Proposal: Chicago - Boston

[JKG33]

I've been thinking about potential landing spots for Toews if he's unhappy in Chicago, and the Bruins came to mind. They need a middle 6 center and appear to be in win now mode with a solid group. It got me thinking of an idea...

To Boston:
Toews (X% retained)
Fleury (50% retained)

To Chicago:
Ullmark
Debrusk
Forbort

Chicago gets a serviceable goalie in Ullmark, a younger forward in Debrusk, and a decent D in Forbort. Boston gets the reigning Vezina winner to pair with Swayman, who I'd imagine they try to re-sign, and a proven winner and still capable middle 6 center in Toews, who should also be familiar with Bergeron and Marchand from Team Canada.

Hawks and B's fans, what needs to be added? Is this close or should I go F myself? How much retention on Toews is necessary? Should the Bruins add a pick/prospect? I also wonder if there's something more here, with Boston adding extra futures to rent Kubalik or De Haan.

Click to read more...

 

[Mrfenn92]

No reason for Boston to do this

 

[SPV]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

 

[Kaners PPGs]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

 

[Mrfenn92]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

Your doubts are correct

 

[Hookslide]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

At 50% the Bruins should add

 

[SPV]

At 50% the Bruins should add

No doubt, I just thought the original trade made such little sense for us that Id propose something like that

 

[Kevin Musto]

Chicago gets nothing out of this trade

 

[weaponomega]

No thanks

 

[McGarnagle]

Now let's not be so hasty, B's fans. Toews' veteran leadership could come in handy in case we need to cover up a sexual assault during the conference finals.

 

[dj Mahoney]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

Is that you Jack a Edwards?

 

[Space umpire]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

Boston is adding 2 1sts right?

 

[Thirty Seven]

I feel like this is a trade neither team would want

 

[kthx]

Not a fit for Boston IMO.

 

[Jamie Winston]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

Ewww. Since when does debrusk come close to that kind of value. Maybe he would be the throw in along with X amounts of firsts and prospects.

 

[mikelvl]

No thanks, I’d do Debrusk for Kane at 50%, but I doubt Chicago would

Are you drunk?

 

[mikelvl]

I've been thinking about potential landing spots for Toews if he's unhappy in Chicago, and the Bruins came to mind. They need a middle 6 center and appear to be in win now mode with a solid group. It got me thinking of an idea...

To Boston:
Toews (X% retained)
Fleury (50% retained)

To Chicago:
Ullmark
Debrusk
Forbort

Chicago gets a serviceable goalie in Ullmark, a younger forward in Debrusk, and a decent D in Forbort. Boston gets the reigning Vezina winner to pair with Swayman, who I'd imagine they try to re-sign, and a proven winner and still capable middle 6 center in Toews, who should also be familiar with Bergeron and Marchand from Team Canada.

Hawks and B's fans, what needs to be added? Is this close or should I go F myself? How much retention on Toews is necessary? Should the Bruins add a pick/prospect? I also wonder if there's something more here, with Boston adding extra futures to rent Kubalik or De Haan.

I would think that the Hawks want nothing but futures at this point. Doesn't make sense at all. Stan Bowman isn't around to blindly call them a Cup contender.