|
Post by bookboy007 on Aug 18, 2015 7:35:32 GMT
That doesn't necessarily mean that Lucic and Hamilton were the problem . Neither had particularly good years but I thought Lucic was thrown to the wolves for a large portion of the year .No Iginla and No Krejci for a lengthy stretch and Krejci was obviously not 100 percent when he did play . Considering the circumstances and the return we got for Lucic it was probably time to move on but I am still fully convinced Lucic could have rebounded this year if complimented well,I am sad to see him go. I agree; I think Lucic will have a great year in LA playing with Kopitar and Gaborik or Kopitar and Brown. Just like I think he looked lazy in Boston when he'd go hard on the forecheck only to see his support turn the puck over and have him chase the play to get back, I think his likely Kings linemates will sustain that cycle, which is what leads to Lucic's scoring chances. He'll seem more engaged just because others are able to work off of what he does so much better, and that will lead to production and an $8M contract (if you believe the hype...).
The same thing would have happened in Boston if they'd have made the Smith for Hayes move and the Beleskey signing, along with a healthy DK.
|
|
|
Post by crowls on Aug 18, 2015 11:28:57 GMT
This notion of "are they better" kind of works off an assumption that there is no Cap, so one can compare the roster apples-to-apples.
Once Hamilton signs for $5.8M per year that ship sails. You would have trouble fielding a team with the little cap room left, so part of the analysis would have to include heads moving.
Understand the exercise, but need to acknowledge that standing pat was not an option.
|
|
|
Post by NAS on Aug 18, 2015 12:22:53 GMT
I like change.
I buy new (to me) cars often.
I move often.
A new look team is fun.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Markwart on Aug 18, 2015 15:16:38 GMT
Change with more first round picks is even better. The Bruins have done fairly well in the past when they needed another team to tank to get a better first rounder.
|
|
|
Post by #4 Bobby Orr! GOAT! on Aug 18, 2015 15:34:20 GMT
That doesn't necessarily mean that Lucic and Hamilton were the problem . Neither had particularly good years but I thought Lucic was thrown to the wolves for a large portion of the year .No Iginla and No Krejci for a lengthy stretch and Krejci was obviously not 100 percent when he did play . Considering the circumstances and the return we got for Lucic it was probably time to move on but I am still fully convinced Lucic could have rebounded this year if complimented well,I am sad to see him go. Krejci 10 points(75pt pace) in first 11 games, 21 in his last 36(48pt pace) for 31 in 47. His injuries dampened his season start so obviously that had a lot to do with Luc's season. Luc also had no RW and half a center for first 60 games, he will have a definite come back year playing with Kopitar or Carter.
|
|
|
Post by #4 Bobby Orr! GOAT! on Aug 18, 2015 15:50:33 GMT
I like change. I buy new (to me) cars often. I move often. A new look team is fun. AKA Prefer paper. Hot wired On the run Face lift
|
|
|
Post by 50belowzero on Aug 18, 2015 16:06:08 GMT
I like change. I buy new (to me) cars often. I move often. A new look team is fun. AKA Prefer paper.
Hot wired
On the run
Face liftAll of this is the criteria for the perfect "Branch Floridian"! Nas has it covered in spades!
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 18, 2015 18:06:59 GMT
This notion of "are they better" kind of works off an assumption that there is no Cap, so one can compare the roster apples-to-apples. Once Hamilton signs for $5.8M per year that ship sails. You would have trouble fielding a team with the little cap room left, so part of the analysis would have to include heads moving. Understand the exercise, but need to acknowledge that standing pat was not an option. Absolutely. but Lucics being written down to about 50 cents on the dollar kind of balances that somewhat.
