I’ve said it a few times now, but there was nothing about the Bruins’ protection list submitted over the weekend that should have surprised you.
Most of this, thanks to some strong managing from Don Sweeney that left the Bruins without much in terms of contractual commitments beyond 2021, was set in stone months ago. The only thing that really seemed up for debate was Boston’s seventh and final protection spot up front, which ultimately went to the recently re-signed Trent Frederic. The Bruins’ desire to continue to see what the 2016 first-round pick can develop into after a 2021 spent entirely in the NHL is understandable.
But it seems that one player’s inclusion on the 11-player list has drawn some criticism for one reason or another, and that’s Jake DeBrusk. Why? Gotta admit, I’m really not sure. Because protecting DeBrusk made all the sense in the world for Boston.
Now, to be clear, there’s no dancing around this: DeBrusk had an awful 2021.
In addition (or perhaps on the way) to his career-worst output, he bounced around the lineup and couldn’t find a home, he got COVID, he was sent to the press box as a healthy scratch and was publicly called out by both coaches and members of the management team for his struggles, he clearly struggled with isolation life, and he heard the noise.
With all that said, he’s not a player you lose for nothing, and protecting DeBrusk from the Kraken does not mean you’re married to his future. It, again, just means that you’re not willing to lose him for absolutely nothing in return. That seems like an obvious decision to make if you’re the Bruins, even when you get beyond the obvious reason of DeBrusk being the only one of their three first-round picks from the 2015 Draft to turn into anything even close to a legitimate NHL contributor.
But let’s just say you chose to expose DeBrusk.
Who are you protecting instead of him?
Is it Nick Ritchie? Ritchie is a pending restricted free agent and given the way his offensive game struggled to hum along at its once-torrid pace when taken off the top power-play unit, as well as his sluggish finish to a postseason that seemed a bit too fast for him as it carried on, perhaps the Bruins wouldn’t mind someone else having to decide the value of his next contract. OK, what about Curtis Lazar? Lazar is a fine piece and helped improve your fourth line, no doubt, but guys like Lazar can be found a month into free agency. This will be no exception in with another flat cap on deck for 2021-22.
With second-line dynamos David Krejci and Taylor Hall without deals for 2021-22, the Bruins weren’t exactly teeming with can’t-lose options beyond the seven they chose to protect from Ron Francis.
But let’s say you wanted to protect Jeremy Lauzon or Connor Clifton instead. Well, now you’re going from protecting 10 skaters to protecting eight as protecting a fourth defenseman would have forced the Bruins out of the seven-forward, three-defenseman plan and into the eight skater protection plan. So who else besides DeBrusk is getting exposed as well because you wanted to protect one of them? It’s not just one extra forward exposed. It’s two. That’s not ‘maximizing’ your list, which has been a point of emphasis from the Boston front office since it was announced that Seattle would be joining the league as its 32nd team.
Exposing DeBrusk would also go against everything people complained about when it came to exposing Colin Miller in 2017.
When the Bruins let the Golden Knights take Miller, people complained about how the Bruins were prioritizing the wrong skill set with their list, and how Miller was too promising to give up on just yet. At that point in time, Miller had totaled nine goals 29 points in 103 NHL games. It was bad asset management, right?
Well, what would you say about letting a 24-year-old with 67 goals and 134 points in 244 games walk out the door for nothing? (And keep in mind that for all his struggles, those 67 goals are still the 34th-most among all left wings since 2017, while his 134 points are the 39th-most.) The numbers stare you in the face and confirm that going out of your way to expose DeBrusk to Seattle would simply be more bad asset management.
I get it. DeBrusk was extremely frustrating in 2021, and he’s trended downward in back-to-back years. But Reilly Smith was a frustrating player in his final year here, the Bruins sold him off as soon as they could, and they then went on a six-year quest for a top-six right wing after trading him for Jimmy Hayes and the cap space to sign Matt Beleskey.
DeBrusk and the Bruins are in a similar situation.
The Bruins simply can’t afford to repeat that kind of mistake and walk away from an under-25 talent with nothing in return, especially with the possibility (as unlikely as it may seem given the recent reports) of Taylor Hall leaving as a free agent and Ritchie failing to build off last year’s strong start. And with nobody in the pipeline knocking at the door on the left wing.
DeBrusk has value, be it to the Bruins with the hope that good players bounce back or to a team that believes in the proverbial fresh start and wants something besides futures in return for a piece the Bruins have their eye on via trade.
And that value is certainly more than “nothing.”
Ty Anderson is a writer and columnist for 985TheSportsHub.com. Any opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of 98.5 The Sports Hub, Beasley Media Group, or any subsidiaries. Yell at him on Twitter: @_TyAnderson.
"easy" - Google News
July 20, 2021 at 03:18PM
https://ift.tt/3zjscmE
Why protecting Jake DeBrusk was an easy call for the Bruins - 98.5 The Sports Hub
"easy" - Google News
https://ift.tt/38z63U6
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Why protecting Jake DeBrusk was an easy call for the Bruins - 98.5 The Sports Hub"
Post a Comment