Value of: James Neal to BOS

[Coach Parker]

You're probably looking at Neal for Backes straight up to get out from any contract problems moving forward as Backes has two years less.

Because of this, Bruins fans will pass until he shows signs of being able to score again.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

He's worthless at this point, and we don't like Neal anyways.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Canes will give you Cliff Pu and a 3rd.

Neal is getting the Skinner treatment. Peters has to do it to someone.

Put Neal on the opposite side of Svech and get a second scoring line.

 

[gumgum]

Rather just miss the playoffs lol

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Neal, Smith and Bennett for Rask?

 

[Hookslide]

That is a pass,do not have any interest that contract........

 

[JPeeper]

He's putting up lucic numbers with a similarly horrid contract why would anyone take him for free?

Neal has as many goals this season as Lucic has in the past 90+ games.

 

[weaponomega]

Neal, Smith and Bennett for Rask?

Lol no

 

[FerrisRox]

Ryan Donato + a 2nd too much? What do you think?

Yeah, that's too much.

Ryan Donato alone is too much.

A 2nd rounder alone is too much.

How can you be a Flames fan and think that Neal is worth either of those things?

 

[Donuts]

Neal + cgy 1st for 3rd rder + backes

 

[Empoleon8771]

People on this site grossly overreacting to a bad 30 game stretch? Well I've never seen that!

Neal is shooting 4.2% this year after shooting at least 10.4% in literally every season before this year. He shot 11.6%, 11.4% and 12.4% in the last 3 years. I'm willing to guess that he didn't just magically fall off this season, and he's just going on an unsustainable dry run. He's not a negative value asset, but I imagine most teams would hesitate to sign him (and Calgary wouldn't be looking to trade him I'd guess).

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

People on this site grossly overreacting to a bad 30 game stretch? Well I've never seen that!

Neal is shooting 4.2% this year after shooting at least 10.4% in literally every season before this year. He shot 11.6%, 11.4% and 12.4% in the last 3 years. I'm willing to guess that he didn't just magically fall off this season, and he's just going on an unsustainable dry run. He's not a negative value asset, but I imagine most teams would hesitate to sign him (and Calgary wouldn't be looking to trade him I'd guess).

I thought that about Loui Eriksson. He went from a top line wing to a 4th liner in one offseason.

 

[b in vancouver]

uhh - He kneed Marchand in the head!

One of the last players I'd want to see on the Bruins even if he was still playing well.

 

[b in vancouver]

You're probably looking at Neal for Backes straight up to get out from any contract problems moving forward as Backes has two years less.

Because of this, Bruins fans will pass until he shows signs of being able to score again.

No way I trade Backes for Neal straight up.
Somebody needs to link the clip of him trying to injure Marchand and getting a justifiable (although light) 5 game suspension for it to see how welcome he'd be in the dressing room. One of the last players I ever want to see in a Bruins sweater.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Yeah, that's too much.

Ryan Donato alone is too much.

A 2nd rounder alone is too much.

How can you be a Flames fan and think that Neal is worth either of those things?

Because Neal has scored 266 goals in this league. Despite all the assertions that he has "negative value" and is totally worthless after a poor 30 game stretch in reality GMs aren't nearly that short sighted and brainless.

Maybe the Rick Nash burn still to fresh? Maybe it's that Nordstrom is about to make his break to stardom and Bruins fans can sense it . Donato is not that great and neither is a 2nd.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Neal + cgy 1st for 3rd rder + backes

I'd rather take Brouwer back over Backes. He is awful. Much worse than Neal.

 

[FerrisRox]

Because Neal has scored 266 goals in this league. Despite all the assertions that he has "negative value" and is totally worthless after a poor 30 game stretch in reality GMs aren't nearly that short sighted and brainless.

He's 31 years old, is signed for five seasons and has three goals this year. Brainless would be giving up a good young asset and a valuable draft pick to acquire him.

His age, contract and performance remove any value he might have had but you are certainly free to pretend that's not the case.

 

[dredeye]

I'd rather take Brouwer back over Backes. He is awful. Much worse than Neal.

Nobody is saying he’s better. Has two years less on his deal and was front loaded so his actual salary is minimal.

 

[Bounces R Way]

He's 31 years old, is signed for five seasons and has three goals this year. Brainless would be giving up a good young asset and a valuable draft pick to acquire him.

His age, contract and performance remove any value he might have had but you are certainly free to pretend that's not the case.

Guess he might as well be dead in HF's eyes

That's just not how things work. A player who has scored 20 goals for 10 straight seasons doesn't just lose all value after a poor two months. Unlike the internet GMs don't base everything off what happened last week. If Marchand doesn't score until the New Year would the Bruins then have to pay someone to get rid of his contract? The Bruins forward core is mostly around 30, they're still in a cup window but I would say it's closer to closing now than it's opening. They need secondary scoring badly right now, they don't really have the luxury of waiting for Donato or that 2nd to turn into some wunderkid.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Nobody is saying he’s better. Has two years less on his deal and was front loaded so his actual salary is minimal.

Contrary to popular belief the goal of an NHL GM isn't to build the cheapest team or the team with the least years on their contracts. It's to build a winning team. Backes does nothing for the Flames.

 

[FerrisRox]

Guess he might as well be dead in HF's eyes

That's just not how things work. A player who has scored 20 goals for 10 straight seasons doesn't just lose all value after a poor two months.

Actually, yeah, quite often player who has done anything for ten straight seasons being to lose their value. Very rarely does a hockey player not begin a steep decline after ten seasons (Neal is playing his 12th professional season and is signed until his 17th) and instead of being paid in accordance to his declining years, he's being paid for his peak year performances and he's being paid that rate until he's 36 years old. Your notion that GM's are not only keen to take that on, but that would be willing to give up valuable assets to get him is just laughable.

