NHL Rumors: Should the Boston Bruins Have Taken Jeremy Swayman in Arbitration?

Sportsnet: Elliotte Friedman and Kyle Bukauskas on 32 Thoughts: The Podcast – Sid's Coming Back episode, on Boston Bruins RFA goaltender Jeremy Swayman and where things stand. In retrospect, should the Bruins have moved Swayman to the salary settlement?

** NHLRumors.com subscription

Bukauskas: “Okay, so you mentioned his name a moment ago, Elliotte, Jeremy Swayman, the RFA coordinator in Boston. Negotiations that, by all accounts, have a wide, wide gap between the two sides. Any update there? Are they close?

Friedman: “I don't hear anything like that. I know there were reports that maybe Swayman and the Bruins were closer than you know, people thought, or even I thought. I haven't, and, with the caveat that anything can change in a single call, I have no reason to believe that yet at this point.

NHL News: Stars, Oilers, Capitals, Leafs, Blues, Devils, Predators, and Utah

You know, it should be noted that Lewis Gross, who represents Swayman, also represents the Gaudreau brothers. So he had other more important things on his mind. I have no doubt the Bruins respected that. The entire hockey world has been in awe of family reunions for the past few weeks. But I think it temporarily halted Swayman's progress. And at this point in time, I have no idea that the gap is closed.

What's really interesting is some of the conversations I had in Vegas about this situation, they were wondering if anyone involved here could go back in time, if they could, if you could use and have access to the HG Wells Time Machine, that's a small reference, but if you had access to the HG Wells Time Machine, you can go back and say, we're going to mediate.

And I think Swayman is clear that he wouldn't, but I wonder if the Bruins would. He knows that if the Bruins could have done it at that time, Swayman could have chosen the award period for one or two years, and two years would have sent him directly to unrestricted free agency. The Bruins knew that. They wanted no part of that. They were well aware of that idea.

But I wonder now, if with a little bit of 20-20 hindsight, and this is always speculation, the Bruins would just say, you know, we should have taken the two-year award that they were going to ask for. , and we could deal with it, at least we could sign him for two years in an arbitration number, everyone would live with it. then settle for a long-term contract next summer or during the following season.

Since they signed Pasternak, you know, 60% of his unrestricted free agent year. They got it all. So, I look at this and I wonder if we can do this again, if the Bruins just say, ah, we're going to fall into the two-year arbitration trap and deal with it later, put the problem down. the road.

Because, you know, it's not, it wasn't easy. It's been a big challenge, and I don't know yet what the solution here will be.

Bukauskas: “I guess I'm just trying to understand here, like last year in the playoffs, Swayman was their guy when the chips were down.

Friedman: “Yes.”

Bukauskas: “They traded (Linus) Ullmark. You are in Ottawa. Now, I understand that Joonas Korpisalo is back in another way, but Swayman is their first guy here.

So my question is, I understand that the Bruins can't hand over a blank check, but how did they expect this to go?

Friedman: “Yeah, you know, I've had people ask me about that, why would they do the Ullmark deal without signing Swayman?

I think, my opinion on that, and again, it's my opinion, that you'll remember the Ullmark trade was before July 1, and …

Bukaukas: “Before the Stanley Cup finals.

Yes, those were a few scary minutes, pucks dropped, what, UIlmarks were traded in Ottawa.

You know, Ullmark could change teams on his roster, and at that point in time, he could trade Ottawa. they could trade Ullmark to Ottawa without asking him. And if you go to July 1, what happens if Ullmark changes his list? So my guess is that that had everything that made that happen at that time.

Yeah, I'm thinking a lot of things here, you know, I had a general manager tell me, looking at this whole situation, that this is another reminder, like, every few years you get a reminder why you can't take a key player. mediation. And he said, everybody looked at this, and the way Swayman learned from it, commented on it, discussed it. And it's a reminder of why you can't, mediation can be such a dangerous thing. Dangerous, dangerous, dangerous.

Because I think the management goes in there and understands that it's a business. They are used to negotiating. They do it all the time. They are usually a little older. Usually the players tend to be young. They have never seen this before.

And you know, one of the great stories I remember is Tim Taylor, who was a Stanley Cup champion with the Red Wings and the Lightning. I remember when he retired and became an officer. I don't remember if it was the Blues or the Flames or who it was, I don't even want to look at it. Can someone tell me who it was.

But he talked about being in the box when he played with other managers for the first time, and he heard the way they talked about the players. And he said, like, almost, I'm 40 years old, and I can't believe how this feels.

NHL Rumors: Leafs, Flyers, Ducks, Oilers, Kings, and Blue Jackets

So, I think this has been a real eye opener for other managers and teams around the league, that this is why you don't get a lot of arbitration cases anymore. Because especially a young player, he can take it for himself and he can, not everyone can say that is a business that he can throw away. Sometimes it can shape your feelings and your conversations in the future.

Bukauskas: “Okay, it was St. Louis, by the way, Elliotte, that's where Tim Taylor started his front office career when his playing days were over.