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

[bruinmann77]

We complained about having Young defense now we got a young kid playing on the top pairing and now people want to move him. Just nuts

 

[Lobster57]

Landeskog -- Krejci -- Pasta

A full year together; what do you guys think they would do?

Landeskog: 26-35-61

Krejci: 16-50-65

Pasta: 40-40-80


That would be my best guess. It would be a hell of a line to watch play.

If his wingers pot 66 goals Krejci is going to get closer to 60 asssists.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Ohoh you won't be happy now

Jamie Benn turned 24 on in 2013... the same year he scored 12 goals and had 33 points

I am sure you didn't want to make this comparison

Haha. You beat me to it. Nice call

 

[Fonzerelli]

I'm making it my goal to never comment on the proposals being thrown around in here, as it's not my board, it's your guys' board.

But let me just comment on this particular thing here.

The entire Avalanche team is a dumpster fire. The whole team. I figured they'd be a PO bubble team this year, but they are approaching historical levels of bad. SOME of the players aren't bad (MacKinnon, Rantanen, Duchene, and Landeskog all have a serious amount of talent and skill up front).

There's a lot of reasons why they're bad, personally, I believe a lot of it starts with their head coach, Jared Bednar. I cannot stress enough how much he just looks overwhelmed and in over his head. I'm not a "systems expert" by any means, but in reality, there's not a lot of variety among systems in the NHL, and once tape got out on his, it was figured out, and he's just not making the adjustments needed to help his team. On top of that, he has just not shown the coaching ability to do what he can to help get the most out of his players.

For instance--Carl Soderberg. He posted a career high in points last year, this year he looks like a completely different person. I'm not saying he should be pacing for career highs every year, but there's no reason for him to be THIS BAD. Bednar just doesn't even try to help jumpstart him and put him in position to help turn things around. That's just one example.

I'm not going to lay all of the Avs' struggles at Bednar's feet, because that wouldn't be accurate. The truth is, it's just a bad season. However, one bad season doesn't negate the pretty remarkable consistency with which he's played before this year.

It's a bad year, the team is epic levels of bad, the team is badly constructed, badly coached, and they're just playing badly. Us Avs fans are just hoping that next year isn't as bad (but I, for one, believe it will still be a rough year).

Thanks for input Erlich. Appreciate your persepctive

 

[Fonzerelli]

You guys can all save your breathe cause Don Sweeney does not have it him to pull off a trade of this magnitude.Bruins will add Stempniak types again.lol

And we could have had Stepniak for free. He was in camp on a P.T.O. was he not? Maybe this year we can flip that 2nd we get from Edmonton to Calgary for Matt Bartkowski and trade Heinen straight up to Nashville for Matt irwin. That oughta do it

 

[riverhawkey91]

It's not the same. We got picks. Not a defenceman who's proven an ability to play tough NHL minutes at 20 years of age.

Well then in a way you kind of answered your own question, because that view right there depends entirely on who you talk to in this thread. I tend to agree with you, in that Carlo has proven he can play tough minutes at 20, has a solid ceiling and the value that accompanies it. But there are plenty here who disagree and think his second-half play is more indicative of his future, leveling off as a good middle-pairing D. At that point, it comes down to what value that holds...if Boychuk, a good #2/#3, gets you two seconds, does that bring Carlo's value back in line with just one second, which is what he was drafted as? If yes, then he and a 2nd are essentially equal value. It all depends on whether you think Carlo has already progressed past his draft value, which clearly many here don't necessarily believe.

Picks. Are we giving them picks? I'd do a 1st and 2 2nds any day. Let's not pretend that Hamilton return was good. Seguin return was awful. Kessel return was lotto tickets that we lucked out on, then messed up (see previous trades) and Joe Thornton was an abysmal return. Just because we drafted well, doesn't mean the other teams reap the benefits. We better not be sending over an A+ package, while we have consistently accepted garbage in return. Why do we accept such crap packages?

