Proposal: Are you in favour of trading Brock Boeser?

[StreetHawk]

Columbus had a low-key brilliant off-season. It should get talked about more. Grabbed 1sts for Foligno and Savard at the deadline, and structured the Seth Jones deal so that they have a good chance of holding Chicago's 1st, with no protection, in 2023. What a re-tool.

That being said, I don't think you'll see any Atkinson-for-Voracek type moves from us - that would be writing next season off and while I think Rutherford is willing to sell *this* deadline, I think the plan is to try and make the playoffs next year.

Depends on the return for the players he moves out. Say he moves Miller and Boeser. Probably a prospect comes back in Miller deal. Boeser depends on how the other team views him. Rental or someone they can agree to terms with that’s lower than his QO.
cba now prevents compensation from being increased if a player re-signs with the team that obtained his rights. So no increase of 2nd round pick to 1st if he signs. Or they get an extra pick if he signs.

 

[Knight53]

I have faith this new management doesn’t do something as stupid as trade this player. 60-70 point player on bottom feeder teams. He’s a stud and character guy who should be locked up long term.

 

[ForecheckBackcheck]

I have faith this new management doesn’t do something as stupid as trade this player. 60-70 point player on bottom feeder teams. He’s a stud and character guy who should be locked up long term.

Boeser's career ppg is higher than Patrik Laine's: 0.79 vs 0.76. And Boeser played on far worse teams than Laine did to start his career. Their goal scoring rate is actually pretty comparable too - 0.37/g for Boeser, 0.41/g for Laine.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Yet he hasn’t scored 30 and the closest he came to this mark was 4 years ago. He is trending down. He isn’t a 30 goal scorer, he is a complimentary middle 6 winger good for 20 goals. Replaceable in the market for a lot less than $7.5MM

He has averaged 30,8 goals per 82 games.

 

[4BlindMice]

Boeser is gone and that makes me sad. Helluva a guy but JR telegraphed that big decisions were coming and salary cap issues will be influential. Boeser's QO will be the straw that breaks the camels back.

Boeser is out. Quote me on it.

 

[Hodgy]

And what if you re-sign him to a huge contract and he doesn't rebound?

Giving him a one-year extension has no end game. If he has a good year ... you're just getting the rental price at next year's deadline or he leaves as a UFA. Might as well sell him now and re-invest that money into a long-term solution.

I think this is overly simplistic and not exactly true. I agree that probably if we don’t trade him at the deadline then our only real option will be to qualify him on a one year contract at a price over what he’s worth. I say probably because if Boeser is conservative then perhaps he entertains a longer term deal at a cap hit that is more palatable. Although even then, I would have serious concerns giving him a long term deal.

With that said, I agree that he’s probably only worth a second and a mediocre prospect at this deadline, and that really isn’t much of a package. It is possible if we extend him for a year he finished this year strong, and plays well next year in which case you may be able to get a first for him.

Edit: I should also say I recognize the value of cap space which makes the above a bit more nuanced since there is an opportunity cost to holding onto Boeser for one more year.

 

[MS]

I think this is overly simplistic and not exactly true. I agree that probably if we don’t trade him at the deadline then our only real option will be to qualify him on a one year contract at a price over what he’s worth. I say probably because if Boeser is conservative then perhaps he entertains a longer term deal at a cap hit that is more palatable. Although even then, I would have serious concerns giving him a long term deal.

With that said, I agree that he’s probably only worth a second and a mediocre prospect at this deadline, and that really isn’t much of a package. It is possible if we extend him for a year he finished this year strong, and plays well next year in which case you may be able to get a first for him.

But again - what is the end game of giving him a 1-year deal? All you're doing is saying to the player 'we don't believe in you' and walking him to UFA ... and as an American UFA he's likely to take that and run.

If you don't believe in the player moving forward, don't waste time dicking around. Deal the player, get some assets back, clear the cap space, and use it on guys you do believe in going forward. Better and cleaner for everyone involved. And his trade value isn't going to be going up if you're walking him to UFA.

 

[Hodgy]

But again - what is the end game of giving him a 1-year deal? All you're doing is saying to the player 'we don't believe in you' and walking him to UFA ... and as an American UFA he's likely to take that and run.

If you don't believe in the player moving forward, don't waste time dicking around. Deal the player, get some assets back, clear the cap space, and use it on guys you do believe in going forward. Better and cleaner for everyone involved. And his trade value isn't going to be going up if you're walking him to UFA.

The point is that Boeser could conceivably increase his value from a second to a first over the next calendar year.

