bob27
Grzelcyk is a top pairing defenceman
- Apr 2, 2015
- 3,332
- 1,426
Please no, he's going the be David Clarkson 2.0. Looking for a similar contract as well.
Proposal: Who stays, Who goes
- Thread starter ashnathan
- Start date
Please no, he's going the be David Clarkson 2.0. Looking for a similar contract as well.
Mount Kramer Cameras
Registered User
- Jul 15, 2014
- 3,645
- 1,000
The chemistry and camaraderie on this team is fading fast, possibly to the point of non-existence. Things are only gonna get worse next year if the roster stays largely the same. I think we need more than one change.
C77
Registered User
Issue at this point is when can the Bruins contend again?
Team needs to operate like a submarine....the destroyers have seen us now...soon they will start tossing depth charges....time to take the ship down for awhile to safety....eventually the destroyers move away....(other successful teams get older and more expensive to retain roster) and the situation becomes safer (Bruins lose bad contracts, collect a few better draft picks, deal off aging players, develop young ones) allowing team err...submarine to resurface.
If we stay on the surface we might sink another ship....i.e. have one bounce back season and make the playoffs...but in the near term destruction is imminent....and even with that possible bounce back season this team is not going to contend next season without a couple of miraculous trades to fix the defense. On the contrary, it seems more likely that the Bruins get passed up by the likes of Florida and Columbus.
Going forward the Bruins will be at a point over the next couple of years where they have too many question marks instead of surefire answers. Given the aging of players and salary cap restraints it was somewhat inevitable although the personnel decisions haven't helped.
My preference would be to keep the guys that have a chance to still be playing at a high level the next time the Bruins have the possibility of being a serious contender which I think you have to put at 2017-2018...that is, barring a set of moves that blows everyone out of the water and a new team that really meshes well with whoever the (hopefully new) coach will be.
Out of the regular guys who have been in Boston/NHL more than a year I would really look to keep are the following….Rask, Hamilton, Krug, Bergeron, Marchand,…..Two young defensemen that can contribute offensively…and with Bergeron + Marchand you have 2/3 of a solid line. I think Marchand will put up 25 goals a year until he is 34-35 years old.
I suppose keeping Krejci is a good idea but it depends on what kind of team the GM wants to have. He just signed a big contract so he’s likely in Boston anyway. That said, he is a piece that could bring back a major return.
Smith could be dealt but my preference would be to hold onto him to see how he performs under another coach/system….He’s never going to be a world beater but he will continue to get stronger…he is moving into his prime years and he has more to give than what he showed this season.
I would lean toward holding onto Kelly + Chara for next year as well. I don’t think the Bruins would get much in return for them at this point and I’d want to have some veteran presence on what should be a young team….I don’t want an Edmonton situation. Besides, it doesn’t look good to push everyone out the door, and it’s not likely that this team is in the running for the Cup next year anyway. Showing these two guys respect is worthwhile to me. I don’t really want the Bruins to be a “cap team†next year anyway (at least in the traditional sense) so stashing Kelly on the 4th line at $3 million doesn’t really matter.
Out of the guys that are signed next season I’m looking to move Lucic and Eriksson for a couple of young defensemen and a young 3rd line type winger.
The UFA can all walk if they want to….Soderberg, Bartkowski, Paille, Campbell, McQuaid. It’s likely that even if they were kept they would not be playing a big role on the team 3 years down the road.
I don’t think the Bruins are going to “fall off a cliffâ€. The core has taken a step back due to aging of Chara + Seidenberg but the team is not bereft of talent and Rask will almost assuredly keep them out of the bottom 5 of the standings. I put more of the blame on the players and coach than on the roster construction. 96 points with a lukewarm effort on many occasions and countless wasted opportunities is not reflective of a team that lacks talent. If the team was good enough to go on some long winning streaks, then the team should have been good enough to avoid the long dry spells as well. Chiarelli was right in that they missed that extra effort….the hunger that I saw watching Ottawa wasn’t there with the Bruins. I suppose you can put that on lack of leadership but that shouldn’t have been a huge issue with a roster that has so many veteran players.
My primary consideration when analyzing the team is to put it in perspective with the other teams in the East especially with the divisional playoff format. I think in the near future it is going to be very difficult to qualify for the playoffs in the Atlantic Division. It already was this year considering 96 points did not get Boston in.
