HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Free Agent Frenzy (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Blackhawks Bruins Proposal (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=175851)

Behn Wilson 09-28-2005 04:40 PM

Blackhawks Bruins Proposal
 
If Boston cant sign Boynton and plan to trade him, I assume they dont want to add much salary in return. How about a young cheap defenseman and defenseman prospect form the Hawks.

My proposal: Jim Vandermeer and Anton Bachuck for Boynton.

Any comments everyone, Flame Away!

Olias of Sunhillow 09-28-2005 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Behn Wilson
If they cant sign Boynton adn trade him and dont want to add salary how about a player and prospect form the Hawks. Vandermeer and Anton Bachuck for Boynton.
Any comments, Flame Away.

Boynton's a shade better than that. Seabrook, Vandermeer and a 2nd for Boynton?

Vatican Roulette 09-28-2005 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Behn Wilson
If they cant sign Boynton adn trade him and dont want to add salary how about a player and prospect form the Hawks. Vandermeer and Anton Bachuck for Boynton.
Any comments, Flame Away.


I like it.

I'm willing to bet Boston fans insist on Barker instead.

neelynugs 09-28-2005 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vatican Roulette
I like it.

I'm willing to bet Boston fans insist on Barker instead.

good bet...but then again, we really don't need young D. we need boynton more than we need to trade him.

Behn Wilson 09-28-2005 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vatican Roulette
I like it.

I'm willing to bet Boston fans insist on Barker instead.

Hawks wouldnt trade Barker straight up for Boynton, his upside is WAY to high. The counterproposal above with Seabrook sounds more feasible, but Seabrook AND Babchuck is too much, only one of those two could be had.

EDIT, I misread the proposal, it was Vandermeer not Babchuck as the throw in, plus a 2nd rounder which I dont care about, weve had so many picks the last few years I dont care about giving up a non 1st round pick.

That is tempting, Id have to think this one over. IMO a lot of people underestimate how good Boynton is, Id love to reunite him with his JR teammate Mark Bell on the Hawks. My only concern is Im not sure how much the Diabetes affects his long term worth. Poor Ron Santo in Chicago, we see how it is affecting him.

Olias of Sunhillow 09-28-2005 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neelynugs
good bet...but then again, we really don't need young D. we need boynton more than we need to trade him.

Which is why Chicago and Boston aren't necessarily the best trading partners... both have full stocks of blue-chip D prospects but are somewhat less robust in the young forward ranks (Boyes excepted).

Michael Karlstrom II 09-28-2005 05:45 PM

I think Boston has spent their money in a win now mode... moving our only good 2-way dmen for kids who cant play now would not be the way the team would move if Boynton must be dealt.

Boston has ready-to-play now kids who are wasting away in the system. Guys like Zinovjev, Jonsson, and Hilbert have already basically walked away from the team because there is no proper opportunity for them to play in the NHL for NHL money with Boston.

If Bruins are forced to move Boynton, they will need a top 3 dman back for him. I dont think age is the biggest worry for the Bruins. Boynton isnt going to be that far away from potential UFA himself so as long as the B's could hope for a good 3-4 years from whoever they pick up, I think that their kid dmen like Stuart/Lashoff/Alberts would all be playing quality minutes in 3-4 years.

I had an idea myself today that Boynton could be packaged with Samsonov and moved to a team like the Edmonton Oilers whom I believe do have the payroll room to keep Sammy in exchange for a guy like Jason Smith [who would have to be resigned] and a guy like Ethan Moreau with some sort of throw in like a conditional pick if Sammy is signed or not for next year.

My idea for the pick to make it fair would be a first if Sammy did resign with Edmonton and whatever comp pick he would fetch if he did leave through UFA.

Boynton is quite a bit younger than Smith and I believe better. Smith can be a top 3 dman on a good cup winning team though. He is good enough. Moreau has been a 20 goal scorer on a third line without much PP time and without much for linemates. Put him as the winger for Thornton and Murray and he could handle the defensive assignment for the line while keeping up with them and being able to take advantage of the opportunities theyd create for him.

Samsonov would figure to be Edmonton's best player IMHO. He should fit in brilliantly with their wide open style of play. He could leave as an UFA next year but even if he did, Edmonton would get one hell of a number 2 dman to play behind Pronger for a few years. I think Oil do have the wiggle rom to get Boynton signed for a longer term deal.

I believe Oil get the best of this deal in terms of age and talent but the key for Boston is the payroll room we'd free up while still filling the holes we need to fill to win now.

salty justice 09-28-2005 09:29 PM

Boynton is a great dman, but if he is in a contract dispute his value drops a whole lot. Vandermeer and a 2nd is borderline overpayment. Anything more isnt worth it.

