TSN: What should Bruins do with Milan Lucic?

[Kaoz]

Where did this Yakupov+16th for Lucic come from? It seems one sided if oilers believe Yakupov will break out.

Dupont, spitballing (and I don't believe he suggested it was anything more then that has he?). Similar to the Calgary rumor, except that was Elliot Friedman making more out of a fantasy sports column then he should have.

Regarding Lucic, there hasn't been anything that would suggest an actual "rumor" as of yet I don't believe has there? Even a good ol' "my anonymous sources say...".

 

[Oates2Neely]

From a neutral perspective I'd rather Yakupov and the pick. It's cost effective, has higher potential and can result in 2 players over 1, both being younger.

Depends the team though. If bruins HAD to make a trade for Lucic for cap reasons that's a good one but I don't see Oilers interested.

Post it on main board I guess, I just don't see it.

Would you trade Pacioretty for Yakupov + 16th?

 

[Man Rocket]

Would you trade Pacioretty for Yakupov + 16th?

eek. Patches > Lucic

 

[BMC]

McQuaid is probably not coming back.

Perhaps but you never know, especially with his injury history.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

eek. Patches > Lucic

What has "patches" ever done in the playoffs ?

 

[BMC]

You have to be strong up the middle from the net on out.

I dont care what era it is or what style is employed. That basic tenet is and always will be gospel.

Listen to the man. He knows of what he speaks.

 

[Man Rocket]

What has "patches" ever done in the playoffs ?

? Pacioretty is just a better player regardless. Like I've said before, Lucic is my favorite Bruin... So if anything I would be biased, but take away the MTL hate and then most fans here would agree. But it's MTL so many are biased. Some probably think Price isn't a top 3 goalie.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

? Pacioretty is just a better player regardless. Like I've said before, Lucic is my favorite Bruin... So if anything I would be biased, but take away the MTL hate and then most fans here would agree. But it's MTL so many are biased. Some probably think Price isn't a top 3 goalie.

Price is pretty good during the regular season too... I have no issue calling out our own players who only show up in meaningless moments too.

 

[Man Rocket]

What has "patches" ever done in the playoffs ?

Price is pretty good during the regular season too... I have no issue calling out our own players who only show up in meaningless moments too.

Steven Stamkos - 26GP - 7 goals, 11 assists, 18 points

Jakob Silfverberg - 16GP - 4 goals, 14 assists, 18 points


Silfverberg is better than Stamkos. Am I doing it right?



Also, lets not act like Lucic is some playoff monster. He is .64 PPG in the post season, while Patcioretty .56 PPG. I'm tired of defending rival players against my own players... People just need to stop being nonsensical.

 

[Scotto74]

Cut the crap or you will be removed from the discussion and infracted. Consider this your official warning.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Steven Stamkos - 26GP - 7 goals, 11 assists, 18 points

Jakob Silfverberg - 16GP - 4 goals, 14 assists, 18 points


Silfverberg is better than Stamkos. Am I doing it right?

No because that doesn't factor in the responsibility and workload of each player. Stamkos carries his team in many respects and faces the best competition. His playoff numbers are very solid. Pacioretti's drop off between the regular season and playoffs is steep enough that he is a playoff "no-show." He has been brutal in the playoffs and has not helped his team enjoy any real success, ie: no Cup appearances or Conference Championship Trophy's. There is a lot of San Jose in his game.

 

[Estlin]

Where did this Yakupov+16th for Lucic come from? It seems one sided if oilers believe Yakupov will break out.

One poster in the TSN article on Lucic (the basis of this thread) offered that as a possible deal. For what it's worth, that's a great trade for Boston. Yakupov can play to the left of Krecji or Spooner and probably put up 30.

I'm just going based on the comments in the thread. I saw it mentioned a few times but I'm doubtful Oilers would do that.

As for Lucic for Hall, good luck with that one.

As far as I know, no one has ever suggested a one-for-one deal. If Hall were to be had, then Boston would have to send more than Lucic.

Well, if the Bruins want to compete and be a perennial contender, they have to clean Chiarelli's cap mess. Trading #17 and another player ( probably Eriksson ) is the fastest way to do so. I understand that some fans want to keep Lucic but we have to stop to live in the past and pretend that he's a game changer because he's not anymore. #17 was a pleasure to watch but the Bruins need to re-shape the roster in a league who value speed and skills way much more then aggression and physicality. It's a business decision the same way as players decide to test the market and accept the best offer from another team.

Very true. Lucic's performance is declining, as the TSN mentioned, and his body will wear down sooner than those of Eriksson or Krecji, for example. In addition, both Eriksson and Krecji are better, more valuable players than Lucic.

 

[LouJersey]

Steven Stamkos - 26GP - 7 goals, 11 assists, 18 points

Jakob Silfverberg - 16GP - 4 goals, 14 assists, 18 points


Silfverberg is better than Stamkos. Am I doing it right?