The elephant in the room is that heading into next year the Bruins have exactly 1 defenseman that they can count that when playing 20+ minutes a night will be a positive factor in helping the team win and that is Hamilton. Krug can play his 19-20 minutes but is essentially neutral in terms of value..but you keep him because he is young and his skill set is hard to find. I would venture a guess that one of Chara + Seidenberg has a bounce back season if both of them are around. So let’s say that’s 2 Top 4 guys that are going to help the team win most nights and a type of tweener in Krug. Looking around at the competition that probably isn’t going to be enough.
I think that for the next couple of years Tampa Bay and Montreal will for the most part be better than Boston. TB is stacked and is getting the latter years of Callahan’s effectiveness with his big contract….in a few years that one won’t look so good but it’s the price to be paid for trying to win…same as Chara + Seidenberg.
It is pretty clear to me that Florida is about to pass up Boston and therein lies the rub as they say. It seems likely that Florida is about to become a solid playoff team, and that leaves the Bruins battling for maybe a wild card spot or benefitting from a year when one of the other teams has major injuries and falls apart.
Ottawa has had this miraculous run but I don’t see them as an elite team in the near future. I suppose you give them the edge on Boston because the Sens have a young elite defenseman in Karlsson and other younger players in big roles but in my opinion Ottawa is a notch below Montreal and Tampa Bay now and in the medium term future below Florida….(even if the Sens matchup well against Montreal).
Detroit hasn’t contended for about 4 years now and have gotten a lot of young players in the lineup, but no one of the caliber of Datsyuk/Zetteberg who are their top 2 scorers this year but are nearing the end of the line as elite players. I think the Red Wings are going to be about an average team league wide and will also be passed up by Florida. Still, the Wings made the playoffs which is more than the Bruins can say.
So if we’re doing a pecking order for the near term future you have
Tampa Bay
Montreal
Florida
4 + 5 Ottawa/Detroit
6. Boston not far behind…maybe 85-90 pts? stuck in mediocrity
7. Buffalo - nowhere to go but up…but not necessarily a successful rebuild even with McDavid/Eichel
8. Toronto - will be completely blown up
Unfortunately I don’t see a way that the Bruins are not going to be in that middle ground area. They are not going to get markedly better because other teams have improved a good deal and the Bruins have lost hall of fame defenseman level play from Chara and no one can replace that. Also, the young players have to develop and aren’t ready to carry the weight yet. Still, they are not going to bottom out because they have some good players and a good goalie. So I guess Chiarelli (or whoever the new GM is) needs to just follow the natural progression looking to win trades….and that’s where Lucic + Eriksson and maybe Seidenberg come in. The Bruins in my opinion must sell on two out of these three guys who are slow of foot, will not improve but can still help contenders and the Bruins are not a contender anymore. Problem is that if you move Lucic the rest of the group of wingers is small non physical….but you can’t give him a big contract either and his effectiveness is declining…game is too fast for him.
My fear is that the natural progression of the organization toward a re-tool will be thwarted by pressure meddlesome ownership to make decisions in the short-term interest.
Team needs to operate like a submarine....the destroyers have seen us now...soon they will start tossing depth charges....time to take the ship down for awhile to safety....eventually the destroyers move away....(other successful teams get older and more expensive to retain roster) and the situation becomes safer (Bruins lose bad contracts, collect a few better draft picks, deal off aging players, develop young ones) allowing team err...submarine to resurface.
If we stay on the surface we might sink another ship....i.e. have one bounce back season and make the playoffs...but in the near term destruction is imminent....and even with that possible bounce back season this team is not going to contend next season without a couple of miraculous trades to fix the defense. On the contrary, it seems more likely that the Bruins get passed up by the likes of Florida and Columbus.
Going forward the Bruins will be at a point over the next couple of years where they have too many question marks instead of surefire answers. Given the aging of players and salary cap restraints it was somewhat inevitable although the personnel decisions haven't helped.
My preference would be to keep the guys that have a chance to still be playing at a high level the next time the Bruins have the possibility of being a serious contender which I think you have to put at 2017-2018...that is, barring a set of moves that blows everyone out of the water and a new team that really meshes well with whoever the (hopefully new) coach will be.
Out of the regular guys who have been in Boston/NHL more than a year I would really look to keep are the following….Rask, Hamilton, Krug, Bergeron, Marchand,…..Two young defensemen that can contribute offensively…and with Bergeron + Marchand you have 2/3 of a solid line. I think Marchand will put up 25 goals a year until he is 34-35 years old.