The difference between an A+ package and garbage is largely just dependent on whether the prospects you get actually work out. That has almost everything to do with scouting, which is the point I was making. The Kessel return was "lotto tickets that we lucked out on," but it could have very easily turned into Erik Gudbranson and Duncan Siemens had our scouts valued them that way and/or prioritized defense (yes I know Seguin was a virtual lock for #2, but everyone thought Seth Jones was in the 2013 draft too...scouts don't always agree). It works the same with with prospect trades. We all agree the Seguin return was awful, and there's likely nothing that would have changed that....but would it have been more manageable if it was, say, Nichushkin and Klingberg instead of Smith/Fraser/Morrow?

The key in any trade like that is to outsmart the other team with superior scouting...make them think they want/need the prospects you know to be inferior. In retrospect, it probably wasn't a good plan to let the scout team that had brought us all of those terrible drafts pick the players coming back, but hindsight is 20/20. And as I said earlier, while I agree the Hamilton trade was bad value on the surface, our good scouting appears to have actually turned it into a positive.

 

[Fonzerelli]

I remember McLaren near decapitating Peter Zednik.Carlo is just a kid yet and is going to get wayyyy more confident and add lots of muscle. Your judging a kid who played most of year as a 19 yr old.

No. He didn't. He's played most of the year as a 20 year old. Why does the pro-Carlo crowd keep pushing the 19 year old narrative. He's not 19. He hasn't been 19 for most of the year. He was turning 20 for 21 games and he's been a full 20 for most of the year.

 

[Fonzerelli]

No matter how good you hope Landeskog to be, if your goal is to make the playoffs...I don't see how subtracting Carlo would make that possible. What are you talking about, going to a Morrow or something? I'm pretty sure the Bruins ehh D couldn't take that hit.

Right side

McAvoy
Chiller
Killer
McQuaid

I'm ok with that.

The best defense is a good offense, and Lando + Cassidy tilts the ice in our favour

 

[HeartsAlive]

I'm honestly warming to the idea of a Carlo/Landeskog swap, provided it's as close to a 1 for 1 (or cap dump beleskey/hayes + another small asset) as possible. Over the summer, before he broke with the team, how many people would have done a 1 for 1 trade? I imagine most of the board would, and consider it a landslide victory for the B's.

It's seeming more and more like a buy low sell high scenario.

 

[Fopppa]

I'm honestly warming to the idea of a Carlo/Landeskog swap, provided it's as close to a 1 for 1 (or cap dump beleskey/hayes + another small asset) as possible. Over the summer, before he broke with the team, how many people would have done a 1 for 1 trade? I imagine most of the board would, and consider it a landslide victory for the B's.

It's seeming more and more like a buy low sell high scenario.

I'm in the same boat as you. While Carlo is a good young piece, he's still unproven as to what he'll really amount to, whereas Landeskog is a very good, young and cost-controlled player that very much fits the profile that fits well with Krejci.

But still, if Sakic is desperate for young D and in particular local boy Carlo, shape the deal to our requirements. I.e. lump Beleskey or Hayes in with the deal. Include a debrusk or similar if that's what it takes.

 

[Oates2Neely]

Projects to around 24 goals? Was Jamie Benn all tapped out of potential?

Or did he become a better player after age 24?

Just asking cause I can probably name 100 guys who play power games who all get better after age 24... Its not too hard to find examples.

I'd say landeskog had a better career up to age 24 than Jamie Benn had

I'm not all that convinced Landeskog plays a power game. The term "power forward" gets loosely tossed around these days. He's more Alex Burrows (minus the antics) than he is Lucic.

 

[Oates2Neely]

We complained about having Young defense now we got a young kid playing on the top pairing and now people want to move him. Just nuts

Similar to the anti-Krug battalion. For years we pined for a PMD, now we have one & he's offered up in fantasy proposals daily

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

Dont remember trading a top D prospect for Backes...

You're right, because when you give someone 6m for 6, you aren't costing yourself any potential to sign other good players, nor did you let other good players go to make room for the 6x6...

 

[BruinLVGA]

Ohoh you won't be happy now

Jamie Benn turned 24 on in 2013... the same year he scored 12 goals and had 33 points

I am sure you didn't want to make this comparison

Well... 33 points in... 41 games...

Ahahah... Shots fired!... LOL

The devil is in the details isn't it.

 

[Blowfish]

if T Barrie involved im all in. Was fantastic last night. L Kog was Connolly like.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

Right side

McAvoy
Chiller
Killer
McQuaid

I'm ok with that.

