Bruins sign Stephane Yelle

As per TSN, Yelle agreed to a 1 year deal worth $750,000 with Boston. Yelle is a great defensive forward with two Stanley Cup rings. He's a great PKer and chips in some goals every now and again.

I love what Brian Murray is doing with this team but my least favourite move he has made has been signing Chris Kelly to his contract that is worth over $2.2 million a year for four years. Chris Kelly is at best a third line defensive player who will chip in the odd goal (and miss a lot of wide open nets). I have nothing against Kelly and I love what he as done in his role, playing in many different situations and positions on our roster. I know Kelly has more offensive upside than a Stenphane Yelle but I really believe that this was very poor managment of cap space by Brian Murray. In reality guys like Kelly are a dime a dozen and a perfect example of this is Stephane Yelle. I would rather have paid Yelle 750,000 to be our 3rd line center over Chris Kelly at 2.2 or even let Cody Bass or Alexander Nikulin take that position. That extra space could have potentially gotten us Brian Campell or another good FA.

My point is that in this Cap world investing such huge sums of dollars in replacable parts like Kelly is not wise.

You make some good points, I guess you just have to look at it as Kelly being younger and could still be much better than what he has shown, so the price for the term may not be too bad.

I totally understand your point but I don't see Kelly at 27 improving too much. I see him as a defensive center who can play wing and who will produce 30 points a season if he's playing with some what talented guys. I think his ceiling is the same player he is but he'll produce 40 points, if he can cash in on more of those golden opportunities he gets from time to time. But the bottom line is he will be a bottom six player and I can't justify paying any player in the bottom six the money he is recieving.

AlfieforPM wrote:I totally understand your point but I don't see Kelly at 27 improving too much. I see him as a defensive center who can play wing and who will produce 30 points a season if he's playing with some what talented guys. I think his ceiling is the same player he is but he'll produce 40 points, if he can cash in on more of those golden opportunities he gets from time to time. But the bottom line is he will be a bottom six player and I can't justify paying any player in the bottom six the money he is recieving.

Word around the campfire is that Hartsburg pretty much insisted on Kelly. He wanted 3 of the smartest forwards to explain his messages when needed. He listed Fisher, Alfie and Kelly as those forwards.

He called Kelly one of the smartest decision makers in the NHL (based on what I'm not sure, I guess he watched a heck of a lot of games when he realized he had a shot at coach) - and basically said go for it to Murray.

Otherwise, I don't like the amount of $$ either. I really don't.

Kelly is definately one of the smarter guys out there and that's why he's had success as an NHLer. But other than his skating he has no other real strengths as a hockey player. His shot is awful and he is not exactly a physically imposing presence.

EDIT: I think Kelly will be a great coach one day.

I'm sorry, but you guys obviously don't pay much attention to Kelly when he's on the ice.
The only knock on him is that he doesn't cash in on some great opportunities and people think thats enough to write him off.
I love the fact that Hartsburg said that (which I didn't know until now) because it shows me a little bit about his thinking process (of which I really have no clue)

Kelly is an amazing player and he is so heavily underated amongst the Sens fan base, it gets really annoying defending him all the time.
His defensive play is immaculate and his offensive progression is as consistent as Phillips' defensive performance.
It is true that he currently has a likely ceiling of 40 points, but he could easily hit 60 by the end of his contract.

His signing is my favorite of the entire summer, just ahead of Smith (Fisher's is mine for the year, but Spezza and Heatley signings just felt like huge anvils lifted off my hopes for the Sens future)
I couldn't be happier to have him here and I'm glad he is a fixture in the core.

(And if you doubt me - and if you have NHLNetwork - watch Game 3 of the 2007 ECF tonight at 10...I've been watching the past few nights and I've taken note of at least 4 Kelly plays that were simply brilliant. Another thing is that Redden was OUTSTANDING in game 1 and you could already see Heatley and Spezza fading, despite their still-increasing point totals)

AlfieforPM wrote:Kelly is definately one of the smarter guys out there and that's why he's had success as an NHLer. But other than his skating he has no other real strengths as a hockey player. His shot is awful and he is not exactly a physically imposing presence.

