All Bruins rumors/proposals: The Long Off-Season

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

It's astounding that Eklund has managed to somehow create a whole industry of fake hockey insiders. It also says something that there are somehow sites even less credible than his

I think it's funny and ironic that the only reason I even know who Eklund is, is because of this site. This site must give him more traffic than anywhere.

 

[DitClapper]

Sorry if someone posted this already:

 

[Mpasta]

Sorry if someone posted this already:

Is that a joke or...?

 

[Fire Sweeney]

Sorry if someone posted this already:

A 40 year old slow D. Just what we need

 

[BB88]

Sorry if someone posted this already:

Well he did play 19-25min games and a strong passer/pp guy would be nice, this would be again just 1y signing and whatever it takes to get Chara off the pp then do it.
But I'd take Ehrhoff over him, I'd guess Zid is the final option.

 

[DitClapper]

I don't know about you guys, but I loved Zidlicky's game from the back end last season. Especially on the power play.

He probably won't cost anything either, maybe that would give us room to sign both Ehrhoff and Zidlicky?

All this goes to show that we will land one of the three names listed. Hopefully two.

 

[BB88]

I don't know about you guys, but I loved Zidlicky's game from the back end last season. Especially on the power play.

He probably won't cost anything either, maybe that would give us room to sign both Ehrhoff and Zidlicky?

All this goes to show that we will land one of the three names listed. Hopefully two.

He'd have around 5M to sign both if he doesn't trade a player, Ehrhoff around 3 and that leaves 2M to Zid,

if Sweeney wants to give the kids 1 year to grow then

Chara-Zid
Ehrhoff-Seidenberg
Krug-McQuaid
would be much better than what we have up right now, and that should be a pretty balanced lineup which could make it strong, playoff money.

But I doubt this, give me atleast one of them. Franson right now, I don't want to be in a situation next year again where we would need to find 2 top4D's or we couldn't be contenders, I don't want to waste our core players prime to much.

 

[Patrice Krejci*]

I feel like putting an old veteran on the 2nd pair over Krug is almost a slap in the face to him. The kid wants to prove himself and has done everything asked and has started to step up his D and get some grit to his game. Let him play on the 2nd pair and put Seids on the right with Krug or let Chara and Seids get their mojo back playing together.

 

[DoubleAAAA]

I have been on the board since 2005. Maybe I missed something, but I have never, ever encountered a case where Eklund was right about anything.

Has he? If not, why does anyone lend credence to his "rumors"?

I don't think anyone does which was my point, that he actually achieved moderate success being an absolutely disconnected nobody. Now other unconnected nobodies are doing the same thing. The motivation to have people believe false information you supply on the internet is fascinating, as in most cases I can't imagine the financial payoff offsets the time and effort.

 

[GordonHowe]

I feel like putting an old veteran on the 2nd pair over Krug is almost a slap in the face to him. The kid wants to prove himself and has done everything asked and has started to step up his D and get some grit to his game. Let him play on the 2nd pair and put Seids on the right with Krug or let Chara and Seids get their mojo back playing together.

As much as I like him, Krug is not a top 4 D. Nor is McQaid. If you're asking too much from them, you're asking for trouble.

This is a transition year; nothing wrong with adding decent to solid veteran experience to stabilize the blue line while bringing along the youth.

 

[Patrice Krejci*]

As much as I like him, Krug is not a top 4 D. Nor is McQaid. If you're asking too much from them, you're asking for trouble.

This is a transition year; nothing wrong with adding decent to solid veteran experience to stabilize the blue line while bringing along the youth.

I agree but I think Krug deserves at least a shot.

 

[BB88]

As much as I like him, Krug is not a top 4 D. Nor is McQaid. If you're asking too much from them, you're asking for trouble.

This is a transition year; nothing wrong with adding decent to solid veteran experience to stabilize the blue line while bringing along the youth.

If he is not then he really needs to become a top4D next year, and Sweeney needs to also help Krug on that, if he'd have a player like Seabrook then Krug would definitely be a good 2nd pairing D.

Krug-McQuaid next year and Krug loggs top4 minutes.