I suppose keeping Krejci is a good idea but it depends on what kind of team the GM wants to have. He just signed a big contract so he’s likely in Boston anyway. That said, he is a piece that could bring back a major return.
Smith could be dealt but my preference would be to hold onto him to see how he performs under another coach/system….He’s never going to be a world beater but he will continue to get stronger…he is moving into his prime years and he has more to give than what he showed this season.
I would lean toward holding onto Kelly + Chara for next year as well. I don’t think the Bruins would get much in return for them at this point and I’d want to have some veteran presence on what should be a young team….I don’t want an Edmonton situation. Besides, it doesn’t look good to push everyone out the door, and it’s not likely that this team is in the running for the Cup next year anyway. Showing these two guys respect is worthwhile to me. I don’t really want the Bruins to be a “cap team†next year anyway (at least in the traditional sense) so stashing Kelly on the 4th line at $3 million doesn’t really matter.
Out of the guys that are signed next season I’m looking to move Lucic and Eriksson for a couple of young defensemen and a young 3rd line type winger.
The UFA can all walk if they want to….Soderberg, Bartkowski, Paille, Campbell, McQuaid. It’s likely that even if they were kept they would not be playing a big role on the team 3 years down the road.
I don’t think the Bruins are going to “fall off a cliffâ€. The core has taken a step back due to aging of Chara + Seidenberg but the team is not bereft of talent and Rask will almost assuredly keep them out of the bottom 5 of the standings. I put more of the blame on the players and coach than on the roster construction. 96 points with a lukewarm effort on many occasions and countless wasted opportunities is not reflective of a team that lacks talent. If the team was good enough to go on some long winning streaks, then the team should have been good enough to avoid the long dry spells as well. Chiarelli was right in that they missed that extra effort….the hunger that I saw watching Ottawa wasn’t there with the Bruins. I suppose you can put that on lack of leadership but that shouldn’t have been a huge issue with a roster that has so many veteran players.
My primary consideration when analyzing the team is to put it in perspective with the other teams in the East especially with the divisional playoff format. I think in the near future it is going to be very difficult to qualify for the playoffs in the Atlantic Division. It already was this year considering 96 points did not get Boston in.
The elephant in the room is that heading into next year the Bruins have exactly 1 defenseman that they can count that when playing 20+ minutes a night will be a positive factor in helping the team win and that is Hamilton. Krug can play his 19-20 minutes but is essentially neutral in terms of value..but you keep him because he is young and his skill set is hard to find. I would venture a guess that one of Chara + Seidenberg has a bounce back season if both of them are around. So let’s say that’s 2 Top 4 guys that are going to help the team win most nights and a type of tweener in Krug. Looking around at the competition that probably isn’t going to be enough.
I think that for the next couple of years Tampa Bay and Montreal will for the most part be better than Boston. TB is stacked and is getting the latter years of Callahan’s effectiveness with his big contract….in a few years that one won’t look so good but it’s the price to be paid for trying to win…same as Chara + Seidenberg.
It is pretty clear to me that Florida is about to pass up Boston and therein lies the rub as they say. It seems likely that Florida is about to become a solid playoff team, and that leaves the Bruins battling for maybe a wild card spot or benefitting from a year when one of the other teams has major injuries and falls apart.
Ottawa has had this miraculous run but I don’t see them as an elite team in the near future. I suppose you give them the edge on Boston because the Sens have a young elite defenseman in Karlsson and other younger players in big roles but in my opinion Ottawa is a notch below Montreal and Tampa Bay now and in the medium term future below Florida….(even if the Sens matchup well against Montreal).
Detroit hasn’t contended for about 4 years now and have gotten a lot of young players in the lineup, but no one of the caliber of Datsyuk/Zetteberg who are their top 2 scorers this year but are nearing the end of the line as elite players. I think the Red Wings are going to be about an average team league wide and will also be passed up by Florida. Still, the Wings made the playoffs which is more than the Bruins can say.
