All Bruins Trade Proposals/Rumours XI

[CombatOnContact]

No. I would extend him after next year tough. Give him 1y deals until he hangs them up. Still looks very good out there, and would be quite the model for the plethora of young D that will make the jump into the NHL in the next few years.

Agree with this 100%. I'll never understand why anyone would want to trade Chara.. not to mention why he would ever want to leave.

I will also never understand this whole idea that every year you're "not a contender" you should be looking to trading everyone over the age of 24 and stock up on picks and prospects.

Why on earth would the Bruins need anymore picks or prospects.

 

[Fonzerelli]

San Jose grabbed Hansen for a prospect and a conditional 4th round pick. A near 40 point RW. And we are passing on deals like that?

You "stand pat" guys are telling us that you would rather hit the post season playing Hayes on our 3rd line than part with a B+ level prospect and a conditional 4th to aquire a near 40 point RW. If that's what you're saying then I don't understand you guys. Why be fans at all if all you want is mediocrity?

 

[ashnathan]

San Jose grabbed Hansen for a prospect and a conditional 4th round pick. A near 40 point RW. And we are passing on deals like that?

You "stand pat" guys are telling us that you would rather hit the post season playing Hayes on our 3rd line than part with a B+ level prospect and a conditional 4th to aquire a near 40 point RW. If that's what you're saying then I don't understand you guys. Why be fans at all if all you want is mediocrity?

I doubt Hansen's 'yes' list had Boston on it.

 

[CombatOnContact]

San Jose grabbed Hansen for a prospect and a conditional 4th round pick. A near 40 point RW. And we are passing on deals like that?

You "stand pat" guys are telling us that you would rather hit the post season playing Hayes on our 3rd line than part with a B+ level prospect and a conditional 4th to aquire a near 40 point RW. If that's what you're saying then I don't understand you guys. Why be fans at all if all you want is mediocrity?

I hope Donny has set his sights higher than Hansen. I'll be disappointed with standing pat. Bruins have more than enough assets to make moves. Seriously.. if he doesn't trade a few of these sure shot prospects, we will end up with nothing anyway if they bust, or there isn't enough room in the lineup. Might as well make a move and he'll the team now.

 

[Dr Hook]

San Jose grabbed Hansen for a prospect and a conditional 4th round pick. A near 40 point RW. And we are passing on deals like that?

You "stand pat" guys are telling us that you would rather hit the post season playing Hayes on our 3rd line than part with a B level prospect and a conditional 4th to aquire a near 40 point RW. If that's what you're saying then I don't understand you guys. Why be fans at all if all you want is mediocrity?

I'm watching the Sharks game live right now and they are not calling this trade, just that McKenzie et al. are saying something is in process. Where are you seeing this is done? Aside from that, I'd do that deal for Hansen in a second. I like stand pat if it means not moving our core or A level prospects for a rental or a like for like deal. But yeah, we have to go for it.

EDIT: They just announced the deal on the broadcast.

 

[riverhawkey91]

San Jose grabbed Hansen for a prospect and a conditional 4th round pick. A near 40 point RW. And we are passing on deals like that?

You "stand pat" guys are telling us that you would rather hit the post season playing Hayes on our 3rd line than part with a B level prospect and a conditional 4th to aquire a near 40 point RW. If that's what you're saying then I don't understand you guys. Why be fans at all if all you want is mediocrity?

Lots of reasons to pass on a deal like that without even factoring in the cost. You seem locked in on the stats of a guy and completely disregard everything else about them. Both Sweeney and Neely were a part of this organization in 2011 and saw Hansen during that series. Maybe they were left with the same bad impression most of us were about Canucks players back then. Maybe they just didn't feel he was a good fit with this particular team for whatever reason, speed, skill, whatever.

As a few others have told you in the other thread, you're probably under-rating Goldobin too.

 

[Fonzerelli]

I doubt Hansen's 'yes' list had Boston on it.

Delete. I mis-read that.

 

[KlausJopling]

It should have been on the 'hell yah' list at this price, especially if standing pat is the alternative ...

Hansen had a no trade. As crazy as that is.

 

[ashnathan]

It should have been on the 'hell yah' list at this price, especially if standing pat is the alternative ...

It doesnt matter if Boston wanted him, if he didnt want to come here its null and void, and I believe 99% Boston would be on the 'no ****ing way in hell' list.

