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 VIII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-15-2017, 02:54 PM
  #76
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsdad View Post
No one wants to trade Carlo or McAvoy, so I will throw another out there to see what the reaction is....

To Colorado...

Spooner, draft pick, prospect like DeBrusk/Zboril....and Colin Miller

Are people more willing to move Colin???
I'm going to assume the pick is a 1st rounder.

Seems like a lot to give up.

Essentially a top prospect + a 1st rounder + a roster player in Colin Miller to upgrade from Spooner to Landeskog.

BruinDust is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 02:57 PM
  #77
Estlin
Registered User
 
Estlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
I didn't realize he was that highly regarded by Bruins management. Certainly not higher than JFK who I assumed they were totally head of heels for. This is a good thing I guess, Donato seemed like a bit of a forgotten prospect when Bruins top prospects have been discussed.

Of these 3, if you have to give up one, which would you give up.

Donato

JFK

Frederic
None of them. Boston is not deep in center prospects, Krejci, Bergeron and Backes are on the wrong side of 30, and who knows what Spooner's future is here. The organization has no first-line center prospect at all. I would keep all three and see how they develop.

I really wish that Boston would walk away from Landeskog. I don't understand how the team would be so much better with him in the lineup, especially given his underwhelming production, the fact that Colorado is shopping him (red flag) and the price that Boston would reportedly have to pay to acquire him.

Estlin is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 02:59 PM
  #78
Dizzay
Registered User
 
Dizzay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 481
vCash: 500
So not only do we not want to trade Carlo and MacAvoy, we're adding in JFK and Donato to the list?

Dizzay is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 02:59 PM
  #79
Mount Kramer Cameras
Registered User
 
Mount Kramer Cameras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Parker View Post
Honestly, maybe 8-12?

If you read here too often and don't watch other teams or visit other boards you'd think top 3.
As Pierre likes to say on seemingly every national broadcast, "The Bruins system is loaded Doc! Loaded!"

This is one time when hyperbole doesn't really come into it. The sheer quantity of B-level prospects is pretty crazy.

Mount Kramer Cameras is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:00 PM
  #80
Greek_physique
Caron - Legit SNIPER
 
Greek_physique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto, Ont
Country: Greece
Posts: 20,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estlin View Post
None of them. Boston is not deep in center prospects, Krejci, Bergeron and Backes are on the wrong side of 30, and who knows what Spooner's future is here. The organization has no first-line center prospect at all. I would keep all three and see how they develop.

I really wish that Boston would walk away from Landeskog. I don't understand how the team would be so much better with him in the lineup, especially given his underwhelming production, the fact that Colorado is shopping him (red flag) and the price that Boston would reportedly have to pay to acquire him.
So how does Colorado shopping him signify a 'red flag'.

Does that mean when Philly unloaded J.Carter or Richards it was the same? I dont buy it myself.

__________________
-Nikos
Greek_physique is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:01 PM
  #81
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estlin View Post
None of them. Boston is not deep in center prospects, Krejci, Bergeron and Backes are on the wrong side of 30, and who knows what Spooner's future is here. The organization has no first-line center prospect at all. I would keep all three and see how they develop.

I really wish that Boston would walk away from Landeskog. I don't understand how the team would be so much better with him in the lineup, especially given his underwhelming production, the fact that Colorado is shopping him (red flag) and the price that Boston would reportedly have to pay to acquire him.
I don't disagree. I'd prefer Boston deal from the natural LWers in the system than the guys who might cut the mustard as NHL centers.

BruinDust is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:04 PM
  #82
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greek_physique View Post
So how does Colorado shopping him signify a 'red flag'.

Does that mean when Philly unloaded J.Carter or Richards it was the same? I dont buy it myself.
Well in Richard's case there were red flags at the time, and they certainly turned out to be the case. I'm speaking strictly from an on-ice perspective here.

Actually Philly deciding to move on from Richards is a great comparison to Colorado thinking about moving on from Landeskog.

Two-way forward who plays bigger than his size, perhaps starting to catch up with him a bit.

BruinDust is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:04 PM
  #83
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
I don't disagree. I'd prefer Boston deal from the natural LWers in the system than the guys who might cut the mustard as NHL centers.
If only we had a chance to draft a top line center prospect in recent drafts....

But yeah agreed, JFK is great, but I don't see elite level skill there.