The best defense is a good offense, and Lando + Cassidy tilts the ice in our favour

And then subtract one to Vegas...

 

[BruinDust]

I would stop using arguments like... he's 24 and peaked... if you also want to argue each players curve is different. I throw out example because there's always exceptions and I want to be fair. I know it's not an exact science to predict development

I also like to be a student of the game. History can teach us. But you can't simply ignore history when it goes against you. You can't introduce Jamie Benn as an example to make your own point and then say you don't care when your examples blows up in your face

You called me out when I remembered Adam Oates and Igor Larinov being teammates and I had to plead mea culpa. My example proved my memory isn't foolproof

I think you wanted to prove 24 year old landeskog isn't 28 year old Jamie benn. Sadly you drew attention to the fact 24 year old landeskog is 24 year old Jamie benn

You have been arguing why would we expect a 24 year old kid to score more when he's 25, 26, 27... And then you threw out Jamie benn. Its ironic.

As for my comparisons I always invite anyone to offer their own... if they feel I'm prejudice or trying to be selective. I take pride in offering a balanced argument. I often admit when I'm wrong.

Hockey isn't a game that allows anyone to be right all the time. Even the guys being paid millions of dollars get these trades wrong half the time

Talent analysis by the scouts fails half the time... draft picks are wrong half the time... free agent signings are wrong half the time... deadline deals fail half the time

I think it's ok if us fans get it wrong half the time too. Your Jamie benn comparison works against your agenda to limit landeskog based on age

But I've never said he's peaked. It's possible we've seen the best of Gabriel Landeskog. It's also possible his best days are yet to come. I have no idea. We can go around in circles with comparisons to other players throughout hockey history.

I am purely basing my judgement on the player he is today.

Heck, I've said multiple times I don't have an issue trading for him....if the price is right.

And that correct price doesn't include Brandon Carlo IMO.

I dropped Benn's name, and Keith Tkachuk. I could of said multiple franchise level power forwards, Neely, Shanahan, Lindros, etc. the fact is they were or are franchise level players at one point. Maybe Landeskog could be, but he isn't now, and you don't deal for him thinking that's what he will become mostly because many want to blame his drop in production on playing for a bad team, when the truth is Landeskog's drop in production is mostly on Gabriel Landeskog.

 

[TheBigBadB]

There is a reason they are willing to give up LG, so there should be warning sign right there. Carlo is in his first year and has been trusted with top minutes. So they last few weeks he has been just ok? Big deal, he is still learning. Beginning of the year he was playing fantastic and had a great plus minus. He needs another year at least to see how he develops.

He started the year as a 19 and is 20 now. Either way its still impressive. Age is a stupid argument here

 

[Over the volcano]

But I've never said he's peaked. It's possible we've seen the best of Gabriel Landeskog. It's also possible his best days are yet to come. I have no idea. We can go around in circles with comparisons to other players throughout hockey history.

I am purely basing my judgement on the player he is today.

Heck, I've said multiple times I don't have an issue trading for him....if the price is right.

And that correct price doesn't include Brandon Carlo IMO.

I dropped Benn's name, and Keith Tkachuk. I could of said multiple franchise level power forwards, Neely, Shanahan, Lindros, etc. the fact is they were or are franchise level players at one point. Maybe Landeskog could be, but he isn't now, and you don't deal for him thinking that's what he will become mostly because many want to blame his drop in production on playing for a bad team, when the truth is Landeskog's drop in production is mostly on Gabriel Landeskog.

Holy straw horse Batman- why argue against him being a "franchise level player" for Boston? I don't think anyone is arguing or even thinking that. He would be the 6th highest salary in here and would slot in as the second line left wing.

I'm not all that convinced Landeskog plays a power game. The term "power forward" gets loosely tossed around these days. He's more Alex Burrows (minus the antics) than he is Lucic.

First someone compared him to connoly now we get ****ing Burrows?

This place never ceases to amaze

 

[BruinLVGA]

Projects to around 24 goals? Was Jamie Benn all tapped out of potential?

Or did he become a better player after age 24?

Just asking cause I can probably name 100 guys who play power games who all get better after age 24... Its not too hard to find examples.

