SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Bs get Necas 2C leave cap to get 1C at trade deadline

Created by: Bgervais31
Team: 2024-25 Boston Bruins
Initial Creation Date: May 29, 2024
Published: May 29, 2024
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
6$6,500,000
4$6,500,000
1$850,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
1$1,000,000
3$5,250,000
1$1,000,000
1$1,000,000
Trades
BOS
  1. Necas, Martin [RFA Rights]
Buyouts
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2024
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
2025
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
2026
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the BOS
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
24$87,700,000$83,890,834$50,000$330,000$3,809,166
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$4,750,000$4,750,000
C, LW
M-NTC
UFA - 3
$5,250,000$5,250,000
C, LW, RW
UFA
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$11,250,000$11,250,000
RW
NMC
UFA - 7
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$6,125,000$6,125,000
LW
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$5,250,000$5,250,000
C, RW
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 2
$6,500,000$6,500,000
RW
RFA
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$2,300,000$2,300,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$870,000$870,000 (Performance Bonus$80,000$80K)
C
RFA - 2
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$2,000,000$2,000,000
C, RW
RFA - 1
$1,000,000$1,000,000
LW, RW
UFA
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$925,000$925,000
C
RFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$775,000$775,000
RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$787,500$787,500
LW, RW
RFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$800,000$800,000
C, RW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$6,500,000$6,500,000
LD
NTC, NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$9,500,000$9,500,000
RD
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$6,500,000$6,500,000
G
RFA
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$250,000$250K)
LD
RFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$4,100,000$4,100,000
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$850,000$850,000
G
RFA
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$800,000$800,000
LD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Boston Bruins
$2,750,000$2,750,000
RD
UFA - 2
$1,000,000$1,000,000
G
UFA
$1,000,000$1,000,000
LD/RD
UFA

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
May 29 at 9:35 p.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 5,168
Likes: 1,725
I am a Bruins fan, but people need to stop believing a straight up deal is possible. We would be adding Lysell and a pick for it to be considered
vikhodush, Trmaus12 and Shanesaw9 liked this.
May 29 at 9:35 p.m.
#2
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
This aint it. Ullmark isn’t worth necas. The dude is awful in the playoffs
May 29 at 9:39 p.m.
#3
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 5,168
Likes: 1,725
Quoting: ecupirate07
This aint it. Ullmark isn’t worth necas. The dude is awful in the playoffs


Dude put up better better numbers against Florida last year in the playoffs with regards to GSAx/60 than Andersen has over the past two years (.260 v .247) and that includes the 16 game sample that hasn’t been consistent with Andersen’s career.
Trmaus12 liked this.
May 29 at 9:39 p.m.
#4
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2018
Posts: 15,942
Likes: 6,649
Now this is a Necas deal I can get behind, not cause the value is good but because the Bruins are overpaying both in terms of trade capital and AAV for a middle 6 winger
May 29 at 9:42 p.m.
#5
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Celtics21
Dude put up better better numbers against Florida last year in the playoffs with regards to GSAx/60 than Andersen has over the past two years (.260 v .247) and that includes the 16 game sample that hasn’t been consistent with Andersen’s career.


Cherry picking stats i see. Lets use 1 favorable series and compare it to a much larger sample size. Freddie’s GSAx/60 was .579 last season and his 2 season average is .36 so you are even bad a cherry picking
May 29 at 9:45 p.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 5,168
Likes: 1,725
Quoting: ecupirate07
Cherry picking stats i see.


He played poorly against Carolina for 2 games and this year he had one good start / got put in on one game where the team quit. Not sure how anyone can say anything based on how he played in the Florida series

Its literally the only playoff experience he’s had since he was stuck in Buffalo all those years

All I know is he’s .593 over his last 97 games including the playoffs. Is 97 games a big enough sample?
Trmaus12 liked this.
May 29 at 9:46 p.m.
#7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Celtics21
He played poorly against Carolina for 2 games and this year he had one good start / got put in on one game where the team quit. Not sure how anyone can say anything based on how he played in the Florida series

Its literally the only playoff experience he’s had since he was stuck in Buffalo all those years


Yet he is still a downgrade in the playoffs
May 29 at 9:49 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 5,168
Likes: 1,725
Quoting: ecupirate07
Yet he is still a downgrade in the playoffs


So is Connor Hellebuyck if I want to ignore overall play and just go to small sample sizes.

I’d argue that Andersen was the primary reason you weren’t competitive against the Rangers. Ullmark has played better and is younger. Should give you upside unless you disregard his play.

