A Reasonable Take On The "D"

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    A Reasonable Take On The "D"

    http://blogs.southcoasttoday.com/bruins/2014/07/06/bartkowskis-arbitration-filing-sets-exit-in-motion/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.southcoasttoday.com/bruins/2014/07/06/bartkowskis-arbitration-filing-sets-exit-in-motion/


    As stated in the title, this seems like a reasonable possibility regarding what we will see from the "D" next year. Thoughts?



    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    How does it play out if the Bruins and Bartko can't agree?

    Someone gets Bartko and the Bruins get picks - same as if some team made him an offer as a RFA?

     

     
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Lex44. Show Lex44's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How does it play out if the Bruins and Bartko can't agree?

    Someone gets Bartko and the Bruins get picks - same as if some team made him an offer as a RFA?

     

     [/QUOTE]

    I don't think so. The arbitrator will come up with a figure. If the Bruins walk away then Bart is an UFA and the team gets nothing in return. I believe that's the case..

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How does it play out if the Bruins and Bartko can't agree?

    Someone gets Bartko and the Bruins get picks - same as if some team made him an offer as a RFA?

     

     [/QUOTE]


    That's the whole idea of arbitration BH. Bartko will have to agree to the arbitrator's decision if it goes that far. Then the Bruins are free to walk away (I think)if they choose to do so but I don't think there's any compensation if they do.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How does it play out if the Bruins and Bartko can't agree?

    Someone gets Bartko and the Bruins get picks - same as if some team made him an offer as a RFA?

     

     [/QUOTE]


    That's the whole idea of arbitration BH. Bartko will have to agree to the arbitrator's decision if it goes that far. Then the Bruins are free to walk away (I think)if they choose to do so but I don't think there's any compensation if they do.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ruling has to be >$3.5M per year for the B's to be allowed to walk away.

    Barring reaching an agreement in advance, B's & Bartkowski will have to live with the decision.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Lex44. Show Lex44's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How does it play out if the Bruins and Bartko can't agree?

    Someone gets Bartko and the Bruins get picks - same as if some team made him an offer as a RFA?

     

     [/QUOTE]


    That's the whole idea of arbitration BH. Bartko will have to agree to the arbitrator's decision if it goes that far. Then the Bruins are free to walk away (I think)if they choose to do so but I don't think there's any compensation if they do.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ruling has to be >$3.5M per year for the B's to be allowed to walk away.

    Barring reaching an agreement in advance, B's & Bartkowski will have to live with the decision.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well can he get much less than they're already offering him? If not what's he got to lose in trying? He knows they're trade him in an instant if they can package him for a better player..

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How does it play out if the Bruins and Bartko can't agree?

    Someone gets Bartko and the Bruins get picks - same as if some team made him an offer as a RFA?

     

     [/QUOTE]


    That's the whole idea of arbitration BH. Bartko will have to agree to the arbitrator's decision if it goes that far. Then the Bruins are free to walk away (I think)if they choose to do so but I don't think there's any compensation if they do.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ruling has to be >$3.5M per year for the B's to be allowed to walk away.

    Barring reaching an agreement in advance, B's & Bartkowski will have to live with the decision.

    [/QUOTE]


    Thanks Crowls. I wasn't sure how that worked. No wonder teams like to negotiate deals before the hearing whenever it's possible. You never know what an arbitrator could award considering what NHL D-men are going for these days. I would hope that Bartko would be happy with a 100% raise from last year (to 1.3M per). Anything higher seems like too much to me.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    Hoping after the award PC packages Bartkowski and Kelly for a 3rd line RW. I think those two would help a small market or rebuilding team.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Claudorr. Show Claudorr's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    Why not trade Seiderberg? The Bruins played most of the season without him and still finished first overall..He is costly and not getting younger... I believe we can obtain a good young player in return, as long, of course, he passes his physical

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Claudorr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why not trade Seiderberg? The Bruins played most of the season without him and still finished first overall..He is costly and not getting younger... I believe we can obtain a good young player in return, as long, of course, he passes his physical

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    because Seids is the B'S second best d-man on a team that defense is their bread'n'butter....  not happening....