|
|
|
Post by crowls on Aug 18, 2015 22:10:37 GMT
This notion of "are they better" kind of works off an assumption that there is no Cap, so one can compare the roster apples-to-apples. Once Hamilton signs for $5.8M per year that ship sails. You would have trouble fielding a team with the little cap room left, so part of the analysis would have to include heads moving. Understand the exercise, but need to acknowledge that standing pat was not an option. Absolutely. but Lucics being written down to about 50 cents on the dollar kind of balances that somewhat. You love making this point...over-and-over-and-over again. Who cares? For 1 season, taking $2.75M of Lucic's contract to secure the return that they got was completely worth it. To remind you, they have Zboril, Colin Miller and Sean Kuraly, as well as, the Sharks 2016 1st rounder. That's a good haul. Would you rather just get Zboril & Colin Miller and have the $2.75M in Cap? Or no Colin Miller? What would you have done differently? And it doesn't balance it out somewhat. The net is still an incremental $2M that they would need to absorb for this year. That's $5.75M per year for the 5 years after. Not to mention the $2M raise to Reilly Smith that they needed to pay for the next two seasons. I am happy with the Lucic deal. Sweeney did well to land the return that he did. Signing Beleskey materially closed the gap on the loss of Lucic as well. A+ all the way around on that one.
|
|
|
Post by caperbruins on Aug 18, 2015 23:28:03 GMT
I really don't know a lot about Beleskey. I just hope he is willing to hit and be hit .We had such a soft team last year .
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 18, 2015 23:50:07 GMT
You love making this point...over-and-over-and-over again. Who cares? For 1 season, taking $2.75M of Lucic's contract to secure the return that they got was completely worth it. To remind you, they have Zboril, Colin Miller and Sean Kuraly, as well as, the Sharks 2016 1st rounder. That's a good haul. Would you rather just get Zboril & Colin Miller and have the $2.75M in Cap? Or no Colin Miller? What would you have done differently? And it doesn't balance it out somewhat. The net is still an incremental $2M that they would need to absorb for this year. That's $5.75M per year for the 5 years after. Not to mention the $2M raise to Reilly Smith that they needed to pay for the next two seasons. I am happy with the Lucic deal. Sweeney did well to land the return that he did. Signing Beleskey materially closed the gap on the loss of Lucic as well. A+ all the way around on that one. The point I'm making, is that "your point" about the Cap is moot, if you only include the additional numbers for Hamilton, but conveniently forget the subtraction of Lucic's. Nothing more.
As for, "Who Cares"....I dunno, but a lot sure went ape when the Bruins had to carry Iginla's bonus into the next year. At this point in the season, stating any move is "completely worth it", probably takes a pretty good haymaker to any sense of objectivitiy you may think you have covered.
|
|
|
Post by crowls on Aug 18, 2015 23:52:23 GMT
Not moot. It's $2M for 1 year, $5.75M per year for the next 5 years. Try to keep up...
|
|
|
Post by ialwayslikedmarcotte on Aug 19, 2015 0:46:32 GMT
Look, the new guys have something to prove: I belong on a Stanley Cup team who is an original six franchise. The old guys have nothing to prove (other than I was popular in Boston and don't suck now). If they're human, the new guys will have a huge chip on their shoulder/score to settle (I belong here/was worth the trade). Very few "resting on their laurels" on the '15-'16 Bruins other than the guys I implicitly trust.
Faith, guys, faith. Worst case scenario, the world doesn't end in Spring 2016.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2015 2:02:35 GMT
This notion of "are they better" kind of works off an assumption that there is no Cap, so one can compare the roster apples-to-apples. Once Hamilton signs for $5.8M per year that ship sails. You would have trouble fielding a team with the little cap room left, so part of the analysis would have to include heads moving. Understand the exercise, but need to acknowledge that standing pat was not an option. No you're right crowls standing pat wasn't an option. That ship sailed once they fired PC, but at the same time there's some issues with regards to what was said immediately after the firing & what exactly transpired. 1. "We want to get our identity back"- Answer by Cam & Don- they trade the best player arguably in the league that epitomizes what that identity they say they lost. Regardless of whether or not they may lose him after the season. This; to a lot of critics is worse than moving Boychuk for the same reason & look how that turned out. 2. "We're not re-building, but re-tooling"- Answer by Cam & Don- They get more 1st rounders than anyone in a deep draft & draft off the board in the hope they don't gel during their ELC's. They say they're forced to trade away Hamilton-- who in a lot of magazines & analysts are saying the Flames got the best trade in the off season. 3. "Tuukka played too many games last season" - Answer by Cam & Don- They get not only a bonafide backup, but a goalie who has the capability of doing what Talbot did last year for the Rangers if the situation presented itself. Again, I have re-iterate that if the B's aren't the hardest working team in the East they will be hard pressed to make it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2015 2:08:17 GMT
You love making this point...over-and-over-and-over again. Who cares? For 1 season, taking $2.75M of Lucic's contract to secure the return that they got was completely worth it. To remind you, they have Zboril, Colin Miller and Sean Kuraly, as well as, the Sharks 2016 1st rounder. That's a good haul. Would you rather just get Zboril & Colin Miller and have the $2.75M in Cap? Or no Colin Miller? What would you have done differently? And it doesn't balance it out somewhat. The net is still an incremental $2M that they would need to absorb for this year. That's $5.75M per year for the 5 years after. Not to mention the $2M raise to Reilly Smith that they needed to pay for the next two seasons. I am happy with the Lucic deal. Sweeney did well to land the return that he did. Signing Beleskey materially closed the gap on the loss of Lucic as well. A+ all the way around on that one. The point I'm making, is that "your point" about the Cap is moot, if you only include the additional numbers for Hamilton, but conveniently forget the subtraction of Lucic's. Nothing more.