Your judgment of his playoff acumen is based on 3, maybe 4 games.
Trmaus12 liked this.
May 29 at 9:54 p.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Celtics21
So is Connor Hellebuyck if I want to ignore overall play and just go to small sample sizes.

I’d argue that Andersen was the primary reason you weren’t competitive against the Rangers. Ullmark has played better and is younger. Should give you upside unless you disregard his play.

Your judgment of his playoff acumen is based on 3, maybe 4 games.


Yep no real interest in helley either. Hes had 9 starts over 3 seasons.

Andersen wasn’t the issue though.
May 29 at 9:58 p.m.
#10
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2018
Posts: 15,942
Likes: 6,649
Quoting: ecupirate07
Yet he is still a downgrade in the playoffs


And Necas is good in the playoffs?! LMAO, guy has 1 regular season over 55 points and 1 playoffs over .5ppg and he is all of a sudden more valuable than Gretzky! Y'all need to calm down some
May 29 at 10:10 p.m.
#11
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Campabee
And Necas is good in the playoffs?! LMAO, guy has 1 regular season over 55 points and 1 playoffs over .5ppg and he is all of a sudden more valuable than Gretzky! Y'all need to calm down some


Nice fallacy argument here. No surprise though

Necas is still better in the playoffs than ullmark is. Ullmark couldn’t manage a .900 sv percentage in 10 games
May 29 at 10:26 p.m.
#12
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2018
Posts: 15,942
Likes: 6,649
Quoting: ecupirate07
Nice fallacy argument here. No surprise though

Necas is still better in the playoffs than ullmark is. Ullmark couldn’t manage a .900 sv percentage in 10 games


Where is the "fallacy" Necas had 9 points in 11 games this year in the playoffs, prior to that his best playoffs was 7 in 15 (literally .5ppg) How many seasons has Necas scored above 55 points? Right 1 in 6 seasons, the guy is 25, looking for a big payday and has never proven to be anything more than Domi. But yeah you are gonna get an impact player or top prospect for that ROFLMFAO!!!
May 29 at 10:28 p.m.
#13
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Campabee
Where is the "fallacy" Necas had 9 points in 11 games this year in the playoffs, prior to that his best playoffs was 7 in 15 (literally .5ppg) How many seasons has Necas scored above 55 points? Right 1 in 6 seasons, the guy is 25, looking for a big payday and has never proven to be anything more than Domi. But yeah you are gonna get an impact player or top prospect for that ROFLMFAO!!!


The fallacy is the bs about Necas being worth more than Gretzky.

Necas is still worth more than Ullmark and a better playoff performer. Ullmark does nothing for the canes
May 29 at 10:39 p.m.
#14
Good nerd
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 891
Likes: 494
Quoting: ecupirate07
This aint it. Ullmark isn’t worth necas. The dude is awful in the playoffs


You can disagree with the trade (I am a Bruins fan and I agree it isn't fair value for Necas), and you can not want a player, but there is no need to extrapolate this narrative that he is "awful in the playoffs" from such a tiny sample size. The guy played hurt last year, which makes up the bulk of his playoff numbers. He started 1 game in the playoffs this year, and while he gave up 3 goals, he was the only player on the Bruins who was keeping them in the game. If you think he isn't an improvement over Freddy Anderson, that is all you need to say.
vikhodush and Celtics21 liked this.
May 29 at 10:41 p.m.
#15
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 7,292
Likes: 3,572
Quoting: tupty
You can disagree with the trade (I am a Bruins fan and I agree it isn't fair value for Necas), and you can not want a player, but there is no need to extrapolate this narrative that he is "awful in the playoffs" from such a tiny sample size. The guy played hurt last year, which makes up the bulk of his playoff numbers. He started 1 game in the playoffs this year, and while he gave up 3 goals, he was the only player on the Bruins who was keeping them in the game. If you think he isn't an improvement over Freddy Anderson, that is all you need to say.


Spot on. These bruins canes trades this week has caused wild discourse on both sides lol
tupty and Celtics21 liked this.
May 29 at 10:41 p.m.
#16
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: tupty
You can disagree with the trade (I am a Bruins fan and I agree it isn't fair value for Necas), and you can not want a player, but there is no need to extrapolate this narrative that he is "awful in the playoffs" from such a tiny sample size. The guy played hurt last year, which makes up the bulk of his playoff numbers. He started 1 game in the playoffs this year, and while he gave up 3 goals, he was the only player on the Bruins who was keeping them in the game. If you think he isn't an improvement over Freddy Anderson, that is all you need to say.