Tim Vezina Thomas is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:12 PM
  #84
Greek_physique
Caron - Legit SNIPER
 
Greek_physique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto, Ont
Country: Greece
Posts: 20,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
Well in Richard's case there were red flags at the time, and they certainly turned out to be the case. I'm speaking strictly from an on-ice perspective here.

Actually Philly deciding to move on from Richards is a great comparison to Colorado thinking about moving on from Landeskog.

Two-way forward who plays bigger than his size, perhaps starting to catch up with him a bit.
So why can't you make the argument that Landeskog is more like a Bill Guerin, Jason Arnott or K.Tkachuk for that matter? I understand people have there own opinions on players and if they don't like them...usually look for examples where others failed...but Landeskog in this conversation is different.

Richards was highly effective because he was your modern day Marchand that hit 10x more; but Los Angeles won 2 cups....and if they had to do that trade over again...they'd do it again if you win those cups.

Greek_physique is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:20 PM
  #85
Roll 4 Lines
Pastafarian!
 
Roll 4 Lines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In The Midnight Hour
Country: United States
Posts: 6,955
vCash: 500
Do we know that Sakic is specifically shopping Landeskog?

I've read Duchene rumors as well, and who know what other names have been tossed around?

Could it simply be that the GM of a bottom dwelling team with defense issues is listening to offers that might help him improve his team?

That's my guess anyway, and that's what he should do. If I'm him, I take my time, and listen to all offers.

Roll 4 Lines is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:30 PM
  #86
Number8
Jacobs Must Go
 
Number8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,527
vCash: 500
For me it comes down to where our biggest need is. And I see it as:

1) Defense
2) Backup Keeper
3) Forward

Adding defense is hard. It's also an area where blue chip prospects can do great or struggle. Nowhere to hide -- particularly on a team like Boston that has a number of 4,5,6's (actual and higher projected guys that are still developing) and no dominating top pair.

Adding a great back-up keeper is hard. Adding one that can get more than two wins at this point should be easy. On that I give DS an F. If we miss playoffs by a hair? Look no further than this obvious hole.

Adding a guy like Lando? Hard. If you have a strong Defense AND a wealth of prospects on D, then do it yesterday. If not, and your number 1 need is defense? (IMO) do it at high risk.

Been a lot of debate on value of Lando. Maybe not fair -- I think we can all agree he'd be a great add if price is right. I just don't think we have the luxury of giving in an area that is weak but full of good prospects. D prospects are much harder to develop and bring up to speed than Forward prospects.

Just my take.

Number8 is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:32 PM
  #87
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 40,880
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizzay View Post
So not only do we not want to trade Carlo and MacAvoy, we're adding in JFK and Donato to the list?
No. they were already on the list

DKH is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:32 PM
  #88
Fenian24
Registered User
 
Fenian24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,709
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizzay View Post
So not only do we not want to trade Carlo and MacAvoy, we're adding in JFK and Donato to the list?
All prospects are now untouchable with Crosby/Weber upside. Willy Sherman may be moved but only for Landeskog, Mackinnon and Duchense and Sakic should be grateful for that.

Fenian24 is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:37 PM
  #89
whatsbruin
Registered User
 
whatsbruin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Central, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsdad View Post
No one wants to trade Carlo or McAvoy, so I will throw another out there to see what the reaction is....

To Colorado...

Spooner, draft pick, prospect like DeBrusk/Zboril....and Colin Miller

Are people more willing to move Colin???
You can't move C. Miller, Carlo, or MCAvoy. This team needs all 3 going forward to improve the D, but also keep the cap down.
Picks and forward prospects + Zbori//Lauzon (sp).

whatsbruin is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:40 PM
  #90
Greek_physique
Caron - Legit SNIPER
 
Greek_physique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto, Ont
Country: Greece
Posts: 20,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatsbruin View Post
You can't move C. Miller, Carlo, or MCAvoy. This team needs all 3 going forward to improve the D, but also keep the cap down.
We also need more of R.Nash on the 3 on 3 hockey in OT and top 9 minutes

C.Miller has played really well, but I still have no issues moving him.

Playing 2 right handed dman on the same 3rd pairing unit is eventually going to fail....or not be as strong. K.Miller is so much more effective playing the RS.

Greek_physique is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:42 PM
  #91
GoBs
Registered User
 
GoBs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goalieman40 View Post
If these are hints the only thing I'm coming out of it is Heinen.
I would like to see Heinen get anther chance now that Clode is in Montreal. He may play a bit looser out there.

