Dave Bolland

[mr grieves]

Ba Bye Bolland. Way too long and way too much, without even knowing if he can play like he used to. He's not a 5m dollar player.

Since this is all still the Tyler Bozak script from last year, I'm skeptical he's gone. I seriously doubt any other team comes close to Bolland's offer, and the Leafs declare victory in retaining an important piece at a dollar value that makes sense to them (if no one else).

 

[Kin]

Since this is all still the Tyler Bozak script from last year, I'm skeptical he's gone. I seriously doubt any other team comes close to Bolland's offer, and the Leafs declare victory in retaining an important piece at a dollar value that makes sense to them (if no one else).

On the plus side, since this is all the "Tyler Bozak script", that means Bolland is going to have the best year of his career next year and only people who are compulsively hung up on the things they were wrong about last year will dislike the signing next June.

 

[princedpw]

If the alternative was letting him walk or a significantly higher AAV, I wouldn't call it a mistake. The additional years likely brought the AAV down.

Well, that really depends on which Gaborik they end up getting - the healthy sniper or the oft injured one that struggled to produce over the past two seasons. If they get the former, then, great. It's still too long, but, if they turn it into another Cup or two, then it's an acceptable mistake. If it's the latter, then it's just a huge debacle.

Either way, I think the last 3 years on that deal are going to be a mess.

Better than all years being a more expensive disaster, as the Clarkson contract may turn out to be?  (I mean, I hope not, but ...)

 

[2badknees]

Since this is all still the Tyler Bozak script from last year, I'm skeptical he's gone. I seriously doubt any other team comes close to Bolland's offer, and the Leafs declare victory in retaining an important piece at a dollar value that makes sense to them (if no one else).

I think you may be right. The leafs have acknowledged a number of regulars won't be offered contracts; my guess is that no team is going to knock Bolland's socks off, and he'll be back on a 4yx$4M term.

 

[bustaheims]

I think you may be right. The leafs have acknowledged a number of regulars won't be offered contracts; my guess is that no team is going to knock Bolland's socks off, and he'll be back on a 4yx$4M term.

I don't think a team will blow his socks off, either, but, the difference between him and Bozak is the level of interest in him around the league. No team is going to give him the contract he's rumoured to be looking for, but I definitely see a very real possibility that some team will present a better opportunity for him than the Leafs will. I also expect that, by the time he's ready to make a decision, the Leafs will have spent enough cap space that they won't be able to fit him in.

 

[mr grieves]

Since this is all still the Tyler Bozak script from last year, I'm skeptical he's gone. I seriously doubt any other team comes close to Bolland's offer, and the Leafs declare victory in retaining an important piece at a dollar value that makes sense to them (if no one else).

On the plus side, since this is all the "Tyler Bozak script", that means Bolland is going to have the best year of his career next year and only people who are compulsively hung up on the things they were wrong about last year will dislike the signing next June.

I know, I know. I really should focus on the positives of a historically bad team.

Setting aside whether it's more likely for media-managed contract negotiations to follow a 'script' than it is for a player's performance to, you're sure right about Bozak. That was a career year. Each time he came back from injury, he was nearly scoring like Lupul the season prior. And, as with Lupul that year, you'll never sell the player higher, so I sure hope they're exploring it this time.

 

[Kin]

I know, I know. I really should focus on the positives of a historically bad team.

Focus on the negatives all you want, I just don't know if every single thread is helped by bringing the conversation back to David Clarkson and your belief that the Leafs chose the wrong center last season. I think the Kessel trade was a disaster that is probably going to end up costing the team a legitimate shot at the cup for a decade but I manage to get through conversations about re-signing Kulemin without bringing it up.

Setting aside whether it's more likely for media-managed contract negotiations to follow a 'script' than it is for a player's performance to, you're sure right about Bozak. That was a career year. Each time he came back from injury, he was nearly scoring like Lupul the season prior. And, as with Lupul that year, you'll never sell the player higher, so I sure hope they're exploring it this time.