Ultimately though the real question is what we think Boeser is as a player. Frankly, I don’t think he’s ever been the player he was after his rookie season. Injuries to his back and wrist have made him slow with a decidedly average shot. I think he’s mostly shored at a good clip because he has good offensive instincts and has played with two play drivers in Petey and Miller. It’s perhaps not too surprising that his play has fallen off a cliff in unison with Petey’s. Interestingly, this analysis has made me consider the implications of trading Miller on Boeser’s value. I think given my thoughts above, trading Miller will only further hurt Boeser’s value, so I am probably now leaning towards trading both at the deadline. I think the chances of Boeser bouncing back without Miller are worse.

 

[StreetHawk]

A team could rent Boeser and then not QO him. But your return is a rental price. Which I would imagine is higher than a 2nd rounder.

 

[Hodgy]

A team could rent Boeser and then not QO him. But your return is a rental price. Which I would imagine is higher than a 2nd rounder.

If he turns his play around massively then maybe he gets a first. I think I looked at his ppg pace before last game and it was like 40 points over an 82 game season. So, definitely not returning a first.

 

[MS]

The point is that Boeser could conceivably increase his value from a second to a first over the next calendar year.

Ultimately though the real question is what we think Boeser is as a player. Frankly, I don’t think he’s ever been the player he was after his rookie season. Injuries to his back and wrist have made him slow with a decidedly average shot. I think he’s mostly shored at a good clip because he has good offensive instincts and has played with two play drivers in Petey and Miller. It’s perhaps not too surprising that his play has fallen off a cliff in unison with Petey’s. Interestingly, this analysis has made me consider the implications of trading Miller on Boeser’s value. I think given my thoughts above, trading Miller will only further hurt Boeser’s value, so I am probably now leaning towards trading both at the deadline. I think the chances of Boeser bouncing back without Miller are worse.

I don't see where dicking around with Boeser for another year in the hopes you could turn a 2nd rounder into a late 1st makes even a lick of sense.

The actual value difference between those two assets is not nearly significant enough.

Agreed with everything in your second paragraph.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Columbus had a low-key brilliant off-season. It should get talked about more. Grabbed 1sts for Foligno and Savard at the deadline, and structured the Seth Jones deal so that they have a good chance of holding Chicago's 1st, with no protection, in 2023. What a re-tool.

That being said, I don't think you'll see any Atkinson-for-Voracek type moves from us - that would be writing next season off and while I think Rutherford is willing to sell *this* deadline, I think the plan is to try and make the playoffs next year.

They also knocked their 1st round selections out of the park. Sillinger was my least favourite of the selections and he's already in the show.

 

[Tomatoes11]

Boeser is definitely worth a 1st and a prospect at the deadline. Players his age the value factors in potential.

Miller was 25 already(an overager) and maxed out at a 47 point season(not even 20 goals I believe)and he still got the equivalent of two 1sts(the cap space we gave Tampa to re sign point when they were desperate is worth a 1st. Point was going to miss training camp)and a 3rd.

Yes, we overpaid big time for Miller but at least we fluked out. That’s not the point though. The point is Boeser and ep’s value really doesn’t drop as much as people here claim it does. They are both worth almost the same as last year.

Boeser is under 25 and has already eclipsed 47 points.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

A team could rent Boeser and then not QO him. But your return is a rental price. Which I would imagine is higher than a 2nd rounder.

If he turns his play around massively then maybe he gets a first. I think I looked at his ppg pace before last game and it was like 40 points over an 82 game season. So, definitely not returning a first.

i think we're underselling boeser's value, partially because we've seen him so much.

my gut tells me that perception on boeser is much higher than where most of us currently are on him. i also think that GMs who haven't necessarily followed our horribad team closely the past few years are probably more apt to remember the rookie boeser, or even the all-star game boeser, than the totally broken player we've seen at many points of the last three years.

objectively, this is how i think boeser looks to a GM looking to make a run:

- one-shot goal scorer in his prime

- career average of 31 goals, 66 pts per 82 games

- career average after his rookie season of 28 goals, 64 pts per 82

- led a team with pettersson, jt miller, horvat, and hughes on it in scoring last year

i think if you can add a guy like that to be the fourth best winger on a contender, even as a pure rental, you are paying a very large premium. assuming, of course, that we retain enough to make it worth their while, but on an expiring contract why wouldn't we?

at the deadline two years ago, athanasiou and a cap dump netted detroit two seconds, barclay goodrow, ondrej kase, and jason zucker were all traded for firsts. none of those players have boeser's offensive upside.

and then there's the age part. when we got an expiring toffoli for a second and madden, this was a 27 year old guy who hit 30 once in his career and leveled off as a 25 goal guy. boeser might actually be the same, but at not quite 25 years old yet and having played on a dumpster fire his whole career, there's still the potential that this is a guy with 40 goal upside who just hasn't found the right situation yet.

 

[MS]

Boeser is definitely worth a 1st and a prospect at the deadline. Players his age the value factors in potential.

