What’s Next? (Part 3)
The great thing about being a Stanley Cup champion (among others) is that you can usually make trades in the offseason from a bona fide position of strength. Last season’s cap-strapped Blackhawks were an anomaly in this respect. The Bruins, in fact, will be dealing from a position of strength even more than the normal champion; save Tim Thomas and Zdeno Chara, the entire core of the team is 30 or less. I am not counting Andrew Ference, Michael Ryder and Tomas Kaberle as core players, but it should be noted that they are over 30. Regardless of your definition of "core" player, the fact is that the Bruins are a young team.
Ultimately, the Bruins can resign their free agents, call up a couple kids from the minors, and get ready to defend Lord Stanley’s beer mug. Truth be told, there’s an excellent chance that they’ll do just that. And that’s a perfectly reasonable offseason plan; while there would be some regression to the mean by some players, natural improvement by younger players would probably offset that.
So Peter Chiarelli doesn’t have to be in a hurry to take anyone’s phone call. He doesn’t have to make a deal. And other GMs will know this. They know that if they want to deal with Chiarelli, they are going to have to bring a good offer right away; there won’t be any discounts borne of desperation. (Paul Holmgren, I’m looking in your direction.)
Now, all that said, not all is perfect in Boston. The Bruins have two weaknesses that Chiarelli would be wise to try and address.
1. Defense
The dirty little secret of the Bruins’ success in 2010-11 was that the defense stunk; only Carolina gave up more shots on goal. The Bruins gave up 32.7 shots on goal per game last year, and while I am willing to entertain the argument that they were surrendering a high volume of low quality shots, that’s still an unacceptably high number. It’s worth noting that they gave up 29.8 shots per game (14th) in 2009-10 with a relatively similar defense, so there may be an argument that the defense will improve on its own. I, however, am not prepared to make that argument.
Chara is the rock of the defense. He should have won his second Norris Trophy this year, but the voters were mysteriously drawn to a power play specialist with a minus rating. Whatever. In any case, he makes everyone better. Anyone who was paired with Chara last year magically turned into a really good defenseman; in this respect, the Bruins were well built for the playoffs. They were able to trot out Chara and Dennis Seidenberg, their two best blueliners, for about 30 minutes a night, and trust that the other four guys wouldn’t get burned too badly in the other half of the game. That can work in the playoffs, with an off night between each game, and lengthy off time between series. It cannot work in the regular season, however.
The Bruins have to improve the defense somewhere. Adam McQuaid is young and should improve, and in any case, is cheap enough that replacing him is unlikely to be cost effective. Chara and Seidenberg are part of the solution, not part of the problem, and while I think Seidenberg is a bit overrated based on his strong playoff performance (i.e. when he was paired with Chara), he’s still a perfectly good top four guy. That leaves three candidates for upgrade: Tomas Kaberle, Andrew Ference and Johnny Boychuk.
I’ve defended Kaberle enough already, and would prefer he stays, but if his price tag is too high, it wouldn’t be crazy for the Bruins to let him go, give his job to Steven Kampfer and use the money saved to upgrade another spot. There’s nothing wrong with starting the season with McQuaid and Kampfer on the third pair. Ference and Boychuk were, statistically, Boston’s worst defensemen in the playoffs. Ference emerged as a great locker room guy and leader, but the fact remains that he’s expendable. Boychuk stabilized a bit in the Vancouver series, but did his level best to submarine the Bruins’ title run against Tampa Bay.
Between those two, I would seek to move Boychuk. Boychuk is a player who should have some real value. His salary for next season is a reasonable $1.875 million, he’s got the size and skill that teams covet, and he’s got that all important Stanley Cup ring. What he lacks is a halfway decent hockey IQ. No matter; a defenseman with great physical skills but no hockey sense will generally fetch more than the reverse.
2. Power play
Well, you knew this one was coming. The Bruins power play was an ongoing Greek tragedy for much of last season, and the playoffs. The attempt to fix it with Kaberle failed completely. What do they do?