 

[DitClapper]

He'd have around 5M to sign both if he doesn't trade a player, Ehrhoff around 3 and that leaves 2M to Zid,

if Sweeney wants to give the kids 1 year to grow then

Chara-Zid
Ehrhoff-Seidenberg
Krug-McQuaid
would be much better than what we have up right now, and that should be a pretty balanced lineup which could make it strong, playoff money.

But I doubt this, give me atleast one of them. Franson right now, I don't want to be in a situation next year again where we would need to find 2 top4D's or we couldn't be contenders, I don't want to waste our core players prime to much.

I keep forgetting about Trotman's one way deal. I still see him in the top 4 opening night.

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

I agree but I think Krug deserves at least a shot.

Like the shot he had last season, when 2 of our top 4 were recovering from injuries, and then Dougie Hamilton got hurt?

Krug needs to take some major steps forward (defensively) to become a top 4 defenseman. And it shouldn't be handed to him. He hasn't played well enough (overall) to deserve the spot yet.

If anything, adding another defenseman creates competition. The best possible option for this team. Krug proves he's one of the 4 best defenseman on a solid defensive core? Job is his. Otherwise, it's an open spot.

 

[BB88]

I keep forgetting about Trotman's one way deal. I still see him in the top 4 opening night.

You know I'm a big fan of T , but that was one reason why I doubt getting 2 new D players.

But give me an honest top4 D and we can watch some playoff games next year if nothing bigger happens injury wise.
I kind of like Chara-Ehrhoff-Krug LD side a lot, that's strong&deep but then again I'd want Franson to be our new JB and give some power to the RD side.

An honest top4 D for 2 years would be great, gives Sweeney 2years to fix that D properly, get a real top pairing D and one of the prospects could/should be ready to be a real top4 D then.

 

[GordonHowe]

If he is not then he really needs to become a top4D next year, and Sweeney needs to also help Krug on that, if he'd have a player like Seabrook then Krug would definitely be a good 2nd pairing D.

Krug-McQuaid next year and Krug loggs top4 minutes.[/

Krug is too small. He would wear down playing top competition, playing major minutes, over a grueling 82 game schedule. Adam is simply not good enough to be a top 4 guy.

They need genuine NHL top 4 relief via trade/FA.

I know we're probably all tired of these debates, because it's summer.

 

[BB88]

Krug is too small. He would wear down playing top competition, playing major minutes, over a grueling 82 game schedule. Adam is simply not good enough to be a top 4 guy.

They need genuine NHL top 4 relief via trade/FA.

I know we're probably all tired of these debates, because it's summer.

Is he too small or too weak? He can be small if he has the strenght, there are ton of small top4 guys who play extremely well in the top4.

The problem with this thinking is that does a Gm want to pay 5M for a 3rd pairing pp specialist and then partner him with someone who has a 2.8M cap hit, that's crazy 3rd pairing money, but I have gotten the feeling that Sweeney believes in Krug and has believed in him?

Krug needs to prove next year that he can be a full time top4 D in 2016-17 or this team won't be contenders untill Seids is atleast gone.
We need 2 top4D's and if Krug is 3rd pairing D with 5M cap hit and Seids is still in the lineup 2016 then it's not going to happen.
We need a prospect who can step up and have a helluva year to make it work

 

[DominicT]

Eklund has some good sources with the Flyers. That's about all though.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

As much as I like him, Krug is not a top 4 D. Nor is McQaid. If you're asking too much from them, you're asking for trouble.

This is a transition year; nothing wrong with adding decent to solid veteran experience to stabilize the blue line while bringing along the youth.

Krug drove the offense pretty well next to Seids. He can be a #4.

His D is overly critiqued because of his size.

 

[GordonHowe]

Krug drove the offense pretty well next to Seids. He can be a #4.

His D is overly critiqued because of his size.

For you & BB88:

I'm a big TK fan. Ideally, I see him as a third pairing guy on a relatively deep blue line. Minus that, I'd much prefer him with Dennis (assuming Dennis is around) than with Adam, which would not work.

TK has the ability & character to become a very good two way player. I believe he wants to work toward that. But the size & strength of top four opponents over a long regular season (never mind playoffs) & major minutes is simply asking too much of him. Especially if outside help isn't forthcoming. He's best slotted in a third pare. Not with Adam. Who should also be a third pare. *****.