Also, lets not act like Lucic is some playoff monster. He is .64 PPG in the post season, while Patcioretty .56 PPG. I'm tired of defending rival players against my own players... People just need to stop being nonsensical.

Which Max Pac play-off memories stand out for you?

 

[Man Rocket]

No because that doesn't factor in the responsibility and workload of each player. Stamkos carries his team in many respects and faces the best competition. His playoff numbers are very solid. Pacioretti's drop off between the regular season and playoffs is steep enough that he is a playoff "no-show." He has been brutal in the playoffs and has not helped his team enjoy any real success, ie: no Cup appearances or Conference Championship Trophy's. There is a lot of San Jose in his game.

Due to the moderator warning I am not going to discuss the matter further.

 

[BadBruins]

I'm just going based on the comments in the thread. I saw it mentioned a few times but I'm doubtful Oilers would do that.

As for Lucic for Hall, good luck with that one.

That's the problem with dealing Lucic. Easy to sit back in a chair and say deal Lucic for a haul, sign Hamilton long term, get a top-4 D. Profit???

Being an impending UFA, I don't think he holds much more value than a guy like Eriksson. Who's going to give up a top-15 pick and/or a blue chip prospect for potentially just one year of Lucic? Trade a couple of your best assets for Lucic OR look to the free agent route at guys like Stewart/Stafford/Ward? Not as impactful, but they don't cost assets and likely don't take up as much cap space.

There is no way I want anything to do with Eriksson long term. He'll be 31 at this point next year and you'll probably have to give him at least 5 years.

Three years from now when Lucic is 29. Will he still have trade value? Depending on he length of the contract and total value, I think so. Especially when you account for rising cap. I think if you're trying to manage your assets for long term sustainability, you sign Lucic and look to deal Eriksson/Kelly/Seidenberg. I'll throw Smith in there too because he's making pretty good coin and isn't what I consider core material (although I like the player, even if I'm in the minority).

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

That's the problem with dealing Lucic. Easy to sit back in a chair and say deal Lucic for a haul, sign Hamilton long term, get a top-4 D. Profit???

Being an impending UFA, I don't think he holds much more value than a guy like Eriksson. Who's going to give up a top-15 pick and/or a blue chip prospect for potentially just one year of Lucic? Trade a couple of your best assets for Lucic OR look to the free agent route at guys like Stewart/Stafford/Ward? Not as impactful, but they don't cost assets and likely don't take up as much cap space.

There is no way I want anything to do with Eriksson long term. He'll be 31 at this point next year and you'll probably have to give him at least 5 years.

Three years from now when Lucic is 29. Will he still have trade value? Depending on he length of the contract and total value, I think so. Especially when you account for rising cap. I think if you're trying to manage your assets for long term sustainability, you sign Lucic and look to deal Eriksson/Kelly/Seidenberg. I'll throw Smith in there too because he's making pretty good coin and isn't what I consider core material (although I like the player, even if I'm in the minority).

In 3 years Looch will be 30, not 29.

Other than my nit-picking, I agree with you.

All this talk of Looch being over the hill is foolishment.

I think he has 4 or 5 good years ahead of him. I just hope they're in Boston at a reasonable cap hit. I'm hopeful, but not overly optimistic that this happens.

 

[Hockey64]

In looking at the Lucic situation, I just can't buy that he holds less value due to his UFA in 2016.

Lucic will be skating for one of them in the 2016 season and it could quite possibly be the Bruins.

But a great deal depends on the financial fit, does he fit in with team philosophy, chemistry with teammates, etc.,.

The kessel situation was a bit different but not certain how much. The B's front office had a sense of who kessel was a player, his financial demands and they traded that asset for a decent return.

I have to guess that if Lucic doesn't fit for any of the above reasons (i.e. maybe he wants to go closer to vancouver roots, just wants to max his contract value, etc) Sweeney knows this and will most likely find a dance partner that will give the B's what they want along with lucic what he is looking for.

Obviously beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the Leafs really wanted Kessel and I have to believe that if Lucic wants something other than to be a bruin, there is at least one team willing to show Lucic some love and the value will be solid despite his pending UFA in 2016.

 

[bp13]

That's the problem with dealing Lucic. Easy to sit back in a chair and say deal Lucic for a haul, sign Hamilton long term, get a top-4 D. Profit???

Being an impending UFA, I don't think he holds much more value than a guy like Eriksson. Who's going to give up a top-15 pick and/or a blue chip prospect for potentially just one year of Lucic? Trade a couple of your best assets for Lucic OR look to the free agent route at guys like Stewart/Stafford/Ward? Not as impactful, but they don't cost assets and likely don't take up as much cap space.

There is no way I want anything to do with Eriksson long term. He'll be 31 at this point next year and you'll probably have to give him at least 5 years.