No, you're right. Clearly that was a good opportunity to pivot the conversation into whether or not you're still right about how good Bozak will be in the future.

 

[rdowdall]

Focus on the negatives all you want, I just don't know if every single thread is helped by bringing the conversation back to David Clarkson and your belief that the Leafs chose the wrong center last season. I think the Kessel trade was a disaster that is probably going to end up costing the team a legitimate shot at the cup for a decade but I manage to get through conversations about re-signing Kulemin without bringing it up.

Awww man!!!! Ten more years of this.  That really sucks.

 

[Kin]

Awww man!!!! Ten more years of this.  That really sucks.

Well, the trade was five years ago.

 

[rdowdall]

Awww man!!!! Ten more years of this.  That really sucks.

Well, the trade was five years ago.

Awww man!!!! Ten Five more years of this.  That really sucks.

 

[Kin]

Awww man!!!! Ten Five more years of this.  That really sucks.

If it makes you feel any better, there's really no guarantee that things improve after those five years so you might as well enjoy things as you can.

 

[rdowdall]

Awww man!!!! Ten Five more years of this.  That really sucks.

If it makes you feel any better, there's really no guarantee that things improve after those five years so you might as well enjoy things as you can.

It's funny, but for all the talk of parity in the league, once you get stuck in a rut in the NHL, you are really stuck in a rut.  You look at the number of teams that have had lengthy dry spells when it comes to playoff appearances, and it is really really hard to build your team to be competitive any other way than through the draft. 

Free agency is gone.  Most teams lock up their assets long term so they don't hit the market.  Trades don't really exist because in order to lock up an asset long term you have to provide them with a no trade or no movement clause, so if they are traded, they get to pick where.  The NHL has effectively removed two tools that GM's can use to improve their teams.

If you need to restructure your team, you can't.  About all you can do is hold a fire sale, and wait the 5 - 10 years for the draft picks to pay off (see Oilers) and hope that you are set up for the next 10 years.  Turning a team around quickly just doesn't happen any more.  And if you screw up the draft, then you are going to be even longer before you get back to a level of respectability where people consider your team a contender.

 

[Highlander]

agreed with S/I he has some major points. These are major puzzles and chess games that only seem to happen with luck or real skill. Perhaps Lombardi is a genius or Bowman but it all seems to come with some sort of magical chemistry. Boy I hope we get Comrade Komorav back

 

[KW Sluggo]

Awww man!!!! Ten Five more years of this.  That really sucks.

If it makes you feel any better, there's really no guarantee that things improve after those five years so you might as well enjoy things as you can.

No guarantee whatsoever...in fact the reverse is more likely true, namely a guarantee that things won't improve after five years..

Been there done that literally since 1967 and today we mailed it in (yet again).

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Rob Longley @longleysunsport

Shanahan on Bolland: "I've made it clear I want David Bolland on this team." #Leafs

 

[Britishbulldog]

Rob Longley @longleysunsport

Shanahan on Bolland: "I've made it clear I want David Bolland on this team." #Leafs

Arrghhh!  I hope that he doesn't mean at any cost!!

I am usually neck and neck with Redleaf and competing with Nutman for giddy optimism for the Leafs but man is it ever getting harder to be happy with a majority of the moves the Leaf's management have been doing in this 9 year winning drought.

 

[Andy007]

Rob Longley @longleysunsport

Shanahan on Bolland: "I've made it clear I want David Bolland on this team." #Leafs

Arrghhh!  I hope that he doesn't mean at any cost!!

What, you don't want to lock up a 19-goal career high scoring centre with a bum ankle who can't win faceoffs long term? Pffft, next you'll be telling us you don't want an out of shape over the hill barely .900 save percentage goalie as your backup.

 

[bustaheims]

Simmsation: Question: if TOR admits Gunnar hip was a concern and they flip him, what's up with the Bolland pension plan idea?