Miller was 25 already(an overager) and maxed out at a 47 point season(not even 20 goals I believe)and he still got the equivalent of two 1sts(the cap space we gave Tampa to re sign point when they were desperate is worth a 1st. Point was going to miss training camp)and a 3rd.

Yes, we overpaid big time for Miller but at least we fluked out. That’s not the point though. The point is Boeser and ep’s value really doesn’t drop as much as people here claim it does. They are both worth almost the same as last year.

Boeser is under 25 and has already eclipsed 47 points.

Miller was signed long-term at $5.2 million.

Boeser requires a $7.5 million QO.

If Boeser was on the Miller contract - yes, their values would be similar. But he is not. He requires a garbage contract to maintain his services.

 

[F A N]

I keep saying this, but the Canucks can take Boeser to arbitration and not give him a $7.5M QO. He'll still make at least $6.375M AAV though.

 

[Hodgy]

Miller was signed long-term at $5.2 million.

Boeser requires a $7.5 million QO.

If Boeser was on the Miller contract - yes, their values would be similar. But he is not. He requires a garbage contract to maintain his services.

Ya, people are really not understanding this. I don’t think team’s will be eager to acquire him given his present play and QO, and frankly, this is the exact reason why we want to trade him. He’s on a 48 point pace ahd that’s partly buoyed by his three point night last game. Before that it was like a 43 point pace. I’m not sure why people think anyone would give up a first but stranger things have happened.

 

[Hodgy]

I keep saying this, but the Canucks can take Boeser to arbitration and not give him a $7.5M QO. He'll still make at least $6.375M AAV though.

Ya, I had considered that but I don’t think this changes things.

 

[F A N]

Ya, I had considered that but I don’t think this changes things.

It depends. There is a perceived jump in what is required from a winger to justify $7.5M vs $6.375M. Currently there are 36 forwards with a cap hit of $7.5M or higher. There are 61 forwards with a cap hit of $6.375M or higher. Of course it doesn't change the discussion if you don't want Boeser at ~$6M

 

[MS]

Ya, people are really not understanding this. I don’t think team’s will be eager to acquire him given his present play and QO, and frankly, this is the exact reason why we want to trade him. He’s on a 48 point pace ahd that’s partly buoyed by his three point night last game. Before that it was like a 43 point pace. I’m not sure why people think anyone would give up a first but stranger things have happened.

People simply do not understand the salary cap and the relationship between contract and asset value.

The same people were blown away when Seattle didn't take overpriced name players in the expansion draft and blown away by the price for Goodrow and Coleman.

 

[bossram]

People simply do not understand the salary cap and the relationship between contract and asset value.

The same people were blown away when Seattle didn't take overpriced name players in the expansion draft and blown away by the price for Goodrow and Coleman.

Yep. Boeser is going to be an expensive ticket. That limits the number of suitors and the potential return.

I really like Boeser and would be open to a long-term extension. But the team needs to retool, and he is one of the pieces that might actually get a useful piece for the future back.

A 1st + prospect is likely what we're looking at. And I wouldn't expect it to be a high first. If they're willing to deal in-division, LA is a team that seems like it wants to improve, could use better wingers, and have quite an interesting variety of prospect capital.

 

[Hodgy]

It depends. There is a perceived jump in what is required from a winger to justify $7.5M vs $6.375M. Currently there are 36 forwards with a cap hit of $7.5M or higher. There are 61 forwards with a cap hit of $6.375M or higher. Of course it doesn't change the discussion if you don't want Boeser at ~$6M

I don’t think it changes anything. It just means you might be able to get him on a one year deal at like 6.4 million vs. 7.5 million, l but you’d then be in the same situation. The less than one million dollar difference won’t have a big impact on his trade value at the point especially considering we can retain salary. But I do think if we decide to not trade him, and can’t extend him at a reasonable price, then we may as well take him to arbitration.

 

[bossram]

I keep saying this, but the Canucks can take Boeser to arbitration and not give him a $7.5M QO. He'll still make at least $6.375M AAV though.

It doesn't really change things. He'll get a one-year award from the arbitrator and walk straight to UFA. It's the same situation.

The Canucks need to make a decision before the season ends: Are they committing to Boeser or not? If not, they simply have to trade him.

 

[bobbyb2009]

A team could rent Boeser and then not QO him. But your return is a rental price. Which I would imagine is higher than a 2nd rounder.

I agree with you. It is absurd to suggest he is only worth a second rounder. Crazy talk. As a rental, he is worth more than that, without a doubt. Do not trade him if this is the kind of return we are discussing. Just crazy.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

What would you want from Anaheim out of curiosity

boeser fiala are 2 guys I’d love Anaheim to target