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

[Fonzerelli]

Proven commodity, and 24, yet has not improved throughout his career. In fact he's regressed the last 4 seasons. Big red flag. Huge.

and then we come back full circle.


Brandon Carlo as a 19 year old under Julien - 21GP, 2G, 2A, 4pts +9
Brandon Carlo as a 20 year old under Julien - 34GP, 2G, 6A, 8pts -10

+9 to -10?

Huge red flag. HUUUUUUUUUUGE

What was Landesog .81 to .72 to .71 last 3 seasons ... cue it up ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbxsZjagMVA

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

OK. Remember when Tom Brady wasn't playing the same minutes as Drew Beldsoe? But he ended up being a respectable replacement anyways.

Don't watch or care about football. I get your point, which goes back to, our defense gets worse, unless you are using Tom Brady (who even I know is one of the best quarterbacks in history) as Colin Miller and Bledsoe as Carlo.

Either way, I'm not even sure what we are arguing about anymore. I know, I don't think it's a good idea to weaken our defense, but others are fine with it as long as we get Landeskog.

It's the weekend, have fun. Cheers.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Don't watch or care about football. I get your point, which goes back to, our defense gets worse, unless you are using Tom Brady (who even I know is one of the best quarterbacks in history) as Colin Miller and Bledsoe as Carlo.

Either way, I'm not even sure what we are arguing about anymore. I know, I don't think it's a good idea to weaken our defense, but others are fine with it as long as we get Landeskog.

It's the weekend, have fun. Cheers.

My point is you don't know unless you try. You are assuming Miller can't play Carlo's minutes. I'm thinking he can handle the extra 3 - 4 minutes a game just fine

Cheers though. Have a good weekend!

 

[weaponomega]

and then we come back full circle.


Brandon Carlo as a 19 year old under Julien - 21GP, 2G, 2A, 4pts +9
Brandon Carlo as a 20 year old under Julien - 34GP, 2G, 6A, 8pts -10

+9 to -10?

Huge red flag. HUUUUUUUUUUGE

What was Landesog .81 to .72 to .71 last 3 seasons ... cue it up ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbxsZjagMVA

34 game regression for a 20 year old vs 270 game regression is comparible. Yeah ok.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

upgrade and replacement isn't "semantics". that's called words in my mouth.

Some people hated Eriksson as he didn't drive the offense. I'd argue Eriksson last year was better than any of Landeskog's seasons so unless Landeskog develops further (offensively) he scores once every 4 games or has a 2 goal game every 8 games. How long will it take for a 'fake tough' two way powerforward to keep the faith of the Boston diehards?

 

[BB88]

Why do I keep seeing Carlo for Landy proposals.
no no no no no no no no no.

There's no one playing defense then. Chara will be gone soon, is the plan to build a Dallas Stars defense? I guess it is.

Build from the defense, if they make a trade at one point then go for young #1C/#1C prospect. Not for another Lw.

 

[cobrak]

woah........ For a couple of minutes I kept refreshing the page. No reason..... just kept refreshing cause I felt like it.

Something just changed a moment ago though ...... can't put my finger on it!!!

Wally: "You know I don't get paid to put up with this crap, people..... you know that, right????"

That was probably your "oh crap I feel like the boss is right around the corner as I do something really dumb" sense

 

[Fonzerelli]

34 game regression for a 20 year old vs 270 game regression is comparible. Yeah ok.

It's completely disengenous to be concerned over a regression of .81 to .72 to .71 at all.

Bergeron had 32 goals and 73 points in 81 games back in 2005-06. He's never even came close to that point total again until 2015-16, or as you say, the next 663 games of regression. So he's trash? You would've red-flagged him in 2009-10 and shipped him our for prospects?

I don't know if you are being serious or simply trolling

 

[CDJ]

It's completely disengenous to be concerned over a regression of .81 to .72 to .71 at all.

Bergeron had 32 goals and 73 points in 81 games back in 2005-06. He's never even came close to that point total again until 2015-16, or as you say, the next 663 games of regression. So he's trash? You would've red-flagged him in 2009-10 and shipped him our for prospects?

I don't know if you are being serious or simply trolling

Well put.

 

[Fonzerelli]

How long will it take for a 'fake tough' two way powerforward to keep the faith of the Boston diehards?

"Fake tough"?

I tell my players this "if you want to show me how tough you are, then go in the corner and come out with the puck"

Landeskog is plenty tough.

 

[cobrak]

Just a question on semantics that I am seeing in the trade discussions:
Can we legitimately call Carlo a "prospect" at this point in the season? He has spent the entire season with Chara who is our "top" D pair.

I can understand him being called a prospect the first 15-20 games in the season to see if he sticks, but he has been playing top 4 minutes all season.

If he is still a prospect, at what point does a player switch from prospect to NHL Regular? 50 games? 80?

 

[riverhawkey91]

You answered your own question.

Carlo's "bottom value" is the last 34 games he played under Claude, which was a regression from the first 21. I didn't give him "bottom value". I project him to be who he is and level out into the solid, dependable 2nd pair guy that his ceiling suggests. His resume consists of a pretty good 21 game start and then a struggling 34 games and now a few more good ones.

Where Ladeskog is a PROVEN commodity over years and STILL is only 24 years old with good term. We already KNOW he will consistantly produce 20-25G and 30-35A with milestones of 60 points ALREADY surpassed at a very young age.

Reading this forum you'd think Landeskog held Beleskey type value, but I must have been in a drug induced fog the year Beleskey won the Calder.

I don't think Landeskog holds that type of value at all; I think he holds tons of value. In fact, over the last few days, I think I can recall only you, myself and Coach Parker arguing both for and against trading Carlo for Landeskog.

Just trying to understand why you view things like the bolded as you do. You say you didn't assign him "bottom value", but the worst he's been this year already has him playing solid dependable second pairing minutes, which you say is what his ceiling suggests. How can that possibly be? You really believe he's peaked as a 20 year old rookie in his first pro year, especially when he's shown in the same season that he can play better than that? That's just hard to believe for me. I find it tough to think that he can never get back to at least playing how he did to start the year, which really was effective (albeit low-end) first pairing minutes.

I think the problem is this. Most Bruins fans expect and hope Carlo will get better rather than having already maxed out. I think its fair to also assume that Landeskog can at the very least get back to being 20-25G/30-35A and that this year is the anomaly. If Carlo does get better and actually expands on how he was playing to start the year, does that make the Landeskog trade worth it if he doesn't get better past that 60 point threshold?

 

[Number8]

That was probably your "oh crap I feel like the boss is right around the corner as I do something really dumb" sense

mebbe.......

 

[CJ17]

If Harry Sinden still has a say, I guarantee they don't trade Carlo for Landeskog.

Secord for Oconnell
Espo for Park
Juneau for Iafrate
Kluzak over Bellows.

Defense first.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Just trying to understand why you view things like the bolded as you do. You say you didn't assign him "bottom value", but the worst he's been this year already has him playing solid dependable second pairing minutes, which you say is what his ceiling suggests. How can that possibly be? You really believe he's peaked as a 20 year old rookie in his first pro year, especially when he's shown in the same season that he can play better than that? That's just hard to believe for me.

No. He obviously hasn't peaked. He fell off a lot after a hot start. Carlo is a defensive defenseman. When he is in his prime, if he continues to develop in an upwards fashion, he will be more consistant. More reliable. He will hold his form for greater stretches, and hopefully some day, full seasons. That's the projection that I have for him, but if he and McAvoy both hit their ceilings, Carlo will not usurp McAvoy as our #1 RHD. Does that clear it up for you?

I mean, by your logic, why don't we just trade Cehlarik straight accross for Landeskog in a hockey trade. Afterall, Cehlarik is a top 6 NHL forward, evident because every NHL game he's ever played he's been in the top 6. THAT DOESN"T MAKE HIM A TOP 6 FORWARD. And it doesn't make Carlo a #1 either.

PS: I'm not irked. Just making a point

 

[4ORRBRUIN]

Im going out to dinner with my wife and when I come back I want to see that a Bruin's trade has happened.

No smarty comments either

 

[Fonzerelli]

Im going out to dinner with my wife and when I come back I want to see that a Bruin's trade has happened.

No smarty comments either

I have more pictures.


Just kidding Wally

 

[Gee Wally]

I have more pictures.


Just kidding Wally

 

[DKH]

Watching UNH-BU on NESN great play by JFK at 6 minute mark. Announcer 'wow he made something out of nothing'

Umm yah

 

[riverhawkey91]

No. He obviously hasn't peaked. He fell off a lot after a hot start. Carlo is a defensive defenseman. When he is in his prime, if he continues to develop in an upwards fashion, he will be more consistant. More reliable. He will hold his form for greater stretches, and hopefully some day, full seasons. That's the projection that I have for him, but if he and McAvoy both hit their ceilings, Carlo will not usurp McAvoy as our #1 RHD. Does that clear it up for you?

