HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

All Bruins trade rumors/proposals: 16/17 Part VII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-15-2017, 12:03 PM
  #1001
Bruinfanatic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,784
vCash: 500
Always comes back to the same thing for me if you move Carlo ,who takes his place now ,Liles,Morrow? Don't think so ,basically there giving up on this season can't see Sweeney doing that.

Bruinfanatic is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:03 PM
  #1002
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean_Jacket41 View Post
Trading Carlo would be the incentive. They don't get him unless they take salary back.

Young cost controlled top-4 D are very pricey to acquire. If Colorado wants Carlo, they'll have to pay. Not the other way around.
That could be. That's kind of what I'm talking about. Your not wrong.

BruinDust is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:03 PM
  #1003
nfld77
Registered User
 
nfld77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Newfoundland
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergyesque View Post
That's why the Bs will have to package at least once or twice, and pounce on opportunities to sell high and buy low.
Landeskog might be one.

Don't know him enough, so I'll leave the talent evaluation to others, but let's say he's something approaching a stud LW (or forward).
Considering that and his age, why Colorado would want to get rid of such a player? Something is going on here and the Bs should be on that, without being desesperate.

If the cost of acquisition is too much (according obviously to talent evaluators on the team and I understand, that is a big question mark...), they should just let go and find another opportunity.

Is Carlo too much? I don't know, but refusing to trade a particular asset (Carlo) because it fills a bigger need NOW than the acquired asset (Landeskog) is not good asset management IF OBVIOUSLY the acquired asset has more value overall .

As I posted a couple days ago, Landeskog's offensive stats have declined the past 4 years. There's something more than that as to the reason Sakic is even shopping him. Their 2nd overall pick who is now under contract til 20-21 for 5.5 million per..Is Sakic regretting that contract?? Sure seems that way. Why else would he be trying to trade him?? What else is there other than the obvious?? Walk away Sweeney, something just don't seem right here..

nfld77 is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:04 PM
  #1004
GloryDaze4877
Thanks Clode
 
GloryDaze4877's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Sticks (West MA)
Country: United States
Posts: 32,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean_Jacket41 View Post
Trading Carlo would be the incentive. They don't get him unless they take salary back.

Young cost controlled top-4 D are very pricey to acquire. If Colorado wants Carlo, they'll have to pay. Not the other way around.
In a vacuum, maybe.

However, the other part of that equation is a 24 year old, former 3rd overall pick that has 52+ points in each of his four full NHL seasons, and has enough intangibles that he was named Captain just shy of age 20 (he was the youngest C in NHL history at the time). In addition he has term and cost certainty in his deal.

I like Carlo a lot, but lets not pretend that Landeskog has no value himself.

GloryDaze4877 is online now  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:06 PM
  #1005
22Brad Park
Registered User
 
22Brad Park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 18,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
That could be. That's kind of what I'm talking about. Your not wrong.
I guess he is not wrong .Defence way more valuable then wingers in todays NHL.Especially good cost controlled ones.Sakic should be told go eat a bag of nuts unless he takes back some salary Let him be the one to worry about cap not Bruins.

22Brad Park is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:09 PM
  #1006
GloryDaze4877
Thanks Clode
 
GloryDaze4877's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Sticks (West MA)
Country: United States
Posts: 32,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfld77 View Post
As I posted a couple days ago, Landeskog's offensive stats have declined the past 4 years. There's something more than that as to the reason Sakic is even shopping him. Their 2nd overall pick who is now under contract til 20-21 for 5.5 million per..Is Sakic regretting that contract?? Sure seems that way. Why else would he be trying to trade him?? What else is there other than the obvious?? Walk away Sweeney, something just don't seem right here..
They have actually declined the last 3 seasons (incl this one). The one year the Avs made the playoffs, he had his highest career point total (65).

He had 59 and 52 points on bad COL teams the previous two seasons. This year has been a train wreck, but he has looked good in the few games I have seen. I would have no issue with Sweeney adding Landeskog or a similar young vet who will help now and going forward.

GloryDaze4877 is online now  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:10 PM
  #1007
Jean_Jacket41
Neely = HOF
 
Jean_Jacket41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: With the smurfs
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloryDaze4877 View Post
In a vacuum, maybe.

However, the other part of that equation is a 24 year old, former 3rd overall pick that has 52+ points in each of his four full NHL seasons, and has enough intangibles that he was named Captain just shy of age 20 (he was the youngest C in NHL history at the time). In addition he has term and cost certainty in his deal.

I like Carlo a lot, but lets not pretend that Landeskog has no value himself.
He has value. Would be happy to have him on the team. Wouldn't be very happy if the return is the rumored Carlo+1st+good prospect(s) price tough...

Jean_Jacket41 is online now  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:12 PM
  #1008
OneManIsNoMan
Registered User
 
OneManIsNoMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfld77 View Post
As I posted a couple days ago, Landeskog's offensive stats have declined the past 4 years. There's something more than that as to the reason Sakic is even shopping him. Their 2nd overall pick who is now under contract til 20-21 for 5.5 million per..Is Sakic regretting that contract?? Sure seems that way. Why else would he be trying to trade him?? What else is there other than the obvious?? Walk away Sweeney, something just don't seem right here..
Outside of this year (just about everyone on the Av's is down), his decline hasn't really been that bad. Since his 65 point season this his how his PPG as looked...

.80 PPG
.72 PPG
.71 PPG
.52 PPG

Career avg = .67PPG

At the end of the day Landeskog is still a 20G/30A guy.

OneManIsNoMan is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 12:13 PM
  #1009
TP
Global Moderator
 
TP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 7th Circle of Hell
Country: United States
Posts: 31,265
vCash: 500
Awards:
New thread


http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=2189945

TP is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:15 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.