Playoffs are just around the corner so depth (even x-tra depth) at that position is crucial...
It is what it is IMO...https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/bruins
* IR = Zboril
* Farm = Achan & Lewington have seen brief time w/ the big club and should be on playoff roster.

Lindholm is 28yrs old and their probably extending him to an 8yr deal. McAvoy, Lindholm, Carlo is a solid top 3 for the next 5yrs. Add in Swayman as their #1 and they're in good shape ok the backend.

Late 1st = about a 65% chance of playing 100 NHL games
2nd rounder = about a 35% chance of playing 100 NHL games

The future isn't in question. McAvoy, Carlo, Swayman, Pastrnak. Possibly Lindholm, Lysell and Lohrei.

I kinda like this deal for both teams, Lindholm is a good top 4 defenseman on the left side that Boston could really use, and they get rid of Moore's contract in the process. I'd say one of the second rounders is nearing the price to take on Moore, so getting Lindholm for a 1st and a 2nd is a pretty fair deal IMO. The Ducks get a good return on a player that likely won't be in their future, and the Bruins get a player they can use for this year and possibly the next if he re-signs. Quality deal through and through.

I hate to say it but McAvoy, Carlo, Pastrnak, and Lindholm are all over 24 years old, which doesn't exactly quality as 'great future assets'. Swayman looks pretty good, but Lysell and Lohrei haven't even yet shown they can succeed at the NHL level. So I have to say I agree with Ritzy

Not if they win the cup.

Huge W for the Ducks. Also hearing Bruins are resigning Lindholm for 8 years... double yikes

What's the significance of the age 24? Also I said the future wasnt in question, not "great future assets".... the funny thing is you knock Lohrei/Lysell for showing nothing in the NHL yet, but they would be "future assets" lol

24 is the peak age of Forwards, but I'm pretty sure it's higher for defenders.

There is no specific reason the age 24 is significant, except for the fact that it isn't exactly an 18 year old. Meaning players that are 24 aren't usually considered prospects, or generally players who can still reach their potential.

Lysell and Lohrei are 100% future assets. I never said they weren't. But not only are those two not exactly high-end prospects, Boston had essentially nothing else in the cupboard. So I stand by my take with full confidence. Boston does not have a future.

Honestly feels like "peak age" varies depending on who you talk to. I've heard people say 26/27 is peak. If peak age was so young then why do teams give out large contracts to players over 24yrs old if they are just declining?

Because they become UFA's. Honestly if A GM could somehow manage to maintain relationships while trading away all of their soon to be UFA's, they would win the cup every single year. Prove me wrong

So 24yr old is just a randomly picked number...amazingly enough it just so happens that age fits your argument for the players you listed (sort of)

Pastrnak/Carlo = 25yr old
McAvoy = 24yr old

When you say Boston doesn't have a future are you talking 5yrs from now? 10yrs?

McAvoy, Pastrnak, Carlo, Swayman all have 8-10 years in the league at worst (barring injury). These arent guys who are 30+ and finishing out their careers. Lysell and Lohrei (despite not being flashy names that the average NHL fan has heard about) are both better prospect then people give them credit for. Lysell top 6 upside and leads his Jr team in G/A/P as a rookie whose getting used to the smaller NA ice surface. Lohrei leads his team in assist and is 2nd on his team in points as a freshman. He also sits just outside the top 10 d-men in NCAA production. He's 6'4 and plays all situations lol.

It's fine, we'll agree to disagree. I have no desire or need to "prove you wrong" on a hypothetical scenario you came up with.

The Bruins should have just paid Krug.

The prices at the TDL this year are high!

Krug and Lindholm are 2 completely different players/playstyles, that's like comparing apples to oranges

A few opinions:

Lindholm can be a #2 on a contender while Chiarot shouldn’t be more than a #4 ideally.
Vaakanainen is 23 without looking like anything besides a bottom pairing D in the league. He’s perhaps not very deserving of the status he still seems to have.
This will have no positive effect if it’s Reilly he’s going to take a top 4 spot from. It’s Carlo that should be on the third pairing or traded.
A 1st and two 2nds still hurts and if you’re not trading for rentals I still think you should trade at the draft to maximize value.
Dumping Moore is great but he was also so incredibly predictably not the guy to sign. And then they repeat it with Forbort…
Keeping DeBrusk matters.

This seems fine to me.

No wait the Bruins still don’t have a 2C, why are they doing this? It’s so sad, cause when you’re thinking of last season and what’s different now, I don’t know how you ever conclude this is the missing piece.

W for the ducks.

Big win for ducks! Overpay for Boston

You're not getting it. 24 doesn't have any specific meaning, it just isn't very young when you're considering prospects.

When I'm saying Boston doesn't have a future I'm saying they don't have enough draft picks or prospects in their system to compete past 2 or 3 years from now.

