I have to begin by saying that I do not know what the definition of a streaky player is, nor could I find anyone who cared to even try and define it with some logic and sense anywhere. I am sure everyone has their own definition and as sure as the sky is blue, there will be some disagreement on that definition. If anyone has a link to an article that breaks it down thoroughly, please send it my way.
That said, Jake DeBrusk is described as streaky player by many and with that comes a variety of different opinions on what his worth is as he looks for a new contract to begin on July 1, 2024. Most take into consideration just goals to define a streaky player, and if that is the argument you are presenting, you can make a case that would have me agreeing with you.
However, it takes multiple different things to happen for a goal to be scored in the NHL and at the top of the list is a mistake by the opposition at some point in the play. If everyone played the perfect game, every game would end 0-0 if we still had ties. You need your players to capitalize on those errors.
Most of the time, you need players to set up goals. Yes, the dreaded assist. Most of the time, you need players to do the things that don’t show up on the scoresheet. Unfortunately, those things can’t be quantified. At least, I don’t know how to quantify them.
Finally, you need players doing the little things that don’t show up on the scoresheet: A big save, a blocked shot, a hit, win a battle along the boards, forecheck well, cycle well, the list goes on. We all know this; we’ve seen it plenty of times where one of those thigs can lead directly to a goal and not show up on the score sheet.
All those things are as important to the goal happening as the goal itself.
I believe that if you are contributing to the offence, that matters whether it is the player putting the puck in the net, the player distributing the puck, or the player doing the things that don’t show up on the scoresheet.
So, is DeBrusk streaky when it comes to offence? The only thing we can quantify with certainty is production and that includes goals and assists. I’m sure the Bruins keep their own internal data that can quantify some of the things I’ve mentioned, but they aren’t releasing that data and no one does it for public consumption.
So, all we can look at is production. And that includes goals and assists.
His worst stretch came during the 2019-2020 season where he had 19 goals and 16 assists in 65 games. He had one stretch of 10 games without a point. He also had 1 stretch of four games without a point, three stretches going pointless in 3 consecutive games and 4 – 2 game pointless streaks. He had seven 1 game pointless stretches.
DeBrusk’s best season came a year ago when he had 27 goals and 23 assists in 64 games. He never had a pointless streak longer than three games and that happened on three occasions. I don’t believe that’s streaky for secondary production but you have the right to disagree. On five occasions, he had pointless streaks of two games. Many fans claim that to be being a beneficiary of playing with Patrice Bergeron and Brad Marchand. Well, Marchand had pointless streaks of 5, 6 and 7 games. Bergeron had a 6-game pointless streak and a 4-game pointless streak.
Let’s take that season a step further. Bergeron’s 6- game pointless streak came between January 26 and February 14. Marchand’s 5 game pointless streak came at the same time except for 1-game between January 28 and February 14. How did DeBrusk do in that time? He was out with an injury. That’s not to suggest that Bergeron and Marchand were reliant on DeBrusk, but to dispel the myth that DeBrusk was the beneficiary. Each member of the trio would drive that line at different times whether we wish to admit it or not.
This season didn’t go as expected for a contract year. DeBrusk had two prolonged pointless streaks of 6 and 4 games before the holiday break. He also had one 3-game stretch and three 2-game stretches without a point. The latter two aren’t exactly being streaky in my opinion but that totals 19 of 31 games without registering a point. Again, not a good look in a contract year.
Many came to DeBrusk’s defence because of his defensive game. I’m not taking that away from him, he’s been very good in that area. I will say that Coach Jim Montgomery experimenting with different lines and pairs has had an effect on him. I have long said that for DeBrusk to be consistent, he needs consistency in his deployment and who he is deployed with.
The debate surrounding DeBrusk stems from his status of becoming an unrestricted free agent at the end of this season. Fans do not want the Bruins paying big money on a long-term deal and would welcome a trade before trade deadline before issuing such a contract to him.
Our friends at Benchrates have DeBrusk’s value this season at $6,929,000 and $6,831,111 based on the last five seasons. It’s important to note that this is not a contract predictor but his contribution to team success.
So, what is DeBrusk worth on his next contract? I think the dollar value, or more importantly the cap hit, will be based on some things DeBrusk would like in this deal: Term, signing bonuses with possible labor unrest in 2026 and of course buyout protection, and some type of (limited) trade protection. The Bruins, giving in to some or all of those asks will make the cap hit come down.
For example: Let’s assume the DeBrusk wants a $3 million signing bonus for 2026, which would be guaranteed if there were to be a lockout. While the Bruins lose out monetarily if there were to be a lockout, they could use it as a negotiating ploy to lower the cap.
Another example would be yearly signing bonuses. The player benefits by lower tax rates, depending on the jurisdiction of course. The Bruins could also use that in negotiations to lower the cap hit. But the Bruins don’t typically hand those out like candy and usually save them for the best of the best. Along with Marchand, only Charlie McAvoy, David Pastrnak and Hampus Lindholm have yearly signing bonuses worth speaking of. And you can see how those signing bonuses were used to lower the cap hits.
One of the other big arguments regarding DeBrusk’s next contract is that he is not a core player. I suppose that depends on the definition of a core player. In my opinion, there are three tiers. You have your core pieces that you build around like Marchand, McAvoy, Pastrnak, Lindholm and Jeremy Swayman. Then you have a second tier, the players that would be difficult to replace from within or free agency and that’s where DeBrusk fits in. You have a final tier of players that you use to fill out the roster.
Here is a quick look at DeBrusk’s 7 NHL season and his pointless streaks and how many in each season.
How the Bruins feel about DeBrusk will be known if and when they come to terms on a contract. The details will explain plenty.