So if we’re doing a pecking order for the near term future you have
Tampa Bay
Montreal
Florida
4 + 5 Ottawa/Detroit
6. Boston not far behind…maybe 85-90 pts? stuck in mediocrity
7. Buffalo - nowhere to go but up…but not necessarily a successful rebuild even with McDavid/Eichel
8. Toronto - will be completely blown up
Unfortunately I don’t see a way that the Bruins are not going to be in that middle ground area. They are not going to get markedly better because other teams have improved a good deal and the Bruins have lost hall of fame defenseman level play from Chara and no one can replace that. Also, the young players have to develop and aren’t ready to carry the weight yet. Still, they are not going to bottom out because they have some good players and a good goalie. So I guess Chiarelli (or whoever the new GM is) needs to just follow the natural progression looking to win trades….and that’s where Lucic + Eriksson and maybe Seidenberg come in. The Bruins in my opinion must sell on two out of these three guys who are slow of foot, will not improve but can still help contenders and the Bruins are not a contender anymore. Problem is that if you move Lucic the rest of the group of wingers is small non physical….but you can’t give him a big contract either and his effectiveness is declining…game is too fast for him.
My fear is that the natural progression of the organization toward a re-tool will be thwarted by pressure meddlesome ownership to make decisions in the short-term interest.
Latrappe
If Cam allow it
- Nov 3, 2006
- 11,071
- 9
C77, my friend... The Bruins can't afford to be neutral. They just can't. They had very important decisions to make on important players. They have to change the dynamic upfront and on D and it's not an option.
On the blueline, the Bruins will have to make a decision on Chara, Seidenberg and Miller/McQuaid. The team can keep Chara if their able to land a top 4 D-man who will be able to reduce the workload on him. Chara still have value but he can't play top minutes anymore. The last 2 seasons are a clear cut example of that. Maybe Seidenberg will recover, maybe not. That's why I would explore a trade for him and move his salary. McQuaid/Miller are redundant on this team. While some fans are not believing in Miller, he was our best D-man before being hurt. Mind you: you don't achieve a +19 ratio by being a spectator on the ice....
Upfront, a lot of decisions too. At first, I though that Smith contract was a good idea. For whatever reasons, this contract was the starting point of a miserable stretch for him. I think he can recover with a new mindset but if the Bruins have a decent offer for him, then it's bye bye. Lucic need to be extended and while Neely might see a lot of reasons to keep him, I would move him for a top 4 D-man. Lucic is the not the game changer he used to be and he was a clear cut passenger this season. It would be tough to nail down #46 since he was hurt all the time but... health seems to be a concern and his contract, an hefty one. I would keep him around unless the Bruins have a strong offer for him. Soderberg,Paille,Campbell and Kelly have to go. We need skills and offensive awareness; not grinders with stone hands.
We're set in goal. We just need a decent backup who can reduce Rask's workload.
With all these important decisions around, I don't want Chiarelli at the helm of the team. These decisions will have a massive impact on the future and on our chances to be contenders again. Chiarelli proved, once and for all, that he doesn't have what it take to make risky/bold moves who can pay off. Claude? He has his flaws but his ability to turn young players into legit NHL'ers can't be denied. Despite what some fans think, his system works and the numbers are there as a proof. That said, I doubt that he will survive to the overhaul. For the fans who think about the guy in Detroit: Forget about it. Detroit will re-sign him.
On the blueline, the Bruins will have to make a decision on Chara, Seidenberg and Miller/McQuaid. The team can keep Chara if their able to land a top 4 D-man who will be able to reduce the workload on him. Chara still have value but he can't play top minutes anymore. The last 2 seasons are a clear cut example of that. Maybe Seidenberg will recover, maybe not. That's why I would explore a trade for him and move his salary. McQuaid/Miller are redundant on this team. While some fans are not believing in Miller, he was our best D-man before being hurt. Mind you: you don't achieve a +19 ratio by being a spectator on the ice....
Upfront, a lot of decisions too. At first, I though that Smith contract was a good idea. For whatever reasons, this contract was the starting point of a miserable stretch for him. I think he can recover with a new mindset but if the Bruins have a decent offer for him, then it's bye bye. Lucic need to be extended and while Neely might see a lot of reasons to keep him, I would move him for a top 4 D-man. Lucic is the not the game changer he used to be and he was a clear cut passenger this season. It would be tough to nail down #46 since he was hurt all the time but... health seems to be a concern and his contract, an hefty one. I would keep him around unless the Bruins have a strong offer for him. Soderberg,Paille,Campbell and Kelly have to go. We need skills and offensive awareness; not grinders with stone hands.
