Boychuk's salary

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

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    Precisely. I never bought into the "Kelly must be retained because he is so valuable to the team" argument (though I may be overstating this a bit). He is an above average bottom 6 forward who had a career year at the right time (for him). I have no problem re-signing him but am just as fine without him in the lineup.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary:
    [QUOTE]Precisely. I never bought into the "Kelly must be retained because he is so valuable to the team" argument (though I may be overstating this a bit). He is an above average bottom 6 forward who had a career year at the right time (for him). I have no problem re-signing him but am just as fine without him in the lineup.
    Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]
    I feel the same way. I really like Kelly as a player but still see him as 1 of the easiest parts to replace (if need be).
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary : I feel the same way. I really like Kelly as a player but still see him as 1 of the easiest parts to replace (if need be).
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Especially if he is gunning for a multi-year $3mill (per) contract. Good complimentary piece but not essential.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary : Finally someone says it!!! There seems to be confusion on these boards about the role he had with the B's this year. He was not the shutdown guy, Bergeron was. He played just over 14 minutes a night against fellow bottom 6 players. Yes, he did score 20 which is quite an accomplishment for a career bottom sixer but he was never the shutdown guy in Boston. Thank you.
    Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]

    Finally?  I posted almost exactly this argument on OatesCam's "Realistic Moves" thread (I think that was it) arguing that the Bruins don't need a defensive centre on the third line, they need a guy with offensive upside.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary : It's only defense that I'm talking about when I say re-sign Kelly.  I don't care that he got 20 goals.  He could have got 2 and I'd still be saying this.  I don't know if he's a shutdown center.  And if it's true that he couldn't handle the toughest situations than my argument takes a hit.  But I view him as the second best defensive forward on this team after Bergeron.  And I theorize that he could match up against top lines.  When Krejci was out, and Horton was struggling to find his game.  Kelly was used on the first line, and did fine.  I don't think it's about who he's out there against.  It's about what he does.  And if he does what he typically does, he's serviceable in any role.  if i'm wrong that Kelly is capable of being a shutdown center against top lines, then fine.  Let him go. 
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]
    He's probably capable of doing it but Bergeron already does the job. You can only spend so much for a guy to be your backup defensive center. I like Kelly but on the open market he's likely to get offered more than he's worth to the Bruins. I'll be pleasantly surprised if Kelly is a Bruin next year but I can't imagine PC offering as much as some other clubs will.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary : Finally?  I posted almost exactly this argument on OatesCam's "Realistic Moves" thread (I think that was it) arguing that the Bruins don't need a defensive centre on the third line, they need a guy with offensive upside.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Yes you did Book. My apologies. We do seem to be in the minority though, or at least were last week anyway.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Boychuk's salary

    In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Boychuk's salary : You're absolutely right.  The maximum return on investment isn't there.  But it's the same concept as saying Lucic, Horton, Krejci, Seguin etc. are our offensive weapons.  So therefore what's the point of signing anyone else?  Someone would be under-utilized for the amount you're paying them/the role you envision for them.  I say that doesn't bother me.  I also agree that the "third line" is an offensive line on this team, so maybe there is a better player than Kelly out there. But the good thing about having Kelly is that if either Seguin or Krejci is struggling, they can be moved both "down" in the lineup and to the wing to find their game. I'd rather have Kelly than Peverley. But in any case i'd like to see another offensive threat brought in.
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]
    As we've seen, you can't have too much offense. You can have too many secondary/role players though.
     

Share