Peter Chiarelli did a lot right last year, but at the trade deadline, he addressed the wrong power play issue. The Bruins had a problem on the back end, and got Kaberle who was, and is, their best power play defenseman. This is, as I have said before, damning by faint praise, but Kaberle led Boston defensemen in points per 60 minutes on the power play. And his points per 60 minutes weren’t far off what we’d expected from him over the last few years. Kaberle was not, and is not, the problem on the power play.
The problem is that the power play has not been the same without Marc Savard. Savard was by far Boston’s best power play forward. In 2009-10, per 60 minutes, Savard was nearly three goals per 60 minutes better than the next best Bruin forward. He was also the best the previous two years. Savard’s skill set lends itself extremely well to the role of power play specialist. There’s a reason Jack Edwards repeatedly called him (with justification) the NHL’s best passer from the half wall. Alas.
The Bruins have to assume that Savard isn’t coming back. For whatever reason, David Krejci, who is also an excellent passer, just has not had the same success as the #1 line center on the power play. I do not particularly understand this, but Krejci has never averaged above 4 points per 60 minutes on the power play, and last year was a putrid 2.16. Patrice Bergeron is not a great choice for the #1 line center, either. Bergeron is an excellent faceoff man, which has real value on the power play, but he just does not possess the offensive skill set to put the power play into overdrive. He is a good passer, not a great one, and most of his goals come from guts and grit. Those are admirable traits, but they do not translate as well to the power play. Indeed, he’s been below 3 points per 60 minutes the last two seasons.
It’s going to be hard to repair the power play from the outside. Krejci and Bergeron bring too much to the team to be moved. A third line center with serious power play chops might be hard to find. Or…will it? The answer to this one, actually, may be in-house. Tyler Seguin’s problems at the NHL level are on the defensive end, not the offensive. With a full season under his belt, Seguin should show some serious improvement in 2011-12, and figures to see regular time on either the second or third line. He projects as a center long term, so why not put him there now? With a regular power play shift, Seguin has a great chance to produce.
Proposed solutions:
Please keep in mind that I have absolutely no insight into what the Bruin front office plans to do this offseason. That said, I’ve got a couple ideas.
Trade Tuukka Rask, Johnny Boychuk and Jared Knight to Phoenix for Keith Yandle.
I’ve said previously that the Bruins can’t afford the Rask/Thomas tandem much longer. Rask is signed for a very modest $1.25 million next year, and is restricted after that. He’s a top 10 goaltender, and that would surely appeal to a Phoenix team that just lost their goaltender. (I won’t even say "to trade"; Ilya Bryzgalov had a figurative gun to their head.) The Coyotes are all about cost certainty right now, and Yandle’s salary demands may be an issue. Getting a cheap year of Rask and Boychuk would appeal mightily to them. I’m not specifically targeting Jared Knight as the guy who would go back, but I am assuming there would have to be a top 5 Bruins prospect thrown in to sweeten the deal.
The benefit from Boston’s point of view is obvious: Yandle immediately becomes their second best defenseman, and their best before long. He could pair with Chara and form a dominant shutdown pair, or carry a second pair. He would probably help the power play and give them the ability to wave goodbye to Kaberle. It’s going to take a big time offer to pry Yandle from Phoenix, but if the Bruins put Rask on the table, I believe they could do it.
Sign Tim Connolly.
This one obviously comes with the caveat of "if he’s healthy". Connolly has plenty of issues, to be sure (a friend of mine played with him in juniors and says he’s the laziest player he’s ever seen), but offensive talent is not among them. Connolly is an excellent power play producer (5.74 points per 60 minutes on the power play last year), and limiting his ice time in a third line/power play specialist role might be a good thing for him. He could probably be signed to a low-risk, high-reward type deal (think 2 years, $5 million) in light of his injury issues. If he doesn’t work out, they lose little. If he does, he fixes the power play on the cheap. Speaking of Buffalo, I would have loved the Bruins to make a run at Drew Stafford, but the Sabres locked him up. Too bad, that’s a guy who could have helped the power play a great deal. And as much as Thomas Vanek would help, his contract would create more problems than his skill would solve. (See also: Briere, Daniel.)
