Proposal: All Bruins trade rumors/proposals: 16/17 Part VI

Status
Not open for further replies.

World of Wardlow

Unscripted Violence
Jul 13, 2006
8,445
292
Montreal
Carlo has proven he can play in the NHL ... it drives me nuts to think that the bruins can be considering dealing for a FWD and weaken the D even more (as if it's not weak enough).
 

ranold26

Tuukka likes the post...
May 28, 2003
21,848
8,067
Just throwing it out there, but IF a guy like Ej was coming back how would be feel about Carlo going out?


Serious money needs to be shipped out. Taking on 11.57m in hits without major money going out will cause issues this deadline and onward.
 

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
I think a lot of us are showing a Bruins bias here. Not to say you guys are wrong, but I think we need to pump the brakes a bit on Carlo.

McAvoy was the higher rated prospect up until day 1 of this season, and I don't hear anyone who's changed their opinion on him. So while surely Carlo has proven himself already, he still looks every bit the 3/4 he was projected to be. Which is great, but should we really get that carried away about him because he stepped in without much of a hiccup?

On the other side, Landeskog was drafted #2 overall and is a 25 goal scorer with grit and solid two-way play. He's a top 6 forward, easily. To say there's no way we can trade a #3/#4 for a 24 year old top 6 winger on a good contract when we have a supposedly better prospect in McAvoy who might be a month away, plus 3 or more top 4 d prospects like 1-2 seasons away, seems a little shortsighted to me.

Don't get me wrong I was banging the drum about our awful D and I like Carlo a lot. Moreover I'm not even sold on Landeskog. But if the Bruins felt Landeskog was going to give them two excellent lines for several years and McAvoy was going to be ready in a matter of weeks, it could easily be the right move. This isn't about this year...it's about the next 3-5 years.
 

robinsonp16

Registered User
Jan 12, 2017
139
1
Are we sure this is even real? Sounds like Sakic making a play only so he can driving up prices for other teams.
 

gvkmedia

Let’s fight through this….
Mar 2, 2002
3,849
506
Kingsville
www.hollandbloorview.ca
Bye bye Carlo.

If EJ were part of the deal I'd like to make it a bigger deal. Acquiring, for instance, Landy and EJ makes us contenders IMO.

Agree 100%
Make the deal bigger and get them both.
Carlo, 1st, 2 more prospects not named McAvoy, Bjork, JFK
1 of McQuaid/Kevan
1 of Belesky/Hayes (unless of course Colorado was willing to take both of these guys and leave us our xtra Dmen)

Boston get EJ and Landy

Time to contend again.
 

patty59

***************
Apr 6, 2008
18,632
1,018
Lethbridge, Alberta
I think a lot of us are showing a Bruins bias here. Not to say you guys are wrong, but I think we need to pump the brakes a bit on Carlo.

McAvoy was the higher rated prospect up until day 1 of this season, and I don't hear anyone who's changed their opinion on him. So while surely Carlo has proven himself already, he still looks every bit the 3/4 he was projected to be. Which is great, but should we really get that carried away about him because he stepped in without much of a hiccup?

On the other side, Landeskog was drafted #2 overall and is a 25 goal scorer with grit and solid two-way play. He's a top 6 forward, easily. To say there's no way we can trade a #3/#4 for a 24 year old top 6 winger on a good contract when we have a supposedly better prospect in McAvoy who might be a month away, plus 3 or more top 4 d prospects like 1-2 seasons away, seems a little shortsighted to me.

Don't get me wrong I was banging the drum about our awful D and I like Carlo a lot. Moreover I'm not even sold on Landeskog. But if the Bruins felt Landeskog was going to give them two excellent lines for several years and McAvoy was going to be ready in a matter of weeks, it could easily be the right move. This isn't about this year...it's about the next 3-5 years.


The kid is playing 21 minutes a game in his 1st year in the pros. I'm not exactl sure how you would consider that projecting as a long term 3/4 guy?
 

ON3M4N

Ignores/60 = Elite
Dec 13, 2015
13,771
19,262
Connecticut
Serious money needs to be shipped out. Taking on 11.57m in hits without major money going out will cause issues this deadline and onward.

Yes and no for this year. If you took both in it would be just under $6 million for a cap hit. We have $3.5 million in cap space and would have to imagine we'd dump a contract like Hayes whose another $2.3 million. Either that or Maybe Colorado is willing to retain a little bit to make it work for Boston.
 

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
The kid is playing 21 minutes a game in his 1st year in the pros. I'm not exactl sure how you would consider that projecting as a long term 3/4 guy?

Well mostly because I don't see the game of a future #1. I'd attribute the minutes due to the fact the rest of our D isn't very good.

This is tough because I'm being forced to criticize the kid and that's not my intent. I think he looks excellent and I'd hate to move him. I'm just noting that scouting reports had him pegged as more of a defense-first, potential minutes eater. Not a top-pairing guy. Typically that's not the kind of guy you'd call untouchable. Whereas McAvoy has been touted as something more, and his progress also hasn't slowed. I'm trusting if the B's make this kind of trade it's because they are relying more on what they've always projected than what they saw from Carlo in the first few months.
 

Dr Quincy

Registered User
Jun 19, 2005
29,370
11,685
Yes and no for this year. If you took both in it would be just under $6 million for a cap hit. We have $3.5 million in cap space and would have to imagine we'd dump a contract like Hayes whose another $2.3 million. Either that or Maybe Colorado is willing to retain a little bit to make it work for Boston.

1) EJ is hurt
2) If we are getting EJ and Landeskog, you'd be looking at a huge haul of assets you don't want to give up. Not Spooner. Not 2nds, Not Hayes. I mean 4 or 5 prime assets.

It's just not happening.
 

Tim Vezina Thomas

Registered User
Jun 4, 2009
11,342
629
I wonder if Sakic was actually scouting someone like Spooner, or another minor piece like Cehlarik to add to Zboril + 1st.

One can dream :laugh:
 

stick9

Registered User
Aug 12, 2004
10,084
1
1) EJ is hurt
2) If we are getting EJ and Landeskog, you'd be looking at a huge haul of assets you don't want to give up. Not Spooner. Not 2nds, Not Hayes. I mean 4 or 5 prime assets.

It's just not happening.

Lando & Zadorov seems like a more reasonable ask and even that is going to cost them.
 

stick9

Registered User
Aug 12, 2004
10,084
1
If they're considering moving Carlo, why didn't they do it when it was Trouba coming the other way...
 

PlayMakers

Registered User
Aug 9, 2004
25,853
27,698
Medfield, MA
Colin Miller is another legit option here.

Like Patty said, if it was going to be Carlo wouldn't it be done already? The Avs can get their Carlo analog in the Duchene deal. That seems like a more reasonable price for that player. I'd pay it, for that player, but not Lando.

It also makes a lot of sense from the Bruins perspective. Carlo and McAvoy are the future on the right side here. We have McQuaid and Kevan. If one of them stays then they can be the 3rd pair anchor and mentor to whatever left side prospects are left after the deal. Gryz-McQuid or Lauzon or Zboril...

Colin Miller, Zboril, 1st for Landeskog.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad