Proposal: BOS-CAL

EK392000

Registered User
Mar 9, 2020
1,111
1,318
I'll preface this with my rationale.

This trade is contingent on the Bruins organization thinking that their window to win with Bergeron (35) and Marchand (32) is closing. They would get 2 more cracks at Lord Stanley before that window closes, but Gaudreau, as an upgrade to Debrusk, will be there to provide some needed secondary scoring. They give up some picks, but given that aforementioned window, the picks are expected to be late in the first round.

Calgary gives up the best player but gets to re-tool with Debrusk, who has shown his scoring touch but needs to find it again. The picks are meant to be flipped to address whatever needs the Flames have (offensive depth, upgrade certain positions, etc.). If the Flames are really aggressive, they could package one or both of the firsts with Monahan to get Eichel, but this is a discussion another day.

To BOS:
Johnny Gaudreau (2 years left @ 6.75 M)

To CAL:
Jake Debrusk (2 years left @ 3.675, RFA upon expiry)
2021 1st Round Pick
2022 1st Round Pick
B prospect? (Unsure as to quality of the prospect, could be convinced that a prospect is not necessary)
+Contract to make salaries work

EDIT: After some feedback, I’ll amend the offer to:

To BOS:
Gaudreau

To CAL:
Debrusk
2021 1st
Beecher
+Contract to make salaries work

OR

To BOS:
Gaudreau
2021 3rd

To CAL:
Debrusk
2021 1st
2022 1st
+Contract to make salaries work


This is just the basis of a trade. I would ask that any criticism be constructive. I don't mind it, but I would rather learn from it than just be flamed. Tell me where I went wrong. Too many picks? Quality of the prospect? Unfit trading partners?

*My valuation on Gaudreau was based a bit on his production two seasons ago and a bit on his current production. He put up 99 points in 82 GP (36 G, 63 A) two seasons ago but put up 58 points in 70 GP (18 G, 40 A) and 27 points in 40 GP (13 G, 14 A) since then.
 
Last edited:

CatchyTune

JOHN TAVARES IS A MAPLE LEAF
Jan 8, 2016
5,757
4,611
Ontario
Bit steep. i dont think Gaudreau is worth 2 1sts.

i also dont think Calgary would trade him for futures, unless they decide to go full on rebuild mode.
 

wintersej

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2011
21,969
16,663
North Andover, MA
DeBrusk+ is certainly a reasonable base.

But this is way way too much more.

Is the extra year of Gaudreau worth all that extra when you can get Hall for much less and give him an extension?

edit: Take out the 2022 1st and we can start talking prospect and salary heading back.
 

EK392000

Registered User
Mar 9, 2020
1,111
1,318
Bit steep. i dont think Gaudreau is worth 2 1sts.

i also dont think Calgary would trade him for futures, unless they decide to go full on rebuild mode.
The picks are meant to be trade chips and not for the future. Calgary can flip them as they see fit.

Also keep in mind that Boston is trading these picks with the intention of them being the last pick in the first round.
 
Last edited:

EK392000

Registered User
Mar 9, 2020
1,111
1,318
DeBrusk+ is certainly a reasonable base.

But this is way way too much more.

Is the extra year of Gaudreau worth all that extra when you can get Hall for much less and give him an extension?

edit: Take out the 2022 1st and we can start talking prospect and salary heading back.
Fair enough. I feel like it makes more sense for Calgary to push for the two firsts along with Debrusk, even if it means sending back a pick to Boston. That’s where valuations get tricky. Debrusk and two firsts for Gaudreau and a 3rd/4th?
 

wintersej

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2011
21,969
16,663
North Andover, MA
Fair enough. I feel like it makes more sense for Calgary to push for the two firsts along with Debrusk, even if it means sending back a pick to Boston. That’s where valuations get tricky. Debrusk and two firsts for Gaudreau and a 3rd/4th?

No team has made fewer first round picks than the Bruins since 2017. They can't give up two more. Just can't. And it's too much for 1.25 years of Gaudreau, regardless. Like, it makes zero sense for the Bruins to pay that much for him when they can get a comparable player like Hall for much less. Zero sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatriceBergeronFan

EK392000

Registered User
Mar 9, 2020
1,111
1,318
No team has made fewer first round picks than the Bruins since 2017. They can't give up two more. Just can't. And it's too much for 1.25 years of Gaudreau, regardless. Like, it makes zero sense for the Bruins to pay that much for him when they can get a comparable player like Hall for much less. Zero sense.
There’s a lot more risk in trading for Hall than Gaudreau.

In Hall, you’re hoping that he can restore his scoring touch in 15 ish games so that he’s ready come playoff time. That isn’t an easy feat for a player that has 2 goals on the season.

In Gaudreau, there’s a greater level of certainty in the player you’re getting. He put up 27 points in 40 GP, which is pretty good considering the state of the Flames this season and the coaching change.