 

[BB88]

For you & BB88:

I'm a big TK fan. Ideally, I see him as a third pairing guy on a relatively deep blue line. Minus that, I'd much prefer him with Dennis (assuming Dennis is around) than with Adam, which would not work.

TK has the ability & character to become a very good two way player. I believe he wants to work toward that. But the size & strength of top four opponents over a long regular season (never mind playoffs) & major minutes is simply asking too much of him. Especially if outside help isn't forthcoming. He's best slotted in a third pare. Not with Adam. Who should also be a third pare. *****.

Krug is going to be way too expensive 3rd pairing D and I don't know if he even wants to be that longterm?
Krug is 24y, he has 40&39 point seasons, if he does that again and maybe a bit more& loggs top4 minutes then how much will he get?
You look at the players that got 5M+ and you get scared.

I don't know why other smaller players survive in the top4 but Krug couldn't?
If he has the strength he has no worries, but if he is weak and small then we'd have a problem.
Krug-McQuaid longterm 3rd pairing would be bad,rookie would have to go straight to top4 situation and we'd need a strong partner for him there, not Seidenberg anymore.

So I hope Krug improves his D-game and earns that spot or we are going to see extemely expensive 3rd pairing. Krug has the fire, he will stand up for his teammates and he wants to improve which is great.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

If he is not then he really needs to become a top4D next year, and Sweeney needs to also help Krug on that, if he'd have a player like Seabrook then Krug would definitely be a good 2nd pairing D.

Krug-McQuaid next year and Krug loggs top4 minutes.[/

Krug is too small. He would wear down playing top competition, playing major minutes, over a grueling 82 game schedule. Adam is simply not good enough to be a top 4 guy.

They need genuine NHL top 4 relief via trade/FA.

I know we're probably all tired of these debates, because it's summer.

Krug played 80 games, 19:36 a game last season. 12 goals, 39 points, +12.

Can you name any 3rd pair players from last season that matches that?

 

[BornBruliever]

Since NJ is apparently in need of forwards, any way we could convince them to part with Damon Severson RH PMD for Koko+ or ++. I would want to explore EVERY possible option before settling on Franson or Erhoff. With or without those 2, we are a bubble team and I would rather miss playoffs and collect a lottery ticket than squeak in only to be knocked out by the Habs or Pens.....I couldn't take it

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

For you & BB88:

I'm a big TK fan. Ideally, I see him as a third pairing guy on a relatively deep blue line. Minus that, I'd much prefer him with Dennis (assuming Dennis is around) than with Adam, which would not work.

TK has the ability & character to become a very good two way player. I believe he wants to work toward that. But the size & strength of top four opponents over a long regular season (never mind playoffs) & major minutes is simply asking too much of him. Especially if outside help isn't forthcoming. He's best slotted in a third pare. Not with Adam. Who should also be a third pare. *****.

I do agree he is BEST for a 3rd pairing. But I don't think he hurts us on the 2nd -- defensive shortcomings (size and lack of experience mainly) can be outweighed by his offensive talent as well. In my opinion.

 

[GordonHowe]

Krug is going to be way too expensive 3rd pairing D and I don't know if he even wants to be that longterm?
Krug is 24y, he has 40&39 point seasons, if he does that again and maybe a bit more& loggs top4 minutes then how much will he get?
You look at the players that got 5M+ and you get scared.

I don't know why other smaller players survive in the top4 but Krug couldn't?
If he has the strength he has no worries, but if he is weak and small then we'd have a problem.
Krug-McQuaid longterm 3rd pairing would be bad,rookie would have to go straight to top4 situation and we'd need a strong partner for him there, not Seidenberg anymore.

So I hope Krug improves his D-game and earns that spot or we are going to see extemely expensive 3rd pairing. Krug has the fire, he will stand up for his teammates and he wants to improve which is great.

I don't disagree with you. He will work for everything he gets, and he's not weak in mind or body. But, he is small. I think the punishment is too much to ask, at least at this point. As with the young D, why not bring in veteran D (again, usual FA suspects, or surprising trade guys) to stabilize the blue line in a transition year? Eminent sense to me.