Will Lucic live up to his contract?
Tyler Dellow has a good post up on Milan Lucic's new $12.25-million deal, a contract that will come with a cap hit of more than $4-million a year beginning next season and ending in 2012-13:
The interesting thing about all of this is that the Bruins clearly made a choice here: Lucic over Kessel. I’m pretty sure that I would have made a different choice. The unspoken question is this: how much can a player add to his shooting rates as he improves? Is [five even strength shots per 60 minutes] when a player is 21 actually pretty respectable and a harbinger of future stardom? I don’t have an answer to this but I’m interested in answers.
Not to mention the fact Marc Savard will need a contract this summer, too.
Statistically, Tyler's pointing to the fact Lucic rarely shoots the puck as part of a forecast for what he will (or rather won't) become, but you can even make that case just looking at his production in a more general sense to this point. Lucic's best season to date is only 42 points, and as a junior, he had only one point producing season (and that came on a powerhouse Vancouver Giants team). In the NHL, he hasn't played big minutes or been a factor on the power play, and the tough thing about this contract is that GM Peter Chiarelli has to try to project just what this unique creature is going to become.
He admitted as much when he talked about giving a big deal to an unproven youngster earlier this week:
"I'm never comfortable with it," Chiarelli said during a press conference at Ristuccia Arena to announce Lucic's deal. "I think it's an issue that has to be addressed somehow, somewhere along the way. But it is what it is now. It's part of our business. I'm certainly enjoying having Milan have this contract because he deserves it."
Going back to Tyler's point, one of Lucic's more glaring statistical anomalies is the fact he has always had more PIM than shots on goal, something that puts him in some unique company among players who had at least 10 goals last season.
| Name | Team | GP | G | A | Pts | PIM | SOG | Pct | S-P | |
| 1 | Ben Eager | CHI | 75 | 11 | 4 | 15 | 161 | 80 | 13.8% | -81 |
| 2 | Cody McLeod | COL | 79 | 15 | 5 | 20 | 162 | 118 | 12.7% | -44 |
| 3 | Milan Lucic | BOS | 72 | 17 | 25 | 42 | 136 | 97 | 17.5% | -39 |
| 4 | B.J. Crombeen | STL | 81 | 12 | 10 | 22 | 148 | 124 | 9.7% | -24 |
| 5 | Matt Cooke | PIT | 76 | 13 | 18 | 31 | 101 | 86 | 15.1% | -15 |
| 6 | Brad Winchester | STL | 64 | 13 | 8 | 21 | 89 | 82 | 15.9% | -7 |
| 7 | David Clarkson | NJD | 82 | 17 | 15 | 32 | 164 | 158 | 10.8% | -6 |
| 8 | Steve Ott | DAL | 64 | 19 | 27 | 46 | 135 | 132 | 14.4% | -3 |
Needless to say, that's not the company the Bruins are looking for Lucic to keep with this contract.
Of course, there are some caveats here. Lucic is still very young, and he brings more to the table than most in terms of his size and physical prowess. In my mind, however, he's also one of those players whose legend outweighs his contributions to this point, and the pressure's going to be on starting next season with this contract.
Boston's big season last year left them with a lot of tough decisions under the salary cap, and this was one of the toughest. And unless he starts shooting the puck an awful lot more, Lucic will have a hard time living up to those dollar figures — at least in the goal department.
0 recs |
37 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
I think the distinction needs to be made between tangibles and intangibles on the Lucic deal. Statistically, Lucic may not end up being a “star” player or even a “superb” player, but we all know that on occasion what shows up on the printed sheet doesn’t represent what shows up on the ice. From what I understand (I’m sure someone will tell me differently), Lucic is a Max Talbot-style role player whose popularity and presence are his most important assets to the team, not so much his statistical production.
Would I have picked Kessel over Lucic? Tough to answer. I haven’t seen enough of Kessel’s play with my own eyes to judge his ability or potential properly, but it seems to me – given the size and term of the deal – that Lucic’s presence in the room was valued far more highly than Phil’s.
You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
by zyllyx on Oct 9, 2009 12:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That’s all fair, but I can’t see how those intangibles add up to the deal he got.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 9, 2009 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. This reminds me of the Mike Fisher contract in Ottawa. I love Fisher to death, he’s a fan favourite and he plays with the kind of physical presence and heart you want a guy to play with… but you have to think Ottawa really regrets giving him that contract.
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Oct 9, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Definitely not saying that the Bruins won’t regret it. Hell, I live in Arizona, home of the Eric Byrnes “popularity” contract. We’ve still got him for another year and nobody will take him off our hands.
You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
by zyllyx on Oct 9, 2009 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Senators regret the Fisher contract...
…that might be true but I believe they regret the Redden contract more due to the fact it came at the expense of losing Chara. And then there were other great moves like Muckler sitting on his hands all the while when Lalime was struggling throughout the 2003-2004 season, when if he had traded for a #1 they would’ve most likely won the Cup that year.
It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!
by hawks61 on Oct 9, 2009 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh??????
sorry, they didn’t even get out of the first round… sure, there was weak goaltending, but when the team in front can’t even get you past the first round, there’s no way you were winning the cup.
Nevertheless, those are both horrible contracts that I’m sure the Sens regret.
"Life is just a place where we spend time between games. Hockey is where we live, where we can best meet and overcome pain and wrong and death." - Fred Shero
by Karina on Oct 9, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
With a price difference of only 1 mil, i’d take Kessel any day.
by LeafFan1989 on Oct 9, 2009 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Kessel’s work ethic and attitude all but forced him out of Boston. And it’s going to be especially noticeable in Toronto. Goals are replaceable, but the attitude, leadership, and work put in by Lucic necessarily isn’t. Yes, this is a contract based largely on intangibles, but Lucic has at least demonstrated an effort towards improving his hands and touch. His low offensive numbers are a direct result of Claude Julien and Peter Chiarelli choosing to go all-out offensive on the PP, and Boston having four superior offensive skill forwards to Lucic.
That said, as a classically pessimistic Bruins fan, I think the deal is for too much. However, the length of the contract keeps it from “albatross” status, like Tim Thomas’ will be in two years. My position is that I’d rather have three more years of Lucic approaching his prime, than three years without him.
by The Jumbotron (Gabe) on Oct 9, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lucic
As one of your articles indicated yesterday, for $4 million a year Lucic has to be a top 6 forward on your team. You can have lots of intangibles, but top 6 forward needs to generate 60 pts a year, and for Lucic that’s likely 25 to 30 goals. Its possible, but not a lock.
I like Lucic a lot, but with this being his second contract, I am not sure Boston needed to go that far yet.
by sctlaw on Oct 9, 2009 1:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
For a guy that’s 21 years old, I don’t find it that hard to believe that he can jump from 17 goals to 25. Some of that should come just naturally when he gets closer to his prime.
by Malurous on Oct 9, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder what Chiarelli's getting at...
…here
. “I think it’s an issue that has to be addressed somehow, somewhere along the way. But it is what it is now. It’s part of our business.”
Is he suggesting that he was forced to sign this deal?
by yrmom on Oct 9, 2009 1:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No one held a gun to his head and said, “you must sign this 40-point player to a deal befitting a 60-70-point player.” Edmonton also had a 40-point youngster in Robert Nilsson, whom they signed to a deal half that rich ($6M/3y). So far, no massive harm done.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
by Doogie2K on Oct 9, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is one striking example of how little points in themselves mean. Robert Nilsson a 40-point youngster, Milan Lucic another 40-point youngster. What do these two have in common? Nothing.
by bearhunter on Oct 10, 2009 5:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. But the point is, Lucic was a 40-point player last year. 40-point players shouldn’t get $4M regardless of what they bring to the table. Paying for potential is what leads to Dustin Penner contracts.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
by Doogie2K on Oct 11, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's been good for everyone.
The Burke-Lowe Feud…check
Oilers fans collectively going WTF….check
Legitimately questioning whether Kevin Lowe thought he was actually signing Corey Perry…check
Burke not signing Kessel to an RFA contract, because then he’d be called out as a hypocrite, which leads him to making a terrible trade…check
I mean that contract has been gold. I think it’s been a win for everyone.
Well except the Oilers, but who cares.
