SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

bhavikp27

Member Since
Jun. 27, 2016
Favourite Team
Boston Bruins
Forum Posts
12626
Posts per Day
4.4
Forum: Armchair-GM23 hours ago
Thread: Guentzel
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Bcarlo25</b></div><div>no, but if you look at the way boston has done things, and despite only having one cup, they're certainly in that upper echelon of teams regarding success (three finals appearances, some presidents trophys etc), it isn't just, "ummmm go get top line players!" it's more, "get the right ones." The top line players they identify always are defensively responsible. Even Pastrnak is pretty good on the other side of the puck for what he brings offensively.

They lost Bergeron and Krejci. It's pretty clear that's the problem here. Guentzel doesn't replace those guys.</div></div>

Yes and and the fact they were consistent 0.80 pts/game player was one of the main reasons they succeeded. You're not getting far with Tomas Nosek or Adam Lowry even if they great defensively. Of course, you'd like the best two-way player and the closest he can be to Bergeron, but that's nearly impossible especially if you're trying to get it in free agency or via trade. Guentzel is top offensive player and whatever he's sacrificing defensively, it's not close to the offense he provides which is the toughest thing to acquire. Stephenson or Lindholm don't provide more positive value than Guentzel because they play a little bit better defensively. If you want a solid defensive player, Reinhart will possibly be available.
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 10:31 a.m.
Thread: Guentzel
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Bcarlo25</b></div><div>on stamkos - yes, he's likely to regress. the risk of both regression and contract disasters is much smaller in a three year window than a seven year window. with stamkos you probably get two good years and one year where you don't love the contract. Very possible with Guentzel you wind up with four years that aren't great, or downright horrible.

They don't need elite forwards. its just not how the bruins build teams, or play hockey. the bruins forward groups are based on structure. Do they need talent? sure. but just throwing money at a goal scoring winger isn't the way the bruins do business.

what they need is responsible centers that do have the talent to facilitate offensive production.</div></div>

Offensively-inclined players like Guentzel tend to age well in their 30s. There's a risk, but the reward is higher. Every Cup winner has multiple top line players. A bunch of complementary top-6 players doesn't cut it unless the goal is to only participate and compete.
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 8:45 p.m.
Thread: Guentzel
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ish</b></div><div>I dont hate the Guentzel signing at all, I just think it’s unrealistic he signs here if we don’t have a good C for him. Maybe playing with Pasta could be enough? I think this team does need some talent. You do have $3.8m in cap still. I wonder if you trade a Geekie to free up $2m and avoid the Carrier signing, that frees up about $7m. I also think the best way for this team to improve the bottom 6 rather than signing someone for it, is to acquire a player that bumps Coyle back down to 3C. Maybe there is a creative way to get a C via trade within this framework or maybe Lindholm takes $7m aav.</div></div>

Players have random reasons when they sign. Gaudreau to Columbus and Panarin to NYR while they were rebuilding, Hall to Buffalo when he wanted to win. It's really about convincing Guentzel with the advantages.

Of course, even with Guentzel, they're still missing a 1st line C and another top6 forward unless Poitras takes a massive step.

Even if you save money on Geekie/Carrier, you need to fill another spot and keep enough money in case of injuries/callups + accruing a bit of cap space.
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 8:35 p.m.
Thread: Guentzel
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Bcarlo25</b></div><div>Lets say Stamkos signs for three years at $7M. I see way less risk in that than 7x9.7 for guenztel, and frankly more upside too. The reason to leave tampa is the salary cap. it's really tight down there.

I do think there's a chance to regret a Lindholm deal, but at least it addresses the position of need. if he can be had at 7x7, I really don't think there's much of a chance you regret it for 3-4 years. Stephenson should be shorter term...maybe 4x6. there's just not that big of a risk there. Guentzel is a massive risk, and I just don't see how its really a team need.

Just for the sake of argument, lets say that next off-season Draisaitl is available. I don't think having Stephenson at six million for three more seasons will prevent you from getting an offer to Draisaitl. Guentzel at 9.7 for another six might.</div></div>

Stamkos is much more likely to keep regressing over that 3-year deal.

You can add Lindholm to replace DeBrusk and therefore improve the position of center, but few guys are still line one line too high (including Lindholm who isn't a 1st liner). Center or wing, there is a hole.

"and I just don't see how its really a team need"
They need elite or high-end forwards. Pastrnak is one. They need a 1st line C. Marchand is 36yo and will continue to decline as he isn't the elite forward he was few years ago so they do have a need on the left wing too.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 11:39 a.m.
Thread: Guentzel
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Bcarlo25</b></div><div>I agree that there isn't a top line center out there (at least not a good one), but the logic of giving out the second or third biggest contract in franchise history to a guy that's going to be 30 when puck drops because, "there's no one else," is how teams wind up with buyouts. Also, I don't think that its a guarantee that Guentzel is what we've seen on the stat sheet in boston. He's spent his entire career playing with elite centers, and Boston doesn't have that to offer. I could certainly see a scenario where that 40 goal winger on crosbys wing is actually more of a 27 goal winger on Zacha's wing. With that risk, I really don't want to be paying him for 7 years at top of the market.