And I agree that we dont have the type of solidified dman Boston would be looking to bring back anyway.

Pierre McGuire 09-28-2005 09:34 PM

I don't see both Boynton and MOC holding out for much longer over 250 000, but we can see anything with the Bruins management.

bb_fan 09-29-2005 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre McGuire
I don't see both Boynton and MOC holding out for much longer over 250 000, but we can see anything with the Bruins management.

:dunno:

bb_fan 09-29-2005 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by salty justice
Boynton is a great dman, but if he is in a contract dispute his value drops a whole lot. Vandermeer and a 2nd is borderline overpayment. Anything more isnt worth it.

that one confuses me? Granted i dont see much of Vandermeer, but something tells me him a second isnt even close to boderline over payment?

DisgruntledHawkFan 09-29-2005 03:58 PM

I'd love to move Babchuk and Vandermeer for Boynton. Throw in Michael Leighton for all I care. Seabrook and Barker are both keys to the future of this team and I expect Seabrook to make the starting roster this year. Boynton is definitely an upgrade over Vandermeer. I can understand Boston not wanting to make this deal.

Dr Quincy 09-29-2005 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan
I'd love to move Babchuk and Vandermeer for Boynton. Throw in Michael Leighton for all I care. Seabrook and Barker are both keys to the future of this team and I expect Seabrook to make the starting roster this year. Boynton is definitely an upgrade over Vandermeer. I can understand Boston not wanting to make this deal.

Generally speaking, players you "throw in" a deal, especially ones you don't even care about throwing in, don't have a lot of value (especially if the other team already has 2 goalies better than he).

Boston, rightly or wrongly, thinks they can contend this year. They aren't giving up their best defenseman for a huge downgrade and a prospect. As has been said, they have at least 3 good defensive prospects of their own. If anything they need an established defenseman.

GaryU 09-29-2005 08:54 PM

Here's an idea....If Boynton's your best D-guy.....Sign him!!! If not, his stock is dropping...

pit 09-29-2005 09:23 PM

If another team *really* wanted Boynton they would only need to give up a second round pick and have the salary cap room for him.

Another team can sign him to an offer sheet of $1.99 million and only owe a second round pick as compensation because it's under 2 miliion. If Boston matches to keep him, they're now paying him more than if they had just signed the QO.

Luckily for the B's it's unlikely that another GM will try and screw them in that fashion. But if they are looking to trade him, that's certainly a factor in keeping the price down.

Dr Quincy 10-01-2005 10:08 AM

Generally the Bruins history has been that they DON'T trade guys with 1 year left on their deals. Instead they keep them and deal with the situation in the offseason. I remember when Guerin was in his last year and there were rumors of a deal (in the media, not sure if they were real) for Drury and something else at the deadline. The B's felt like they'd rather take their chance with Guerin in the playoffs then to deal him. Also, the players they've dealt because of contract disputes have mostly been because the player was holding out into the regular season: Allison, Carter, and, IRC, McLaren. They don't trade guys for not signing a year early, they trade them for not showing up.

Also, I'm not a Bruins fan, I just live in the area. Again, the B's think they are a player in the playoffs this year. They will not deal Boynton for a Dman who helps them less this year. They just won't. They'll try to sign Boynton now or in the offseason, or they'll let someone sign him, but they need Boynton if they want to do anything this year.

EquabaleAce 10-01-2005 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pit
If another team *really* wanted Boynton they would only need to give up a second round pick and have the salary cap room for him.

Another team can sign him to an offer sheet of $1.99 million and only owe a second round pick as compensation because it's under 2 miliion. If Boston matches to keep him, they're now paying him more than if they had just signed the QO.

Luckily for the B's it's unlikely that another GM will try and screw them in that fashion. But if they are looking to trade him, that's certainly a factor in keeping the price down.

Well, it isn't so much screwing, but I'd bet if a team offered him a contract at $1.99 million, the Bruins would match in a heartbeat, because of the low $ amount and the compensation they would receive. Plus, if the Bruins matched and signed Boyton, then he'd be in their lineup. If I was a GM, I'd rather play the Bruins without their top d-man, as opposed to with him dressed.

Anything over that, GM's would be weary to loose 2 1st rounders, as with a cap now, developing from within has gained a greater importance, especially if you loose Boyton to free agency as well in two years time. It's a risk, but if you are a team who drafts well in later rounds (ie: Ottawa, New Jersey, Colorado) then I would be confident in scouting staffs ability to make up for the lack of 1st rounders.

Vyse64 10-01-2005 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Karlstrom II
Jason Smith [who would have to be resigned].

:teach:
he was signed before the lockout for 4 years, so its 3 years now at $1,976,000 per season


as for the proposal, its great value for the Oilers but no way does Boston do it


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:24 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.