The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Oct 12, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Early days and all, but he might finally live up to his deal this year. For reals, this time.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
by Doogie2K on Oct 13, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Burke not signing Kessel to an RFA contract, because then he’d be called out as a hypocrite, which leads him to making a terrible trade…check
That’s not at all why he made the trade.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
by PPP on Oct 16, 2009 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wondered if it was some kind of CBA reference, or general complaint that GMs aren’t winning the cost-control battle against RFAs anymore. If that’s the case, I’m surprised Chiarelli went this high, at this time, when there was no negotiating urgency to do so.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Oct 9, 2009 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s what I thought-it’s pointless posturing and griping about the job a GM has to do-assign worth to future potential.
by yrmom on Oct 9, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Lucic’s contract is more a commentary on his ability to but butts in seats moreso than his hockey ability. The Bruins went through a very rough period where they were a distant 4th in popularity here in Boston. Lucic played a big role in re-establishing the franchise as a team worth watching. If the B’s had lost him in free agency, fan backlash would have pretty severe, based on the number of his jerseys (and unlicensed “Lucic Crew” and “Lucic Fight Club” shirts) in the stands.
It’s a bit Dale Jr.-esque in a way. Neither is really an elite talent, and neither puts up gaudy numbers…but boy, do they sell tickets and move merchandise.
by Arenacale on Oct 9, 2009 1:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think all that’s a great point, but we’re looking at it from a hockey perspective, and that’s where he could fall short. Maybe it doesn’t matter if he’s that beloved in Boston a few years from now, but it does eat into the team’s salary cap space and give Chiarelli fewer options.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 9, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, but the team does have more space than one would think. Yes, Savard is probably a goner, but Glen Murray’s buyout is coming off the books, the end of the Derek Morris era frees up $3.5 mil, and Bergeron’s $4.75 and Kobasew’s $2.2 are gone in 10-11. If the 4th line can continue to cost <$2 mil, and the third D-pairing can hold up with $1.5 mil between them, then the Bruins are in better shape than most people think.
With Lucic signed, the biggest question mark for them is what to do with Tuukka Rask. Homie wants to play NOW.
by The Jumbotron (Gabe) on Oct 9, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent point!
For as a longtime Hawks fan it would be an absolute marketing disaster for the Hawks if either Toews and/or Kane leave Chicago at season’s end. Granted it may be true that Keith is much more valuable on the ice for the Hawks, but in the end will be slated as a #3 priority for negotiations throughout the year.
It’s a pretty safe bet that the Hawks will make some significant moves in order to make room for Toews and Kane and will try to make room for Keith if able, but if not it’s pretty much a guarantee that Keith will be the odd-man out if it should come to that.
It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!
by hawks61 on Oct 9, 2009 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just like that James called Lucic a “unique creature.”
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
by RudyKelly on Oct 9, 2009 3:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He tried to capture the spirit of the thing.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Oct 9, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
had the same thoughts
Put me down as a skeptic. As much as Lucic’s big hits and fighting ability make him a fan favorite, I still think he’s very overrated as a player. Not that he isn’t a legit NHL forward, but the folks in Boston who insist on calling him the next Cam Neely (and that comparison gets made A LOT here) seem to have forgotten how great Neely was. Lucic doesn’t seem to do a lot of things (create havoc along the boards as a forechecker, crash the net for garbage goals) that elite power forwards do.
P is for Latrobe.
by holiday park on Oct 9, 2009 3:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
As a Boston fan…. I agree. I like Lucic, I like his energy. But next Cam Neely? I’m definitely not sold. He definitely needs work on his hands. Missed a few good chances to finish last night.
And every time he gets a game misconduct or is sent to the locker room… about 90% of the women in the stands leave. Lucic brings out the bandwagon fans.
by BuriesIt on Oct 9, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's worth every penny
Every time he hammers Mike Komisarek into submission.
by Exit716 on Oct 9, 2009 5:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Some are missing the point here.
During the regular season Kessel’s speed and agility to go along with his explosive speed and scoring touch are more valuable, but in this instance the Bruins already feel that they have the necessary ingredients to become a long-term annual playoff team like the Red Wings, and Chiarelli’s previous employer Ottawa (until last season). And with that logic comes the answer to the Bruins thinking that Lucic is a more valuable asset than Kessel.
