Proposal: Boston - New York, Boston - Anaheim

[Coach Parker]

This place has been pretty grim lately and downtrodden fans make for sad talk. Let's speculate and have some thoughts on two trade proposals that have been met with positive responses from the other teams' fanbases:

To Boston:

LW Rick Nash (1.8 Million Retained)

To New York:

RW Jimmy Hayes
RHD Colin Miller
2017 2nd Round Pick (Edmonton's)

CAP IMPLICATIONS: 6.0 Million in, 3.3 Million out = 2.7 Million added

Now, let's fix that defense a little:

To Boston:

LHD Cam Fowler

To Anaheim:

C/W Ryan Spooner
RW Zach Senyshyn

CAP IMPLICATIONS: 4.0 Million in, .95 Million out = 3.05 Million added

The Bruins take from the cupboard and add on forward and defense. Overall, they add 5.75 million to the cap hit.

Do you like either trade? Do you like both? Care to explain why?

Happy thoughts and conversations during the dog days of summer...

Or do you think its time the Boston Bruins offer-sheet (given the depth in the prospect pool) Trouba or Lindholm?

Click to read more...

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

call me crazy but Spooner AND Senyshyn seems like an overpayment for Fowler. I mean Spooner is an NHL-proven center who still has tons of upside and Senyshyn is one of their top 5 prospects (arguably top 3). Fowler's good, but he's at best the 3rd best D on the Ducks.

Spooner and one of the B's lesser prospects seems more fair to me, but maybe I'm being biased.

 

[Tim Vezina Thomas]

I'm really high on Senyshyn, him and Macavoy are the only two prospects I wouldn't trade (relatively speaking, of course).

 

[Coach Parker]

call me crazy but Spooner AND Senyshyn seems like an overpayment for Fowler. I mean Spooner is an NHL-proven center who still has tons of upside and Senyshyn is one of their top 5 prospects (arguably top 3). Fowler's good, but he's at best the 3rd best D on the Ducks.

Spooner and one of the B's lesser prospects seems more fair to me, but maybe I'm being biased.

They didn't like the idea of Bjork and Spooner and wanted Senyshyn. I said I'd post here and get responses. Given the prices on PMD's I can see why they ask for him.

 

[Fenian24]

call me crazy but Spooner AND Senyshyn seems like an overpayment for Fowler. I mean Spooner is an NHL-proven center who still has tons of upside and Senyshyn is one of their top 5 prospects (arguably top 3). Fowler's good, but he's at best the 3rd best D on the Ducks.

Spooner and one of the B's lesser prospects seems more fair to me, but maybe I'm being biased.

Agree with this, Senyshyn could be a top 6 wing and a rare right handed shot for the Bruins for years to come, Spooner is OK, I think once Julien leaves he will become more productive and right now they can hide his defensive deficiencies with a strong defensive winger. I like Fowler but would try to work something around picks or another prospect besides Senyshyn.

Like the Nash move even though I think he is coming to the end of the line. Would try to give Joe Morrow first even if it means no salary retained, also not sure how long Nash's contract is but I don't want it to interfere with Marchands extension.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

They didn't like the idea of Bjork and Spooner and wanted Senyshyn. I said I'd post here and get responses. Given the prices on PMD's I can see why they ask for him.

who is "they?" Anaheim fans? Who cares? Of course they want one of our best prospects, doesn't mean it's a fair deal.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

Why on God's green earth would the Rangers even do that.

 

[Fenian24]

They also can't offer sheet anybody unless it's for four first round picks because they don't have their second next year.

 

[Fenian24]

Why on God's green earth would the Rangers even do that.

They may want to move Nash's contract without having to buy it out. Nash has never been speedy and the game is getting faster and he seemed a step behind in the few Rangers games I saw last year.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Why on God's green earth would the Rangers even do that.

Because Nash only had 36 points in 60 games last year while making 7.8 million? It would be purely for them to get out from under Nash's contract ahead of schedule.

 

[DoubleAAAA]

No thanks on Nash. Fowler, I'd probably be content with that deal.

 

[Coach Parker]

Agree with this, Senyshyn could be a top 6 wing and a rare right handed shot for the Bruins for years to come, Spooner is OK, I think once Julien leaves he will become more productive and right now they can hide his defensive deficiencies with a strong defensive winger. I like Fowler but would try to work something around picks or another prospect besides Senyshyn.

