Sure, but that's not a likely scenario that leads to millions in cap hit. We're talking the difference of maybe 500k.
He's worth keeping imo.
He's worth keeping imo.
I feel the opposite. I'd like to keep these guys and avoid replacing them with more expensive JAGS.I see both DeBrusk and Grzelcyk in the same category. Important depth, but movable if it makes this team better. I think if either one is moved, it will be to improve the other end of the ice.
Agreed. If they can't get a Pietrangelo or a OEL if they let Krug go, they need to fix the age old question of a big time winger for Krejci. See if Taylor Hall will put his money where his mouth is in terms of wanting to play for a winner over the most money. Maybe a 1-year deal at his value now to get him to market in a supposed better financial market for a long-term deal would interest him.I think Krejci has more value to them than what he'd bring back in a trade. I'd be a bit leery about moving Coyle up and hoping Studnicka can handle 3C. I don't think he'd bring back enough in a trade to make it worth it. Eric Stall just returned Marcus Johansson so the return wouldn't be great.
With Krejci, I think you run the contract out and see where you are at the end of the season.
Me too. The return for them(+ non roster assets) needs to be a clear upgrade to the active roster, and I acknowledge that both the likelihood and feasibility of actually finding that are low.I'd like to keep these guys and avoid replacing them with more expensive JAGS.
The problem is, people are looking around to try and find ways to improve the current roster and it just isn't there, so they talk themselves into trading these guys. I've fallen for this trap in the past.Me too. The return for them(+ non roster assets) needs to be a clear upgrade to the active roster, and I acknowledge that both the likelihood and feasibility of actually finding that are low.
I actually disagree. I think they are in a great position moving forward. They have been competitive every year and just as their roster is aging, they have tons of cap flexibility and have the option to rebuild around youth.We all agree that this is not an ideal situation.
Maybe there are numbers that back it up, but I think Carlo is incredibly underrated. He's far from an offensive force, but he's not immobile either. I think highly of Lauzon as a sturdy defense-first defensman, but he's not there yet.. I was disappointed that he regressed a bit late in the year, but this is hard year to judge. But Clifton "Stepping into Carlo's minutes" seems like a pipe dream.Fluto actually has Carlo as more likely to go because he feels they have internal options like Clifton and Lauzon to step into his minutes. He;s also up for a new deal and raise after next season. We're there now with DeBrusk. Inconsistency hurts both players.
They were the best duo in the league this year and the Bruins don't have any internal options ready to take over for a traded one. I don't think it makes much sense to trade either of them. I'd run it back and then re-evaluate at the end of the season. They could do something crazy like trade Rask and sign a UFA to save some money but I just don't see it.Mostly agree, but why are the goalies untouchable?
Whither Kase?Fluto did a trade tiers column at the Athletic. i'm bored so I put one together myself:
Untouchable, Franchise Cornerstone
David Pastrnak, Charlie McAvoy. Should be pretty obvious.
Untouchable, Old core members/NMC's
Patrice Bergeron, Brad Marchand, David Krejci, Tuukka Rask, Jaroslav Halak, Charlie Coyle
These ones should be pretty obvious too. I lumped Charlie Coyle into this group since he's got a partial NMC and I think he's too valuable to the team for now and in the coming years to consider a trade. Krejci, Rask and Halak maybe you consider trading at the deadline if the team isn't in playoff position, but I don't think you deal any of them right now.
Untouchable, Prospects
Jack Studnicka, John Beecher
With Bergeron and Krejci aging and nearing the end, I don't think the Bruins are in much of a position to be dealing center prospects. Studnicka showed well in the bubble. Beecher's likely another year away from signing so maybe he could be used in a trade but I think it'd be safest to hold for now.
Maybe?
Jake DeBrusk, Brandon Carlo, Matt Grzelyck
Both players would probably be considered core members. If they are shaking up the core, one of these guys could go. Fluto actually has Carlo as more likely to go because he feels they have internal options like Clifton and Lauzon to step into his minutes. He;s also up for a new deal and raise after next season. We're there now with DeBrusk. Inconsistency hurts both players. Any trade including them would be a hockey deal where they're improving elsewhere.I put Grzelyck in here too but I think the only way he gets traded is if either Krug re-signs or they are getting a replacement LHD,.
Prospects, maybe?
Urho Vaakanainen, Zach Senyshyn, Dan Vladar, Jakob Zboril, Trent Frederic, Oskar Steen, Jakub Lauko, Karson Kuhlman
I think Vaak might be a stretch to put as a maybe but I think if they need a prospect to headline a package, he makes more sense than Studnicka or Beecher because of the depth they have at the position. The rest of the players on this list would be fillers more than headliners.
