Are you laughing because you’re starting to realize that you might not know what you’re talking about.

Every single thing in that post was accurate.

From what you've shown here, I doubt this.

I get it, you're a Boston fan and want to be a massive homer. DeBrusk has been as disappointing this season and the past seasons. All the stats, microstats and whatever else you want to use show that. That's why he's still playing way down your lineup and actually averaging less time on ice this season than last. Time to get your head out of your ass.

If you want to talk about back to normal. The season you cited to show that a 20 goal return might happen he shot 6% higher than any other year. It's the outlier.

When have i said anything about his performance being anything but negative? When i have i ever used micro stats? You seem very very confused.

When you quoted a post that says he wasn't disappointing this season and said everything said there was true.
If you want to talk about back to normal. The season you cited to show that a 20 goal return might happen he shot 6% higher than any other year. It's the outlier. You should really have a look at those stats before you keep trying to defend DeBrusk with no basis.

There's a reason you are going from thread to thread right now and saying none of them are enough. It's because you don't have a realistic view of what he is worth, you have a biased view.

The first line of that post was that he was disappointing…what are you talking about?
The first three seasons of his career he scored at a 25 per 82 pace….what are you talking about?

I’ve said a whole bunch of them are excellent returns for the bruins, and many of them are far too much of an offer….what are you talking about? But ya i don’t want Kane or Henrique….or dermott.

I'm talking about without that outlying season where he shot 17%, he'd be on pace for 20 goals a season through those other 2 seasons. For him to recover and score the 20 goals you want him to this season, he would need to shoot at that outlying 17% pace again. A unlikely, unrealistic expectation. Then if he's not that 20 goal scorer this season, according to you, he won't be qualified. What does this mean? It means any trade for him should be considered a rental. The facts tell us so.

Fun fact he is owed 4.85mill as his QA...no thank you hard pass

you gotta remember though debrusk is arguably your number 1 LW in terms of skill him and bunting will be the top 2 guys mean debrusk will be with 2 of nylander, matthews, marner, tavares. he won't need a miraculous season he was putting up 20+ goals with 34+ yr old krech and either heinen or ritchie give him one of matthews or marner hitting 20 goals will never have been easier for the kid



^ agreed debrusk the last 2 seasons wasn't given the ideal setting to succeed. debrusk at his best is playing top 2 line minutes along with PP time but once hall and smith were acquired he lost all of that. the worst was last year cassidy playing ritchie 2nd line instead of debrusk that was just simply coaching mistakes that translated to debrusk having a down season

Boston has 64 games left. I don’t want to play the game of how many games he would have left because every team has played a different number. In order to hit 20 goals this season with the remaining games boston has, he would have to score at a 21.7 goal pace….the horror! I don’t really think you should be leaning so hard into facts here. You’re not really the one providing any.

Here’s the deal. Had you said, “i think there’s a decent chance whoever trades for him doesn’t wind up qualifying him blah blah blah,” I would see your point, and maybe agree to a certain extent. That’s a far cry from, “RARARA he’s as good as UFA.” He’s not. Any pending RFA can not receive a QO, and become UFA. Duh. We all know this. Teams trade for the ability to make that decision.

Think the bruins thought, “well, Nick Ritchie will clearly be a UFA at the end of his deal, so that’s what we’re trading for.” No, they tried to get a struggling player and fix him, but he’s just not an NHL player so he wasn’t qualified. Simple.

Could you though?

The stats say otherwise. At his current rate for shots per game, he would need to shoot close to 17% to reach 20 goals this season, a number thats only going to go up the longer he stays on the Bruins. He reached that mark once but his real average is 11%. Just in general, 17% is an unreasonable mark to expect. It's better than even the best shooters in the league's average shooting %. Could it happen? Sure. Is it likely to happen? Very much no. Will any GM act like it might happen? No.

Provide stats, poster ignores the stats because they show he's being unreaslistic, poster then tries to act like you didn't provide any. Funny.