Like the Nash move even though I think he is coming to the end of the line. Would try to give Joe Morrow first even if it means no salary retained, also not sure how long Nash's contract is but I don't want it to interfere with Marchands extension.

Nash has this year and next on his contract which would be 6.0 million to the Bruins. Again, I see the downside and would rather move Morrow but replacing Miller and Hayes for a difference of 2.7 million and Nash playing with Krejci is an improvement to this team this year and next. The wildcard's are Nash returning to top form and Miller possibly breaking out as a solid #3 defensman.

Also sounds like if it wasn't Senyshyn you'd be on board. Gabrielle perhaps? DeBrusk?

 

[Coach Parker]

who is "they?" Anaheim fans? Who cares? Of course they want one of our best prospects, doesn't mean it's a fair deal.

Is there a middle ground between Bjork and Senyshyn that makes sense? Gabrielle?

 

[Coach Parker]

They also can't offer sheet anybody unless it's for four first round picks because they don't have their second next year.

For Lindholm and Trouba it would be the four 1st route. Figured that was assumed to ensure that neither match and the Bruins prospect pool is now deep enough to miss out.

 

[Coach Parker]

call me crazy but Spooner AND Senyshyn seems like an overpayment for Fowler. I mean Spooner is an NHL-proven center who still has tons of upside and Senyshyn is one of their top 5 prospects (arguably top 3). Fowler's good, but he's at best the 3rd best D on the Ducks.

Spooner and one of the B's lesser prospects seems more fair to me, but maybe I'm being biased.

Fowler was the best Duck defenseman until Christmas when Lindholm stepped up. He was then the #2, better than Vatanan but not by much.

It seems like many here won't part with Senyshyn for Fowler in a trade but would move Spooner and another prospect for Fowler.

My worry, looking at the prices for PMD's is that even Senyshyn isn't enough.

 

[BruinDust]

Without salary retention on a 22-man roster it puts Boston over the cap by 2 million.

So let's say the Ranger's retain 2.5 million, puts Boston under the cap by half a million. Works for now.

What do you do the next year though.

Marchand raise of approx. 2.5 million

Chara goes down 2.9 but Seidenbergs goes up by a million. So a saving of 1.9 million.

Liles goes likely replaced by an ELC, so another million there. There's Marchand's money.

But what about Pasta? Do you take the risk of a bridge deal? Maybe you have to.

There's always the option of getting McQuaid out the door and replacing him with an ELC, saves another 1 and half million roughly.

And who knows who gets picked in the expansion draft.

The more I look at this it isn't terrible at all. Granted I'm not as high on Senyshyn as many here are.

But you pretty much have to get at minimum 2.0 million in salary retention on Nash or I don't see how the numbers work this year or next.

If Pasta goes out and has a huge year, it could make things much harder.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

honestly, the Hayes/Nash deal isn't even worth discussing. Nash on the back half of his career, and while I don't think he's done, I don't think the Bruins would get enough out of him to make it worth giving up Colin Miller and a 2nd. I'd rather just play through with Hayes (who is likely to have a better year if you believe in regression analysis). Factoring in money and it's a total no-go for me.

A Fowler deal is intriguing though because he makes a lot of sense as a target and the Bruins have the pieces to get him which makes the discussion of what's the best deal for either side kind of intriguing.

 

[Coach Parker]

Without salary retention on a 22-man roster it puts Boston over the cap by 2 million.

So let's say the Ranger's retain 2.5 million, puts Boston under the cap by half a million. Works for now.

What do you do the next year though.

Marchand raise of approx. 2.5 million

Chara goes down 2.9 but Seidenbergs goes up by a million. So a saving of 1.9 million.

Liles goes likely replaced by an ELC, so another million there. There's Marchand's money.

But what about Pasta? Do you take the risk of a bridge deal? Maybe you have to.

There's always the option of getting McQuaid out the door and replacing him with an ELC, saves another 1 and half million roughly.

And who knows who gets picked in the expansion draft.

The more I look at this it isn't terrible at all. Granted I'm not as high on Senyshyn as many here are.

But you pretty much have to get at minimum 2.0 million in salary retention on Nash or I don't see how the numbers work this year or next.

If Pasta goes out and has a huge year, it could make things much harder.

Hmm...

General fanager has the Bruins with 6.6 million in space. Did you remove Jimmy Hayes' contract? Hayes and Miller out and a 6.0 Nash in is 2.7 as listed above.

