I am not a Hutton fan but realistically their are not many options available. Hanafin would be a good addition but that probably means the end of Debrusk.
We currently do not have enough money to add Hoffman so the offense will suffer for sure.
Boston Bruins 2020-2021 Roster Discussion IV - STAY ON TOPIC
- Thread starter Fenway
- Start date
- Status
We currently do not have enough money to add Hoffman so the offense will suffer for sure.
Any chance Tampa moves Stamkos? I would be all over that. Move Krejci and add Stamkos on the cheap
Stamkos
Studnicka
Coyle
Frederic
Down the middle for the future would be awesome
Stamkos
Studnicka
Coyle
Frederic
Down the middle for the future would be awesome
Stamkos would not come cheap.
His injury would worry me.
I would rather have some one like Patty Kane.
Don Cherry
Registered User
- Sep 28, 2017
- 3,891
- 2,283
Stamkos is one of the few players in this league that I would overpay to have. Great player.
Maybe not, but Kase has not proven much yet and we could use a legit goal scorer.
I would rather overpay for Kane, he never gets hurt, averages 40 goals a year.
Look at the numbers he has put up the last 3 years, when the Hawks have been less than stellar.
And his contract expires in 3 years, perfect fit.
I think if we really want to go for it then you go after him. He is very durable, can really ignite a team and he is a consistent player year in and year out. Has a little edge to his game as well. He just turned 32 and should have at least 3 good years left unless something unforseen happens. He would really add to the offensive side of the game.
Bergeron and Krecji are 35 and 34 respectively and still are producing at a fairly high level. This is happening even though both have injury issues lately, which Kane has not been prone to.
I say this would be good for 1 last run at the Cup at this time. Arranging the logistics for this to happen could be another story.
Last edited:
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,314
- 21,675
I think they would move him if they could but I thought it was reported he basically has zero interest in leaving Tampa. Which considering he explored leaving back in 2016 and ultimately re-signed with TB, seems likely to be the case.
Son of Donegal
Stay-at-home defenseman with zero upside.
Blackhawks are trying to rebuild but they are anchored by those big four contracts. Kane and Toews aren't going anywhere. Seabrook is toast. Duncan Keith, however, is still excellent at age 37 thanks to his insane skating and attention to fitness training. He is owed $5.5m for another 3 years, a solid value. I am not sure if he would waive for BOS, but the B's could use a veteran D who can still log >20mins a night to mentor the young D.
I am sure, if Keith was open to moving, Sweeney could find a deal that worked for CHI.
I am sure, if Keith was open to moving, Sweeney could find a deal that worked for CHI.
Mantis
I am a doctah
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,314
- 21,675
Even if a deal could be worked out and Keith was willing to come to Boston, his NMC would still technically be intact and would be mandatory to protect him in the expansion draft.
If I'm the Bruins I'm not wasting one of their 3 D protected slots on a Duncan Keith approaching 38 years old.
What if Grezclyk was the primary piece going back. Would that change your calculation or would it further your belief?
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,314
- 21,675
I'm not giving up Gryz for Duncan Keith. If it was it probably wouldn't change my viewpoint. Protecting Keith would just mean a Lauzon would likely be the guy Seattle takes. Either way, the Bruins would lose one (and if they sent Gryz to Chicago) two younger D for the privilege to employ Duncan Keith into his 40s.
The NMC makes it a full non-starter for me. If there was no NMC, I'd consider Keith but only if basically nothing was going back Chicago's way. I'd see it as the Bruins taking on Keith's contract the asset going back is simply cap space, no need for valuable players or picks to be involved. The Bruins would be half doing them a favor.
The Andrew Peeke Fan
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2020
- 809
- 946
Blowfish
Count down ...
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,314
- 21,675
I'd just as soon go with the kids. Hutton is inconsistent, plus the Bruins basically have their own Ben Hutton named John Moore.
I with you. I would consider trading Grizz for the right package but no way am I giving up Grizz for the privilege of doing Chicago a favor.
Kane is a fitness fanatic, ALA Gary Roberts.
His personal trainer said it would not surprise him to see Kane play at a good level until he is 40.
Chara did it, Chelios did it.
Totally agree with you.
Keith at best is a 5-6 guy now.
Gryz is younger, faster and much more affordable.
I have no issue going with the kids, agree with you.
Hutton and Moore are close in talent, you can get Hutton for 1M a year now if you wanted.
At that price it makes him a better add vs Moore would.
Not sure what DS was thinking giving a #6-7 dee that contract ( Moore).
Terrible.
Fenian24
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2010
- 10,352
- 13,419
Wonder how many teams in the NHL would want Lauzon, Clifton, Vaakaninen and Zboril in their top 7 D. I'm betting not many. Lauzon yes, good bottom pair D, Clifton plays tough and is a good skater but all 4 of them is a disaster waiting to happen.
Package 2 of the 4 and get a real top 4 D in here or start selling the vets and start the rebuild with a better GM than Sweeney.
Package 2 of the 4 and get a real top 4 D in here or start selling the vets and start the rebuild with a better GM than Sweeney.
Son of Donegal
Stay-at-home defenseman with zero upside.
I get the NMC issue, but it's almost arbitrary.
Any upgrade to Boston's D corps is going to mean someone the Bruins value gets exposed in the expansion draft. To me it's worth it for a D who can play top pairing minutes. Would I prefer someone younger? Sure. But, the Bruins do not have the assets to acquire a younger proven top pairing D without dramatically weakening the current roster. Hanafin has done little to prove he is capable of carrying the load against top lines night in and night out. Sergachev would have been great but he is off the table. In either case, the Bruins would have sold the future as well as present (Carlo+) to bring them in - and STILL the Bruins would end up exposing a young, up and coming D (Gryz) in the process.
In the case of Keith, you are undervaluing him. He is still a de facto top pairing D at a manageable cap hit. He led CHI playing 24 minutes last night and, to me, doesn't really look like he has lost all that much. The team around him is NOT good. There is a cost for that sort of player, but hopefully not the sort of cost that removes any chance of re-tooling in 2021 and beyond.
Bottom line, if you are worried about exposing D to Seattle, then you have to make peace with this current D corps. OR acknowledge that there are different ways of doing business...like offering assets for SEA to lay off Gryz in lieue of a Moore.
Son of Donegal
Stay-at-home defenseman with zero upside.
You are mistaken. He would be BOS #2 immediately. He is a fitness freak like Chara.
- Status