I'd say landeskog had a better career up to age 24 than Jamie Benn had

Benn, a 129th overall pick let's not forget this, by the time he hit 24 had 193 points in 263 games, a 0.734 ppg.
Landeskog, a 2nd overall pick, by the time he hit 24 (<- actually considering the whole season, 15-16, in which he turned 24), has 246 points in 356 games, a 0.691 ppg.
This doesn't show Landeskog, a much higher pick than Benn, had a better career up to 24.

And then, there's the matter of how the players are trending in production.

Trends:
Jamie Benn -> 41 pts (22g), 56 pts (22g), 63 pts (26g), 33 pts on shortened season... on pace for 66 pts (24g), 79 pts (34g), 87 pts (35g), 89 pts (41g)... This year he is on pace for 79 pts and 28 goals, a slow year for him, but his trend has always been UP...

Landeskog -> 52 pts (22g), 17 pts (9g) on shortened season... on pace for 38 pts (20g), 65 pts (26g), 59 pts (23g), 53 pts (20g), This year he has a 41 pts (19g) pace... having already missed 10 games already that goes to 39 pts (17g)... His trend has been DOWN for the past 3 1/2 seasons.

Now Landeskog might be getting back to his happy 55-60 points self, but if anyone is happy and cozy with the fact that he seems to be producing less and less, I like your optimism! This gives me doubts about him.

 

[JAD]

There is a reason they are willing to give up LG, so there should be warning sign right there. Carlo is in his first year and has been trusted with top minutes. So they last few weeks he has been just ok? Big deal, he is still learning. Beginning of the year he was playing fantastic and had a great plus minus. He needs another year at least to see how he develops.

He started the year as a 19 and is 20 now. Either way its still impressive. Age is a stupid argument here

Carlo is still developing both on the ice and physically. He is gathering massive experience with each game played.
Physically, guys have their easiest time adding muscle to their frame between the ages of 18 and 25. Just wait until he fills out and develops ture inner core strength.

 

[BruinLVGA]

We complained about having Young defense now we got a young kid playing on the top pairing and now people want to move him. Just nuts

In a nutshell, my same feeling. For a gritty, two way 20-25 goals / 50-55 points winger hopefully, no less. Like that was a game changer.

 

[22Brad Park]

No. He didn't. He's played most of the year as a 20 year old. Why does the pro-Carlo crowd keep pushing the 19 year old narrative. He's not 19. He hasn't been 19 for most of the year. He was turning 20 for 21 games and he's been a full 20 for most of the year.

OK THEN.How about Still his first year and young as can be for a D man in the NHL.Plus he was paired with Chara facing other teams best attackers plenty .Why do so many here want to keep getting rid of a young D man who we have no ideas how good he will become? Wait till he fills out and he will and then I imagine he will be more valuable and playing more minutes then Landeskog..Only way I support a Landeskog trade is if he is not included nor McAvoy Bruins need to keep their young D and build it right.Sorry I just get bad vibes telling me Carlo is going to grow and get alot better as he gets more confidence and muscle .He should probably put on another 15 to 20lbs of muscle in near future as he matures

 

[Oates2Neely]

Holy straw horse Batman- why argue against him being a "franchise level player" for Boston? I don't think anyone is arguing or even thinking that. He would be the 6th highest salary in here and would slot in as the second line left wing.


First someone compared him to connoly now we get ****ing Burrows?

This place never ceases to amaze

In terms of style of play, yes. Gritty, get to the front of the net & score some dirty goals. It wasn't meant as a slight. My definition of power forward apparently differs from yours.

Burrows has had seasons where he's scored 28, 35, 26 & 28 goals. Ya Alex ****ing Burrows

 

[BruinDust]

Holy straw horse Batman- why argue against him being a "franchise level player" for Boston? I don't think anyone is arguing or even thinking that. He would be the 6th highest salary in here and would slot in as the second line left wing.


First someone compared him to connoly now we get ****ing Burrows?

This place never ceases to amaze

A 2nd line winger is exactly what he is, you nailed it.

A guy for the right package you bring in. I have no issues with him becoming a Bruin for the right price. Even if his cap hit potential causes issues not too far down the road.

But not a guy you in any way shape or form over-pay to get.