As for, "Who Cares"....I dunno, but a lot sure went ape when the Bruins had to carry Iginla's bonus into the next year. At this point in the season, stating any move is "completely worth it", probably takes a pretty good haymaker to any sense of objectivitiy you may think you have covered. Yep we sure did! Personally I applauded PC bring Iginla in, because I loved having a GM who just went for IT today & tried to win as much as possible NOW! It was refreshing to have that after the MOC & Sinden years. Yes, it suks that the B's got into cap trouble, but that would've been "moot" had the B's won another cup in 2013 & went on another great run in 14' wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Post by caperbruins on Aug 19, 2015 2:38:34 GMT
The point I'm making, is that "your point" about the Cap is moot, if you only include the additional numbers for Hamilton, but conveniently forget the subtraction of Lucic's. Nothing more.
As for, "Who Cares"....I dunno, but a lot sure went ape when the Bruins had to carry Iginla's bonus into the next year. At this point in the season, stating any move is "completely worth it", probably takes a pretty good haymaker to any sense of objectivitiy you may think you have covered. Yep we sure did! Personally I applauded PC bring Iginla in, because I loved having a GM who just went for IT today & tried to win as much as possible NOW! It was refreshing to have that after the MOC & Sinden years. Yes, it suks that the B's got into cap trouble, but that would've been "moot" had the B's won another cup in 2013 & went on another great run in 14' wouldn't it? Yes, it would have . Solid argument . I am not willing to pass any sort of judgement on Sweeney until I see how this year plays out .
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 19, 2015 11:12:46 GMT
I started writing a loooong bookboy style post and decided against it. Firstly, because there have been enough of them in this thread already. Secondly, because it basically said something I could easily boil down to what's below. My gut tells me they will have a hard time scoring on too many nights and that their D, at least on paper, is a big question mark. However, my gut also tells me they will be much tougher to play against. That, combined with the pretty good level of talent on the roster overall makes me think they will be a better, more spirited team with more heart. I think that will translate into making the playoffs and at least getting out of the first round. So many question marks going into this season ,for me ,the biggest one is what kind of a year are we going to get out of David Krejci . We almost need him to be better than he ever has ,at least in the regular season . you know I think you're right. competitively, there are bigger issues, but DK just got an extension for premium bucks. If he doesn't deliver "elite", the team will be financially hooped well into the future. Not so with Chara. His Norris days may be gone, but he only has to be a top 12ish dman to earn his money, and only short term. That's very doable. At 4 per, Seidenberg isn't that much of an issue either. He should be able to contribute close to that in value. But DK??? the pressure is on.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 19, 2015 11:18:05 GMT
The point I'm making, is that "your point" about the Cap is moot, if you only include the additional numbers for Hamilton, but conveniently forget the subtraction of Lucic's. Nothing more.