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Claudorr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why not trade Seiderberg? The Bruins played most of the season without him and still finished first overall..He is costly and not getting younger... I believe we can obtain a good young player in return, as long, of course, he passes his physical

    [/QUOTE]


    If they had Seidenberg in the lineup the B's would likely have made it to the Finals again. He's one of the last guys I want to see moved because it's difficult to upgrade much for his price.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruinfaninnewjersey. Show Bruinfaninnewjersey's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Claudorr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why not trade Seiderberg? The Bruins played most of the season without him and still finished first overall..He is costly and not getting younger... I believe we can obtain a good young player in return, as long, of course, he passes his physical

    [/QUOTE]


    Wow, really?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Claudorr. Show Claudorr's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    To: bruinfaninnewjersey: is that all you have to say? What is your solution ?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruinfaninnewjersey. Show Bruinfaninnewjersey's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    I think  Chara + Hamilton / Seides + Boychuk / McQuaid + Krug / Miller as a 7th

    is the best D in the NHL. What is the problem that needs solving?

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Claudorr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why not trade Seiderberg? The Bruins played most of the season without him and still finished first overall..He is costly and not getting younger... I believe we can obtain a good young player in return, as long, of course, he passes his physical

    [/QUOTE]

    Because he's awesome and his contract is amazing

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Claudorr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why not trade Seiderberg? The Bruins played most of the season without him and still finished first overall..He is costly and not getting younger... I believe we can obtain a good young player in return, as long, of course, he passes his physical

    [/QUOTE]

    Because he's awesome and his contract is amazing

    [/QUOTE]


    And one of the strongest players in the league. Wasn't there an article somewhere a couple of seasons ago where he benched pressed in the top 5% of all players?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Claudorr. Show Claudorr's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    An amazing contract... , a strong man...that could bring in a nice offer, like a first line right wing. Not that I don't like Sei., on the contrary, but I believe that we are set at defense with the rest of the team, and a guy like Hamilton, and possibly Krug, could fulfill the void created by Sei.'s departure.My point is : let's get a good player in return for a good player who plays on a defense that will only improve.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaveyN. Show DaveyN's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to Claudorr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    An amazing contract... , a strong man...that could bring in a nice offer, like a first line right wing. Not that I don't like Sei., on the contrary, but I believe that we are set at defense with the rest of the team, and a guy like Hamilton, and possibly Krug, could fulfill the void created by Sei.'s departure.My point is : let's get a good player in return for a good player who plays on a defense that will only improve.

    [/QUOTE]

    By that token, why not trade Boychuk? He's only got one year left on a deal.  Is a top 2/4 d-man on any team in the league, and has a reasonable cap hit.  Wouldn't it make sense to try to and trade someone with an expiring contract before he gets a bigger pay day elsewhere?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    I'm surprised they're so high on Worseoffsky.  Pleased, but surprised.

    I think the chalk is Hamilton and Chara, Seidenberg and Boychuk, Krug and McQuaid with Miller as the 7th D.  So it makes perfect sense that Bartkowski isn't offering any hometown discounts.  He'll be dealt to the highest bidder before or after his hearing, even if the highest bidder is only offering a 5th round pick.  There's no room for him on the roster; he won't survive waivers.  Fans probably have to check their expectations on what he brings in return.  (Seidenberg wouldn't bring back a first line winger unless maybe if he was part of a package that included a first round pick a la Wideman and a 1st for Horton).

    I could see them going even deeper with the deals by moving Miller if there's any appetite for him and keeping Warsofsky as the 7th D.  Depending on McQuaid's health.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    So no Bart for Kane deal then? :P

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to jmwalters' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So no Bart for Kane deal then? :P

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No cap space.  

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    No cap space.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes there is. PC can go into the red until sept or oct or something like that. Cases in point: Philly and the Hawks. Sort it out later....lol

     

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to jmwalters' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    No cap space.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes there is. PC can go into the red until sept or oct or something like that. Cases in point: Philly and the Hawks. Sort it out later....lol

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Could toss in Rask.  :-)

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    Ha! Yeah, I am sure a goaltending duo of Svedberg and Smith=AutoCup....lol

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: A Reasonable Take On The

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmwalters' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So no Bart for Kane deal then? :P

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No cap space.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep.  Gave it all to Rask, or the deal would done.


    [object HTMLDivElement]

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share