Speculation: Boston - Vancouver
- Thread starter Szechwan
- Start date
Does Jimmy Murphy rise to the level of speculation?
Mal Reynolds
never goes smooth, how come it never goes smooth?
- Sep 28, 2008
- 1,687
- 611
I'd say that's reasonably interesting from a Canuck POV. I'm fairly high on Lysell, I guess not everyone would be. Plus wing isn't as much of a need for them. So I could understand why they might say no
I can also see why Boston might say no. Have to think they prefer to move some of their better futures for help at center
I believe Garland is from that area as well... so that part could be kinda cool
I can also see why Boston might say no. Have to think they prefer to move some of their better futures for help at center
I believe Garland is from that area as well... so that part could be kinda cool
quietbruinfan
Salt and light
Sweeney should have been fired long ago, but he should be fired immediately if he trades a first line prospect for a low-end second liner who moves a lot. (I like Garland btw, but that is the long and the short of it.)
Szechwan
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2006
- 6,152
- 6,334
I honestly have no clue who this guy is, but the basis of the deal seems pretty intriguing to me.
Canadian Canuck
Hughes4Calder
Garland is not a low end second liner. You’re extremely not informed at all. Garland has been our best 5v5 player all season statistically. He’s a 1st/2nd line complimentary winger.
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,731
- 17,458
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
When did Garland become a top 6 center/top 4 LD?
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,731
- 17,458
burstnbloom
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2006
- 4,552
- 3,980
I don't think I'd give up Lysell AND a 1st for Garland, but he's intriguing. Imagine Garland and Marchand on the same line. The world would implode
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
biggest of passes.
no 40 pt seasons and 1 20 goal season doesn't make you worth a blue chip prospect plus a great looking prospect in Lysell
no 40 pt seasons and 1 20 goal season doesn't make you worth a blue chip prospect plus a great looking prospect in Lysell
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
Dr Danglefest
Lindros|Giroux|Krug
Hardest of Passes if that’s the price for Garland
Lysell should not be for sale, the Bruins rarely draft an offensively gifted forward, choosing to consistently go with the “safe” bottom 6 prospect, they shouldn’t trade the one they just drafted 6 months ago
Lysell should not be for sale, the Bruins rarely draft an offensively gifted forward, choosing to consistently go with the “safe” bottom 6 prospect, they shouldn’t trade the one they just drafted 6 months ago
I'd take Lysell and a 1st for Garland. That's a high cost for the Bruins though, as the 1st could be back in the 18-22 range.
I think a 1st + recent first is a reasonable cost that some team will likely pay. Garland is awesome, and still has a bunch of untapped potential. I'd hate to trade him.
I think a 1st + recent first is a reasonable cost that some team will likely pay. Garland is awesome, and still has a bunch of untapped potential. I'd hate to trade him.
Does Bruins need another small forward abused night after night...
Skelen
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2015
- 1,300
- 1,575
Top 6 RW should be below second line center and top 4 LHD. I really like Garland but I would rather keep Lysell whom I think has the potential to be better if the cards are right. If he's traded it should be for a bigger piece in a package. I'm all for trying for Garland if other pieces are used to acquire him.
TooMuchMan
Registered User
This is idiocy. The Bruins need a top six center or a top-4 d… the need for a middle six RW isn’t a priority. I like Garland but Lysell is far and away the best Bruins forward prospect in years. This is just silly.
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
burstnbloom
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2006
- 4,552
- 3,980
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
I think Garland is actually a better player than Horvat in a vacuum but with Bo being a center, our captain and like the face of the team after the Sedins, he probably won't be cheap.
Good for 55 points while being average at best defensively.
Whuddya got
burstnbloom
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2006
- 4,552
- 3,980
I hear all that but I'm not paying for intangibles if I'm the Bruins. I guess I'd look at the Hayes trade as a comp and add for the extra year of control. 26 years old, similar numbers. He got Lemiuex and a 1st. I'd say Jake, one of Lysell/2022 first and another middling prospect or a non 1st pick. Harrison or Beecher maybe. I'm not very good at this. Horvat is a nice fit though. Jake, Jaime Harrison, 2022 1st for Horvat.
quietbruinfan
Salt and light
I like Horvat's fit on the Bruins. He strikes as more of a shooter than a playmaker and fairly gritty, which means he can also play wing. His defense is a concern, but again I like the fit. Lysell is off limits though. That is just Murphy throwing things against the wall as usual. Carlo and Studnicka for Horvat?
Some of the Bruins' better assets (particularly lysell) for a tertiary need, so I'd have to say no. We can't afford to use what little high-value assets we do have on anything but our core needs (top4 LD/2C).
Agreed . Lysell is a terrific prospect and the Bruins would do well to keep him , I wonder if the Canucks would settle for a first and a third maybe a lower prospect keeping in mind that Garland makes the Bruins a much more dangerous opponent for any team they meet in the playoffs.