Sure, but their value isn't high
Anders Bjork, Connor Clifton, John Moore, Jeremy Lauzon, Nick Ritchie, Chris Wagner, Sean Kuraly, Par Lindholm
These guys could all be included in a trade but they wouldn't drive the return. Kuraly is entering the final year of his deal, I'd lump him in with Krejci as a possible deadline trade candidate if they are out of position.
Forgot about him. I probably should do a separate tier with Kase and Grzelyck. Maybe but super unlikely. We don't really know what we have with him, I think we need a bigger sample size.Whither Kase?
I don't have the time or resources to look, but I'd be curious if there is a team that has a young promising goalie that we can stick behind Halak/Tuukka for a year that would be a good trade fit.They were the best duo in the league this year and the Bruins don't have any internal options ready to take over for a traded one. I don't think it makes much sense to trade either of them. I'd run it back and then re-evaluate at the end of the season. They could do something crazy like trade Rask and sign a UFA to save some money but I just don't see it.
They have Vladar, Keyser and Swayman in the system. They all have promise. Vladar is the closest, he's probably in Boston after next season. I don't think they need to go find a young goalie.I don't have the time or resources to look, but I'd be curious if there is a team that has a young promising goalie that we can stick behind Halak/Tuukka for a year that would be a good trade fit.
Both goalies are up next season, they need to address it soon. I'd explore a Tuukka trade for his replacement.
The dude has put up 70 points twice in a 10 year career. That's not exactly a reasonable ask for a dude coming off of season where he was playing at a 63pt/82 game clip - when he almost never plays 82 games.With Krejci and Bergeron, Hall can help extend the window. I don’t see them competing in 2021 with just a minor adjustment or 2. If Hall can put up 70+ points next to Krejci while Pasta puts up 70+ next to Bergeron, they are a more dangerous team.
Hall comes with risks but they could be worth it.
We also have to take into account the return that they would get for DeBrusk. If they can get a similar age LHD with some size and enough skill to play with McAvoy for DeBrusk, then sign Hall to play with Krejci and Kase, it has the potential to make them a better team overall.The dude has put up 70 points twice in a 10 year career. That's not exactly a reasonable ask for a dude coming off of season where he was playing at a 63pt/82 game clip - when he almost never plays 82 games.
He's played on disasters and hasn't had the same coach for 2 years straight. He's also been asked to be "the guy," and here he wouldn't be.The dude has put up 70 points twice in a 10 year career. That's not exactly a reasonable ask for a dude coming off of season where he was playing at a 63pt/82 game clip - when he almost never plays 82 games.
He's also going to cost significantly more than DeBrusk and they could use the difference in cash for a UFA.He's better than DeBrusk and it let's them use DeBrusk to address the defense.
He's played on disasters and hasn't had the same coach for 2 years straight. He's also been asked to be "the guy," and here he wouldn't be.
He's a better player than DeBrusk and it'd free them up to use DeBrusk to replace Krug's vacancy.
I totally agree, it seems like making a move just to make a move.He's also going to cost significantly more than DeBrusk and they could use the difference in cash for a UFA.
He's also 29 and injury prone. I'm not sold that signing him makes the Bruins better over an 82 game season.
I mean, trading a 23 year old RFA to sign a 28 year old UFA isn’t exactly building for the future.To those that don’t like it, what’s your plan 1, 3 year plan(s)?I don’t see how they compete next year without improvements.
As mentioned they can hope for improvement from Debrusk, Kase, Bjork but most gains are likely to be modest. More importantly, those gains are likely to be offset by declines from Bergeron (35), Krejci (34) and Marchand (32). They’ll remain useful top line players decline from their status as league leaders. (as two way players)
It’s legitimate to go with that they have for another year. And then your rebuild for a year or 2 but I just see them getting toward a Chicago type of team.
Look at his shooting% numbers from before and after the hand injury.Since he left Edmonton, he's been pretty durable. Hand injury wrecked one year, but he's played 82, 72, 76, 33 (hand problem), 65 games in the shortened season this year.
I don't believe they should sell out the future for marginal improvements next year. They have to reset going into 2021 anyway and trying to extend that by a couple years is not going to end well.To those that don’t like it, what’s your plan 1, 3 year plan(s)?I don’t see how they compete next year without improvements.
As mentioned they can hope for improvement from Debrusk, Kase, Bjork but most gains are likely to be modest. More importantly, those gains are likely to be offset by declines from Bergeron (35), Krejci (34) and Marchand (32). They’ll remain useful top line players decline from their status as league leaders. (as two way players)
It’s legitimate to go with that they have for another year. And then your rebuild for a year or 2 but I just see them getting toward a Chicago type of team.
Not to mention, DeBrusk has scored more goals over the last two seasons (both actual, and projected if Hall plays a 82 game season in 18/19) than Hall.I don't believe they should sell out the future for marginal improvements next year. They have to reset going into 2021 anyway and trying to extend that by a couple years is not going to end well.
What can they get for that? Fringe prospect? Low draft pick?