As for, "Who Cares"....I dunno, but a lot sure went ape when the Bruins had to carry Iginla's bonus into the next year. At this point in the season, stating any move is "completely worth it", probably takes a pretty good haymaker to any sense of objectivitiy you may think you have covered. Yep we sure did! Personally I applauded PC bring Iginla in, because I loved having a GM who just went for IT today & tried to win as much as possible NOW! It was refreshing to have that after the MOC & Sinden years. Yes, it suks that the B's got into cap trouble, but that would've been "moot" had the B's won another cup in 2013 & went on another great run in 14' wouldn't it? that's my point Nite. The Iginla cap charge, was cuz we went for it. the Lucic..is because we didn't.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 19, 2015 11:33:08 GMT
Not moot. It's $2M for 1 year, $5.75M per year for the next 5 years. Try to keep up... You're right. I'm having difficulty keeping up. You're always introducing new stuff. Now it's Reilly Smith, the 3.4 mil, 24 year old 1 time 20 goal scorer, and all the money being saved there. You're penciling in some savings because of Hayes....the 2.3 mil 25 year old 1 time 19 goal scorer ?
That would be great if the baseline for 20 goal scorers is 2.3, but we now have examples much closer to Smiths 3.4. That would be 27 year old 1 time 22 goal scorer Belesky @ 3.8 mil
|
|
|
Post by crowls on Aug 19, 2015 12:21:34 GMT
Not moot. It's $2M for 1 year, $5.75M per year for the next 5 years. Try to keep up... You're right. I'm having difficulty keeping up. You're always introducing new stuff. Now it's Reilly Smith, the 3.4 mil, 24 year old 1 time 20 goal scorer, and all the money being saved there. You're penciling in some savings because of Hayes....the 2.3 mil 25 year old 1 time 19 goal scorer ?
That would be great if the baseline for 20 goal scorers is 2.3, but we now have examples much closer to Smiths 3.4. That would be 27 year old 1 time 22 goal scorer Belesky @ 3.8 mil
Understanding the difference between RFA vs UFA seems like a baseline requirement for this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by The OC on Aug 19, 2015 12:21:45 GMT
Somebody needs to get Stevie a Chiarelli t-shirt and a beer or five.
|
|
|
Post by stevegm on Aug 19, 2015 12:44:17 GMT
Absolutely. but Lucics being written down to about 50 cents on the dollar kind of balances that somewhat. You love making this point...over-and-over-and-over again. Who cares? For 1 season, taking $2.75M of Lucic's contract to secure the return that they got was completely worth it. To remind you, they have Zboril, Colin Miller and Sean Kuraly, as well as, the Sharks 2016 1st rounder. That's a good haul. Would you rather just get Zboril & Colin Miller and have the $2.75M in Cap? Or no Colin Miller? What would you have done differently?
And it doesn't balance it out somewhat. The net is still an incremental $2M that they would need to absorb for this year. That's $5.75M per year for the 5 years after. Not to mention the $2M raise to Reilly Smith that they needed to pay for the next two seasons. I am happy with the Lucic deal. Sweeney did well to land the return that he did. Signing Beleskey materially closed the gap on the loss of Lucic as well. A+ all the way around on that one. Since you asked.
I think the Bruins were a championship contender last year, and figured there was still a small window left despite missing the show. I didn't think anything was a result of a flawed roster, rather an inexplainable funk. Certainly there were flaws, but I felt the logical option was a new coach to shake things up, and the usual tweaks. I would have been more Lombardian in my approach for 2015. I see this year as a major re-tooling, and I would have put that off for a year. Every playoff team was happy they didn't have the Bruins or Kings to worry about. Using the kind of logic you regularly present regarding the last GM, I'd have kept Lucic, and brought in Kopitar, and had LA eat 2.8 mil of his salary instead. I would have gladly signed Hamilton for what he got, and am fairly certain I could have leveraged a trade that would bring back significant pieces that could not only potentially help the future...but definitely aid the chase for another Cup this year. Like Chicago, I'd do what I had to, to become compliant, which may include parting with a few pieces for cheaper ones. To me, Hamilton should've got both a Belesky and a Hayes type. Maybe I'd have only kept one, and since I had both Lucic and Kopitar that money would have gone to the D. I probably would have traded Smith, as I think that was an excellent move. I agree a little heavier is good, but not at the expense of anything. I'd commit to big change next year, if it didn't work now, simply because my core is past it's best before date, yet still has good value. Belesky, to me, is a great example of what's already out there if you're a good shopper. IMO, Marchand and Louis, even though I love them, aren't core players. Core players to me...are the ones nearly impossible to get. I don't see the 8 million dollar value in a guy like Bergeron, unless you have something pretty special to start with. Something to protect. He could still bring back a ton next year, and I wouldn't keep him, if I'm going rebuild. I fully believe Chara will bounce back, and next year a contender would do back flips to get him. I think LA sees Lucic like a "rental", and I do to. I'd have kept him for this big run, but I wouldn't have given him much term going forward, so I would've got zero come spring, and I'd be prepared to live with that, because of my plan. Basically, when I see really good players go for mostly picks...I see