true. Way too expensive.

Again I stress, I think there's no option other than trading a big contract for Shattenkirk. If we trade picks and prospects, we're letting Eriksson walk for nothing, and then won't be able to resign Shattenkirk, Spooner, and Marchand anyways, and one of them will walk as well.

When players get too expensive, someone needs to get traded. It's what Chicago does. They don't let them walk for nothing. Letting Eriksson walk and keeping all these other contracts will be the downfall of the team. What's worth more, Eriksson and the futures, or Krejci or Marchand. In that case, I'm trading Krejci or Marchand.

True. As of right now I wouldn't trade krejci for any one of those guys. Ask me again in two years and a few of those guys will probably get a hell yes.
- dothedougie

Well in a couple of years, we wouldn't be able to move Krecji for any of those guys... so that's kind of the idea. Move him now while he still has value, before he loses it all and can't be moved anywhere. There are definitely a few guys on that list that I would move Krecji for... I wouldn't say 1 for 1 straight up, but I would definitely move Krecji for some of those guys plus a little extra.

Well in a couple of years, we wouldn't be able to move Krecji for any of those guys... so that's kind of the idea. Move him now while he still has value, before he loses it all and can't be moved anywhere. There are definitely a few guys on that list that I would move Krecji for... I wouldn't say 1 for 1 straight up, but I would definitely move Krecji for some of those guys plus a little extra.
- mixturebill

I just dont think Krejci is worth that much to teams right now. The guy has been bogged by injuries the last couple seasons and with his cap hit I just dont see who is willing to pay a top 5 pick for him. Maybe we can con benning out of Vancouver's pick.

I don't think that's how it works...

I think that once he's over 40 his cap hit drops to whatever his actual salary is. So his contract was structured so that he's only being paid $4 million when he's 40, so that's what the Bruins will pay him, and that's what his cap hit will be.
- mixturebill

Hmm. I guess I dont know for sure. I thought that the actual cap hit was the one thing that remained constant throughout the length of the contract. I guess I am operating under the assumption that his cap hit is equal to the AAV of the contract but I could be wrong.


EDIT: https://www.capfriendly.com/faq -----> This is sort of an explanation of over 35 contracts. I honestly dont think the Bruins get any relief.

Hmm. I guess I dont know for sure. I thought that the actual cap hit was the one thing that remained constant throughout the length of the contract. I guess I am operating under the assumption that his cap hit is equal to the AAV of the contract but I could be wrong.


EDIT: https://www.capfriendly.com/faq -----> This is sort of an explanation of over 35 contracts. I honestly dont think the Bruins get any relief.
- dothedougie

Typically the cap hit is consistent throughout a contract, but it's different once a player reaches 40.

Just look at his cap hit on any of those sites...
On that cap friendly site, his cap hit is listed at $4m... on the Hockeybuzz cap section his cap hit is listed as $4m....

It's because he's over 40 at that point, so his cap hit is equal to that of his contract.

That's what Florida gave him (which sounds insane IMO), but that doesn't necessarily mean that's what he would have signed in Boston for.
- mixturebill

Yeah, I think Sweeney would have overpaid for Yandle, Don't think he would have given that big of a contract. But even that ballpark is nuts.

Typically the cap hit is consistent throughout a contract, but it's different once a player reaches 40.

Just look at his cap hit on any of those sites...
On that cap friendly site, his cap hit is listed at $4m... on the Hockeybuzz cap section his cap hit is listed as $4m....

It's because he's over 40 at that point, so his cap hit is equal to that of his contract.
- mixturebill

Cool. Well I learned something today.

Cool. Well I learned something today.
- dothedougie

But you are half right in that a cap has the same value regardless of a players pay (unless he's over 40).

So if you sign a guy to a 2 year contract... 1 year at $1m and 1 year at $2m, then his cap his is $1.5m for both of those years.

Or a more complicated example... if you sign a guy for 7 years, and every single year you are paying him a different amount... the average of his contract is his cap hit for all 7 of those years (unless he's over 40).

I believe that's correct, but if anyone else has other info, correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, I think Sweeney would have overpaid for Yandle, Don't think he would have given that big of a contract. But even that ballpark is nuts.
- HandsomeRalph

Yeah the way I was seeing it go down is that he would overpay for his rights, but then sign him to a reasonable contract once we acquired him. But I could be wrong on that and he might have given him 7 years and a full NMC too.