Forums/NHL Signings

Boston Bruins signed Charlie Coyle (6 Years / $5,250,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options

 

Nov 28, 2019 at 12:54
#26
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 251
Likes: 110
Not saying it will but Bruins better hope his game doesn't fall off with age like Backes did. Know Backes was more physical than Coyle is but they're both power forward C's...
Nov 28, 2019 at 9:29
#27
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 638
Likes: 120
The guy has ONE 20 goals season and has only had 40 points in a season TWICE, in 8 years in the league. A lot of money when you consider that.
Nov 28, 2019 at 9:30
#28
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 638
Likes: 120
Seems like he is getting paid for his playoff performance...
Nov 28, 2019 at 9:53
#29
best poster
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,661
Likes: 925
okay signing.
Nov 28, 2019 at 2:30
#30
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,304
Likes: 860
Pass
Nov 28, 2019 at 9:59
#31
No regretzkys
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 239
Likes: 88
Quoting: Trickster
Slightly high on money and way too much term IMO.
So Krug is gone right?


Quoting: Brian2016
If Krug is gone they'll need to replace him with either a trade or another UFA Defenseman. Nobody in house is capable of running the PP like Krug, or even close to Krug.


Quoting: Trickster
Agreed, maybe give assets and move Backes to resign Krug?


They have so much cap space to re-sign Krug. Won't be an issue
Nov 28, 2019 at 11:57
#32
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 780
Quoting: MadLin27
They have so much cap space to re-sign Krug. Won't be an issue


Not really. They're gonna have like $17M in cap space to sign 8 players. And that's just based on their current roster. DeBrusk, Krug, and Halak are an easy $10M+. It's gonna be very tight. Especially if Z returns, which he probably will do (another $2M).
Nov 29, 2019 at 12:38
#33
No regretzkys
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 239
Likes: 88
Quoting: Brian2016
Not really. They're gonna have like $17M in cap space to sign 8 players. And that's just based on their current roster. DeBrusk, Krug, and Halak are an easy $10M+. It's gonna be very tight. Especially if Z returns, which he probably will do (another $2M).


Well no. You don't have to sign 8 players. You have Krug and Debrusk then you start making decisions on the non-core pieces. Plenty of players under contract already. I guarentee it won't be an issue. I'm envisioning 7.25x8 for Krug and 5.5x5 for Debrusk
Nov 29, 2019 at 3:18
#34
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 780
Quoting: MadLin27
Well no. You don't have to sign 8 players. You have Krug and Debrusk then you start making decisions on the non-core pieces. Plenty of players under contract already. I guarentee it won't be an issue. I'm envisioning 7.25x8 for Krug and 5.5x5 for Debrusk


The Cap is always an issue for Cup contenders. BOS is just extremely fortunate to have their amazing top line locked up for about $13M less than fair market value. But, right now they only have 15 players signed through next season. Plus Backes and John Moore makes 17. You can't forget they combine for almost $9M AAV. Ouch! No chance they can keep Backes. Gonna need to buyout or trade him with a pick/prospect to the Sens. Not a huge problem there though.
Nov 29, 2019 at 9:34
#35
LongtimeLeafsufferer
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 29,653
Likes: 7,113
You think the term in...six year is too much for 45 point player. But usually the Bruins get good value in their players.
What did the Flyers pay for maybe a similar player Hayes. 7.125m X 7 Hayes has 11 points in 25 games and is a minus 7.

IMO, the more prudent move would have been not sign him, and sign other players and then see what the cap situation is next summer. But hey, I'm on CapFriendly and the Bruins executives are paid to real decisions on their team.
hanson493 liked this.
Nov 29, 2019 at 11:44
#36
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
I feel like everyone who is saying bad contract, backes contract in 3-4 years etc etc. doesnt realize coyle just turned 27, krejcis contract is up next year and probably wont get resigned. Bergeron is up the year after. It was crucial for them to have at least 1 capable center on the team incase krejci is gone and bergeron goes the retirement route.
McGruff and palhal liked this.
Nov 29, 2019 at 1:37
#37
Oui non grille-pain
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,834
Likes: 1,237
It's gonna suck at the end, but that's the case with most contracts like these. It's not buyout-proof, either. Bad contract in a vacuum, but in the short-term, it is worth it, and in the long-term, a buyout will not sting too hard.
Nov 29, 2019 at 2:53
#38
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
Quoting: Icegirl
It's gonna suck at the end, but that's the case with most contracts like these. It's not buyout-proof, either. Bad contract in a vacuum, but in the short-term, it is worth it, and in the long-term, a buyout will not sting too hard.


what makes you think at 33 hes going to be done playing hockey?
Dec 11, 2019 at 12:21
#39
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 126
Likes: 96
Contracts in the $5M range with term are weird to evaluate. They are almost never just fair unless they are a bridge deal.

