|
Post by Fletcher on May 3, 2015 5:12:20 GMT
I was thinking about the Bruins stats from last season, and the production levels by salary. That's certainly not a perfect metric (being in a rookie contract makes a huge difference), but still it is interesting to see the breakdown. Here are the Bruin forwards that played at least 25 games last year, with points-per-game shown and dollars-per-point. It is also pro-rated based on the time/games at the NHL level/salary (eg. Pastrnak's only counts at 56% of season salary -- 46/82 games played; Bergeron at 81/82 games played). Player | Points-per-game | $$-per-Point | Spooner | .62 | $14,245 | Pastrnak | .59 | $19,219 | Soderberg | .54 | $22,727 | Griffith | .33 | $27,165 | Smith | .49 | $34,573 | Cunningham | .09 | $78,049 | Paille | .18 | $86,585 | Eriksson | .58 | $89,323 | Krejci | .66 | $97,069 | Marchand | .55 | $100,610 | Campbell | .17 | $120,935 | Kelly | .35 | $121,951 | Bergeron | .68 | $134,701 | Lucic | .54 | $134,701 |
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on May 3, 2015 5:31:24 GMT
It would be interesting to compare with other teams - is it generally true that, in terms of dollars/point, 3rd and 4th liners are better value? If that's the case, it's not a very useful metric in terms of team building because we all know a team of Pailles isn't going to win much. Just for argument's sake, Kelly's $121,951 is what a point/game scorer making $10M would score on this metric.
|
|
|
Post by Fletcher on May 3, 2015 5:38:55 GMT
Yeah, I'm not sure about 3rd or 4th liners (Kelly and Campbell come out awful here), but I think if you're in an ELC and can score any points you're going to be near the top. And, someone like Smith is going to go way down next year in the new contract, even if his scoring picks up.
What is interesting, is comparing players in similar situations. Erikson looks pretty good here in his contract compared to Bergeron or Lucic. Krejci too.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on May 3, 2015 5:43:35 GMT
And it's hard to factor in when deals were signed. Bergeron, UFA eligible, last year; Lucic, RFA, just before the lockout; Eriksson, RFA, before that. So hard to ascertain what to take away from this other than the lower the $$ per point, the better!
|
|
|
Post by NAS on May 3, 2015 5:56:53 GMT
Trade Bergeron!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 15:56:34 GMT
As an onlooker, I think the Bruins went wrong with having too many "core" guys. Fourth liners should never have job security if they can't perform spot duty on other lines. Signing players like Paille, Campbell and Thornton to multi year NHL only deals shows loyalty, but doesn't make financial sense. Not to mention that not a single Bruin in the top-4/6 signed a cap friendly deal. Lucic, Bergeron, Seidenberg, Rask all great players, but not one took a below market value deal. Add in a dearth of quality players on ELCs and you have an untenable situation and a fired GM.
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on May 3, 2015 16:25:55 GMT
Agree with book here. While interesting it is definitely more than a little flawed. ppg and $$per game both. It is, for instance, impossible to presume that Spooner, for example, would keep up the pace points wise in a full season. 82 games is along a grueling schedule and many bubble players can perform well for 20-30 games and then wear out or drop off a cliff due to the daily grind. The $$ per game follows the same pattern in my opinion.
So really, the only way this can seem even moderately useful is if the player plays a full schedule and preferably not on an ELC. Or maybe bonus $$ may have to count too?
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on May 3, 2015 16:51:20 GMT
Bye Bye Lucic!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 18:10:24 GMT
This only reinforces my opinion that Kelly, Campbell and Paille must go... and probably Soderberg and Smith too (Smith I might give a second chance.) Of course, what do you do with 'em all when no one wants to trade?
|
|
|
Post by goodnewsbears on May 3, 2015 18:38:56 GMT
This only reinforces my opinion that Kelly, Campbell and Paille must go... and probably Soderberg and Smith too (Smith I might give a second chance.) Of course, what do you do with 'em all when no one wants to trade? Campbell, Paille and Soderberg are UFA. So, I'm pretty sure they're gone. We'll have to wait and see for Smith and Kelly.
|
|
|
Post by goodnewsbears on May 3, 2015 18:46:23 GMT
I think Lucic surprises his critics next year and comes back full beast mode. I expect close to 25 goals and a few fights in there for good measure.
|
|
|
Post by bruins92 on May 3, 2015 18:50:15 GMT
Out of curiosity, could we get anything for Kelly or would it have to be a salary dump?
|
|
|
Post by goodnewsbears on May 3, 2015 18:53:23 GMT
Out of curiosity, could we get anything for Kelly or would it have to be a salary dump? I think if he gets traded it would be for third or fourth round draft pick. Nothing better for sure.