How does he have no other strength as a player other than skating, but he is "definitely one of the smarter guys out there"??
And its true that he has hands made of stone and he isn't exceedingly physical, but he isn't paid to score and he doesn't shy away from contact.
I would MUCH rather have a Kelly - whose performance doesn't drop off the planet when the post-season and tight-checking-games roles around - than an Afinogenov - who can dazzle you one night and amaze you the next, but when its big game time, he is Useless!

(Also you can't talk about managing a smart cap and in the same post suggest signing a 7M dollar Brian Campbell...those are contradicting statements)

AlfieforPM wrote:Kelly is definately one of the smarter guys out there and that's why he's had success as an NHLer. But other than his skating he has no other real strengths as a hockey player. His shot is awful and he is not exactly a physically imposing presence.

EDIT: I think Kelly will be a great coach one day.

He's a great PK guy. He's great 5-on-5 in a shut-down role. He's a good skater. And he's decent in the face-off circle.

The fact is that you have to have a guy on your team who you can trust to anchor your 3rd line, AND who won't Wing Dang Doodle about "more minutes, more PP time, more offensive role please" every chance he gets. You pay him because he does a job most people don't like and he does it well, and he doesn't make a fuss about it.

He's not Kris Draper yet, I know, but he's of that mold -- smart, defensively strong, and PKer extraordinaire. As soon as he gets the clutch face-off thing down, we're golden. That will come with experience.

cash wrote:I'm sorry, but you guys obviously don't pay much attention to Kelly when he's on the ice.
The only knock on him is that he doesn't cash in on some great opportunities and people think thats enough to write him off.
I love the fact that Hartsburg said that (which I didn't know until now) because it shows me a little bit about his thinking process (of which I really have no clue)

Kelly is an amazing player and he is so heavily underated amongst the Sens fan base, it gets really annoying defending him all the time.
His defensive play is immaculate and his offensive progression is as consistent as Phillips' defensive performance.
It is true that he currently has a likely ceiling of 40 points, but he could easily hit 60 by the end of his contract.

His signing is my favorite of the entire summer, just ahead of Smith (Fisher's is mine for the year, but Spezza and Heatley signings just felt like huge anvils lifted off my hopes for the Sens future)
I couldn't be happier to have him here and I'm glad he is a fixture in the core.

(And if you doubt me - and if you have NHLNetwork - watch Game 3 of the 2007 ECF tonight at 10...I've been watching the past few nights and I've taken note of at least 4 Kelly plays that were simply brilliant. Another thing is that Redden was OUTSTANDING in game 1 and you could already see Heatley and Spezza fading, despite their still-increasing point totals)

First and foremost this is not a "hate on Chris Kelly" thread. Chris Kelly is a fine player. The point is Murray mismanaging the cap (which albeit is not often). Third line centers are just not worth this kind of money. Secondly, I really can't understand anyone thinking that Chris Kelly will hit 60 points. Mabye if he was to play an entire season between Heatley and Alfredsson like he did in 05-06. But now he won't be on the same line as guys like Vermette and Eaves and won't be able to produce the same kind of offense he has in the past. Instead he'll be playing with guys like Winchester and Ruutu.

504Heater wrote:

AlfieforPM wrote:I totally understand your point but I don't see Kelly at 27 improving too much. I see him as a defensive center who can play wing and who will produce 30 points a season if he's playing with some what talented guys. I think his ceiling is the same player he is but he'll produce 40 points, if he can cash in on more of those golden opportunities he gets from time to time. But the bottom line is he will be a bottom six player and I can't justify paying any player in the bottom six the money he is recieving.

Word around the campfire is that Hartsburg pretty much insisted on Kelly. He wanted 3 of the smartest forwards to explain his messages when needed. He listed Fisher, Alfie and Kelly as those forwards.

He called Kelly one of the smartest decision makers in the NHL (based on what I'm not sure, I guess he watched a heck of a lot of games when he realized he had a shot at coach) - and basically said go for it to Murray.

Otherwise, I don't like the amount of $$ either. I really don't.

Exactly, Yelle is no better than McCammond. We already have a Yelle that can score more often. Good for Boston, that's their replacement for Metrpoletit

AlfieforPM wrote:

cash wrote:I'm sorry, but you guys obviously don't pay much attention to Kelly when he's on the ice.
The only knock on him is that he doesn't cash in on some great opportunities and people think thats enough to write him off.
I love the fact that Hartsburg said that (which I didn't know until now) because it shows me a little bit about his thinking process (of which I really have no clue)

Kelly is an amazing player and he is so heavily underated amongst the Sens fan base, it gets really annoying defending him all the time.
His defensive play is immaculate and his offensive progression is as consistent as Phillips' defensive performance.
It is true that he currently has a likely ceiling of 40 points, but he could easily hit 60 by the end of his contract.