We're set in goal. We just need a decent backup who can reduce Rask's workload.
With all these important decisions around, I don't want Chiarelli at the helm of the team. These decisions will have a massive impact on the future and on our chances to be contenders again. Chiarelli proved, once and for all, that he doesn't have what it take to make risky/bold moves who can pay off. Claude? He has his flaws but his ability to turn young players into legit NHL'ers can't be denied. Despite what some fans think, his system works and the numbers are there as a proof. That said, I doubt that he will survive to the overhaul. For the fans who think about the guy in Detroit: Forget about it. Detroit will re-sign him.
C77
Registered User
I don't think the team should be neutral. I think they should let every UFA walk and replace them with in-house options or via trade or a veteran signing or two. Plus I think they should move out 2 out of 3 of Lucic, Eriksson + Seidenberg.
That means the team will have a lot of youth on it, and the type of young players are guys that can contribute offensively with skating + skill and those aren't Claude's system type of guys. Granted, after the organization scolding by Jacobs, Julien changed some things up but zebras don't often change their stripes.
So having a young team next year with possibly all or most of Pastrnak, Spooner, Hamilton, Ferlin, Trotman, Morrow, Lindblad etc. you want to have some veterans around as well and that's why I'd keep Kelly in a 4th line role and probably Chara. Regarding Chara, as you say he has broken down the last few seasons, so why would other teams give up something valuable for him? And if that is the case, it makes more sense to hold onto him for a year or two and then let him retire. The Bruins can't rebuild the entire defense in the offseason.
08SeaBass08
Maybe next year.
NightmanCometh
Registered User
a PERFECT characterization of the situation. Personally I see Krejci + as our most valuable/expendable trade piece, given our center depth and lack there of at other positions. As unrealistic as it might be, I'd love to see us acquire a top D who can stabilize our blue line and reinvigorate this team. It's what they need -- everyone from Bergeron to Pastrnak. That being said, PC would be reliant upon a team who is cap constrained or downright naive to acquire a top D in a trade in this era. They are few and far between for a reason... what a gift we've had with Chara over these years. I guess you don't really appreciate it until it's... not what it used to be.
Man Rocket
88+73
- Jul 12, 2011
- 6,916
- 77
Don't get your hopes up for drastic changes. The core of the team is all pretty much the same age at 27-30. They will say we have the players we just couldn't put it together. They will want to keep it together because the core is in their prime and they will expect to be right there again.
Now, let's hope all those guys get fired (chia, neely etc )
Now, let's hope all those guys get fired (chia, neely etc )
Extend Eriksson - 4 x 5
Resign Mcquaid - 3x2.25
Hamilton - 4 x 5.25
Connolly - 2 x 1.75
Call Up Ferlin
Trade Soda @ draft or do sign and trade, shop Reilly.
Off Paille, Soupy, Kells.
March-Bergeron-Eriksson
XXX-Krejci-Connolly
Lucic-Spooner-Pasta
Ferlin-Talbot-XXX
Seids-Hamilton (unless knee shot)
Chara-Morrow
Krug-MacQuaid
Miller
Rask
quality sub
For LW slot, maybe take a flyer on Booth as a reclamation for 4th line, or see if Koko can play LW. Otherwise will need a trade...
Resign Mcquaid - 3x2.25
Hamilton - 4 x 5.25
Connolly - 2 x 1.75
Call Up Ferlin
Trade Soda @ draft or do sign and trade, shop Reilly.
Off Paille, Soupy, Kells.
March-Bergeron-Eriksson
XXX-Krejci-Connolly
Lucic-Spooner-Pasta
Ferlin-Talbot-XXX
Seids-Hamilton (unless knee shot)
Chara-Morrow
Krug-MacQuaid
Miller
Rask
quality sub
For LW slot, maybe take a flyer on Booth as a reclamation for 4th line, or see if Koko can play LW. Otherwise will need a trade...
ODAAT
Registered User
NightmanCometh
Registered User
All I know is that with the house cleaning coming up Chara will make out like a bandit with his real estate lisence.
norwoodmustang
Registered User
The draft pick will be at worst, 14th overall, with a 1% chance of the first overall pick. Even 14th is a really good spot in a deep draft.