Either you are getting a really good deal on a player who is a better than average top half of the line up type of player (Similar to Konecny), or you are overpaying for versatility or depth.

Coyle seems like a tweener. He can play in the top 6, but you likely don't have a strong top 6 if he is anything other than a complimentary player on a scoring line. He does seem to provide plenty of versatility, but I don't think this deal is likely to represent great value. Probably isn't insanely overpaid, but on this part of the line, I think avoiding term or cap hits over $4.5M is likely a better bet than locking in guys until past 30 who could easily get pushed down the line up and become less and less valuable, even without age based decline.
Dec 11, 2019 at 1:14
#40
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
Quoting: Danny12357
Contracts in the $5M range with term are weird to evaluate. They are almost never just fair unless they are a bridge deal.

Either you are getting a really good deal on a player who is a better than average top half of the line up type of player (Similar to Konecny), or you are overpaying for versatility or depth.

Coyle seems like a tweener. He can play in the top 6, but you likely don't have a strong top 6 if he is anything other than a complimentary player on a scoring line. He does seem to provide plenty of versatility, but I don't think this deal is likely to represent great value. Probably isn't insanely overpaid, but on this part of the line, I think avoiding term or cap hits over $4.5M is likely a better bet than locking in guys until past 30 who could easily get pushed down the line up and become less and less valuable, even without age based decline.


He will likely be their 2 c when krecji walks next year. could be a 1c (not so much points wise but play wise) if bergeron misses time.
Dec 12, 2019 at 12:44
#41
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 126
Likes: 96
Edited Dec 12, 2019 at 12:53
Quoting: hanson493
He will likely be their 2 c when krecji walks next year. could be a 1c (not so much points wise but play wise) if Bergeron misses time.


That's based on opportunity though, I mean will the 2nd line be strong if Coyle is the guy you are building it around? Or do you need at least one winger that is significantly more valuable than he is in order to have a good 2nd line?

I just think that in general, contracts signed at this price point (6.25-7.5% of the cap) and term (5 or more years) for complimentary forwards in their late 20's are usually awkward bets. For instance, let's say that the player you think is worth that amount is a 20 goal, 45 point versatile player who kills penalties. That could be close to fair, but how many players whose ceiling looks to be about that stay around that level from 27-33? When you look at all the recent (relatively) contracts signed for guys around 26-28 in that price range, it's a mixture of contracts that look pretty bad in retrospect (Nielson, Dubinsky, Little, Sutter, Anisimov, Fillpula), with the most positive contracts looking like maybe Brock Nelsons, and that one is still early.

The issue ends up being that it's hard for a player of this caliber (good complimentary player) to massively outperform the contract as they likely are the player they are, and if anything injuries and age will likely decrease their value long before the contract expires. Coyle will likely be worth a chunk of this contract, it just feels like there is far more room for him to under perform it than there is for him to outperform it.
Dec 12, 2019 at 1:23
#42
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
Quoting: Danny12357
That's based on opportunity though, I mean will the 2nd line be strong if Coyle is the guy you are building it around? Or do you need at least one winger that is significantly more valuable than he is in order to have a good 2nd line?

I just think that in general, contracts signed at this price point (6.25-7.5% of the cap) and term (5 or more years) for complimentary forwards in their late 20's are usually awkward bets. For instance, let's say that the player you think is worth that amount is a 20 goal, 45 point versatile player who kills penalties. That could be close to fair, but how many players whose ceiling looks to be about that stay around that level from 27-33? When you look at all the recent (relatively) contracts signed for guys around 26-28 in that price range, it's a mixture of contracts that look pretty bad in retrospect (Nielson, Dubinsky, Little, Sutter, Anisimov, Fillpula), with the most positive contracts looking like maybe Brock Nelsons, and that one is still early.

The issue ends up being that it's hard for a player of this caliber (good complimentary player) to massively outperform the contract as they likely are the player they are, and if anything injuries and age will likely decrease their value long before the contract expires. Coyle will likely be worth a chunk of this contract, it just feels like there is far more room for him to under perform it than there is for him to outperform it.