|
|
|
Post by MrHulot on May 3, 2015 19:11:23 GMT
I think Lucic surprises his critics next year and comes back full beast mode. I expect close to 25 goals and a few fights in there for good measure. Contract year for Lucic; he'd better return to "full beast mode" if he wants a shiny new deal. I think they should trade Loui. I don't think they will be able to sign both Lucic and Loui to new contracts after next season, and unless Fat continues to be invisible on most nights, I'd rather have him on the team than Loui.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on May 3, 2015 19:11:53 GMT
I think Lucic surprises his critics next year and comes back full beast mode. I expect close to 25 goals and a few fights in there for good measure. $6.5M - $7M a year for a 25 goal scorer compromises what the new GM can do to help the team. That kind of money with the hope that he returns to his previous #s is a chance that shouldn't be taken. Lucic was kept over Seguin and hasn't produced. This would be a return to Chiarelli ways of keeping over priced players and pushing the Bruins up against the cap again. This would not be progression.
|
|
|
Post by goodnewsbears on May 3, 2015 19:15:59 GMT
I think Lucic surprises his critics next year and comes back full beast mode. I expect close to 25 goals and a few fights in there for good measure. Contract year for Lucic; he'd better return to "full beast mode" if he wants a shiny new deal. I think they should trade Loui. I don't think they will be able to sign both Lucic and Loui to new contracts after next season, and unless Fat continues to be invisible on most nights, I'd rather have him on the team than Loui. I'm not so sure about not being able to sign both. I think if the cap stays flat, salaries will adjust because there won't be too many teams with cap room to give out raises. Also, Kelly's contract will come off the books.
|
|
|
Post by MrHulot on May 3, 2015 19:22:16 GMT
Contract year for Lucic; he'd better return to "full beast mode" if he wants a shiny new deal. I think they should trade Loui. I don't think they will be able to sign both Lucic and Loui to new contracts after next season, and unless Fat continues to be invisible on most nights, I'd rather have him on the team than Loui. I'm not so sure about not being able to sign both. I think if the cap stays flat, salaries will adjust because there won't be too many teams with cap room to give out raises. Also, Kelly's contract will come off the books. True, but there are a few teams out there who can certainly afford at least one of them (at about $6-7M). I can't see Loui signing for less money than Lucic, and I don't think the new GM can afford to do the "Chiarelli" with their agents (trying to sign them early with a generous offer), even if the cap stays flat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 22:46:24 GMT
Out of curiosity, could we get anything for Kelly or would it have to be a salary dump? I hope your right but even I am starting to think we will never see the old Lucic back and I am not just talking about his point production.
|
|
RLL
Regular Member
Posts: 54
|
Post by RLL on May 3, 2015 23:06:32 GMT
I like Loui, but I would be surprised if even wants to resign with the Bruins. All the crap that goes along with being the main piece in the Seguin trade, must weigh on a person.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on May 3, 2015 23:14:22 GMT
Eriksson should be re-signed as he is one of the best all-around best players on the team.
LouI-Spooner-Pastrnak would be a lethal 3rd line.
|
|
|
Post by bruins92 on May 3, 2015 23:39:35 GMT
I'm a fan of Eriksson as well. I had a horrible concussion in high school that makes me very sympathetic to guys who get bad concussions. It takes a tremendous amount to get back from a concussion. You lose your timing and doing things at speed. He really had a good bounce back year this year.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on May 3, 2015 23:50:08 GMT
I'm a fan of Eriksson as well. I had a horrible concussion in high school that makes me very sympathetic to guys who get bad concussions. It takes a tremendous amount to get back from a concussion. You lose your timing and doing things at speed. He really had a good bounce back year this year. Like ^this!
|
|
|
Post by socca10 on May 4, 2015 1:48:54 GMT
Eriksson is basically the winger version of Bergeron. Strong, but not fast, skater. Great stick, even better game sense and timing, can play on any situation, and can score occasionally. I'd keep him over about 1/2 the other regular forwards.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Markwart on May 4, 2015 6:41:03 GMT
Eriksson is a "nice" player. But that is part of the problem imho...He does everything well but nothing elite. Spending top dollars on nice players is not prudent. I'd rather have his kind of cash invested in players in the former mold of Horton (when he was healthy) or Iginla. The Bruins need to get back the identity that made them a tough team to play against and nice guys like Loui or Riley Smith are not those guys. I do like Loui, but not at a top dollar amount.
|
|
|
Post by Fletcher on May 4, 2015 13:16:42 GMT
The tough to play against thing is tricky and I don't necessarily think that Smith and Eriksson hurt that goal (although you can't have too many of the same type of course).
I think that guys who hustle and play hard every night are a big part of being tough to play against. Obviously more toughness is needed. I think more speed helps too. I want guys who backcheck, will work doggedly in the defensive zone, but can then explode in transition for an attack the other way. That's hard to find.
|
|