Elliotte Friedman noted during his most recent episode of the 32 Thoughts podcast that the Boston Bruins might be rethinking the way they’ve handled contract negotiations with goaltender Jeremy Swayman. Noting that they both wish they hadn’t taken him to arbitration last season, the club might be wishing they did this summer considering how things have played out of late.
Friedman explained that he doesn’t believe that Swayman and the Bruins are getting any closer to finalizing a contract extension. Considering how long this is taking, the people Friedman talked to wondered if the team would go back in time and do arbitration the arbitration they did with him last year. Thinking Swayman never really got over that experience, he’s not willing to bend at all now when it comes to a new contract.
So too, Friedman believes that choosing to forego arbitration this summer might have been viewed as a mistake. He wonders if the Bruins would have preferred to just take Swayman to arbitration for a second time and let him choose the one or two-year term.
The downside of that was that Swayman could have walked himself right into unrestricted free agency. That is why the Bruins wanted to avoid arbitration now, but the NHL insider is thinking that since Swayman seems to be holding out for more money, the Bruins might have preferred to get the deal done, not have it drag into the 2024-25 season and try to sort out a longer extension before things got problematic at the end of the second season. In other words, the Bruins could have punted the problem down the road.
As it stands now, the Bruins have a goaltender who has ill feelings toward the organization for dragging him through arbitration once and he’s not going to do them any favors knowing he’s got some leverage, even as an RFA.
Why Did the Bruins Trade Ullmark Knowing Swayman Was Upset?
When asked why the Bruins would have traded Linus Ullmark knowing that all of this could blow up their faces, Friedman suggested that the ability for Ullmark to change the teams on his no-trade list was a potential concern. They wanted to be able to make the move they did, sending Ullmark to Ottawa. The fact that could have gone sideways on them was something they were concerned about.
Next: 3 Reasons to Expect New Heights for Morgan Rielly in 2024-25
Steve
September 14, 2024 at 10:38 pm
I think the Lynus Ulmark no-trade List Theory is just a Theory. It’s a Lame Excuse and an Unwise Risky move to trade away a Great Goaltender in Ulmark whom was already under contract. . I do not buy that no-trade List “Get Panicked, Trade Ulmark to Ottowa Quick” Theory at all, I think GM Don Sweeney mis-judged the goaltending situation BigTime. I think GM Sweeney mis- judged that Swayman would be all-In on resigning with solely the Bruins… what ever any reasonable offer from Sweeney would be. Ulmark is gone. So Now What? The Question we should be asking is” Are the Bruins better off now, that Sweeney successfully traded Ulmark to Ottawa? Obviously Not. So Trading away Lynus Ulmark before resigning Jerremy Swayman was not in the best interests of the Team. Correct? So Sweeney screwed up. Admit it! Now what if both Ulmark and Swayman do not play for the Bruins this year. Is anyone going to argue Sweeney did an Beyond Excellent job negotiating the Bruins Goaltending situation? Obvious a huge Blunder by Sweeney. Swayman has leverage and may be gone folks. You still liking Don Sweeney’s negotiation plan for the goaltending situation? He screwed up. Admit it. everyone makes mistakes. Some negotiation mistakes like this BIG one get GM’s FIRED. We’ll see what happens soon. Can the Bruins afford to Roll out the Brinks Truck for Swayman Watch Tix Prices Increase as well. Hot Mess!
.