If you’re really trying to maximize this Bergeron-Marchand window, you go with the option that has more certainty. It’d be a shame to give up assets for a failed experiment in Hall.

As for the lack of first round picks since 2017, I think you’d have to consider your priorities here. Is your team in a position where trading for a player with the first round pick will give them a really good chance at winning the cup? I think it’s possible the Bruins win the cup one more time in the next two years if they refine their team a bit. Or, are you going to hold onto your first round picks just for the sake of keeping them and ice a team that is great but lacking that extra bit needed to win?
 

Tkachuk Norris

Registered User
Jun 22, 2012
15,602
6,639
Gaudreau is still an incredible talent. Anyone that watches flames games can see it. Once he goes to a good team he’s going to return to a top ten offensive producer in the league.

OP seems like a lot but really it’s two late firsts (one in a toss up of a draft) and a middle 6 forward for a player that when he’s on is as dangerous as anyone not named McD. It’s not bad value but personally I’d rather just get one significant asset rather than 3 decent ones.

I still wonder if Johnny re-signs. I think him and his agent might realize Calgary might be the best chance to get paid in the current market. Maybe he starts lighting it up with the Tkachuk and Lindholm line they put together as well.
 

EK392000

Registered User
Mar 9, 2020
1,111
1,318
Gaudreau is still an incredible talent. Anyone that watches flames games can see it. Once he goes to a good team he’s going to return to a top ten offensive producer in the league.

OP seems like a lot but really it’s two late firsts (one in a toss up of a draft) and a middle 6 forward for a player that when he’s on is as dangerous as anyone not named McD. It’s not bad value but personally I’d rather just get one significant asset rather than 3 decent ones.

I still wonder if Johnny re-signs. I think him and his agent might realize Calgary might be the best chance to get paid in the current market. Maybe he starts lighting it up with the Tkachuk and Lindholm line they put together as well.
I don’t think an asset equal to Gaudreau, whatever it may be, moves the needle for the Flames in terms of their contention. I think they are in need of a slight retool, perhaps a major shakeup depending on how this season ends. You get a serviceable player in Debrusk but you also get some picks that can be used to add some scoring depth to the lineup or packaged for an upgrade at centre or wing.

If the Flames got what I proposed, I would package both first round picks alongside Sean Monahan and Milan Lucic for Jack Eichel. Might need to add more for them to take on Lucic’s contract but I think that could get the conversation started.

Top 6 could look something like this:

Tkathuck-Eichel- Backlund/Cheap RW that can contribute (someone like Connor Brown)
Debrusk-Lindholm-Mangiapane

I’m not a Flames fan by the way. Would just be cool to see Eichel go to a Canadian team.
 

Sparky93

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
7,002
1,040
I'd do Gaudreau for DeBrusk, 2022 1st + Beecher

I don't think a 1st, young middle 6 roster player and a young depth prospect is a bad asking price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EK392000

nbwingsfan

Registered User
Dec 13, 2009
20,861
14,572
There’s a lot more risk in trading for Hall than Gaudreau.

In Hall, you’re hoping that he can restore his scoring touch in 15 ish games so that he’s ready come playoff time. That isn’t an easy feat for a player that has 2 goals on the season.

In Gaudreau, there’s a greater level of certainty in the player you’re getting. He put up 27 points in 40 GP, which is pretty good considering the state of the Flames this season and the coaching change.

If you’re really trying to maximize this Bergeron-Marchand window, you go with the option that has more certainty. It’d be a shame to give up assets for a failed experiment in Hall.

As for the lack of first round picks since 2017, I think you’d have to consider your priorities here. Is your team in a position where trading for a player with the first round pick will give them a really good chance at winning the cup? I think it’s possible the Bruins win the cup one more time in the next two years if they refine their team a bit. Or, are you going to hold onto your first round picks just for the sake of keeping them and ice a team that is great but lacking that extra bit needed to win?
19 in 37 and 27 in 40 is only about a difference of ~12 pts in an 82 game season and that's with Hall playing on a historically bad team. Certainly not worth the +++ to get Gaudreau.

Also if you're going to partially value Gaudreau for what he did two years ago then you have to do the same for Debrusk when he scored at a 35G pace.

Take out one of the 1sts and drop it to a C level prospect and it's a good deal
 

EK392000

Registered User
Mar 9, 2020
1,111
1,318
19 in 37 and 27 in 40 is only about a difference of ~12 pts in an 82 game season and that's with Hall playing on a historically bad team. Certainly not worth the +++ to get Gaudreau.

Also if you're going to partially value Gaudreau for what he did two years ago then you have to do the same for Debrusk when he scored at a 35G pace.

Take out one of the 1sts and drop it to a C level prospect and it's a good deal
You’re right on the comment about Debrusk. Should have done the same.

I also paid more attention to the goals rather than points. Hall would be on pace for 4 and Gaudreau for 26 in an 82 game season.

If the Bruins have faith that Hall can turn it around, he is the cheaper, possibly better option.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->