That's a bad deal. Number one goalies are a premium. Should be a trade across the board.
- T-Rask

What do you mean by "across the board"?

Guess you didn't re-read my post.

Unrealistic because I don't think every player over the age of 28 should be given ...
Salary +
Term +
NMC ?

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
- Nasty_Duck

Maybe not but that is the market. Let's take an actual hard look at Boston and MA in general.

It's now one of the most expensive places to live in country (mainland)
The taxes are brutal
It's winter 8 months out of the year
The fans and media are bumholes for the most part

Stack that up against places that are viable now that weren't in the not so distant past:

Vegas
Dallas
Florida

If you're offering a player a similar contract in a state which much better weather, a relaxed media, and no or low state tax sans the contract clause, being an original 6 team(complete bullpoop) will not get it done.

Whether you like it or not, that is what it takes to be competitive. Take a good look at the Red Sux. They're trying to play Moneyball and they can't attract players or executives to even run that circus.

Maybe not but that is the market. Let's take an actual hard look at Boston and MA in general.

It's now one of the most expensive places to live in country (mainland)
The taxes are brutal
It's winter 8 months out of the year
The fans and media are bumholes for the most part

Stack that up against places that are viable now that weren't in the not so distant past:

Vegas
Dallas
Florida

If you're offering a player a similar contract in a state which much better weather, a relaxed media, and no or low state tax sans the contract clause, being an original 6 team(complete bullpoop) will not get it done.

Whether you like it or not, that is what it takes to be competitive. Take a good look at the Red Sux. They're trying to play Moneyball and they can't attract players or executives to even run that circus.
- glove_was_stuck

Baltimore and Clevland are middle the pack in terms of taxes and have two of the lowest payrolls in mlb. Yet they seem to be doing OK.

HOW you spend the money makes a big difference.

Also - I wasn't advocating trying to do things the Harry Sinden way. I was saying you don't need to give every player max salary AND extras like NMC. Things like NMC should be reserved for only a few special players. Swayman IMO is not there yet.

Baltimore and Clevland are middle the pack in terms of taxes and have two of the lowest payrolls in mlb. Yet they seem to be doing OK.

HOW you spend the money makes a big difference.

Also - I wasn't advocating trying to do things the Harry Sinden way. I was saying you don't need to give every player max salary AND extras like NMC. Things like NMC should be reserved for only a few special players. Swayman IMO is not there yet.
- Nasty_Duck

He now has 3 full years plus 10 games with the club. Current career save% is .919 and by the way, 10% of his starts are shutouts. Yes, like it or not, he deserves the #1G money and contract.

He now has 3 full years plus 10 games with the club. Current career save% is .919 and by the way, 10% of his starts are shutouts. Yes, like it or not, he deserves the #1G money and contract.
- bluemoon737

Oh, and in 18 playoff starts he has a .922 save%.

Baltimore and Clevland are middle the pack in terms of taxes and have two of the lowest payrolls in mlb. Yet they seem to be doing OK.

HOW you spend the money makes a big difference.

Also - I wasn't advocating trying to do things the Harry Sinden way. I was saying you don't need to give every player max salary AND extras like NMC. Things like NMC should be reserved for only a few special players. Swayman IMO is not there yet.
- Nasty_Duck

Not there yet? What exactly does he have to do to "get there? Win a Vezina?

Not there yet? What exactly does he have to do to "get there? Win a Vezina?
- dothedougie

To get max term at 7-8m/year AND a NMC?

More than 3 regular seasons and one good playoff run.

To get max term at 7-8m/year AND a NMC?

More than 3 regular seasons and one good playoff run.
- Nasty_Duck

You're a tough sell man.


I think he is deserving of it all now. The foundation is there to be the starter for the foreseeable future.

You're a tough sell man.


I think he is deserving of it all now. The foundation is there to be the starter for the foreseeable future.
- dothedougie

I mostly agree. That's why I'd prefer a bridge deal.

Not saying he's gonna be a Hellybuck, but the guy had some decent post-season performances and got a NMC. Look at his last two post-seasons. He's why I'm a little gun-shy on those NMCs. You can always move a player with big cap-hit (Price aside...)

I mostly agree. That's why I'd prefer a bridge deal.

Not saying he's gonna be a Hellybuck, but the guy had some decent post-season performances and got a NMC. Look at his last two post-seasons. He's why I'm a little gun-shy on those NMCs. You can always move a player with big cap-hit (Price aside...)
- Nasty_Duck

Fair enough. I just see it as following the trend in recent years where young players are getting full contracts out of their ELCs or signing very short "prove it" contracts then getting paid. For me the arbitration money was Swayman's "prove it", and he did. He brought it this year and is one of the chief reasons they finished as high as they did this year.

I dont think a bridge is even on the table at this point. Its full contract or trade. Swayman has paid his dues. Accepted being sent down when Tuukka Came back, then road back seat to ullmark and eventually worked into splitting time. Then this year's performance splitting time and absolutely stellar play in the post season.

Pay dat man his money.

Fair enough. I just see it as following the trend in recent years where young players are getting full contracts out of their ELCs or signing very short "prove it" contracts then getting paid. For me the arbitration money was Swayman's "prove it", and he did. He brought it this year and is one of the chief reasons they finished as high as they did this year.

I dont think a bridge is even on the table at this point. Its full contract or trade. Swayman has paid his dues. Accepted being sent down when Tuukka Came back, then road back seat to ullmark and eventually worked into splitting time. Then this year's performance splitting time and absolutely stellar play in the post season.

