BOSTON — On Aug. 1, 2023, two days after their arbitration hearing in Toronto with Jeremy Swayman, the Boston Bruins received the decision. Swayman was given a $3.475 million award.
Swayman filed for arbitration on July 5. So did Trent Frederic and Ian Mitchell. The latter two accepted settlements before their hearings.
In all three cases, because the players filed for arbitration, the club had the choice of electing either a one- or two-year award.
The Bruins chose the former with Swayman. In retrospect, they made the wrong decision.
Things have gone so far sideways that Lewis Gross, Swayman’s agent, is calling president Cam Neely’s $64 million declaration a falsehood. Whether a cooling-off period allows Swayman to reset and study the situation without emotion is unknown. It’s quite clear by now how deeply the hearing touched Swayman to his core.
“Having gone to the doorstep as a player, and knowing the process from both sides, it’s uncomfortable, to be perfectly honest with you,” general manager Don Sweeney said of arbitration on Oct. 9, 2023, prior to the start of the 2023-24 season. “It’s just uncomfortable. You hope to avoid it. You don’t see a lot of guys go. When you do, you just make sure that you’re 100 percent forthright in the fact that you separate the business and the personal side of things. You try to realize there’s a lot of lawyers on both sides that are trying to position accordingly.”
Hard post-arbitration feelings were unavoidable. But this current clash could have been avoided had the Bruins chosen the two-year award.
It would have kicked the negotiating can down the road by one season and locked up Swayman for 2024-25 at $3.475 million — chump change considering how his price has more than doubled.
The Bruins chose a one-year award primarily because their opinion of the goalie’s value, which they discovered during pre-hearing negotiations, was significantly different than Swayman’s perspective. Nothing has changed, it seems, a year later.
“Based on the fact we couldn’t find common ground on a multiyear deal was probably the first indication it was going to be the best path,” Sweeney said last October when asked why he elected one year.
Sweeney had a second reason for going with a one-year award. It was a sign of good faith to Swayman that he’d re-enter the market a year later with the chance to cash in. The Bruins hoped Swayman would remember the gesture when they revisited the negotiating table.
“It puts Jeremy right back in a really good situation,” the GM continued. “Because we expect him to be a top-flight goaltender and challenge, despite having a Vezina winner riding shotgun with him. The way Jeremy is wired, he feels that he’s as good if not better and wants to be the go-to guy. So those are good problems to try and sort through and have motivated players that have confidence as well as talent. It’s a good thing for us as an organization, especially at such a key position.”
The Bruins believed that after a withering hearing, they would do Swayman a solid by going with a one-year award. In hindsight, it was a mistake.
By then, the damage had been done.
Had they stuck with an all-business, cutthroat approach, they would have accepted a two-year award. Swayman would have had no choice but to eat it and revisit the issue in 2025. He would still have been under team control.
It was a mistake. The Bruins are paying for it.
(Photo of Don Sweeney: Bruce Bennett / Getty Images)