Either way, I see your future math problems with the current line-up but as of today there is 6.6 million in cap space.

1.8 retained on Nash was the original trade proposal.

 

[Coach Parker]

honestly, the Hayes/Nash deal isn't even worth discussing. Nash on the back half of his career, and while I don't think he's done, I don't think the Bruins would get enough out of him to make it worth giving up Colin Miller and a 2nd. I'd rather just play through with Hayes (who is likely to have a better year if you believe in regression analysis). Factoring in money and it's a total no-go for me.

A Fowler deal is intriguing though because he makes a lot of sense as a target and the Bruins have the pieces to get him which makes the discussion of what's the best deal for either side kind of intriguing.

I figured some would be on board for one and not the other and Fowler is the best option outside of what it would cost for Shattenkirk. Then again, what is Shattenkirk wanting to sign for and does it look better than a $4,000,000 Fowler?

 

[BruinDust]

honestly, the Hayes/Nash deal isn't even worth discussing. Nash on the back half of his career, and while I don't think he's done, I don't think the Bruins would get enough out of him to make it worth giving up Colin Miller and a 2nd. I'd rather just play through with Hayes (who is likely to have a better year if you believe in regression analysis). Factoring in money and it's a total no-go for me.

A Fowler deal is intriguing though because he makes a lot of sense as a target and the Bruins have the pieces to get him which makes the discussion of what's the best deal for either side kind of intriguing.

While I would absolutely love to never see Jimmy Hayes in a Bruins uniform again (strictly based on his on-ice play, nothing else), which Nash would Boston be getting.

The guy who scored 42 in 2014-15.

Or the guy on pace for 20 last season.

Nash at 5.5 million or so vs. Jimmy Hayes at 2.3 I think I'd still take the risk with Nash.

Nash at full price the Rangers can forget about it, even if they take Hayes the other way.

 

[BruinDust]

Hmm...

General fanager has the Bruins with 6.6 million in space. Did you remove Jimmy Hayes' contract? Hayes and Miller out and a 6.0 Nash in is 2.7 as listed above.

Either way, I see your future math problems with the current line-up but as of today there is 6.6 million in cap space.

1.8 retained on Nash was the original trade proposal.

I prefer Cap Friendly but I have it at 2.0 million over without retention.

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/edit/182263

 

[Coach Parker]

I prefer Cap Friendly but I have it at 2.0 million over without retention.

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/edit/182263

Most Rangers fans agreed that retention would be the way to go with Nash. I'm also with you taking Nash at 5.5-6.0 million over Hayes at 2.3.

 

[BruinDust]

Most Rangers fans agreed that retention would be the way to go with Nash. I'm also with you taking Nash at 5.5-6.0 million over Hayes at 2.3.

Get that retention and both to me are solid well-thought proposals Coach. Value there for both sides.

Another part I like is it cracks that proverbial window open further for the Bruins the next two years by adding Nash and Fowler by subtracting only Spooner and Hayes.

With retention, cap wise there are ways to make it work both years.

The biggest wildcard/risk to me is Pastrnak. If he goes out and has a very good year (say 25g and about 30 A), it could really put the Bruins in a bind cap wise next year and the threat dare I say of an offer sheet. Considering the numbers Pastrnak has put up since breaking in (20g, 20 A pace since Day 1), those numbers aren't out of the realm of possibility, especially if he gets some more PP time.

 

[patty59]

not interested in Rick Nash at all. If you want rid of Hayes then just buy him out next summer for peanuts. I think you could easily trade him at the deadline for a pick.

 

[Coach Parker]

Get that retention and both to me are solid well-thought proposals Coach. Value there for both sides.

Another part I like is it cracks that proverbial window open further for the Bruins the next two years by adding Nash and Fowler by subtracting only Spooner and Hayes.

With retention, cap wise there are ways to make it work both years.

The biggest wildcard/risk to me is Pastrnak. If he goes out and has a very good year (say 25g and about 30 A), it could really put the Bruins in a bind cap wise next year and the threat dare I say of an offer sheet. Considering the numbers Pastrnak has put up since breaking in (20g, 20 A pace since Day 1), those numbers aren't out of the realm of possibility, especially if he gets some more PP time.

Thanks!

I agree about Pastrnak but that is a problem I'm sure they'd love to have. I also see Nash walking UFA and one of the many LW prospects being ready to replace him. That is also the year that Chara comes off the books and retires.