Proposal: All Bruins trade rumors/proposals: 16/17 Part V

[barstool]

Spooner scored an overtime goal against Montreal.I say keep him

 

[bp13]

About the same playing with lesser talent and half the pay. Younger

Look I'm all for trading Krejci, but saying he's about the same as Spooner is outrageous. Count the seconds the puck is on Krejci's stick every game vs. Spooner, and sure, go ahead and adjust for ice time. It's still not even close.

David Krejci is a key puck possessor for this team and when he's on, he's an excellent player. Obviously he struggles with any consistency in his health and is probably overpaid, but let's not use hyperbole to prove that point, it's not needed.

If cost was equal, 99.99% of Bruins fans would rather have David Krejci than Ryan Spooner. I refuse to believe that's not true.

 

[SPLBRUIN]

Spooner fits a lot better than 50% of the rest of the Bruin Roster. He will continue to improve, will be cheap to resign, he is fast, creative and he can score. You don't trade an asset like him when you have a roster that consists of players like Hayes, Schaller, Accairia, Czarnick, Beleskey, etc.

This.

 

[SPLBRUIN]

I agree 100 percent but the problem is Spooner doesn't play the game Bruins management/coaching want the team to play. I'm not at all defending it and I agree when placed with talented players Spooner can be a weapon like we saw when he played with Pasta and Looch.

Spooner should not be moved especially considering that we likely will have a new coaching staff next year. He wouldn't be the 1st young player to flourish under new leadership.

 

[ON3M4N]

Aging unproductive krej backes or cheap spooner. Who do u keep

Since when is 3rd on team in scoring considered unproductive?

 

[ON3M4N]

Spooner fits a lot better than 50% of the rest of the Bruin Roster. He will continue to improve, will be cheap to resign, he is fast, creative and he can score. You don't trade an asset like him when you have a roster that consists of players like Hayes, Schaller, Accairia, Czarnick, Beleskey, etc.

3 of those guys are wingers and not centers like Spooner. The problem with Spooner is he wants to be a center, but he can't play center in this system. He's awful on face-offs (no seriously look it up he's atrocious), he struggles with his defensive responsibilities and loses more battles then he wins.

Going forward I just don't see how he fits with this team. He's not a centerman on this team, but he doesn't want to be a winger. I'm not saying he's not an good offensive player, but in Boston management wants two-way game. If he was willing to be 4th line LW/PP specialist then hey I'm all for it, but if that doesn't work then move on.

 

[bp13]

3 of those guys are wingers and not centers like Spooner. The problem with Spooner is he wants to be a center, but he can't play center in this system. He's awful on face-offs (no seriously look it up he's atrocious), he struggles with his defensive responsibilities and loses more battles then he wins.

Going forward I just don't see how he fits with this team. He's not a centerman on this team, but he doesn't want to be a winger. I'm not saying he's not an good offensive player, but in Boston management wants two-way game. If he was willing to be 4th line LW/PP specialist then hey I'm all for it, but if that doesn't work then move on.

I wouldn't argue with any of this but I would note that people are always so careful to point out that he's not a good center "in this system". Then they go on to defend that by saying he's awful on faceoffs, struggles with defensive responsibilities and loses more faceoffs than he wins. All of which is true to varying degrees.

So here's the thing...it's not the "system" where he's not good enough. It's the POSITION. There is no system out there that likes a center who loses a ton of faceoffs, loses most of his battles and struggles defensively. So let's not couch it like this coach or team is some excuse for him. Those are major shortcomings and any coach/team is going to have a problem with those.

 

[Kaoz]

Ah yes - the inside joke that nobody ( I think ) gets but you. Enlighten the masses then.

Eeesh, you must be an absolute hoot at parties. Glad to see this place still has it's exclusive, miserable sob's that work hard to make you feel welcome.

Here you are, the basis of the "joke" Franky Fact Finder.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=59838709#post59838709

 

[chizzler]

This news screams to me a management team needing to make a move to get this team to the playoffs to save their jobs or job (Neely).