GoBs is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:42 PM
  #92
Alan Ryan
Registered User
 
Alan Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfld77 View Post
I never realized Donato was so high of a prospect. Great to know for sure. Guys, are the Bruins top 5, top 10 in prospects?? Where do they stand compared to the other 29 teams??

Kirk Luedeke's latest Bruins prospect report (today) has a focus on Donato, after his Harvard team won the Beanpot.



With 16 goals in 25 games including 5 in his last two, Donato is starting to show the hockey world the sheer offensive acumen that saw him drafted in the second round after David Pastrnak in 2014. As a junior with Dexter, he potted nearly 3 points per game and rode that to a 56th overall selection in Philadelphia. Now, Donato is taking his game to another level as a sophomore after a solid freshman campaign.

He’s got elite offensive hockey sense with tremendous hands and a will to compete and win.

https://scoutingpost.com/2017/02/15/...ght-reel-goal/

Alan Ryan is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:49 PM
  #93
ranold26
Oh them Bruins.....
 
ranold26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,520
vCash: 500
Hayes, Gabrielle, Lauzon and a 1st.... and get it over with. godsakes.

ranold26 is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:52 PM
  #94
Greek_physique
Caron - Legit SNIPER
 
Greek_physique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto, Ont
Country: Greece
Posts: 20,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranold26 View Post
Hayes, Gabrielle, Lauzon and a 1st.... and get it over with. godsakes.
I can't take you serious Mr.Griffin.

Greek_physique is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:53 PM
  #95
BMC
PerJohan Axelsson
 
BMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Northeastern CT
Country: United States
Posts: 28,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number8 View Post
For me it comes down to where our biggest need is. And I see it as:

1) Defense
2) Backup Keeper
3) Forward

Adding defense is hard. It's also an area where blue chip prospects can do great or struggle. Nowhere to hide -- particularly on a team like Boston that has a number of 4,5,6's (actual and higher projected guys that are still developing) and no dominating top pair.

Adding a great back-up keeper is hard. Adding one that can get more than two wins at this point should be easy. On that I give DS an F. If we miss playoffs by a hair? Look no further than this obvious hole.

Adding a guy like Lando? Hard. If you have a strong Defense AND a wealth of prospects on D, then do it yesterday. If not, and your number 1 need is defense? (IMO) do it at high risk.

Been a lot of debate on value of Lando. Maybe not fair -- I think we can all agree he'd be a great add if price is right. I just don't think we have the luxury of giving in an area that is weak but full of good prospects. D prospects are much harder to develop and bring up to speed than Forward prospects.

Just my take.
I'm with you. And I don't see Landeskog or Duchene being worth the price they would cost for what they can do.

Leave the young defensemen alone Sweeney.

BMC is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:56 PM
  #96
22Brad Park
Registered User
 
22Brad Park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 17,655
vCash: 500
Habs GM up to his old tricks.Said today not 1 elite centre available on the market and habs out on any big moves.He must think everyone is stupid .

22Brad Park is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:56 PM
  #97
bp13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 14,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranold26 View Post
Hayes, Gabrielle, Lauzon and a 1st.... and get it over with. godsakes.
If that's all it takes, I'm not as high on Landeskog as I was before.

And great avatar.

bp13 is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:58 PM
  #98
FormerBruinsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIsle View Post
Were you the one in love with Knight?
Yes he was.

FormerBruinsFan is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 03:58 PM
  #99
Alan Ryan
Registered User
 
Alan Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,280
vCash: 500
Some of the focus has shifted to Bruins prosects that Colorado could choose in a deal for Landeskog.

For perspective, here is Kirk Luedeke's latest (January 30) top 10 Bruins prospects who are still in college or junior hockey. Read about them here: https://scoutingpost.com/2017/01/31/...pect-rankings/

The rankings:

1. McAvoy
2. JFK
3. Bjork
4. Frederic
5. Senyshyn
6. Lauzon
7. Lindgren
8. Gabrielle
9. Donato
10. Zboril

Alan Ryan is offline  
Old
02-15-2017, 04:00 PM
  #100
Coach Parker
Stanley Cup Champion
 
Coach Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patty59 View Post
LAshoff and Karsums were part of one of the best trades Chiarelli ever made.
Exactly!

Mangement moved a 'high' prospect at the time that of course fizzled out for NHL talent.

Coach Parker 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 02:10 AM.

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.