I mean, by your logic, why don't we just trade Cehlarik straight accross for Landeskog in a hockey trade. Afterall, Cehlarik is a top 6 NHL forward, evident because every NHL game he's ever played he's been in the top 6. THAT DOESN"T MAKE HIM A TOP 6 FORWARD. And it doesn't make Carlo a #1 either.

PS: I'm not irked. Just making a point

I don't think your second point really follows with the logic I was using, but I understand your point. It is a small sample size and a lot of different things could happen. I would just argue that forwards and defenseman are different when it comes to that sort of thing, so they aren't really comparable situations aside from the obvious ridiculousness of it.

To the bold, yes, it clears it up to an extent, however I think you contradicted yourself there, which was kind of my point. He is already arguably playing at his worst right now. His worst right now is currently a solid 2nd pairing defenseman. If he continues to become more reliable and hold his form for longer stretches/full seasons, that would mean he gets back to playing how he did to start the season...which was at the level of a low-end #1 RHD, maybe overall a #2D. To me, that would make that his ceiling and potentially where he lands when he levels out, rather than simply a solid dependable second pairing D.

I agree that he will not beat out McAvoy for that spot. But IMO that doesn't have anything to do with how good Carlo can be, only that we expect McAvoy will be better. Obvious hyperbole here, but that's potentially like when people call Malkin a second-line center because he plays behind Crosby. I think categorizing him as simply a defensive defenseman is unfair anyways. I see him much more along the lines of a Pietrangelo/Hedman type than just like a Hal Gill defensive guy.

 

[Blowfish]

Almost 730. Anyone sitting from the AVS?

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

I don't think Landeskog holds that type of value at all; I think he holds tons of value. In fact, over the last few days, I think I can recall only you, myself and Coach Parker arguing both for and against trading Carlo for Landeskog.

Just trying to understand why you view things like the bolded as you do. You say you didn't assign him "bottom value", but the worst he's been this year already has him playing solid dependable second pairing minutes, which you say is what his ceiling suggests. How can that possibly be? You really believe he's peaked as a 20 year old rookie in his first pro year, especially when he's shown in the same season that he can play better than that? That's just hard to believe for me. I find it tough to think that he can never get back to at least playing how he did to start the year, which really was effective (albeit low-end) first pairing minutes.

I think the problem is this. Most Bruins fans expect and hope Carlo will get better rather than having already maxed out. I think its fair to also assume that Landeskog can at the very least get back to being 20-25G/30-35A and that this year is the anomaly. If Carlo does get better and actually expands on how he was playing to start the year, does that make the Landeskog trade worth it if he doesn't get better past that 60 point threshold?

Peaked isn't the right word... Although it's possible. I'd say spikes. Many many many kid down can play on adreline emotion at the beginning of their career. Then as they make mistakes and get used to the goodlife things Wil struggle

I can of course give you dozens of examples. Kids like Luke Schenn, Darnell nurse, Zack bogosian, Seth Jones... So many others enter the league... Become immediate saviors... Untouchable to their fan base. Many of these guys eventually become studs but it can be 4 5 6 seasons later

To expect Carlo to not regress from his 20 game hotstreak is unrealistic. He was never supposed to step immediately into the NHL. This isn't a kid anyone predicted greatness from. Of course he might develop like chara Keith weber and other late picks did

I see so many fans arguing against Carlo because they are worried who will pay next year. Counting on Carlo isn't a smart bet. Carlo is probably a couple years away from being consistent enough for us to expect that high level of play he's capable of.

Young down struggles is why so many get traded... Scott Stevens, Chris pronger, Ed jovanovski... The list has impressive names

I enjoyed what Carlo did for 20 games as much as anyone... But what he did for past 31 games is what can be expected for next couple years. Very very very few down don't have growing pains

 

[BruinsPortugal]

What if Carlo becomes Chara???
I mean..we won't know if we don't try.

 

[JAD]

Just a question on semantics that I am seeing in the trade discussions:
Can we legitimately call Carlo a "prospect" at this point in the season? He has spent the entire season with Chara who is our "top" D pair.

I can understand him being called a prospect the first 15-20 games in the season to see if he sticks, but he has been playing top 4 minutes all season.

If he is still a prospect, at what point does a player switch from prospect to NHL Regular? 50 games? 80?

I would call such a player a rookie - 1st year pro.

 

[bruinmann77]

Mac and Carlo could be our future number one pairing