SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

BergerOn

Member Since
Jun. 1, 2015
Favourite Team
Boston Bruins
2nd Favourite Team
Calgary Flames
Forum Posts
158
Posts per Day
0.0
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 21, 2015 at 12:49 p.m.
Thread: Canucks side of nsurge9's VAN-BOS trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>palhal</b></div><div><i>Is Elder that good? Think the Bruins should hold onto Morrow and their pick and if they need a Dman next year, get a free agent.</i></div></div>

Edler is worth two top prospects and a 1st rounder especially because he is signed long term, he ma not be the guy as a No. 1 but hes a Top 2 Dman and for the bruins a top 6 of Chara-Edler, Krug-Seidenberg, Irwin-McQuaid is a legitimate force in the Atlantic, plus Morrow is likely not going to get a great opportunity on the bruins because of their depth down the left side this season, and they could hold on to him but he is too close to spend more AHL time and the bruins probably see Colin Miller, Zach Trotman, and Matt Irwin as all better options. On the Canucks side of it, I see Koko maybe playing on the 4th line with the canucks and I say this because I expect either Burrows or Chris Higgins to be traded anyway becaxuse of the Canucks forward depth, and Morrow may get a top 6 spot as he is a former 1st rnder, hes definitely a better option than Bartkowski and Weber. Anyways, on both sides it is an improvement: cancucks improve depth, fre up cape space, and have the freedom to move on from burrows/higgins, and the bruins get a real top 4 D core
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 4, 2015 at 2:01 a.m.
Thread: bruins nash
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BruinsDieHard213</b></div><div><i>That team goes nowhere, sorry.

<strong>To start off:</strong>

Neither the Bruins nor the Rangers would touch that deal. It doesn't make any sense for either team. Rangers give up a 40-50 goal scorer for a downgrade in Lucic (scoring wise). I'd rather have Lucic over Nash come playoff time (assuming the B's make the playoffs).

Go compare Krug and Yandle. Very similar players, with Krug still having tons of time to mature and grow as a player. Yandle is extremely expensive (and the Rags aren't retaining his salary; especially that much). Going forward, i'd take Krug over Yandle anyway. Krug is a gamer and comes up big when you need him to; albeit in a small career sample size.

Reilly Smith, though i don't care for him, has value and should be used elsewhere, since like i said, the deal wouldn't happen.

<strong>On the Vancouver Deal:</strong>

It's even worse than the Rangers deal. Downgrading a great deal in both positions. Eriksson &gt;&gt; Kassian and Seidenberg is still better than Bieksa, even if Seids is coming off injury.

<strong>Everything else:</strong>

Chris Kelly cannot be on this team come the start of the season. His cap hit is too large for a team needing cap space. He doesn't put up points, and at this point in his career in a grossly overpaid 4th liner. That proposed 3rd line would be brutal offensively. Your hoping Connolly can put it together here in Boston. You will get ZERO offensive help from Kelly; Spooner would rot with those two.

Too many "??" for the RW depth. Pastrnak, though on track to be a really good player, is still young and more than likely won't be able to handle a full 82 game season as the team's #1 RW option. Kassian is nothing more than a 3rd/4th liner at this point, and though he shows flashes, doesn't have the IQ to be a consistently good player. I would take him on the team, but not in the role you proposed and not in the deal you proposed.</i></div></div>

Jensen potential top 6 and former first rnder, kassian a risk with high upside and Bieksa is a better D man than seids and is a righty which fits the bs better for the 4th d man so for the vancouver deal I think the bruins get a lot for a d man on the dcline with 3 yrs left at 4 mil and an expiring misfit in eriksson. As far as nash... your trading for an underachiever but you clear out two underachievers in smith and lucic and only give up krug and a pick added on to get Nash (40 goal scorer) and Yandle whose better defensively than Krug and has same PP strengths. Morrow has better upside as top 4 than krug anyways so you put him as 6D with miller to develop but you cant trust Krug for top 4 D minutes (and after this season when hes an RFA again i bet they would trade him anyway cuz he doesnt fit as a long term player with the bruins as a top 4 D), but Yandle you can trust as a top 4 D with those minutes. Also, you get younger, faster, and more skilled only giving up Seids, Lucic, krug and Smith. Nash has only 3 more years, Yandle and/or bieksa can be let go after the season and that cap space can be used elsewhere instead of it being tied up in Krug, Smith, and Seids who werent going to get it done at the price.

O and on Kelly, I see your point but the reality is that Kelly brings trust to the table that they will want at the very least from him at the 4th line LW position (if talbot is on the bench then), and 1 more year at 3 mil to help along a team of young guys who have the two way skill but need someone to push them to put it all together. Koko/spooner can benefit from kelly in doses, not saying he starts every game but they need a fall back plan if Koko/spooner/talbot/connolly cant get it done on the bottom six defensively. Kelly here is a safety net and a veteran presence