You said alot about value and over/under performing. what if he just hits what they ask of him? the chemistry between him and debrusk is there, as well as him and bjork. a line of those 3 i think would be pretty good. If he kept consistent production through even 31 or 32 ide be content with this contract., cost effective option at 2nd line center. helps affordability in other areas. He doesnt need to be a top line player on the 2nd line. he just needs to perform on the 2nd line. if on the fringe second/third line he ends up with a 14/27/41 line ide expect he could elevate that a little with better quality guys on the 2nd line. I think the bruins utilize him to his strengths.
Dec 15, 2019 at 7:52
#43
Nazaleaf
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 102
Likes: 96
Quoting: MadLin27
Well no. You don't have to sign 8 players. You have Krug and Debrusk then you start making decisions on the non-core pieces. Plenty of players under contract already. I guarentee it won't be an issue. I'm envisioning 7.25x8 for Krug and 5.5x5 for Debrusk


I believe you're under selling DeBrusk. He's a big game player and better than Coyle (imo, anyway)... He probably wouldn't take 5.5 unless he has a bad season + playoffs..
Dec 16, 2019 at 12:37
#44
No regretzkys
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 239
Likes: 88
Quoting: thelastlongbow
I believe you're under selling DeBrusk. He's a big game player and better than Coyle (imo, anyway)... He probably wouldn't take 5.5 unless he has a bad season + playoffs..


The guy isn't exactly tearing it up... I could see him getting a deal similar to McAvoy's. If they went long term I could see an Ehlers type deal.
Dec 18, 2019 at 8:21
#45
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 126
Likes: 96
Quoting: hanson493
You said alot about value and over/under performing. what if he just hits what they ask of him? the chemistry between him and debrusk is there, as well as him and bjork. a line of those 3 i think would be pretty good. If he kept consistent production through even 31 or 32 ide be content with this contract., cost effective option at 2nd line center. helps affordability in other areas. He doesnt need to be a top line player on the 2nd line. he just needs to perform on the 2nd line. if on the fringe second/third line he ends up with a 14/27/41 line ide expect he could elevate that a little with better quality guys on the 2nd line. I think the bruins utilize him to his strengths.


That was my point, it's very hard for players with that middle level of production to just keep it going for long term. There are far more examples of players who were solid 45ish point players in their mid to late 20's who fall off of a cliff than there are of guys who just keep that going well into their 30's.

I really think that longer term $5M contracts (6-8% of cap) are weird bets when you add term on a player in his later 20's. You are rarely getting a player that is going to come out of the gate and out perform that cap hit, but players who are "worth" exactly that right now, have a hard time keeping up that value for a long enough term that it doesn't end up looking ugly. The end result usually being that you get about fair value for some of the contract, with the later years looking terrible. I just don't get why any team would want to give term to a player that isn't firmly part of their core.
Dec 18, 2019 at 8:54
#46
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
Quoting: Danny12357
That was my point, it's very hard for players with that middle level of production to just keep it going for long term. There are far more examples of players who were solid 45ish point players in their mid to late 20's who fall off of a cliff than there are of guys who just keep that going well into their 30's.

I really think that longer term $5M contracts (6-8% of cap) are weird bets when you add term on a player in his later 20's. You are rarely getting a player that is going to come out of the gate and out perform that cap hit, but players who are "worth" exactly that right now, have a hard time keeping up that value for a long enough term that it doesn't end up looking ugly. The end result usually being that you get about fair value for some of the contract, with the later years looking terrible. I just don't get why any team would want to give term to a player that isn't firmly part of their core.


He is 27 will be 28 in march, his contract will end after he just turns 34 yo. "keep it going into his 30s" dude its not like hes going to be 39 with a 5m contract like marleau was given. he is in the prime of his career. By extending him, they are making coyle part of their core. They did the same exact thing with bergeron, krejci, marchand etc. There arent that many players that fall off from a 50 point pace to below 30 at 33. maybe the last year is a bad contract but you sacrifice a year for the good years thats typically how these things work.
Dec 31, 2019 at 3:56
#47
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 126
Likes: 96
Quoting: hanson493
He is 27 will be 28 in march, his contract will end after he just turns 34 yo. "keep it going into his 30s" dude its not like hes going to be 39 with a 5m contract like marleau was given. he is in the prime of his career. By extending him, they are making coyle part of their core. They did the same exact thing with bergeron, krejci, marchand etc. There arent that many players that fall off from a 50 point pace to below 30 at 33. maybe the last year is a bad contract but you sacrifice a year for the good years thats typically how these things work.


There are numerous examples of players around Coyle's level of production falling off drastically, in fact I would say the majority of players who produce around 45 points a year fall off very drastically in their early 30's.

Ladd, Okposo, Little, Dubinsky, Callahan, Fillpula, Hanzal, Weiss, Zajac, etc.

It's actually far harder to find guys around this level who stayed valuable into even a year or two into their 30's.

Some of these guys are still NHL quality players, but any team that committed term to them usually ends up regretting it. Meanwhile, the upside just isn't there. He isn't going to turn into a bonafide 30 goal threat capable of driving the results of a strong scoring line all of a sudden.