Put it this way: in the summer, coming off his 25-goal effort Calgary was the only team willing to give him that contract. You are now suggesting that after putting up 3 goals in 29 games teams are now interested? How does that make any sense at all?

Unlike the internet GMs don't base everything off what happened last week. If Marchand doesn't score until the New Year would the Bruins then have to pay someone to get rid of his contract?

Cool. Except Neal hasn't been bad since last week, he's been bad since September. And he's 31, so it's not exactly surprising to see a player drop off a cliff. Internet GM's and real GM's alike are acutely aware of this because there's literally mountains and mountains of evidence of this happening time and time again.

As for Marchand, how would three weeks of struggling somehow equate to the same thing as 30 games of no production? Marchand is close to a point-a-game right now. Neal has six points. Do you think offering up ridiculous examples somehow improves the point you are making?

They need secondary scoring badly right now, they don't really have the luxury of waiting for Donato or that 2nd to turn into some wunderkid.

And your solution to solving their need for secondary scoring is to bring in a guy with six points? Brilliant.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Actually, yeah, quite often player who has done anything for ten straight seasons being to lose their value. Very rarely does a hockey player not begin a steep decline after ten seasons (Neal is playing his 12th professional season and is signed until his 17th) and instead of being paid in accordance to his declining years, he's being paid for his peak year performances and he's being paid that rate until he's 36 years old. Your notion that GM's are not only keen to take that on, but that would be willing to give up valuable assets to get him is just laughable.

Put it this way: in the summer, coming off his 25-goal effort Calgary was the only team willing to give him that contract. You are now suggesting that after putting up 3 goals in 29 games teams are now interested? How does that make any sense at all?

Sweeney gave up more than Donato and a 2nd just last year for UFA Rick Nash, who isn't even playing this year. HF darling Cheveldayoff gave up a 1st and more for 32 year old UFA Paul Stastny. But sure, the notion any GM would be willing to give up assets for a very proven top 6 scorer is "laughable". Lots of teams were in on Neal, Vegas included, I think it was Mike Smith and the extra year that convinced him to come to Calgary.

Cool. Except Neal hasn't been bad since last week, he's been bad since September. And he's 31, so it's not exactly surprising to see a player drop off a cliff. Internet GM's and real GM's alike are acutely aware of this because there's literally mountains and mountains of evidence of this happening time and time again.

As for Marchand, how would three weeks of struggling somehow equate to the same thing as 30 games of no production? Marchand is close to a point-a-game right now. Neal has six points. Do you think offering up ridiculous examples somehow improves the point you are making?

He has yes, that doesn't just discount the entire body of work his NHL career includes. He's shot 6% below his career average. I didn't say he was worth a ton, Donato has 11 total career NHL points please don't act like he is some superstar in the making. Just think it's totally outrageous for people to suggest a player of Neal's caliber has negative value and the Flames would have to pay other teams to take him on after two poor months in an otherwise very impressive career.

And your solution to solving their need for secondary scoring is to bring in a guy with six points? Brilliant.

He would be the Bruins 6th highest scoring forward even with those measly 6 points. They need a top 6 RW and they need one badly. Neal has been that his entire career.

 

[bearcountry17]

Sweeney gave up more than Donato and a 2nd just last year for UFA Rick Nash, who isn't even playing this year. HF darling Cheveldayoff gave up a 1st and more for 32 year old UFA Paul Stastny. But sure, the notion any GM would be willing to give up assets for a very proven top 6 scorer is "laughable". Lots of teams were in on Neal, Vegas included, I think it was Mike Smith and the extra year that convinced him to come to Calgary.



He has yes, that doesn't just discount the entire body of work his NHL career includes. He's shot 6% below his career average. I didn't say he was worth a ton, Donato has 11 total career NHL points please don't act like he is some superstar in the making. Just think it's totally outrageous for people to suggest a player of Neal's caliber has negative value and the Flames would have to pay other teams to take him on after two poor months in an otherwise very impressive career.



He would be the Bruins 6th highest scoring forward even with those measly 6 points. They need a top 6 RW and they need one badly. Neal has been that his entire career.

Your wasting your time because there is no way the Bruins can fit Neal's contract past this year. The Bruins wouldn't have payed anything for Nash if he was signed for multiple seasons past his prime even though he was actually on pace for 24 goals. The only way the cap works for the Bruins is if the salary is close to equal going back. Doesn't matter if Neal is slumping, or Donato is a bust, or a 2nd round pick may not turn out, it's just simple math.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Your wasting your time because there is no way the Bruins can fit Neal's contract past this year. The Bruins wouldn't have payed anything for Nash if he was signed for multiple seasons past his prime even though he was actually on pace for 24 goals. The only way the cap works for the Bruins is if the salary is close to equal going back. Doesn't matter if Neal is slumping, or Donato is a bust, or a 2nd round pick may not turn out, it's just simple math.

Well this is a reasonable view, though I think with Chara's deal ending there is some room to make it work if he retires. This is a totally hypothetical trade thread, of course it's a waste of time. I follow the Bruins somewhat haphazardly, they are my Dad's team and I would cheer for them over most teams in the East. I've watched a lot of their games this year, and what I've seen is that they are a one line team that lacks depth at forward. Krejci-DeBrusk are good top 6 players but they are having a tough time being effective without another threat on their line. Krejci and Neal would be a nice combo I think, Neal needs a center that can set him up and so far this year he's mostly been with Derek Ryan.

 

[Hookslide]

another year of Chara is a helluva lot better deal than 4 more years of Neal.....