His signing is my favorite of the entire summer, just ahead of Smith (Fisher's is mine for the year, but Spezza and Heatley signings just felt like huge anvils lifted off my hopes for the Sens future)
I couldn't be happier to have him here and I'm glad he is a fixture in the core.

(And if you doubt me - and if you have NHLNetwork - watch Game 3 of the 2007 ECF tonight at 10...I've been watching the past few nights and I've taken note of at least 4 Kelly plays that were simply brilliant. Another thing is that Redden was OUTSTANDING in game 1 and you could already see Heatley and Spezza fading, despite their still-increasing point totals)

First and foremost this is not a "hate on Chris Kelly" thread. Chris Kelly is a fine player. The point is Murray mismanaging the cap (which albeit is not often). Third line centers are just not worth this kind of money. Secondly, I really can't understand anyone thinking that Chris Kelly will hit 60 points. Mabye if he was to play an entire season between Heatley and Alfredsson like he did in 05-06. But now he won't be on the same line as guys like Vermette and Eaves and won't be able to produce the same kind of offense he has in the past. Instead he'll be playing with guys like Winchester and Ruutu.

He most likely won't be playing with Vermette this season, but he could easily advance into that role in future seasons. He has more offensive upside than you think.
Regardless, his intangibles of intelligence, leadership, and humility make him invaluable.

cash wrote:

AlfieforPM wrote:

cash wrote:I'm sorry, but you guys obviously don't pay much attention to Kelly when he's on the ice.
The only knock on him is that he doesn't cash in on some great opportunities and people think thats enough to write him off.
I love the fact that Hartsburg said that (which I didn't know until now) because it shows me a little bit about his thinking process (of which I really have no clue)

Kelly is an amazing player and he is so heavily underated amongst the Sens fan base, it gets really annoying defending him all the time.
His defensive play is immaculate and his offensive progression is as consistent as Phillips' defensive performance.
It is true that he currently has a likely ceiling of 40 points, but he could easily hit 60 by the end of his contract.

His signing is my favorite of the entire summer, just ahead of Smith (Fisher's is mine for the year, but Spezza and Heatley signings just felt like huge anvils lifted off my hopes for the Sens future)
I couldn't be happier to have him here and I'm glad he is a fixture in the core.

(And if you doubt me - and if you have NHLNetwork - watch Game 3 of the 2007 ECF tonight at 10...I've been watching the past few nights and I've taken note of at least 4 Kelly plays that were simply brilliant. Another thing is that Redden was OUTSTANDING in game 1 and you could already see Heatley and Spezza fading, despite their still-increasing point totals)

First and foremost this is not a "hate on Chris Kelly" thread. Chris Kelly is a fine player. The point is Murray mismanaging the cap (which albeit is not often). Third line centers are just not worth this kind of money. Secondly, I really can't understand anyone thinking that Chris Kelly will hit 60 points. Mabye if he was to play an entire season between Heatley and Alfredsson like he did in 05-06. But now he won't be on the same line as guys like Vermette and Eaves and won't be able to produce the same kind of offense he has in the past. Instead he'll be playing with guys like Winchester and Ruutu.

He most likely won't be playing with Vermette this season, but he could easily advance into that role in future seasons. He has more offensive upside than you think.
Regardless, his intangibles of intelligence, leadership, and humility make him invaluable.

Again, I'm not questioning Kelly's intelligence or leadership or his intangibles. The focus is that I don't like that Murray over spent on Kelly. I was simply saying that perhaps it would be best to spend $750,000 - $1 million on a veteran like Yelle instead of overpaying for a player like Kelly. His role on the team is very replaceable. I would change my tune if Murray gave Kelly 1.5 million for 2 or 3 years instead. If we decided to pay all of our thrid liners Kelly-type money we would be in very bad shape cap wise. It is just very poor cap management.