Overall, it just seems like a bad bet.
Jan 2 at 9:18
#48
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
Quoting: Danny12357
There are numerous examples of players around Coyle's level of production falling off drastically, in fact I would say the majority of players who produce around 45 points a year fall off very drastically in their early 30's.

Ladd, Okposo, Little, Dubinsky, Callahan, Fillpula, Hanzal, Weiss, Zajac, etc.

It's actually far harder to find guys around this level who stayed valuable into even a year or two into their 30's.

Some of these guys are still NHL quality players, but any team that committed term to them usually ends up regretting it. Meanwhile, the upside just isn't there. He isn't going to turn into a bonafide 30 goal threat capable of driving the results of a strong scoring line all of a sudden.

Overall, it just seems like a bad bet.


Literally almost all of those named above have been injured or have a terrible injury history, okposo, concussions, callahan degenerative back, ladd fell off a little but hes also injured right now, filppula was on dominant lines in tampa. little is injured now but hes producing 40+ points still. hanzal injured, weiss sucks are we really putting him in this category, zajac is still fine. like idk coyles a different animal. i mean coyle had some terrible linemates in minnesota, he isnt having the greatest linemates this year but hes still on pace for 40 points bouncing around the lineup.
Jan 8 at 9:25
#49
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 126
Likes: 96
Quoting: hanson493
Literally almost all of those named above have been injured or have a terrible injury history, okposo, concussions, callahan degenerative back, ladd fell off a little but hes also injured right now, filppula was on dominant lines in tampa. little is injured now but hes producing 40+ points still. hanzal injured, weiss sucks are we really putting him in this category, zajac is still fine. like idk coyles a different animal. i mean coyle had some terrible linemates in minnesota, he isnt having the greatest linemates this year but hes still on pace for 40 points bouncing around the lineup.


Again, this isn't saying Coyle isn't a decent player, but decent players don't make great bets as signings for Term with this percentage of the cap.

Signing a UFA is a bet on what kind of value you think you will get on the contract. When you go with a longer term, you should either be betting that A) the player will either likely stay at their current value, thus creating savings as the cap increases through cost certainty, or B) The additional years got the cap hit down so that the player can out perform their contract early, when the cap savings are more important, in exchange for being undervalued later.

Coyle certainly wasn't underpaid on this deal compared to what this type of player typically commands on the UFA market, so the extra years didn't seem to bring his cap hit down, and it has historically been a bad bet to go longer term on mid roster players unless you are getting a significant cap savings.

The Bruins have a great cap situation at the top of their roster. No team boasts as much value per dollar spent on their top 3 forwards as Boston does, no team is even remotely close. So they can afford this in the shorter term, but personally, I think this is the part of your roster where GMs need to be the most shrewd since this is the type of player that most often turns into the worst contracts in the league.
Jan 8 at 9:53
#50
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 775
Quoting: Danny12357
Again, this isn't saying Coyle isn't a decent player, but decent players don't make great bets as signings for Term with this percentage of the cap.

Signing a UFA is a bet on what kind of value you think you will get on the contract. When you go with a longer term, you should either be betting that A) the player will either likely stay at their current value, thus creating savings as the cap increases through cost certainty, or B) The additional years got the cap hit down so that the player can out perform their contract early, when the cap savings are more important, in exchange for being undervalued later.

Coyle certainly wasn't underpaid on this deal compared to what this type of player typically commands on the UFA market, so the extra years didn't seem to bring his cap hit down, and it has historically been a bad bet to go longer term on mid roster players unless you are getting a significant cap savings.

The Bruins have a great cap situation at the top of their roster. No team boasts as much value per dollar spent on their top 3 forwards as Boston does, no team is even remotely close. So they can afford this in the shorter term, but personally, I think this is the part of your roster where GMs need to be the most shrewd since this is the type of player that most often turns into the worst contracts in the league.


I dont disagree, but at the same time, as ive mentioned multiple times, krejcis deal ends next year. bergeron the year after. Idk if you are a bruins fan but i know what our center prospects are right now. we have studnicka, beecher, frederic, shen. Studnicka looks good, frederic hasnt looked good when he plays up here. Beecher is a rookie. shen they just brought into the ahl. Im under the assumption krejci will not be back after this contract is up. which would slot coyle in as a 2c. 5.25m for a 2c is not bad. lets studnicka get a real feel for the nhl. at 3c then takes over 1st line duties for bergy when his contract is up, hopefully he comes back at a lesser hit and becomes our 3rd c kinda like what thornton is doing with the sharks. But with Bergys groin history i dont see that as likely. Coyle is very dependable, you know what you are getting. I like the signing, i think its a slight overpay by about 250k but ide rather overpay 250k than overpay millions on a similar player.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Submit Poll Edit