McAvoy and Pastrnak are the only building block players you mentioned. Swayman and Carlo are good, but not stars. They never will be. My point is that Boston doesn't have the drafting or prospect means necessary to build around McAvoy and Pastrnak enough to compete for a cup past 2-3 years from now. Even with Lindholm, who is also not a star, you have a decent D core, lackluster goaltending, and just Pasta up front once Marchand starts slowing down (again, in 2-3 years)

I disagree that Lysell is going to be a top six player, I think that's your homer instinct coming in. He projects to be a solid middle six guy who can score 20 goals in a good season. Heck, you're boasting about his CHL stats when players like Xavier Bourgault, who was drafted after Lysell, have a significantly higher PPG than him. So reconsider what you believe to be a top 6 forward prospect.

I'm a fan of Lohrei, he's a strong offensive defencemen. As long as he can translate his scoring to the NHL, he should be a solid top 4 D at tops. Once again, definitely not a player you can build a team around.
I'm still quite confused that you seem to consider him a blue chip prospect. You must be in absolute awe of players like Cole Caufield, Trevor Zegras, and Moritz Seider, because they are legions better than any of your prospects.

The homer mindset is strong with you. I hope Lysell and Lohrei turn out to be superstars, or else Boston will be hanging out in the basement of the league for a long time

Wow a lot to unpack here. I'm skip over attempted insults and focus on some of your "points" in your post.

Swayman since last year ranks 6th among all goalies in GSAA and since last year his .930 SV% ranks best in the NHL among goalies with at least 10 games. His HDSV% is the 6th best in the NHL again going back to last season. To say the goaltending is lack luster makes me question everything else in your post.

As for Lysell he was ranked as a top 10 pick in last years draft and multiple scouting reports project him as a top 6 winger. You can disagree all you want, I'm going on what I've read in reports and have personally seen. Also comparing his production his first year in the WHL to a guy whose in his 4th year in the QMJHL is questionable at best.

Lohrei without his offense is still strong enough defensively and has the size to be a 3rd pairing guy in the NHL. You being a "fan of Lohrei" would know that though.

And yes I am in awe if guys like Zegras and Seider because they are insanely talented players, which is why they are in the NHL now.

With all that said I'm done. I don't have anymore time for someone who needs to hurl insults.

If you think that's me hurling "insults", you must have had a very sheltered childhood

Also I don't really think you've rebutted any of my points either, which is frustrating because you act like you have.

Swayman has been getting duel starts with Ullmark, no? At one point, he was even sent down to Providence in favour of Tuukka Rask coming back. While he is a good goaltender, and you're stats may seem impressive, but he is much behind elite goalies in his conference such as Vasilevskiy, Bobrovsky, Vanecek, Jarry, Andersen, etc. I could go on. I don't think he would hold up well in a playoff scenario in the next few seasons, and by that time the Bruins' window will have closed. So one of your arguments is invalid.

Okay, Lysell was ranked top 10 by a few scouts. As much as I'd like to agree and stop it there, I'm sure the 20 NHL GMs that passed him on would agree with me in that this certain argument is also invalid. If he were a top 10 caliber player, he probably would have been taken in the top 10. Or even the top 15. Looking back at pasts drafts where a forward has been selected 21st overall, I can see a sort of trend. In 2011, Stefan Noesen was probably considered a top 6 forward prospect. The same probably goes for Frederik Gauthier in 2013. Julien Gauthier in 2016. And Filip Chytil in 2017. And Sam Poulin in 2019. The only two forwards that I found that achieved mild success were Robby Fabbri and Colin White, although I think you would agree with me that neither of those players would be a top six forward on a playoff team? Any argument here? I don't think so.
And let's talk about his production, shall we? As I keep stressing, The Bruins' window is closing. They have about 2-3 more years until Brad Marchand starts to decline and the team begins a nosedive. In that case, it would certainly be helpful if Lysell were to develop quickly. But his point totals with Vancouver aren't exactly impressive for a first rounder. I'm not sure what your reports may say, but usually first round picks score more than barely above PPG in the CHL, especially if they have experience in the SHL like Lysell does. I find your point about Bourgault ridiculous, because Bourgault has had 4 years in the Q, yes, but Lysell played a year with men in the SHL, one of the best amateur leagues in the world. So it would make sense that he could translate his production against much weaker competition. Second argument also invalid.

Okay, you think Lohrei could be a 3rd pairing guy. That's fantastic, but not what the Bruins need. I am a fan, and I do believe he has the size and ability to be a 3rd pairing defenceman as well. But not a star two-way defenceman, which is what the Bruins need, because Lindholm isn't exactly on that level either.

I'm glad you're done, because you clearly don't have any more points to bring forward. I don't feel the need to hurl insults, just defeat you with logic, which I feel I have done effectively. I haven't called you a single name or implied that you have a negative characteristic, just pointed out that you are biased by your homer mindset, which you are.

TBH the Bruins' situation makes me feel even better about what Kent Hughes and the Habs are doing with our franchise. I hope you have a good night.