AlfieforPM wrote:
First and foremost this is not a "hate on Chris Kelly" thread. Chris Kelly is a fine player. The point is Murray mismanaging the cap (which albeit is not often). Third line centers are just not worth this kind of money. Secondly, I really can't understand anyone thinking that Chris Kelly will hit 60 points. Mabye if he was to play an entire season between Heatley and Alfredsson like he did in 05-06. But now he won't be on the same line as guys like Vermette and Eaves and won't be able to produce the same kind of offense he has in the past. Instead he'll be playing with guys like Winchester and Ruutu.

Yeah, because, off the top of my head, they are no comparables out there for Kelly and his contract:

Sammy Pahlsson $1.4 mil / 1 yr [a 2 year old contract now, I believe]
Paul Gaustad $2.3 mil / 4 yrs [signed this year]
Ryan Kessler $1.75 mil / 2 yrs [a 2-year old contract now]
David Backes $2.5 mil / 3 yrs [signed this year]
Mike Grier $1.775 mil / 1 yr [a 2-year old contract now]
John Madden $2.938 mil / 1yr [signed this year]
Kris Draper $1.583 / 3 yrs [a 1 year old deal, I believe]

Other than Kris Draper, who took a sweetheart deal for Detroit, we've got Gaustad, Backes, and Madden as direct comparables (3rd line centres, play defensive roles, signed very recently) and, surprise, they make the same kind of money that Kelly just signed for. The other guys -- Pahlsson, Kessler, and Grier -- make less but are a couple years into their deals; they will each command $2+ mil apiece when their contracts expire.

Kelly does for us what these guys do for their teams, and we pay him in the same range that other teams pay their PKing, defensive 3rd line centres. The contract Murray gave Kelly is not an anomaly, but rather standard and necessary.

I quite like Chris Kelly. I too feel like 2.125 million per year is a tiny bit of an overpayment but I think it'll be worth it over the duration of the contract. He's another one of those every situation type players and has performed his role to perfection for a couple of years. Hopefully he excels even more under Hartsburg, as him and Vermette seem to be his type of player.

rooneypoo wrote:

AlfieforPM wrote:
First and foremost this is not a "hate on Chris Kelly" thread. Chris Kelly is a fine player. The point is Murray mismanaging the cap (which albeit is not often). Third line centers are just not worth this kind of money. Secondly, I really can't understand anyone thinking that Chris Kelly will hit 60 points. Mabye if he was to play an entire season between Heatley and Alfredsson like he did in 05-06. But now he won't be on the same line as guys like Vermette and Eaves and won't be able to produce the same kind of offense he has in the past. Instead he'll be playing with guys like Winchester and Ruutu.

Yeah, because, off the top of my head, they are no comparables out there for Kelly and his contract:

Sammy Pahlsson $1.4 mil / 1 yr [a 2 year old contract now, I believe]
Paul Gaustad $2.3 mil / 4 yrs [signed this year]
Ryan Kessler $1.75 mil / 2 yrs [a 2-year old contract now]
David Backes $2.5 mil / 3 yrs [signed this year]
Mike Grier $1.775 mil / 1 yr [a 2-year old contract now]
John Madden $2.938 mil / 1yr [signed this year]
Kris Draper $1.583 / 3 yrs [a 1 year old deal, I believe]

Other than Kris Draper, who took a sweetheart deal for Detroit, we've got Gaustad, Backes, and Madden as direct comparables (3rd line centres, play defensive roles, signed very recently) and, surprise, they make the same kind of money that Kelly just signed for. The other guys -- Pahlsson, Kessler, and Grier -- make less but are a couple years into their deals; they will each command $2+ mil apiece when their contracts expire.

Kelly does for us what these guys do for their teams, and we pay him in the same range that other teams pay their PKing, defensive 3rd line centres. The contract Murray gave Kelly is not an anomaly, but rather standard and necessary.

Fair enough, but I really think many of those guys are superior players to Kelly (again nothing against Kelly). Madden especially. Pahlsson is great. He shut down our big guns with ease in the SCF, he deserved the Conn Smyth IMO that year. Kessler has real offensive upside. Backes is a poor example. He was signed to an RFA offer sheet so we all know he got overpaid. He also has far superior offensive upside (about 65 points or so). Mike Grier has been a beast for the Sharks and has played on Marleau's wing for most of his time there. Gaustad is the best example but I feel he is overpaid as well. I would prefer to have Gaustad over Kelly though. His physical presence with his offense and defensive abilities make him into a force on the ice.