Guys still on the board at that pick in the 2003 draft everyone compares 2015 to:
Brent Seabrook
Zach Parise
Ryan Getzlaf
Brent Burns
Mark Stuart
Ryan Kesler
Mike Richards
Brian Boyle
Corey Perry
Not to mention Loui Eriksson, Patrice Bergeron, David Backes and Jimmy Howard in the 2nd round.
We have a decent shot at grabbing at least one very good (young, cheap) player to add to Pasta and Spooner. Plus you still have Koko, Ferlin, Hickman, and other prospects who can fight for a spot next year.
Campbell, Paille, Svedberg, and Bartowski are almost certainly gone. Soda and McQuaid probably gone too but could stay depending on the plan.
You also have trades and free agency.
Assuming none of them are moved, our top 9 forwards should be
Lucic-Krejci-Pasta
Marchand-Bergeron-Eriksson
Smith-Spooner-Connolly
Then you have Kelly and Talbot as 4th liners, again, assuming Kelly isn't traded.
While there's room for some improvement in the forwards, even if they were kept the same, I think with the addition of a top 4 D the team would be leaps and bounds better- and we all know the forward group WILL change.
Guys still on the board at that pick in the 2003 draft everyone compares 2015 to:
Brent Seabrook
Zach Parise
Ryan Getzlaf
Brent Burns
Mark Stuart
Ryan Kesler
Mike Richards
Brian Boyle
Corey Perry
Not to mention Loui Eriksson, Patrice Bergeron, David Backes and Jimmy Howard in the 2nd round.
We have a decent shot at grabbing at least one very good (young, cheap) player to add to Pasta and Spooner. Plus you still have Koko, Ferlin, Hickman, and other prospects who can fight for a spot next year.
Campbell, Paille, Svedberg, and Bartowski are almost certainly gone. Soda and McQuaid probably gone too but could stay depending on the plan.
You also have trades and free agency.
Assuming none of them are moved, our top 9 forwards should be
Lucic-Krejci-Pasta
Marchand-Bergeron-Eriksson
Smith-Spooner-Connolly
Then you have Kelly and Talbot as 4th liners, again, assuming Kelly isn't traded.
While there's room for some improvement in the forwards, even if they were kept the same, I think with the addition of a top 4 D the team would be leaps and bounds better- and we all know the forward group WILL change.
NightmanCometh
Registered User
I won't deny that the addition of a legit top 4 D would fundamentally change this team for the better, but I don't think it would be smart to draft our way there. Everybody knows that even elite NHL defenesman take several years to reach their full potential. If we drafted a 'supposed' top 4, we probably wouldn't see him on the team for at least 2 seasons. Who knows what happens by then. Personally I'd rather see us draft a high-quality, Bruins oriented forward who is capable of putting the puck in the net. The chances of him making the team as an 18 year old are much, much higher than any D player. His impact (like Pastrnak) would be felt immediately. If we then trade certain assets for a quality D, I like our post-season chances for next season. Of course the powers at be will somehow find a way to **** things up.
norwoodmustang
Registered User
I wasn't saying you draft a D, I'm saying you're likely adding a quality player via the draft, and if it's a forward all the more reason to not worry so much about trading for a forward or getting one through free agency because we have more forward options than we do D options. We don't have a young D ready to step in next season and make a real contribution, whereas we do have some forwards like Koko and Hickman and Ferlin who may be able to fill some of those forward roles. So if we can only afford to sign one player in free agency or we can only make one trade, IMO it should be for a top 4 D before anything else.
Mount Kramer Cameras
Registered User
- Jul 15, 2014
- 3,645
- 1,000
I agree, but it depends on the context. If someone like Werenski slides and is available at our pick, we'd have to take him. Seems unlikely though
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,515
- 22,214
Generally take the best player available, forward or D-man.
But if there's two players the scouting staff likes about the same and one is a D and the other a forward, take the D. Quality D-men are now the hardest thing to acquire in trade and free agency. If you don't draft and develop your own, very hard to get them.
Either way any D they take even at 14 isn't going to help the Bruins next season or likely the season after.
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,515
- 22,214
Who needs to stay:
Bergeron, Spooner, Pastrnak, Marchand, Connolly, Ferlin, Hamilton, Krug, Morrow, Trotman, and Rask.
I'd like to keep but would trade for the right deal:
Lucic, Eriksson, Krejci, Chara, Miller
UFAs who need to be cut loose:
Paille, Campbell, Soderberg, and Bartkowski
UFAs I'd like to see return but don't believe the Bruin's can afford to pay market value for:
McQuaid
Players I absolutely want to see traded in the off-season:
Kelly, Talbot, Smith, Seidenberg, and Svedberg.