Three years from now when Lucic is 29. Will he still have trade value? Depending on he length of the contract and total value, I think so. Especially when you account for rising cap. I think if you're trying to manage your assets for long term sustainability, you sign Lucic and look to deal Eriksson/Kelly/Seidenberg. I'll throw Smith in there too because he's making pretty good coin and isn't what I consider core material (although I like the player, even if I'm in the minority).

While you may be right about Lucic's market value today (honestly none of us can really know right?), I don't think the argument to deal him begins and ends with his return. Personally, I think just as big a piece is whether he's worth what he's reportedly seeking.

To make my case easier, I'd argue he isn't worth what he's getting now, which is $6M. When I look at the list of players in that neighborhood (and obviously time of signing, term, etc. all matter so let's not debate that), on average I don't think he falls into that category. If he's looking for $6.5M or even more, he's going to be in the top 35 of the NHL, and he simply doesn't belong there. Now obviously reasonable minds can differ on that, but that's my view. The Bruins alone have 3-5 players who are more valuable/better than Lucic, and I can't think of a single NHL team on which he'd be one of the 2 best players. Further, I can think of several teams off the top of my head where he also wouldn't be in the top 3-5. So just by simple math I don't see how he slots into that group.

Note: I realize timing of a contract is key in this analysis, but there are a handful of players who've recently signed in this neighborhood whom I'd take over Lucic in a cocaine heartbeat including Pietrangelo, Nugent-Hopkins, Pavelski and Hall.

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

Which Max Pac play-off memories stand out for you?

For me, it's his no-show in 2011.

As for this thread subject, Sweeney should either extend or trade Lucic this summer.

 

[BadBruins]

Note: I realize timing of a contract is key in this analysis, but there are a handful of players who've recently signed in this neighborhood whom I'd take over Lucic in a cocaine heartbeat including Pietrangelo, Nugent-Hopkins, Pavelski and Hall.

Pavelski is the only signing that's eating up all UFA seasons (if I'm not mistaken). The rest are RFA signings which are eating up mostly controlled seasons. Even then Pavelski signed for $6M coming off the 16 goal/31 point lockout season. He then exploded these past two seasons. Dumb luck or good forecasting rather than good negotiating.

The market for UFA's comparable to Lucic is somewhere between Foligno and Bobby Ryan IMO.

 

[bp13]

Pavelski is the only signing that's eating up all UFA seasons (if I'm not mistaken). The rest are RFA signings which are eating up mostly controlled seasons. Even then Pavelski signed for $6M coming off the 16 goal/31 point lockout season. He then exploded these past two seasons. Dumb luck or good forecasting rather than good negotiating.

The market for UFA's comparable to Lucic is somewhere between Foligno and Bobby Ryan IMO.

Fair point. But while eating up UFA years might cost a team a bit more, does that mean a team tight against the cap should spend it?

Ultimately this is going to come down to whether he is reasonable in his demands, and what his market value is vs. the market for other Bruins who could be moved to sign him (Loui, Kelly, Seids, etc.). There are a bunch of moving parts here.

 

[Scotto74]

Due to the moderator warning I am not going to discuss the matter further.

The warning was not directed at this conversation. It was directed towards a bunch of crap I had to delete which you can no longer see. I should have been clearer as to what I was referring too.

I sometimes forget to think that posters might not know what I am talking about after I delete things off the board especially if I do it before they see it.

 

[Man Rocket]

The warning was not directed at this conversation. It was directed towards a bunch of crap I had to delete which you can no longer see. I should have been clearer as to what I was referring too.

I sometimes forget to think that posters might not know what I am talking about after I delete things off the board especially if I do it before they see it.

ah, ok thank you for clearing that up.

 

[BadBruins]

Fair point. But while eating up UFA years might cost a team a bit more, does that mean a team tight against the cap should spend it?

Not always, but I think if he's a core player (which I understand you may not agree with), you pay him his market worth and make it work. Just like they did with Krejci. Lucic is the youngest of the Bergeron/Krejci/Marchand forward core that won a cup and made it to the finals. I also understand you can't hold on to everyone forever.

Ultimately this is going to come down to whether he is reasonable in his demands, and what his market value is vs. the market for other Bruins who could be moved to sign him (Loui, Kelly, Seids, etc.). There are a bunch of moving parts here.

I agree. That is kind of what I was trying to get at with my initial point. There seems to be a crowd who are simply shouting "trade Lucic", but aren't actually taking into account his worth to other organizations. I said earlier in the thread I would do Yakupov +16 in a heartbeat. I honestly believe they'd be hard pressed to get a 1st round pick alone. Maybe I'm wrong on that though. Down season.... 1 year left on his contract.... already making big coin. Not going to throw a boatload of cash at him without testing the trade waters, but if nothing comes of that, I wouldn't have a problem extending. Better than taking B level assets in return. If by chance they can get a good haul for him AND fix the cap issues. By all means. I just see that scenario as very very unlikely.

 

[4ORRBRUIN]

Due to the moderator warning I am not going to discuss the matter further.

Thank God!