So no, I don't think paying that guy, who isn't really a positional need and has some concerns is the answer to, "but there's no one else out there."

take some lower risk shots:
make stamkos is available
maybe Lindholm or Stephenson don't have the market we might think and could be had at a more reasonable tag.
Barring that, there are good depth options out there that will come with much less term, so that if they don't work out, it's not going to be a handcuff for the better part of a decade.

Now, the one argument I could see for going this route - slap Poitras between Guentzel and Pastrnak. if that kid can't develop with those two guys on his wings, he's not meant for this league.</div></div>

I'll believe it when I see it, but chances are you are more likely to regret a Lindholm/Stephenson contract than Guentzel. They will cost less because they are worse players and while the Bruins do need to replace DeBrusk, their priority should be elite/high-end talent to help in addition to Pastrnak. Guentzel and Reinhart are 1st liners.

Stamkos is 35 next season and he isn't the play driver he once was. Health concerns aside, why would he leave TBL to join another team in the same division? It's doubtful he takes a discount either. Most importantly, it would have to be a short-term contract and I'm not sure the Bruins will be a serious threat in that time.
Forum: Armchair-GMMon. at 5:20 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFri. at 2:01 p.m.
Thread: Why not get both
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>tupty</b></div><div>I agree that Lindholm is ideally a 2C, but who do you propose that they get?

I agree they need a 1st liner, but I do not think there are any 1st line true centers available, and I do not think any 1st line wingers will be worth their contract. In my opinion, they need at least one improvement at center, and they can use the rest to get a 2nd line wing. This ACGM proposal was an idea, but perhaps not the best one.</div></div>

Do not give them bad contracts, that's number 1. Everybody knows they are desperate for a center and this is where overpaying/giving too much term would be a huge mistake. I agree the options aren't great. In my opinion, Guentzel or Reinhart should be the main targets so at least you have two high-end talents (Pastrnak the other) who can drive their own line instead of Lindholm/Stephenson who are centers, but can't carry their line. I do think they need a 2nd liner to replace DeBrusk who it seems like he won't be re-signed although I would bring him back. Again, if you can Lindholm on a good contract, sure, but I doubt it happens.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 23 at 5:26 p.m.
Thread: Is This Possible
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Celtics21</b></div><div>In recent years, his hits have been better as he has moved his people into the organization. There are few teams that understand fit better in the past 3 years.

Forbort has played OK. Ullmark looks like a HR. Last year, did he actually miss outside of Lucic?</div></div>

Forbort was not worth $3M in any year nor has he ever been in his career to even give him that $, you don't give any kind of clause to bottom-line/extra players and three-year... is long-term for him. That's just the contract. Hopefully they don't repeat that mistake with Edmundson or give a bad contract to Dillon or Zadorov. Ullmark was a gamble that paid off, let's see if they can finish the job by trading him to improve somewhere else.

It's fine when Sweeney doesn't have much money like last year, 2019 or 2017. When he has a lot of cap space with only few holes, it's another story. Again, I would love to see a successful off-season, I am not cheering against him just to be right.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 23 at 4:34 p.m.
Thread: Is This Possible
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Celtics21</b></div><div>I trust Don Sweeney’s current ability to discern whether a player fits. His hit rate recently has been outstanding. If he believes Lindholm is worth the risk, I trust his judgment more than a random fan on cap friendly</div></div>

He sure nailed it with the contracts he gave to Beleskey, Backes, Moore, Foligno, Forbort. I gave him a chance for the first years, but free agency under him has been mediocre at best. Some good signings, some okay and these five are unacceptable. From now on, I'll believe it when I see it and I do think he's improved (draft as well) although the bar was low given how he started.

That Lindholm fits is one thing and I wouldn't be surprised if it works but, a) he is not a 1C so this management plan can't pencil him into that role and b) it's the contract that is worrying. It's hard to not see the front office give too much term or too much money. This applies to Stephenson, Zadorov or any other top6 F/top4 D they could target. Contract is the main concern.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 22 at 10:11 p.m.
Thread: After the press conference
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Mojo</b></div><div>The problem I see with the UFA center market is risk.
Lindholm seems to be the popular answer but he didn’t have the best season and played bottom 6 in Vancouver.
Monahan had a great season! But his injury history is terrifing.
Chandler Stephenson? I don’t know? How much center vs wing does he play? Stats elevated on the VGK wagon?
Alex Wenneberg doesn’t move the needle. Not sure he’s a number 2 let alone 1.
Ullmark trade to LA for Dubuois? Is there a bruins fan who thinks this is a good idea???
Somehow wrangle the rights to Necas? Might be a natural fit with pasta and Zacha. But does he win draws? Wasn’t he on the wing in Carolina?
I’d love to hear who you guys think is “our guy”.</div></div>

Lindholm seems like their target, but he is 30yo and he'll probably not get a good contract. Stephenson is also 30yo and just seems close to Zacha/Coyle's level. The rest of the UFAs are 3rd liners. Necas hasn't played much C and isn't good at faceoffs, but he's 25yo, likely a top6 forward and could get better. It's the only interesting target. However, he will cost a lot and I don't know if it's the guy they should pay for.