Bergeron, Spooner, Pastrnak, Marchand, Connolly, Ferlin, Hamilton, Krug, Morrow, Trotman, and Rask.
I'd like to keep but would trade for the right deal:
Lucic, Eriksson, Krejci, Chara, Miller
UFAs who need to be cut loose:
Paille, Campbell, Soderberg, and Bartkowski
UFAs I'd like to see return but don't believe the Bruin's can afford to pay market value for:
McQuaid
Players I absolutely want to see traded in the off-season:
Kelly, Talbot, Smith, Seidenberg, and Svedberg.
missingchicklet
Registered User
- Jan 24, 2010
- 36,589
- 34,464
I would absolutely keep Eriksson and sign him to a multi-year deal pronto. 22 goals this year playing primarily with a slumping line and out of his natural position. That's 68th best in the league on a team that struggles to score. 81 games played, gets to the dirty areas, passes well, plays solid D, super high IQ. He's arguably one of the three most important players on the team in overall play. Guy is a bargain right now and I don't think it would take a whole lot more to re-sign him to a new deal of 3-4 years. He's a lot more valuable than he gets credit for.
Should add he is second in shooting pct. on the Bs right behind Marchand 13.3 vs 13.0 shooting pct (Griffith excluded).
Should add he is second in shooting pct. on the Bs right behind Marchand 13.3 vs 13.0 shooting pct (Griffith excluded).
GloveSave1
*** 15 ***
To the shock of many, Chia and Clode stay. Their leashes cut short. Thanks for the championship and run of success, that saved you from the axe.
I don't feel the Bruins have to make a grand sacred cow slaughter by trading a Lucic or Marchand, but they could. Just address the glaring needs and cut where it obviously has been calling for it. THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO CUT IT ALL. Both Chia and Clode are going to have to learn from this a bit, go/trust younger.
Lucic-Krejci-(?, finisher)
Marchand-Bergeron-Connolly
Koko-Spooner-Pasta
(?, physical)-Talbot-(?, physical+speed)
Ferlin
Chara/Seidenberg
(?, defensive lock)/Hamilton
Miller/Krug
Trotman
Morrow
Rask
(?, cheap)
Out:
Smith (duh)
Eriksson (physical upgrade, trade chip)
Soderberg (Spooner in, scoring)
Campbell (phased)
Paille (phased)
Kelly (phased, $)
McQuaid (no room, $)
Bart (upgrade)
* If the Bruins were interested in paying the extra 800k to go McQuaid over Miller on D3, I'm all for it in the name of physicality, I just doubt it.
I don't feel the Bruins have to make a grand sacred cow slaughter by trading a Lucic or Marchand, but they could. Just address the glaring needs and cut where it obviously has been calling for it. THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO CUT IT ALL. Both Chia and Clode are going to have to learn from this a bit, go/trust younger.
Lucic-Krejci-(?, finisher)
Marchand-Bergeron-Connolly
Koko-Spooner-Pasta
(?, physical)-Talbot-(?, physical+speed)
Ferlin
Chara/Seidenberg
(?, defensive lock)/Hamilton
Miller/Krug
Trotman
Morrow
Rask
(?, cheap)
Out:
Smith (duh)
Eriksson (physical upgrade, trade chip)
Soderberg (Spooner in, scoring)
Campbell (phased)
Paille (phased)
Kelly (phased, $)
McQuaid (no room, $)
Bart (upgrade)
* If the Bruins were interested in paying the extra 800k to go McQuaid over Miller on D3, I'm all for it in the name of physicality, I just doubt it.
Last edited:
Old Time Sauce
Registered User
- Oct 8, 2008
- 831
- 0
I really hope they can find a way to keep Mcquaid. IMO he was one of the few guys who showed passion and effort every night. Is his game perfect? No. But slot him where he belongs (3rd pair), and he is a great role player. I doubt you find a better replacememt for cheaper on the market and I don't think theres anyone in the system that can fill his void.
Fire Sweeney
Registered User
Bad Puck Bounce
Run Ralphie Run
Stone Clode
Kicks him, stunner!!
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Gold Medal 2024 IIHF WORLD CHAMPION - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 7Staked: $36,600.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-