Bruins Off Season III

[DKH]

FSorry folks who undervalue Pasta and over value Trouba

From Joe Haggerty today

http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins/haggerty-trouba-deal-one-bruins-need-get-done

worst-case scenario is Kevin Cheveldayoff taking a page from the Kevin Shattenkirk trade talks, and both starting and ending any conversations with David Pastrnak as the main trade chip. The Bruins have made it clear they’re done “sprinkling their talent around the rest of the league” as one B’s front office exec made clear to CSN.

 

[BB88]

Sorry folks who undervalue Pasta and over value Trouba

From Joe Haggerty today

worst-case scenario is Kevin Cheveldayoff taking a page from the Kevin Shattenkirk trade talks, and both starting and ending any conversations with David Pastrnak as the main trade chip. The Bruins have made it clear they’re done “sprinkling their talent around the rest of the league†as one B’s front office exec made clear to CSN.

I like Pasta and hope he's a longterm Bruin, certainly don't expect to get traded for Trouba, that doesn't address a need.

But you have to admit DKH that top pairing RD's have more value than wingers.

 

[DKH]

I like Pasta and hope he's a longterm Bruin, certainly don't expect to get traded for Trouba, that doesn't address a need.

But you have to admit DKH that top pairing RD's have more value than wingers.

Yes

Trouba is good but he's not elite yet and may not be.

He's Glen Wesley at 23.

Wesley did get 3 firsts though

 

[bp13]

Yes

Trouba is good but he's not elite yet and may not be.

He's Glen Wesley at 23.

Wesley did get 3 firsts though

Right and the same exact thing can be said of Pasta.

 

[Seidenbergy]

Yes

Trouba is good but he's not elite yet and may not be.

Same goes for Pasta.

 

[Ice Nine]

I know he's a Finn and I'm a Finn but I believe RR is a player you can build around a winner.
Top10 in icetime last year, played some of the toughest minutes in the league with Gorges and scored 41 points, loves to throw hits and go against top players.

Ristolainens situation is interesting, he's said multiple times he wants to stay in Buffalo but that the talks are frozen.
Only way to get him to Boston is offer sheet.

The offer sheet would have to be huge, something Buffalo couldn't justify matching.

I'd say 7.5m, which would make him instantly one of the top paid D in the league, more than Erik Karlsson, Chara, Doughty. Buffalo, however, may match that, so you might have to go higher. Still think he's worth it.

 

[DKH]

Same goes for Pasta.

Just giving my opinion my belief is it would be bad

Others think opposite

My view I understand is the one they are in agreement with

 

[DKH]

Right and the same exact thing can be said of Pasta.

Maybe they will trade him then

 

[BB88]

Yes

Trouba is good but he's not elite yet and may not be.

He's Glen Wesley at 23.

Wesley did get 3 firsts though

I said top pairing, not elite.
Jones non elite player brought back Johansen, non elite Larsson brought back Hall.

You have Trouba, McAvoy, Carlo developing on the right side and in few years sell one of them for high price to address a need in a nice World.

The offer sheet would have to be huge, something Buffalo couldn't justify matching.

I'd say 7.5m, which would make him instantly one of the top paid D in the league, more than Erik Karlsson, Chara, Doughty. Buffalo, however, may match that, so you might have to go higher. Still think he's worth it.

If they matched it it would make re-signing Eichel and Reinhart more difficult.

I don't see RR in Boston, just don't believe an offer sheet like that would happen or Buffalo would trade him to a different team in same division.
You don't lose players like RR, you build around them.

 

[DKH]

I said top pairing, not elite.
Jones non elite player brought back Johansen, non elite Larsson brought back Hall.

You have Trouba, McAvoy, Carlo developing on the right side and in few years sell one of them for high price to address a need in a nice World.



If they matched it it would make re-signing Eichel and Reinhart more difficult.

I don't see RR in Boston, just don't believe an offer sheet like that would happen or Buffalo would trade him to a different team in same division.
You don't lose players like RR, you build around them.

Haggs speculated Spooner Carlo first

 

[bp13]

Maybe they will trade him then

That doesn't mean maybe they will, but if your argument is that Trouba isn't a sure thing (and I'd agree), then certainly neither is Pasta.

I would be so much happier today and so much more on board with this rosey future you see if they hadn't signed Backes. I remain baffled as to how signing a worn 32-year old to a 5 year deal jives with a strategy to compete when your D pipeline is contributing. Everybody knows D men take time. Those guys are conservatively 3 years from being real contributors. Why sign a guy who may kill your cap when you are finally good again? Is it as obvious as it looks, that it's just a PR move? Or was the plan to sign Backes then deal some combo of futures/picks/whatever to add a real Dman and actually try to compete?