I'm not sure. I think it will be more of a problem long term than short term. Carlo is staying in the NHL, Shattenkirk will probably want to and will play in the top 4, and McAvoy will probably make the team next season, maybe even play a game or two at the end of this season.

Let's say the Bruins decide to go with Shattenkirk, Carlo, and McAvoy on the right side, the Bruins will have to move Kevan Miller, Colin Miller, and Adam McQuaid which may prove to be a difficult task if Kevan or McQuaid aren't claimed in the expansion draft. Down the line, Carlo and McAvoy will be needing new contracts and even if Chara may be gone by then, the Bruins will have other prospects at forward to accommodate as well.

In my opinion, the Bruins should stay away from Shattenkirk. Who knows how long Bergeron and Rask will be out for, and even if both are healthy, the Bruins need to fix lines 2-4 to even remotely believe they'll even make it let alone get anywhere in the playoffs. I've mentioned this a lot last season. The Bruins have defensemen that can carry the puck out of their zone (Krug, Morrow, Colin Miller, Carlo can, McAvoy can). The problem isn't the personnel to achieve that goal, it's the system that relies on heavy defense. Place Shattenkirk, who at best in my opinion is a 2nd-pairing defenseman that will need a defensive anchor as a partner, in Julien's system, and all he would be is an offensive specialist that would be taken advantage of in his own end. In my opinion, Shattenkirk isn't worth the rental price as he isn't going to suddenly change this team and signing him long-term is an even worse decision given where the cap may be, the signings that need to be made (Pastrnak), and the upcoming prospects that can eventually provide the same thing or even more than Shattenkirk can at the price of an entry-level contract.

Shattenkirk is a big name that fans of any team may want, but in my opinion, he's not a fit or worth the price to trade for and/or sign for the Bruins.

I've been harping on this for years man. People always use the puck moving d for this team excuse for ever. It's the square peg in a round hole thing. How great was Kaberle? He was the answer right. He cycled just like the rest. Bruins play the perimeter. Skating is not part of that system.

 

[bruinmann77]

This.

making sense is not allowed

 

[ON3M4N]

I wouldn't argue with any of this but I would note that people are always so careful to point out that he's not a good center "in this system". Then they go on to defend that by saying he's awful on faceoffs, struggles with defensive responsibilities and loses more faceoffs than he wins. All of which is true to varying degrees.

So here's the thing...it's not the "system" where he's not good enough. It's the POSITION. There is no system out there that likes a center who loses a ton of faceoffs, loses most of his battles and struggles defensively. So let's not couch it like this coach or team is some excuse for him. Those are major shortcomings and any coach/team is going to have a problem with those.

There maybe a team out there that is ok w/ his defensive struggles if they feel like he can provide enough offense. Maybe they have someone take face-offs for him and then he slides back to center.

Personally I don't think he's a good centerman, but some team out there might value his speed/skill more then his 3-zone game and because of that try and make it work.

 

[Gordoff]

There maybe a team out there that is ok w/ his defensive struggles if they feel like he can provide enough offense. Maybe they have someone take face-offs for him and then he slides back to center.

Personally I don't think he's a good centerman, but some team out there might value his speed/skill more then his 3-zone game and because of that try and make it work.

Yeah Montreal. Wouldn't that be a PIA watching him tuck it to the B's every time they meet for the next 5-6 years.

Once again, whether looking at trading Krejci or Spooner, it ALL comes down to the return and not hating on either player. Both have strengths and weaknesses, both have their prices to keep and to trade.
There needs to be a rebuild of the B's at some point but that rebuild needs to be done after the coach is changed during the '17 offseason.
IMO it's too late to salvage this season without a miraculous trade, one that nobody seems naive enough to give DS.

 

[Tim Vezina Thomas]

Spooner should not be moved especially considering that we likely will have a new coaching staff next year. He wouldn't be the 1st young player to flourish under new leadership.

If Spooner stays he needs to play center and I just don't see that happening here.

 

[TP]

New thread

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2184563