Trade Boychuk and Matt Bartkowski to Calgary for Robyn Regehr.
Regehr may be headed to Buffalo, so this may be moot. But if that falls through, it’s obvious that he’s on the market. The Flames are in a tough spot: they’re capped out, they have a crappy farm system, and they suck. Apart from that, things are just dandy. They save money with this deal, they get younger, and they add some help to the farm system. Regehr has little to no offensive skill, but he is absolutely a guy who can tighten up the Bruins at the back end. I don’t have a good idea of what the Flames are looking for the obviously-available Regehr, but I can’t imagine it would be a lot more than this. I’d throw in a draft pick to sweeten the deal, if need be.
(And I’m aware that I’ve proposed trading Boychuk twice. If they’ve already done deal #1, then sub Andrew Ference in and add a draft pick.)
Trade a draft pick for Milan Hejduk.
The Avalanche are in rebuilding mode, and so it shouldn’t take a ton to pry away a 35 year old who’s signed for 1 more year at $3 million. Maybe a third rounder? A B prospect? A conditional pick? Whatever it may be, Hejduk can help Boston. He had a sick 6.27 points per 60 minutes on the power play. Amazingly, that number has gone UP three straight years. If that seems like an anomaly, remember that playing 5 on 4 allows older players to take better advantage of their skill and smarts, without having their loss of physical ability be exploited as much. He’s becoming a power play specialist at this point in his career (10 of his 22 goals on the PP), but that’s okay. The Bruins are so good 5 on 5 that they can afford to play a guy like that. Put him on a third line with some combo of Seguin, Peverley and Kelly and he’ll be fine.
Again, I would not expect Boston to make any significant moves this offseason, but it sounds like Peter Chiarelli is looking. They were close to getting Ryan Ellis for their first round pick, but must have backed out when Dougie Hamilton fell to them unexpectedly. So, it will be interesting to see what happens, but we can at least take comfort in that the front office doesn’t actually have to do anything.
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
well if you have a scenario/idea that involves trading Rask (I would not shed a tear), who becomes the #2 next year? As you mentioned, Bruins should be right in the mix next year, but they like to keep TT with a reasonable workload.
Khudobin, but he might play in Russia next year…so I just don’t see Rask getting traded.
Your 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins
Hockey Blog Adventure: New Post: 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins: YES!!! (I'm also on Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)
by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Jun 25, 2011 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions
After Timmy and Tuukka, there is NO ONE in the system that has proven they can get the job done. Khudobin has yet to prove himself even though he shows some promise. Timmy isn’t going to be around forever, his style of play doesn’t led itself to longevity. The Bruins organization has stuck a shot ton of time into Rask grooming him as the next Bruin’s goalie for a long time to come. He isn’t going anywhere unless a GM is willing to sell the farm to get him.
For #18
I agree…but don’t you think Yandle qualifies as “the farm”?
by Phunwin on Jun 26, 2011 9:12 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think Yandle is pretty close to the farm and there are a few others I think they would bite at for the right price.
Although I am not convinced Chiarellii is going to look to move anyone. I am not even sure he is going to look hard to upgrade the defense at this point. Although Chia is often good at not over sharing intent, most of what he has said makes me think this team doesn’t intend to do a lot of wheeling and dealing during the free agency period.
I think if the right trade for the right defensive piece comes along though-I think that one might happen. I lean more towards them trying to do a wishful thinking upgrade and not involve Rask in the trade at all.
Yandle might be said farm, but I wouldn’t give up Tuukka for him. I personally think the Bruin’s D are better than they showed. The whole playoffs Boychuk was trying to do way too damn much. He was excellent in the ‘10 playoffs because he kept his game simple and did what he was good at, being physical. Kaberle I think was under a ton of pressure to basically fix the PP on his own(which is silly)and his game suffered. I think if those two guys play to their strengths, there is nothing wrong on the blue line. Can it be better? Sure. To me there isn’t enough of a need to warrant sacrificing Rask though.
For #18
I personally would like to see a true top player to lead the second pairing.