 

[BB88]

Haggs speculated Spooner Carlo first

Wasn't it Spooner+ Morrow+ 1st?

It's Haggs, what does Winnipeg do with Spooner?
He's a max 3rd line player on that team, which means his value isn't that high for Winnipeg.

Their ask/want is clearly a left shooting defenseman, Morrows is nowhere near replacing Trouba on the LD side.

 

[patty59]

I think people will be surprised with what Trouba fetches in trade. I don't think he's going to get top pairing LHD.

This is a tough spot for Winnipeg, he's unsigned and wants out. I think the longer it goes the worse it is for them.

 

[Greek_physique]

I think people will be surprised with what Trouba fetches in trade. I don't think he's going to get top pairing LHD.

This is a tough spot for Winnipeg, he's unsigned and wants out. I think the longer it goes the worse it is for them.

If they get off to another slow start..it will become a huge problem IMO.

I can't see Cheveldayoff given another free pass if the team misses the playoffs again. They can play hardball now; but once they start losing he'll be moved if he isn't signed.

 

[northeastern]

Wasn't it Spooner+ Morrow+ 1st?

It's Haggs, what does Winnipeg do with Spooner?
He's a max 3rd line player on that team, which means his value isn't that high for Winnipeg.

Their ask/want is clearly a left shooting defenseman, Morrows is nowhere near replacing Trouba on the LD side.

Yeah but they need to understand they aren't getting a LD replacement back for trouba. Why would someone make that deal. They've put themselves in a spot that they're going to have to take the best value and go from there in my opinion.

 

[DKH]

That doesn't mean maybe they will, but if your argument is that Trouba isn't a sure thing (and I'd agree), then certainly neither is Pasta.

I would be so much happier today and so much more on board with this rosey future you see if they hadn't signed Backes. I remain baffled as to how signing a worn 32-year old to a 5 year deal jives with a strategy to compete when your D pipeline is contributing. Everybody knows D men take time. Those guys are conservatively 3 years from being real contributors. Why sign a guy who may kill your cap when you are finally good again? Is it as obvious as it looks, that it's just a PR move? Or was the plan to sign Backes then deal some combo of futures/picks/whatever to add a real Dman and actually try to compete?

I love the Backes signing and it makes sense to me and quite a bit of others. It surely doesn't mean the Pro Backes crowd is correct or those that are against it are. You and a few others may look brilliant over this but it's almost as rare finding a mint 1952 Mickey Mantle rookie card than people who don't like this signing other than the term specifically year 5.

Backes is the perfect signing for where this team is only the term is an issue but you don't get him otherwise

My rosy view and your pessimistic view is why I can't fathom your take and you mine. But I still like you

 

[Seidenbergy]

Backes is the perfect signing for where this team is only the term is an issue

Not quite sure how it's the perfect signing when, at the beginning of this offseason, center was the team's clear strength and defense the clear weakness.

 

[BNHL]

I love the Backes signing and it makes sense to me and quite a bit of others. It surely doesn't mean the Pro Backes crowd is correct or those that are against it are. You and a few others may look brilliant over this but it's almost as rare finding a mint 1952 Mickey Mantle rookie card than people who don't like this signing other than the term specifically year 5.

Backes is the perfect signing for where this team is only the term is an issue but you don't get him otherwise

My rosy view and your pessimistic view is why I can't fathom your take and you mine. But I still like you

I have no idea what the loss of Eriksson and the gain of Backes translates to in net wins. Signing either one for 4 years was treacherous,never mind 5.

 

[DKH]

Not quite sure how it's the perfect signing when, at the beginning of this offseason, center was the team's clear strength and defense the clear weakness.

I'm looking at this broad scope - including his defensive game which makes overall team defense better

Team I've been with or coached that had weaker defenses but strong forward groups specifically centers we would bring back for support. Most of our better players/skaters would play center and we'd have them based on situations provide as Claude would say 'back pressure'. We actually would use his system.

I'm banging my head in this thread anyways - not worth it. You like signing or not that's cool. Enjoy

 

[DKH]

I have no idea what the loss of Eriksson and the gain of Backes translates to in net wins. Signing either one for 4 years was treacherous,never mind 5.

Yah I'm out. All bad signings agree

Time as Wally or Fenway would say take a break

 

[sarge88]

That doesn't mean maybe they will, but if your argument is that Trouba isn't a sure thing (and I'd agree), then certainly neither is Pasta.