In the playoffs Lucic is an animal, there is no other way to put it for his explosive physical style and presence is exactly what every team desires comes playoff time. Face it no defenceman wants to look over his shoulder when retrieving a puck in his own zone and see that gargantuan monster barrelling down on him and to realize when licking his wounds on the bench that he is not only going to face this shift after shift but for possibly 7 games. He can not only physically wear down his opponents but mentally as well, and now add to the fact that he has the offensive instincts to beat you on the scoreboard and you have a physical dimension perfectly suited for playoff hockey and that’s the reason why the Briuns selected Lucic over Kessel, for Chiarelli knows from his days in Ottawa that you can have all the skilled players you want but come playoff time you better have some sandpaper for he has seen first hand what damage a player like Lucic and Gary Roberts can do to thier opponents in a 7-game series.
Want to compare Lucic to anyone, compare him to Gary Roberts or Wendell Clark (during their tenure with the Leafs).
It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!
by hawks61 on Oct 9, 2009 8:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You want to compare Lucic to Wendel Clark? Are you kidding?
Clark scored 34 goals in 66 games his rookie season on a team full of chumps.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
by Chemmy on Oct 12, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
this was kind of my point above
What you’re saying about Lucic would make a lot of sense, but only if the second paragraph of it described his game in any way. He has the frame to be an effective power forward, but he hasn’t really shown me that he has the mentality for it. He’s good at bringing people to their feet when he gets a chance to line someone up for a big hit. But most nights he stays away from the mucking and grinding in the corners and behind the net. You’re making him sound like Evgeni Malkin or Johan Franzen, and I don’t think the comparison holds at all.
As far as the B’s keeping Kessel vs. Lucic, I think both are being overpaid, so there’s that. But I do think Boston will miss having a game-breaking scorer like Kessel. Not to mention that Lucic’s productivity will suffer badly if Savard signs elsewhere.
P is for Latrobe.
by holiday park on Oct 13, 2009 8:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it is very likely that most of the people preferring Kessel to Lucic are people who have not closely observed these two players on the ice. Kessel has been a one-dimensional player so far. His poor team play has stood out for me numerous times. It is not just sloppiness, it’s like an ingrained way of being. Either he scores or he’s a detriment. Lucic is far more than the numbers in the goal and assist columns. I was very impressed with what I saw from him in his rookie year already, and that’s excluding his fisticuff ability. (This is from a neutral observer, by the way. I’m not a Bruins fan, and I don’t buy into the second coming of Cam Neely hype at all. I see many things in Kessel that I like as well, hell, I love his shot and speed, but I’d take Lucic over Kessel any day of the week, and so would Brian Burke.)
That said, I do think this contract is overkill. It is not good when players are regularly starting to get overpaid as soon as their entry-level deal ends. I would suggest this phenomenon causes palpitations for both the NHL and NHLPA.
by bearhunter on Oct 10, 2009 5:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That said, I do think this contract is overkill. It is not good when players are regularly starting to get overpaid as soon as their entry-level deal ends. I would suggest this phenomenon causes palpitations for both the NHL and NHLPA.
I thought the 2003-2004 lockout was supposed to have solved that problem. After all, that’s why hockey lost a year and Bob Goodenow was ousted from his post, right?
Supporter of the Sergei Berezin "Give and Go" - You give me puck, then you go to hell
by bkblades on Oct 13, 2009 12:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It definitely didn’t have anything to do with this issue. The elimination of the second contract is a new phenomenon that’s really risen only after the lockout.
by Malurous on Oct 13, 2009 12:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, silly. That was all about making the games affordable for regular fans by controlling ticket prices and putting the entire league on a secure financial footing, remember?
"While there's life, there's hope." --Cicero
by Baroque on Oct 13, 2009 6:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah. What was I thinking? I mean, the NHL even thanked the fans, so I should have known about their goodwill in other ventures and solely blame the players for being money-hungry greedy leeches forcing owners to bleed cash. ;)
Supporter of the Sergei Berezin "Give and Go" - You give me puck, then you go to hell
by bkblades on Oct 14, 2009 4:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Kessel vs Lucic comparison is unfair. I think every team wished they could have a power forward as dominant as Lucic is. Goal scoring is only part of what he brings to the table, and he’s had flashes showing hints of what he may yet become. Kevin Lowe proved how desperate teams are for power forwards, good on Chiarrelli for signing Lucic.
I don’t think Chiarelli signing Lucic indicates he chose him over Kessel. I think Ryder at 4 million is a better comparable to Kessel. And in that regard, Chiarelli made a terrible decision.
by Gusinabox on Oct 13, 2009 11:40 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 


