 

[mjmgrand]

Rob Longley @longleysunsport

Shanahan on Bolland: "I've made it clear I want David Bolland on this team." #Leafs

Arrghhh!  I hope that he doesn't mean at any cost!!

What, you don't want to lock up a 19-goal career high scoring centre with a bum ankle who can't win faceoffs long term? Pffft, next you'll be telling us you don't want an out of shape over the hill barely .900 save percentage goalie as your backup.

I think its obvious that Dave Bolland plays with a lot of heart and would be a huge addition to this team. Both sides of the coin are valid - he has never been a consistent 50 point scorer in the league, but Shanahan is calling a spade a spade when he explicitly states that he wants something to get done with the Bolland camp.

Bolland is special player who has a lot more to give. Calling him a bum and that he should just be told to take a walk is a bit disingenuine. Those 15 games we got from him before the achilles heel slash were some of the best I have seen from a Leaf centre in quite some time.

Its also obvious however that Bozak has improved significantly and that has to be factored into any negotiotions. The Bollland camp cannot be greedy - Bolland has to sign something in the 3-5 year range because he still has to prove himself. He's 27 years old, its not like he's 37, he can always sign a big ticket contract at 30 but they can't be greedy. Bolland needs to hit 20 goals and 50 points for 3 straight seasons before anyone is going to take him seriously as a big ticket guy.

Unfortunately, his camp is probably looking at Clarkson's contract and thinking why not us? Keep in mind, Clarkson did inexplicably hit 30 goals a couple seasons ago which is why he was able to absolutely fleece Toronto last year in negotiations. We are talking about perhaps the single most dangerous contract handed out in modern NHL history in regards to how erroneous and misguided it was.

But money is money, and it's your prerogative to take it when you negotiate for it and the other party acquiesces. It's never going to change.

 

[mjmgrand]

Rob Longley @longleysunsport

Shanahan on Bolland: "I've made it clear I want David Bolland on this team." #Leafs

Arrghhh!  I hope that he doesn't mean at any cost!!

What, you don't want to lock up a 19-goal career high scoring centre with a bum ankle who can't win faceoffs long term? Pffft, next you'll be telling us you don't want an out of shape over the hill barely .900 save percentage goalie as your backup.

I think its obvious that Dave Bolland plays with a lot of heart and would be a huge addition to this team. Both sides of the coin are valid - he has never been a consistent 50 point scorer in the league, but Shanahan is calling a spade a spade when he explicitly states that he wants something to get done with the Bolland camp.

Bolland is special player who has a lot more to give. Calling him a bum and that he should just be told to take a walk is a bit disingenuine. Those 15 games we got from him before the achilles heel slash were some of the best I have seen from a Leaf centre in quite some time.

Its also obvious however that Bozak has improved significantly and that has to be factored into any negotiotions. The Bollland camp cannot be greedy - Bolland has to sign something in the 3-5 year range because he still has to prove himself. He's 27 years old, its not like he's 37, he can always sign a big ticket contract at 30 but they can't be greedy. Bolland needs to hit 20 goals and 50 points for 3 straight seasons before anyone is going to take him seriously as a big ticket guy.

Unfortunately, his camp is probably looking at Clarkson's contract and thinking why not us? Keep in mind, Clarkson did inexplicably hit 30 goals a couple seasons ago which is why he was able to absolutely fleece Toronto last year in negotiations. We are talking about perhaps the single most dangerous contract handed out in modern NHL history in regards to how erroneous and misguided it was.

But money is money, and it's your prerogative to take it when you negotiate for it and the other party acquiesces. It's never going to change.

For the record, why I injected Bozak into this moments ago is that the Leafs are forced to use him as a comparable for any FA centre negotiations. If your numbers are not better than a guy who is widely considered not an elite talent, you're not going to get a contract in that range.

No matter how special Bolland has shown that he is capable of being, you have to be able to argue from numbers. I believe there is not a single GM in the league who doesn't know that Bolland's market value, in the absence of the bubble effect that July 1 historically adds, is a $3.5 mm/3 year contract.