rebuild. I think the fact that the conversation has abrubtly turned from Cup contender to Playoff contender throughout the industry gives that thought some credence. I think the premise behind the overall mission moving forward, was a bit knee-jerk, and I think the odds of regressing, are better than improvement. I also don't feel there would be a huge drop off, in potential return,,,if the team waited another year to start stockpiling picks. I don't think improvement is impossible though, so I'm waiting til I see a good sample of the new product before I'm willing to go against my gut and proclaim everythings good. If all goes well, and the Bruins do better than 96 points, I'll gladly admit I've been shown a better way. I've already stated, that record, coupled with all the picks should be considered an outstanding achievement for our 1st year GM. As stated before, what happens in LA and Chicago hugely affects how I interpret things too. If LA doesn't do well, getting Lucic, while giving up picks backfires considerably. If Chicago regresses, it's also a reasonable sign the cap is working the way it's supposed to, and that the Bruins, are, in fact, way ahead of the curve.
|
|
|
Post by crowls on Aug 19, 2015 18:09:56 GMT
You love making this point...over-and-over-and-over again. Who cares? For 1 season, taking $2.75M of Lucic's contract to secure the return that they got was completely worth it. To remind you, they have Zboril, Colin Miller and Sean Kuraly, as well as, the Sharks 2016 1st rounder. That's a good haul. Would you rather just get Zboril & Colin Miller and have the $2.75M in Cap? Or no Colin Miller? What would you have done differently?
And it doesn't balance it out somewhat. The net is still an incremental $2M that they would need to absorb for this year. That's $5.75M per year for the 5 years after. Not to mention the $2M raise to Reilly Smith that they needed to pay for the next two seasons. I am happy with the Lucic deal. Sweeney did well to land the return that he did. Signing Beleskey materially closed the gap on the loss of Lucic as well. A+ all the way around on that one. Since you asked.
I think the Bruins were a championship contender last year, and figured there was still a small window left despite missing the show. I didn't think anything was a result of a flawed roster, rather an inexplainable funk. Certainly there were flaws, but I felt the logical option was a new coach to shake things up, and the usual tweaks. I would have been more Lombardian in my approach for 2015. I see this year as a major re-tooling, and I would have put that off for a year. Every playoff team was happy they didn't have the Bruins or Kings to worry about. Using the kind of logic you regularly present regarding the last GM, I'd have kept Lucic, and brought in Kopitar, and had LA eat 2.8 mil of his salary instead. I would have gladly signed Hamilton for what he got, and am fairly certain I could have leveraged a trade that would bring back significant pieces that could not only potentially help the future...but definitely aid the chase for another Cup this year. Like Chicago, I'd do what I had to, to become compliant, which may include parting with a few pieces for cheaper ones. To me, Hamilton should've got both a Belesky and a Hayes type. Maybe I'd have only kept one, and since I had both Lucic and Kopitar that money would have gone to the D. I probably would have traded Smith, as I think that was an excellent move. I agree a little heavier is good, but not at the expense of anything. I'd commit to big change next year, if it didn't work now, simply because my core is past it's best before date, yet still has good value. Belesky, to me, is a great example of what's already out there if you're a good shopper. IMO, Marchand and Louis, even though I love them, aren't core players. Core players to me...are the ones nearly impossible to get. I don't see the 8 million dollar value in a guy like Bergeron, unless you have something pretty special to start with. Something to protect. He could still bring back a ton next year, and I wouldn't keep him, if I'm going rebuild. I fully believe Chara will bounce back, and next year a contender would do back flips to get him. I think LA sees Lucic like a "rental", and I do to. I'd have kept him for this big run, but I wouldn't have given him much term going forward, so I would've got zero come spring, and I'd be prepared to live with that, because of my plan. Basically, when I see really good players go for mostly picks...I see rebuild. I think the fact that the conversation has abrubtly turned from Cup contender to Playoff contender throughout the industry gives that thought some credence. I think the premise behind the overall mission moving forward, was a bit knee-jerk, and I think the odds of regressing, are better than improvement. I also don't feel there would be a huge drop off, in potential return,,,if the team waited another year to start stockpiling picks. I don't think improvement is impossible though, so I'm waiting til I see a good sample of the new product before I'm willing to go against my gut and proclaim everythings good. If all goes well, and the Bruins do better than 96 points, I'll gladly admit I've been shown a better way. I've already stated, that record, coupled with all the picks should be considered an outstanding achievement for our 1st year GM. As stated before, what happens in LA and Chicago hugely affects how I interpret things too. If LA doesn't do well, getting Lucic, while giving up picks backfires considerably. If Chicago regresses, it's also a reasonable sign the cap is working the way it's supposed to, and that the Bruins, are, in fact, way ahead of the curve.