Pay dat man his money.
- dothedougie

Why does everyone think I don't want to pay him?
I just don't want an NMC added onto a max-term high cap hit.
That's it.

Why does everyone think I don't want to pay him?
I just don't want an NMC added onto a max-term high cap hit.
That's it.
- Nasty_Duck

What if its a NMC for years 1-4, then modified NTC (providing a list of teams, list gets smaller and smaller towards the end of the contract)

And you did just say you would rather him be on a bridge. I guess you never did say a price you would pay so that is fair. Just seems like you were not convinced haha.

Just the impression I got.

What if its a NMC for years 1-4, then modified NTC (providing a list of teams, list gets smaller and smaller towards the end of the contract)

And you did just say you would rather him be on a bridge. I guess you never did say a price you would pay so that is fair. Just seems like you were not convinced haha.

Just the impression I got.
- dothedougie

one poster asked me to choose between 7m + NMC or 8m. I chose the 8m (reluctantly).

Have moved off the bridge deal mostly (still can't believe the Bruins burned first year of elc by letting him play exactly 10 games)

But if Swayman wants an NMC I'd insist his cap hit comes down.

one poster asked me to choose between 7m + NMC or 8m. I chose the 8m (reluctantly).

Have moved off the bridge deal mostly (still can't believe the Bruins burned first year of elc by letting him play exactly 10 games)

But if Swayman wants an NMC I'd insist his cap hit comes down.
- Nasty_Duck

I agree. I think for protections you take a little less money. And if its a max term contract, I prefer protections to ease up as the contract matures to essentially nothing but a no-trade list in the final years.

8 for 8 seems fair IMO, it will be a bargain at the end of the contract.

I agree. I think for protections you take a little less money. And if its a max term contract, I prefer protections to ease up as the contract matures to essentially nothing but a no-trade list in the final years.
- dothedougie

Can anyone explain why Sweeny let Swayman play exactly 10 games his first year?

Bruins would have a lot more leverage if Swayman was coming off his ELC. Seems like gross mismanagement to me.

Can anyone explain why Sweeny let Swayman play exactly 10 games his first year?

Bruins would have a lot more leverage if Swayman was coming off his ELC. Seems like gross mismanagement to me.
- Nasty_Duck

Because they went into the playoffs with Halak injured and then Rask had issues. Not much choice and he was awesome in that short stint. It is was it is...

Can anyone explain why Sweeny let Swayman play exactly 10 games his first year?

Bruins would have a lot more leverage if Swayman was coming off his ELC. Seems like gross mismanagement to me.
- Nasty_Duck

The 10 game rule is only for players that are 18-19 years old. Swayman was 21 so his contract starts as soon as he’s signed.

Happens with a plenty of college players to make sure that they are signed. Pretty sure Lohrei and Mcavoy both had years burned. Better to burn a year than risk them staying in college.

The 10 game rule is only for players that are 18-19 years old. Swayman was 21 so his contract starts as soon as he’s signed.

Happens with a plenty of college players to make sure that they are signed. Pretty sure Lohrei and Mcavoy both had years burned. Better to burn a year than risk them staying in college.
- Mahewman

Ah - did not realize that 18-19 rule. Sucks that 10 games burns a full year though.

Thanks.

Ah - did not realize that 18-19 rule. Sucks that 10 games burns a full year though.

Thanks.
- Nasty_Duck

I guess Lohrei didn’t burn a year but his entry level contract was only two years because of his age. Didn’t realize the entry level contracts become shorter for players 22-24 years old.

I mostly agree. That's why I'd prefer a bridge deal.

Not saying he's gonna be a Hellybuck, but the guy had some decent post-season performances and got a NMC. Look at his last two post-seasons. He's why I'm a little gun-shy on those NMCs. You can always move a player with big cap-hit (Price aside...)
- Nasty_Duck

The Bruins shot themselves in the foot when they took him arbitration. he didn't take that well and was candid about it. Classic Bruins move too. I remember when they took Bourque to arbitration. (frank)ing idiots.

The Bruins shot themselves in the foot when they took him arbitration. he didn't take that well and was candid about it. Classic Bruins move too. I remember when they took Bourque to arbitration. (frank)ing idiots.
- glove_was_stuck

Bourque?

Don't recall that.

It's funny and sad all at the same time.

(I do remember Neely getting benched. that was another brutal time for Bruins org)

The Bruins shot themselves in the foot when they took him arbitration. he didn't take that well and was candid about it. Classic Bruins move too. I remember when they took Bourque to arbitration. (frank)ing idiots.
- glove_was_stuck

They can take some blame for sure but it was Swayman who filed for arbitration, no? He signed up for the process then didn’t like it. They also didn’t really have a lot of cap room to bargain with.

8x8M is a risky contract. Hopefully they can lower that number.

Bourque?

Don't recall that.

It's funny and sad all at the same time.

(I do remember Neely getting benched. that was another brutal time for Bruins org)
- Nasty_Duck

https://www.nytimes.com/1...tor-rules-for-bruins.html

They can take some blame for sure but it was Swayman who filed for arbitration, no? He signed up for the process then didn’t like it. They also didn’t really have a lot of cap room to bargain with.

8x8M is a risky contract. Hopefully they can lower that number.
- Mahewman

Based on interviews from current and former players it's a poop experience. Sounds a lot like corporate performance reviews where they nickel and dime you, tell you in mostly exaggerated and made up ways why you're not worth it, and suck your soul out.

After turning a performance like Swayman did, It would be pay me or (frank)ing trade me.