I don’t think the team has to trade for this, but I think defense is the main area that needs improving-far more than I think the team needs a high level scorer to center or wing one of the forward lines. I think if the team is serious about repeating that finding a man who can head that second pairing is important-I think the question is how much does it cost to get him and if the cost is worth it.
Honestly I think defense is the weakest link that needs to be addressed the most. The Bruins I think got lucky with their defense.
I don’t think they can trade Rask unless they have a better back up alternative and I don’t think they do.
While I really like Boychuk the man and I love some of his big hits I think he is the weakest link and post Stanley Cup the most tradable. I like him much like I really liked Stuart, but I think there are better options out there and I think the B’s right now can afford one of those options if they can find the right deal.
I think Seids was very good in the playoffs, but I think he was very good because he was paired with Chara, could pull the almost 30 or so minutes of ice time in the play offs and their games complemented each other well. But I think we need a true #1 guy to lead the second pairing.
I think everyone else is and could be tradable, but I would trade Ference or McQuaid and Kaberle is either going to make a deal or find a better one.
McQuaid IMO is a keeper and does really well what he is there to do-stays home, plays hard, stands up for his teammates and gives the top pairings some rest. I think he is well suited for a bottom 3 defensive pairing and he is cheap-I don’t see an upside at this point for trading him.
Ference might be tradable, but I have the impression he is a locker room leader and I kind of see him as the most likely to get the A Recchi leaves behind. If a good deal comes along for something we really need and we know is better, I think they make the trade, but I suspect they will mostly look to move Boychuk and prospects to find something better.
I honestly expect the team to mostly stand pat on forwards and I am fine with that. The team IMO should seek to use its capital to upgrade the defense.
If they can upgrade from Boychuk to a legit top 4 guy, I am okay with keeping Ference around. I really think Boychuk is a guy they need to look to move. If not, Ference is next on the chopping block. We’re not looking at a complete tear-down job or anything; the pieces are there for a really good defense. It’s just about upgrading from a couple weak links.
i wouldnt mess with the d
i used to love regher but he just got sent to the sabres anyway
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
Yeah, last night at the draft, it sounded like that was off the table, and I sent the article off to Ryan. Then, Regehr apparently did a 180 after I sent it, signed off on a trade, and I felt like a dummy. Oh well.
its cool tho
id land wisneiwski if we need another d guy
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
I love Timmy but....
how many more years does he truly have left in him? Yes he played out of this world this season and he is the reason we won the cup but I cant say that I would want to part with Rask under any circumstances unless he asks for an insane contract at the end of next season. The plan has been to groom him to take over for Timmy when hes done which under most assumptions would be 3-4 years at most. Not many goalies stay in prime condition after turning 40. Dont take this as any hate on Timmy cause I do love what he has done for us but in looking down the road how long can he play for?
They did it for Savy, they did it for Horton, they did it for each other, they did it for us. I give you the 2011 Stanley Cup Champions....The Boston Bruins!!
I would only trade Rask if the return was a “godfather” type offer. Thomas is older, but he seems to have a couple more years in him, and this team is good to contend for a couple more years. Bring in another veteran to back him up and look for a goalie of the future when the opportunity presents itself. But if for instance, they could get Keith Yandle as a part of a deal for Rask (and they can sign him), I think you make that trade.
As for the defense, aside from Chara and Siedenberg, I think anyone is trade-able in the right deal. I would prefer to hold onto McQuaid because I think he is getting better. And the point about Ference being a team leader could make him safe as well. But if you trade Boychuck, you have to get someone better than him. Even without Ryder, I think the Bruins are good on the lines.
I agree with whoever said, the Bruins are probably going to bring back mostly everyone and work from there.
I wouldn’t trade Rask-although for Yandle I could see the temptation. I am sure they could probably trade for or sign an able goalie, but I don’t think it would get anyone as good as Rask. I do suspect Rask isn’t going to be content to play back-up for a long time. He is a team player, but he wants in the game.