I would be so much happier today and so much more on board with this rosey future you see if they hadn't signed Backes. I remain baffled as to how signing a worn 32-year old to a 5 year deal jives with a strategy to compete when your D pipeline is contributing. Everybody knows D men take time. Those guys are conservatively 3 years from being real contributors. Why sign a guy who may kill your cap when you are finally good again? Is it as obvious as it looks, that it's just a PR move? Or was the plan to sign Backes then deal some combo of futures/picks/whatever to add a real Dman and actually try to compete?

Because being relevant is important, even while rebuilding.

Not saying Backes is a guarantee toward a playoff spot for the next year or three, but if the goal is to "contend" in year 5...once the defense prospects mature, one would think that at least some of those prospects will be here during parts of years 1-5.

That being said...participating in meaningful regular season and hopefully playoff games would be an important part of their development.

 

[BruinDust]

Not quite sure how it's the perfect signing when, at the beginning of this offseason, center was the team's clear strength and defense the clear weakness.

And who were they suppose to sign to help the D. Goligoski and Yandle were off the board before July 1 and they took a run at Demers and didn't get it done. It happens.

Not sure what signing Backes has to do with fixing the D.

Maybe, just maybe, the front office realize defending is a 5-man effort and bringing in a former Selke nominee just might help them in their efforts to keep the puck out of there net more often.

 

[Taz#24]

Trouba

Based on early reports (offer sheet, attempted trade etc), he is the guys the Bruins want and I don't blame them. He would be a great young addition as a potential #1 D in the not too distant future, heir apparent to CHARA. MCAVOY, CARLO, ZBORIL all appear to have high potential top four ability but not sure any translate to a #1 type, MCAVOY with an outside shot. KRUG has high end O but he's a defensive liability and always will be, despite his work ethic and outstanding fortitude he's just too small to handle bigger forwards effectively. Bruins need to take serious run at TROUBA.

I don't see SPOONER as a fit in Winnipeg so he's probably not going to excite them as part of a package. I think DS should offer up Jake DEBRUSK, one of Colin MILLER or Jakob ZBORIL (Jets choice) and our 1st in 17. If the Jets want a sweetener you add Malcom SUBBAN if they add something too (a second rounder or Nik PETAN).

TROUBA would really help finally stabilize our D, which IMHO has been our achilles heal both times we failed to lock up a playoff spot. Acquiring TROUBA may also allow for some cap relief by in turn moving Adam MCQUAID if the Jets choose ZBORIL over C. MILLER, if they choose MILLER, you keep MCQUAID.

RASK
KHUDOBIN

CHARA-C. MILLER (if Jets choose ZBORIL)
KRUG-TROUBA
LILES/MORROW-K. MILLER

CHARA-K. MILLER (if Jets choose C. MILLER)
KRUG-TROUBA
LILES/MORROW-MCQUAID

MARCHAND-BERGERON-PASTRNAK
VATRANO-KRECJI-BACKES
BELESKEY-SPOONER-MUELLER or HAYES (deal HAYES if someone bites should MUELLER impress)
MOORE-ACCAIRI-NASH/RANDAL

 

[ThomasJ13]

Because being relevant is important, even while rebuilding.

Not saying Backes is a guarantee toward a playoff spot for the next year or three, but if the goal is to "contend" in year 5...once the defense prospects mature, one would think that at least some of those prospects will be here during parts of years 1-5.

That being said...participating in meaningful regular season and hopefully playoff games would be an important part of their development.

Yup, people forget that it's only a minority of overall fans who have this 'cup or bust' attitude that is prevalent on HF and in other hard-core hockey fan circles. Playoff hockey might be meaningless (and even scorned) by the majority around here, but in the real-world where NHL GM's and owners operate, it has significant value (both literally and figuratively).

That's why Backes was signed, IMO.

 

[bp13]

I love the Backes signing and it makes sense to me and quite a bit of others. It surely doesn't mean the Pro Backes crowd is correct or those that are against it are. You and a few others may look brilliant over this but it's almost as rare finding a mint 1952 Mickey Mantle rookie card than people who don't like this signing other than the term specifically year 5.

Backes is the perfect signing for where this team is only the term is an issue but you don't get him otherwise

My rosy view and your pessimistic view is why I can't fathom your take and you mine. But I still like you

I would fully grasp your perspective on the Backes deal and a Pasta-Trouba trade if I could understand how you think this defense is even average in terms of NHL quality. The fact the defense is so bad IMO, means I can't understand why they'd overpay for a 'win now' guy like Backes nor can I understand why they wouldn't deal a young forward with potential for a young dman with potential. It all comes back to the defense.