 

[Fonzerelli]

It doesnt matter if Boston wanted him, if he didnt want to come here its null and void, and I believe 99% Boston would be on the 'no ****ing way in hell' list.

Yeah I mis-read your post. I thought had it the other way around. If he didn't want to come here that's another story. But if we are passing up deals like that, that's not good.

 

[CDJ]

Goldobin is a pretty nice prospect. Probably rates higher than Heinen and debrusk

Probably talking senyshyn for him and no thanks to that

 

[Fonzerelli]

Lots of reasons to pass on a deal like that without even factoring in the cost. You seem locked in on the stats of a guy and completely disregard everything else about them. Both Sweeney and Neely were a part of this organization in 2011 and saw Hansen during that series. Maybe they were left with the same bad impression most of us were about Canucks players back then. Maybe they just didn't feel he was a good fit with this particular team for whatever reason, speed, skill, whatever.

As a few others have told you in the other thread, you're probably under-rating Goldobin too.

Please don't pretend to know what I'm locked in on. Make your own case is fine, but don't presume to know my mind please. I'm not under-rating anybody. Hansen is proven, can help now and next year. Goldobin is unproven after 2 years, with nothing to show but a Seth Griffin type resume.

 

[Gordoff]

Not for anything but with what I've heard (here) about Benning you would think that Sweeney would have been able to take advantage of him by now?! I mean really, either Benning isn't as dumb as many here say or Sweeney isn't as opportunistic as many here have said, or both.

 

[riverhawkey91]

Please don't pretend to now what I'm locked in on. Make your own case is fine, but don't presume to know my mind please. I'm not under-rating anybody. Hansen is proven, can help now and next year. Goldobin is unproven after 2 years, with nothing to show but a Seth Griffin type resume.

Didn't mean any offense but you referred to him literally only as a "40 pt RW." I also believe it was you who did the same thing in the last week or so with Ribeiro when he was on waivers/the block. There is way more to players than just the points they put up -- that's the case I made in my last post and am making in this one. It's not as simple as "this guy put up ~40 pts and 40 > whatever Hayes has, so he'd be better there."

Also I absolutely hate to make this argument but he's 21...him being unproven yet means nothing, and just under a PPG in the AHL is not entirely unproven anyways. FWIW (admittedly very little) a Seth Griffith type resume would be fantastic for most players that aren't Seth Griffith.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Didn't mean any offense but you referred to him literally only as a "40 pt RW." I also believe it was you who did the same thing in the last week or so with Ribiero when he was on waivers/the block. There is way more to players than just the points they put up -- that's the case I made in my last post and am making in this one. It's not as simple as "this guy put up ~40 pts and 40 > whatever Hayes has."

Also I absolutely hate to make this argument but he's 21...him being unproven yet means nothing, and just under a PPG in the AHL is not entirely unproven anyways. FWIW (admittedly very little) a Seth Griffith type resume would be fantastic for most players that aren't Seth Griffith.

I said he was a near 40 point RW, which he is. And it was partially in counterpoint to a poster who called him a 30 point RW, which he hasn't posted numbers that low in 4 years. And just because his points are referred to in a 100 word post, doesn't preclude an appreciation for any other qualities. Your comments are patronizing. I don't appreciate them. That's not how we speak to each other here

 

[riverhawkey91]

I said he was a near 40 point RW, which he is. And it was partially in counterpoint to a poster who called him a 30 point RW, which he hasn't posted numbers that low in 4 years. And just because his points are referred to in a 100 word post, doesn't preclude an appreciation for any other qualities. Your comments are patronizing. I don't appreciate them. That's not how we speak to each other here

My comment wasn't patronizing in the slightest. You seemed offended that I would interpret something you said a certain way so I was explaining what led me to that.

Near 40 or 30+ is semantics and wasn't my point at all. Twice in your post you didn't just refer to his points, you used them to represent him as a player. I absolutely do believe that precludes an appreciation for whatever else that player brings. Especially for a 3rd liner joining a line like Spooner/Vatrano, points are one of the least important things I'd be judging a potential addition on.

 

[Coach Parker]

San Jose grabbed Hansen for a prospect and a conditional 4th round pick. A near 40 point RW. And we are passing on deals like that?