I agree that anyone other than Chara and Seids are tradable-shoot I would even argue under the right conditions either of them would be tradable, but I just don’t see the front office doing much movement with the team that won the cup. I mostly see minor tweaks depending on what happens with Kaberle and Ryder and perhaps trying to land a better version of Kaberle or a defenseman capable of anchoring the second pairing. I suspect most of the off season trades to come more in the prospect market than the core team.
Thomas has a no trade clause, for one. It’s hard to imagine him waiving it now. And while his value will never be higher, I think there would be pitchforks and torches outside TD Garden if he got traded. If he hadn’t just won the Conn Smythe Trophy, I would absolutely advocate a Thomas trade. But he’s played himself into “untouchable” status, at least for the time being.
The problem is that Rask is probably going to be in line for a big raise at the end of the season. The Bruins could just let someone tender offer him, and take draft picks, or ransom him for picks, like they did with Kessel. But I think that their window for success is open now, and it makes sense to take advantage, rather than just take draft picks.
More than likely, they’ll keep him around, and see what happens this season. Thomas will probably regress a bit, and that might give them the opening needed to sign Rask and trade Timmy. Or maybe Rask will take a step back and they’ll sign him cheaper than I expect.
Phunwin
You make a good point about Rask vis a vi Kessel. Other teams know that he’s an RFA. Other teams also know that the B’s have been willing to play the “tender” card before. In the given trade scenario, I don’t think that it would take a top 5 prospect in addition to Rask and Boychuck to get Yandle.
It might not. I was on the fence about that. Our farm system isn’t highly ranked though, since Seguin went right to the pros. So a top 5 prospect from Boston isn’t nearly as valuable as one from, say St. Louis.
by Phunwin on Jun 26, 2011 9:15 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
To answer a few questions:
1. I actually wrote this but am having problems with my SBN account. Thus, all hate mail can be directed to me, not Ryan.
2. “Who plays backup goal?” Uh, who cares? Competent backup goaltenders can always be found in the free agent market for reasonable prices. I can’t imagine the Bruins would have a hard time finding someone to play 25 games and not get absolutely shelled.
3. Yes, giving up Rask would suck, but #2 defenseman (and future #1) is ALWAYS more important than backup goalie. They can’t keep Thomas and Rask much longer; one of them will have to go by next offseason at the absolute latest, unless PC wants to spend about $9 million on his goaltending, and I hope to hell he does not.
My guess is that they entertain a couple Rask offers, turn them down, and enter the season with Thomas and Rask, and hope the problem resolves itself one way or another.
I actually like your idea, but I think you need a plan to replace Rask, Could they get a guy like Boucher (would they want a guy like Boucher?). You need some insurance on Thomas.
There’s some competent backup goaltending to be had in free agency. JS Giguere’s starting days are behind him, but for 25 games, he could be a great value if his salary demands aren’t great. Ray Emery and Brian Boucher are both solid backups, and wouldn’t demand much. Jose Theodore still has game. Pascal Leclair is a good goaltender who can’t stay healthy; they could take a flier on him. As a backup, durability is much less an issue.
And honestly, I think the Bruins could do much worse than to give Khubodin a shot at the backup job in such an instance.
noooooo
ever since we traded for rask i thought he would be our future franchise goalie. love thomas but i love rask too. cant we just hold on to each both until it blows up in our face?
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!
Why would you keep a player around who has monstrous trade value and is doing nothing to help you?
by Phunwin on Jun 25, 2011 6:02 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think this is the real question and I think it really depends on what the return is.
There are some defensemen that I can absolutely see trading Rask to obtain, because it would make the back end better, although I think they would need to have a clear back up plan in place and not just hope they find something on the market. If the B’s had somebody in the pipeline that could truly step in I might feel different but the best plan for a backup is heading back to Russia unsigned.
So the real answer to the question is “you keep him around unless the offer brings you something you really want and can’t have without the trade.” I would only consider a trade if the return was a known top 4 who could anchor their own defensive pair.
Understand, I am NOT in favor of just giving Rask away. I wouldn’t even think of trading Rask except for the type of return I’m describing. You don’t give away a top 10 goaltender who’s getting paid slave wages unless you get something serious in return. If the return was anything short of a top pair defenseman who’s got at least 5 good years ahead of him, PC should hang up the phone.
This article was definitely worth the wait, It’s interesting how some are reading this as, we can only play 1 goalie at a time, let’s trade one. I don’t see it that way at all. The Bruins have a very short window where they could hold onto Khudobin before he goes back to Russia. He’d be the ideal guy if you were to trade Rask, young backup with starter upside. I tend to agree with you that the happy go lucky Thomas/Rask arrangement only lasts about as long as one of them is injured (we now know that each one has been the last two seasons at different times) or one of them (and only one) is puttng up ungodly numbers. Athletes tend to have a different viewpoint on things. We look at Rask and say, hey, I’m sure he understands, Thomas won the Vezina, but chances are, a competitive guy like Rask believes given the opportunities, HE’D win the Vezina. So this might not go so smoothly in the very near term. That’s not to paint Tuukka as a Finnish malcontent, just as a very talented goalie who belives in himself (and all it takes is one GM to agree and the Bruins have an issue).
The other thing that makes me nervous is PC’s seeming unwillingness to make changes to this year’s team. It’s one thing for us as fans to fall in love with the first cup team in our lifetimes, it’s another for the GM to do it, and I believe you’re absolutely right in your observation that the defense is the place to do it. I can’t remember ever being comfortable this postseason with the bottom two pairings (at least not until Bergeron’s shorty in game 7), and I think Thomas’ immortal season covered up a lot of the deficiencies back there.
by Michael Taylor on Jun 26, 2011 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you are right that the Thomas Rask arrangement likely isn’t super happy go lucky-or at least won’t stay that way if both are 100% healthy. Thomas is clearly not the type to be content riding the bench and occasionally coming in to play a game here and there to rest the #1 and I don’t think Rask is that way either. I honestly think Rask would look to go somewhere that he gets the #1 job if the opportunity came his way. I am not 100% convinced the front office is willing to watch him go.
I think the Canucks kind of have the same problem with their Luongo contract. Schneider appears to be a guy who is going to want to play and be a key player for his team, not the guy who comes in to relieve Luongo.
I think unlike any other position goalie is a tough one, because strong capable goalies aren’t going to sit contentedly for years waiting for their turn to be #1.
One crucial difference is that they are wedded to Luongo, for good or ill. That contract is going to be all but impossible to trade. The Bruins could, theoretically, bite the bullet and give Rask a 3 year, $12M deal when he comes up in free agency and live with a year of $9M worth of goaltending. I’m not sure it’s the best option, but it’s a reasonable one.
i dont see unwillingness to make changes
i see unwillingness to make changes without careful consideration
this is chiarelli’s MO, he doesnt make a trade just to make a trade
Good point.
I actually think Chiarelli did a nice job last summer of assessing the breakdowns in the play off collapse of ’10 and looking to affordably fix those problems. Now when he initially made the trade for Horton/Campbell he did so with the belief that Savard would be playing.
Then the team lost Savard and Chiarelli had to trade for more depth at center. He couldn’t really trade for a star-not enough cap space, so he went for depth and in hindsight I think he put a lot of thought into just which centers he wanted to trade for and he went out and got them. The Kelly trade especially left some fans scratching their heads, but I think the playoffs proved out and it is pretty clear Chiarelli didn’t just trade to make trades, but he made the right trades to fill a need for the most affordable cap hit.
I don’t see him signing, resigning or trading for anyone unless he thought it could make the team better.
Rask
Casey, Lacher, Carey, Grahame, Hackett, Raycroft, Riendeau, Shields, Tallas, Blue, Billington….
There were a lot of crap goalies in Boston between Moog and Dafoe and Thomas (and even Dafoe was seriously overrated in these parts).
Lets not underestimated how awesome it is we have a goalie lined up. No reason to cross the upcoming RFA status bridge until we have too.
Milan Hejduk is a move worth making.
i feel like
hejduk might work out like satan did. one hit wonder who bruins fans will like
You know how I said my profile pic would always be an animal? well, Chara's a BEAST!

by 