Thanks for answering. A couple of thoughts. - Amid the PC vs Cam/Charlie/ DS debate, CJ has skated by without that much criticism. I agree that axing him should have been on the table for consideration. Also, think he is the next lever that gets pulled if they get off to a bad start. That said, I think PC was in an equally tough spot given the roster and cap pressure.
- Think the Kopitar example is good satire, but isn't realistic. There was no cap space to absorb $3M of Kopitar. In the end, there were no real options to improve the roster and take on money, saying otherwise is not factual. Unless, part of the discussion was to move salary. Even PC understood this, see trading JB for picks.
- Seems like you agree that the "big changes" were eminent, but you wanted 1 more run with this group? That certainly was an option, guess the Cam/Charlie group didn't agree.
- The Cup Contender vs Playoff Contender statement seems way off. After getting bounced by Montreal and missing the playoffs last year, I don't recall their being much analysis indicating the Bruins were Cup Contenders.
- Hate when you say things like "throughout the industry". You seem to use this approach to squash an opposing point of view. I share my view, because it's mine. Saying that "the industry is unanimous" about a topic looks to stifle debate. It also cannot be proven. I respect your point of view and am much more interested in that than what Darren Dreger or Fluto says about it. We are Bruins fans, they are not.
- Not sure why LA success/failure defines the validity of the Bruins approach? LA is going for it. Bruins already tried that with Iginla. I don't think LA is wrong to try with Lucic because it didn't work for the Bruins with Iginla. Different situations, would expect different outcomes. Part of the LA impact may be felt in the years to come following the "go for it" approach. Similar to the Bruins, so it might be worth extending the window.
Either way, there isn't much in your explanation that I would strongly disagree with. I think axing CJ and sticking it out with PC was an option, and not an unreasonable one. I have stated that before and think I have been pretty consistent in that thinking. Hate the way this team played last year, no life and no fight. Think DS is right to try to address that, and that's not measured by fighting majors. It's about how they play, think that gets lost when talking about coming up short with 96 points.
In the end, I think PC was a very good GM, I just don't like the way he handled contracts. I think that critique is fair, and is not intended to take away from his accomplishments. Ultimately, I think it cost him his job.
Anyway, thanks for the reply and the read.
|
|
|
Post by caperbruins on Aug 19, 2015 22:15:29 GMT
So many question marks going into this season ,for me ,the biggest one is what kind of a year are we going to get out of David Krejci . We almost need him to be better than he ever has ,at least in the regular season . you know I think you're right. competitively, there are bigger issues, but DK just got an extension for premium bucks. If he doesn't deliver "elite", the team will be financially hooped well into the future. Not so with Chara. His Norris days may be gone, but he only has to be a top 12ish dman to earn his money, and only short term. That's very doable. At 4 per, Seidenberg isn't that much of an issue either. He should be able to contribute close to that in value. But DK??? the pressure is on. Still think we need another D pretty desperately to be reasonably competitive . Seidenberg was pretty bad last year . The backend is a concern among many .
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Aug 19, 2015 23:57:09 GMT
Seidenberg was not bad the second half of the year. He will come into camp fully healthy and not coming off a major surgery.
|
|