Teams don't trade value for that decision when they know that decision is likely to be a 'no' is the point you've been purposefully trying to ignore the entire time. The Bruins can't expect to get the value of an RFA with team control for a player that will likely not be qualified. That is why for all intents and purposes, he should be valued as a UFA.

You made something up that was inaccurate. I did the math for something that objectively, and irrefutably is accurate.

he also shoots what 2-3 times a game on the 3rd line? give him 1st line minutes and PP time and now he shoots 4-7 times a game with also having much better opportunites. shooting % doesn't judge a players accuracy necessarily if he doens't have linemates who can help him produce high scoring chances then no kidding his percentage will be low.

i believe shooting % can be just a slightly over valued at times look at kreider everyone sees him and is like omg he is shooting at +20% and has 15 goals but what they dont realize is that 9-10 of those goals have came from PP where he is the main set up guy and he is given easier chances to score. all those things play affect if debrusk was sitting by the dot on toronto's PP averaging about 1:30 of PP time a night im sure you would see a huge jump in his overall production and shooting % just like when he was 2nd line LW and 1st line PP in boston

How was it inaccurate? You haven't shown it.

It's funny you used the Ritchie trade as an example because its very comparable to this. They traded Danton Heinen, a player who had shown he could do more that a team hoped might turn it around but was bad cap for Nick Ritchie, a player who had shown he could do more that a team hoped might turn it around but was bad cap. The idea there is comparable to this trade except Dermott isn't a bad cap hit.

That's exactly the point though. He might get better opportunity in Toronto and he might see a turn around but that isn't what the Bruins are trading. They are trading the winger who is currently playing on his 3rd line and not producing. The Bruins don't get value for how the Leafs might use him. That value is what the Leafs are gambling. He might recover, he might also end up playing on the Leafs 4th line, draining their cap with a terrible hit and leaving at the end of the season.

You said for him to score 20 he would have to shoot at 17%. That’s just made up. He could shoot at 1% and get a whole bunch of shots. He could shoot at 100% and get 17 more shots.

Don't stop to wonder why I don't think you understand how hockey works when you can't understand basic stats like shooting %.

Saying that debrusk needs to shoot at 17% to score 20 is just inaccurate, and frankly simplistic and dumb.

A far easier way to score more is to shoot more. No coach has ever said to a player, “I’m really going to need you to get your shooting percentage up.” They want more shots and chances.

It's not inaccurate, its what he needs to shoot given his current shot rate. Calling it inaccurate is, to quote you, 'simplistic and dumb'. As I pointed out to the other person, how Toronto might use him isn't reflected in the value Boston gets in a trade. You are trading what he is and his current shooting rate. Toronto's gamble is that he might improve given more opportunities. He might also not improve, end up on the 4th line, burying their cap picture for the season and leave at the end of the year. You don't get value for the positive side of a gamble when the negative is probably more likely. How do we know Boston sees the negative side as more likely? They are trading him rather than giving him more opportunity themselves.

6 points in 17 games for a third liner isn't bad? kase has 7 in 20 and i've seen leafs fans praising how good he looks. debrusk may not look like the scoring threat he once was but his defence and physicality has improved dramatically. 1st 2 years in the league he was a sniper that's it, now he is a strong skating 2 way guy who has become more physical. debrusk plays PP, PK and 5v5 and has looked good in all 3 given the time he has received, not to mention all of his points are from 5v5 time which is a big positive. Jakes Goals expected per 60 is also 6th on team only behind the perfection line and coyle who has been playing at almost the best he even has and hall

You mentioned nothing about current shot rate. You just said he needs to shoot 17% to score 20.

When you can't argue the facts, play semantics ... wait, thats not it, pound the table.

All this and yet Boston is playing him less this season on average than he played last and looking to trade him. How they view DeBrusk's effectiveness is a hard argument for you to be making and will be even more difficult for the team.