You "stand pat" guys are telling us that you would rather hit the post season playing Hayes on our 3rd line than part with a B+ level prospect and a conditional 4th to aquire a near 40 point RW. If that's what you're saying then I don't understand you guys. Why be fans at all if all you want is mediocrity?

Solid post.

First trade that wasn't for a rental and was for a need on the Bruins (3rd line RW). Not been many but that price doesn't seem steep at all.

 

[Coach Parker]

I doubt Hansen's 'yes' list had Boston on it.

Fair response too. If that was indeed the case, nothing Sweeney could do about that.

 

[Coach Parker]

Lots of reasons to pass on a deal like that without even factoring in the cost. You seem locked in on the stats of a guy and completely disregard everything else about them. Both Sweeney and Neely were a part of this organization in 2011 and saw Hansen during that series. Maybe they were left with the same bad impression most of us were about Canucks players back then. Maybe they just didn't feel he was a good fit with this particular team for whatever reason, speed, skill, whatever.

As a few others have told you in the other thread, you're probably under-rating Goldobin too.

Again, another solid response as to why the Bruins may not have been in on Hansen.

 

[Coach Parker]

Goldobin is a pretty nice prospect. Probably rates higher than Heinen and debrusk

Probably talking senyshyn for him and no thanks to that

BLASPHEMY! None shall rule above the Bruins prospect pool! I condemn you to Providence!

 

[The National]

Are we happy with no changes being made to this current team? As they are playing now, I am yes. But as a pessimistic Boston sports fan I don 't see it lasting.

Would have liked to see a Hayes, Beleskey, Liles, Nash, even Morrow go. Not that they are very attractive bait.

Feeling this is going to be another motionless deadline for the Bruins.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Just looking through TSN's Trade Bait board
http://www.tsn.ca/tsn-hockey-s-trade-bait-list-1.203546

Looking at players with term, for playoffs now and moving forward. In order of rank on the TSn board

1.) Duchene - 6M X 2 yrs
2.) Landeskog - 5.5M X 4 yrs
3.) Flippula - 5M X 1 yr
4.) Shehan - 2M X 1 yr
5.) Kane - 5.25M X 1 yr
6.) Sobotka - 2.7M X 1 yr
7.) Fehr - 2M X 1yr
8.) Halak - 4.5M X 1 yr
9.) Perrault - 3M X 4 yrs
10) Craig Smith - 4.3M X 3 yrs
11) Gaborik - 4.9M X 4 yrs
12) Ryan Murphy - 1.2M X 1 yr
13) Eberle - 6M X 2 yrs

 

[Coach Parker]

Just looking through TSN's Trade Bait board
http://www.tsn.ca/tsn-hockey-s-trade-bait-list-1.203546

Looking at players with term, for playoffs now and moving forward. In order of rank on the TSn board

1.) Duchene - 6M X 2 yrs
2.) Landeskog - 5.5M X 4 yrs
3.) Flippula - 5M X 1 yr
4.) Shehan - 2M X 1 yr
5.) Kane - 5.25M X 1 yr
6.) Sobotka - 2.7M X 1 yr
7.) Fehr - 2M X 1yr
8.) Halak - 4.5M X 1 yr
9.) Perrault - 3M X 4 yrs
10) Craig Smith - 4.3M X 3 yrs
11) Gaborik - 4.9M X 4 yrs
12) Ryan Murphy - 1.2M X 1 yr
13) Eberle - 6M X 2 yrs

1,2,5,8,12 and maybe 13 if Beleskey seems enticing to Chiarelli.

Also, only 12 if we are buying dirt cheap and hoping he progresses next season.

 

[The National]

1,2,5,8,12 and maybe 13 if Beleskey seems enticing to Chiarelli.

Also, only 12 if we are buying dirt cheap and hoping he progresses next season.

I still like 2, whether it is by deadline or in off-season. Think he would be a great fit.

Krejci line or Spooner line. High price to pay for 3rd liner but maybe could get Spoons going.

 

[riverhawkey91]

1,2,5,8,12 and maybe 13 if Beleskey seems enticing to Chiarelli.

Also, only 12 if we are buying dirt cheap and hoping he progresses next season.

Would be interesting to see what our current scouts think of Murphy now. He was projected to go to the Bs by virtually everyone before Dougie slipped to them / Krug came along. Can't really see him fitting in now with Krug and Miller here though.

If Craig Smith could play RW I'd definitely take him though. Otherwise only 1 & 2 for me.