He doesn’t have a .900 sv percentage in 10 games in the playoffs. My point stands
May 29 at 10:58 p.m.
#17
Good nerd
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 891
Likes: 494
Quoting: vikhodush
Spot on. These bruins canes trades this week has caused wild discourse on both sides lol


I'm not really sure why Bruins fans think 1 year of Ullmark is going to net them a guy who they think is a top 6 player. I think a late 1st round pick is the likely ceiling on an Ullmark trade. But we won't know until he either is (or isn't) traded.
vikhodush liked this.
May 29 at 10:59 p.m.
#18
Good nerd
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 891
Likes: 494
Quoting: ecupirate07
10 games


My PoInT sTiLl StAnDs
65324bb3906b6865f904a72f8f8a908541-16-spongebob-explainer.rhorizontal.w700.jpg
vikhodush liked this.
May 29 at 11:00 p.m.
#19
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 5,168
Likes: 1,725
Quoting: ecupirate07
He doesn’t have a .900 sv percentage in 10 games in the playoffs. My point stands


Save percentage is one of the most useless stats when assessing a goaltender, it doesn’t contemplate difficulty of shot faced. It’s as much a team metric as a goalie one. GsaX/60 is a pretty simple metric to review and it does.
May 29 at 11:01 p.m.
#20
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 7,292
Likes: 3,572
Quoting: tupty
I'm not really sure why Bruins fans think 1 year of Ullmark is going to net them a guy who they think is a top 6 player. I think a late 1st round pick is the likely ceiling on an Ullmark trade. But we won't know until he either is (or isn't) traded.


His 15 team NTC doesn’t help either in terms of a return. I get Bs fans not wanting to give up a ton for Necas either. I don’t think he’s a great fit for what you guys need or your structure. Just don’t seem like great trade partners but EF comment about canes and bruins talking about an Ullmark deal last TDL sparked even more of these deals. Problem with that is the context of that situation wasn’t really provided which is canes weren’t sure if Freddy would be back at all and Koochie and Raanta were shaky in the beginning of the year. Just doesn’t make sense for either side honestly.
tupty liked this.
May 29 at 11:01 p.m.
#21
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Celtics21
Save percentage is one of the most useless stats when assessing a goaltender, it doesn’t contemplate difficulty of shot faced. It’s as much a team metric as a goalie one. GsaX/60 is a pretty simple metric to review and it does.


Im overly aware of GSAx. Ullmark is negative in his games played over 3 seasons but we are still trying to push the use here. Andersen has been better.
May 29 at 11:02 p.m.
#22
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: tupty
My PoInT sTiLl StAnDs
65324bb3906b6865f904a72f8f8a908541-16-spongebob-explainer.rhorizontal.w700.jpg


Under .900 and negative GSAx is bad no matter how you try to delegitimize the argument. Especially when you are talking about believing he returns a top 6 RFA. Not worth it.
May 29 at 11:04 p.m.
#23
I Love J Boqvist
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 13,697
Likes: 3,714
Quoting: tupty
I'm not really sure why Bruins fans think 1 year of Ullmark is going to net them a guy who they think is a top 6 player. I think a late 1st round pick is the likely ceiling on an Ullmark trade. But we won't know until he either is (or isn't) traded.


You could also say based on comps for guys like Necas (Fiala, Reinhart, Trouba, Debrincat to Detroit), that a 1st+prospect is probably near the cap on a Necas return.

Ullmark+Lysell for example would be, imo, an offer that is certainly competitive for Necas, and would come down to what Carolina prefers
tupty liked this.
May 29 at 11:06 p.m.
#24
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2018
Posts: 15,942
Likes: 6,649
Quoting: ecupirate07
The fallacy is the bs about Necas being worth more than Gretzky.

Necas is still worth more than Ullmark and a better playoff performer. Ullmark does nothing for the canes


It is called be facetious, exagerating upon an over inflated expectation. No, no one actually said he was worth more than Gretzky but many Canes fans think he is netting a top 10 pick + A or B prospect, a young impact NHL regular or a top prospect with top line potential. Why would any team give up any of that for a guy who isn't that in the first place, never has been that and likely never will be that either?!
May 29 at 11:08 p.m.
#25
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2020
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 3,084
Quoting: Campabee
It is called be facetious, exagerating upon an over inflated expectation. No, no one actually said he was worth more than Gretzky but many Canes fans think he is netting a top 10 pick + A or B prospect, a young impact NHL regular or a top prospect with top line potential. Why would any team give up any of that for a guy who isn't that in the first place, never has been that and likely never will be that either?!


Not a fan said that. Using an exaggeration to come back in an argument is a logical fallacy.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll