Fred65 Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 5 hours ago, BPA said: I love how people are under selling Boeser. He is a 20g 50pt player. This is a down year for him. But he should be making less than Garland who has never cracked over 40pts yet. Yeah. Garland hustles but not much has come from it lately. BB = 19 + 19, Garland = 14 + 21, however Graland is a plus10 player and BB a minus-4 player 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 5 hours ago, BPA said: I love how people are under selling Boeser. He is a 20g 50pt player. This is a down year for him. But he should be making less than Garland who has never cracked over 40pts yet. Yeah. Garland hustles but not much has come from it lately. To be fair, Boeser has only cracked 50 points twice, his rookie and sophomore seasons. Also to be fair, 50 points isn't automatically deserving of $7+ a year, that's what people are saying. Tanner Pearson has come close to 50 points multiple times in his career and you don't see him making 7+. The point is most want Boeser back, just not at his qualifying offer rate. His current play isn't worth that money. If you're looking at this year only, he has 38 points in 62 games - the fact he's having his worst season stataisclly in a contract year is discouraging. Boeser doesn't have much value if he's not scoring....he's not physical, doesn't kill penalties, not the best defensively and not a super high effort player....his value isn't high unless he scoring. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 (edited) On 3/25/2022 at 8:29 PM, BPA said: To add to that, how many times have you seen Brock miss the net completely or hit the goalie right in the crest of the Jersey? Brock is not a creative offensive player, he's got a very good shot but that's really it. I've watched him a a lot, and he goes long stretch's where he looks mediocre and predictable and his shots are easy saves...he doesn't do much to make players miss or guess what he's going to do and lacks foot speed. Yeah he snipes one every now and again but has had many tap ins in front of the net this year too. There's isn't much about his play this year that's impressive or indicative of deserving a huge contract. Edited March 29, 2022 by Harold Drunken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 16 hours ago, ba;;isticsports said: I thought that was saved for high picks Juolevi and Virtanen? Speaking of which what if the Boeser pick fails, that's 3 top pick fails that will set us back even further than we should be So overpaying a player because you don't' think you can find good player ever again in the draft is the better choice? I hate the Juolevi pick now as much as anyone else, but at the time he was indeed the best guy available and very highly touted. He was the best D man on the board when they picked....that's the thing about drafting players nothing is guaranteed - Juolevi wasn't a reach or a bad pick at the time - he just didn't pan out like hundreds of other first rounders that didn't either. Just because they didn't work out doesn't mean you're never going to hit on a 1st rounder again, severely flawed logic. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 1 hour ago, Harold Drunken said: To be fair, Boeser has only cracked 50 points twice, his rookie and sophomore seasons. Also to be fair, 50 points isn't automatically deserving of $7+ a year, that's what people are saying. Tanner Pearson has come close to 50 points multiple times in his career and you don't see him making 7+. The point is most want Boeser back, just not at his qualifying offer rate. His current play isn't worth that money. If you're looking at this year only, he has 38 points in 62 games - the fact he's having his worst season stataisclly in a contract year is discouraging. Boeser doesn't have much value if he's not scoring....he's not physical, doesn't kill penalties, not the best defensively and not a super high effort player....his value isn't high unless he scoring. Think Boeser is worth more than Garland if comparing point totals and not just cherry picking this season stats. Never said Boeser should be making $7M. Think his ballpark should be around $6M. If not, JR can trade him just like he did with Motte. But for some people to say he is worthless and only amount to $4M and to let him walk away for nothing is a just plain crazy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 2 hours ago, Fred65 said: BB = 19 + 19, Garland = 14 + 21, however Graland is a plus10 player and BB a minus-4 player Boeser = 25yr old 2017-2018 = 29g + 26a = 55pts 2018-2019 = 26g + 30a = 56pts 2019-2020 = 16g + 29a = 45pts 2020-2021 = 23g + 26a = 49pts 2021-2022 = 19g + 19a = 38pts Garland = 26yr old 2017-2018 = minors 2018-2019 = 13g + 5a = 18pts 2019-2020 = 22g + 17a = 39pts 2020-2021 = 12g + 27a = 39pts 2021-2022 = 14g + 21a = 35pts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 (edited) 32 minutes ago, BPA said: Think Boeser is worth more than Garland if comparing point totals and not just cherry picking this season stats. Never said Boeser should be making $7M. Think his ballpark should be around $6M. If not, JR can trade him just like he did with Motte. But for some people to say he is worthless and only amount to $4M and to let him walk away for nothing is a just plain crazy. Totally agree, Brock should be making more than Garland, and $6m sounds about right for sure. I just think he'll get more based on his age and potential some teams may see. He's definitely not worthless, but like I said unless he's scoring he doesn't have a ton of value. It will be interesting to see what happens. Edited March 29, 2022 by Harold Drunken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Harold Drunken said: So overpaying a player because you don't' think you can find good player ever again in the draft is the better choice? I hate the Juolevi pick now as much as anyone else, but at the time he was indeed the best guy available and very highly touted. He was the best D man on the board when they picked....that's the thing about drafting players nothing is guaranteed - Juolevi wasn't a reach or a bad pick at the time - he just didn't pan out like hundreds of other first rounders that didn't either. Just because they didn't work out doesn't mean you're never going to hit on a 1st rounder again, severely flawed logic. He absolutely was NOT the BPA, that was MT, most had him going 4th or higher and he slipped to us and we didn't take him. OJ had a few guys rank him around 9...a few guys had him ahead of the rest of the D's as well. But he certainly was not the best player available at five. PLD was supposed to be our guy...which is why MT slipped to us. Maybe we could have still drafted EP and QHs, maybe not - but the OJ pick was for sure off board. Wasn't even the consensus number one D - just the one with the "highest floor". A perfect example of how the world juniors scew the rankings as well. If he was injured, he'd likely have gone in the second round where he should have all along. The rest of this i so agree with though. We aren't going to hit on all our first rounders, even the high ones. Stajonov. Allen at 4...although he did decently enough. Edited March 29, 2022 by IBatch 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxNaslundxX Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 Juolevi wassnt even the best D. He was supposed to be the "safe pick". Sergachev was the flashy high potential D I wanted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 (edited) 42 minutes ago, IBatch said: He absolutely was NOT the BPA, that was MT, most had him going 4th or higher and he slipped to us and we didn't take him. OJ had a few guys rank him around 9...a few guys had him ahead of the rest of the D's as well. But he certainly was not the best player available at five. PLD was supposed to be our guy...which is why MT slipped to us. Maybe we could have still drafted EP and QHs, maybe not - but the OJ pick was for sure off board. Wasn't even the consensus number one D - just the one with the "highest floor". A perfect example of how the world juniors scew the rankings as well. If he was injured, he'd likely have gone in the second round where he should have all along. The rest of this i so agree with though. We aren't going to hit on all our first rounders, even the high ones. Stajonov. Allen at 4...although he did decently enough. Best defenseman I meant sorry, defense was a desperate need for this team so they were almost certainly going to take one. Juolevi was ranked top 6 overall on many draft boards. so he most definitely was not a reach or a surprise pick was my point at the time. Don't get me wrong..Tkachuk was who I wanted but the talk all summer was defenseman. NHL central scouting had him ranked correctly. He was taken right where most thought he would be. Edited March 30, 2022 by Harold Drunken 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 21 minutes ago, XxNaslundxX said: Juolevi wassnt even the best D. He was supposed to be the "safe pick". Sergachev was the flashy high potential D I wanted Not true. many draft boards and scouting lists had him ranked top 5 or 6 overall and the best D. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 24 minutes ago, XxNaslundxX said: Juolevi wassnt even the best D. He was supposed to be the "safe pick". Sergachev was the flashy high potential D I wanted Whether he was regarded as a safe pick or not is irrelevant, he was drafted where most thought he would be and near or at the spot he was ranked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Drunken Posted March 29, 2022 Share Posted March 29, 2022 http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 2 hours ago, BPA said: Boeser = 25yr old 2017-2018 = 29g + 26a = 55pts = .89 ppg 17:30 - ES pts per 60 min 2.10 - Ave PP Time 2:55 2018-2019 = 26g + 30a = 56pts = .81 ppg 19:10 - ES pts per 60 min 1.92 - Ave PP Time 3:32 2019-2020 = 16g + 29a = 45pts = .79 ppg 18:34 - ES pts per 60 min 2.27 - Ave PP Time 4:07 2020-2021 = 23g + 26a = 49pts = .88 ppg 19:19 - ES pts per 60 min 2.07 - Ave PP Time 3:39 2021-2022 = 19g + 19a = 38pts = .61 ppg 18:34 - ES pts per 60 min 1.07 - Ave PP Time 3:13 Garland = 26yr old 2017-2018 = minors 2018-2019 = 13g + 5a = 18pts = .38 ppg 12:47 - ES pts per 60 min 1:52 - Ave PP Time 2:23 2019-2020 = 22g + 17a = 39pts = .57 ppg 14:09 - ES pts per 60 min 2.07 - Ave PP Time 2:06 2020-2021 = 12g + 27a = 39pts = .80 ppg 17:55 - ES pts per 60 min 2.36 - Ave PP Tmie 2:51 2021-2022 = 14g + 21a = 35pts = .56 ppg 16:06 - ES pts per 60 min 2.23 - Ave PP Time 1:43 Just using point totals assumes equal opportunity. It doesn't tell you much when leaving out the context of GP and ice time per game. So I figured I'd add some context to those point totals. I added PPG with respective ice time, Pts per 60 minutes played at ES, and average PP time per game. It would appear Brock's superior season totals are obviously aided by more ice time per game and also more PP time. This has to make one wonder how much better Conor's numbers might be if his ice time and PP time were increased. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 Will will re-sign Boeser this off season to a 6 x 6 deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieVedder Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 8 minutes ago, Baggins said: Just using point totals assumes equal opportunity. It doesn't tell you much when leaving out the context of GP and ice time per game. So I figured I'd add some context to those point totals. I added PPG with respective ice time, Pts per 60 minutes played at ES, and average PP time per game. It would appear Brock's superior season totals are obviously aided by more ice time per game and also more PP time. This has to make one wonder how much better Conor's numbers might be if his ice time and PP time were increased. Thank you. Yet some half-wits still actually believe hes worth 6 mil at 6 yrs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 5 minutes ago, EddieVedder said: Thank you. Yet some half-wits still actually believe hes worth 6 mil at 6 yrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 20 minutes ago, Baggins said: Just using point totals assumes equal opportunity. It doesn't tell you much when leaving out the context of GP and ice time per game. So I figured I'd add some context to those point totals. I added PPG with respective ice time, Pts per 60 minutes played at ES, and average PP time per game. It would appear Brock's superior season totals are obviously aided by more ice time per game and also more PP time. This has to make one wonder how much better Conor's numbers might be if his ice time and PP time were increased. So exactly where would Garland position be on PP1? Is he going to take Miller, EP or Bo spot? Or is he going to get Boeser spot down low and screen the goalie? Garland points may improve if he gets more PP time but I doubt it be that much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 14 minutes ago, EddieVedder said: Thank you. Yet some half-wits still actually believe hes worth 6 mil at 6 yrs. But Garland who has never cracked 40pts yet in his entire career is worth $5M at 5yrs. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bathgate Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 On 3/22/2022 at 10:05 AM, Alflives said: option to let him go and save cap too. Since he's an rfa, trade rights after season and save cap. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now