SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

tad77

Member Since
Jun. 5, 2017
Favourite Team
Columbus Blue Jackets
2nd Favourite Team
Carolina Hurricanes
Forum Posts
373
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: NHL TradesFeb. 19, 2018 at 12:43 p.m.
Thread: Mrazek to Philly?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DoctorBreakfast</b></div><div>I think the biggest issue is the fact that Mrazek is making $4 million and will still have RFA status at the end of this season; his play hasn't warranted that kind of pay. Because of his RFA status, Philly would have to also pay him around that same amount next season if they want to keep him. They could not give him a QO, but that would cause him to become a UFA and he would have his choice of 30 other teams to play for; Philly would have given up assets for less than half a season of an inconsistent goalie.</div></div>

Right, but that inconsistent goalie is also a .910 this year, and has historically has had very high peaks. Additionally, he is certainly a better option than Alex Lyon, and with the playoffs so close, there's a chance he could end up being a key piece in case of reinjury/slow return.

Furthermore, while 4 million is a lot, the Flyers are opening up a significant amount of cap space that does not have to be filled. Other than maybe hurting their chances at a John Tavares signing, giving Mrazek a QO doesn't seem like the worst move in the world.

A third-round pick seems like a fair price. Maybe it ends up being a fourth and moving from the sixth to seventh or something, but that's realistically all semantics.
Forum: NHL TradesFeb. 16, 2018 at 8:29 a.m.
Thread: (TOR / STL) - 2019 4th round pick for Soshnikov
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jarvis</b></div><div>I am a bit surprised Leafs even got a 4th for Sosh. The entire league knew the Leafs were stuck. If they sent Soshnikov down, his contract allowed him to leave and go back to Europe.
Leafs aren't demoting Kapanen or Dermott to make a spot for him. So, the last option would've been to put someone on waivers. Which likely would have resulted in losing someone for no return.

Leafs now have flexibilty + another draft pick while Blues got a player with potential. I would say Blues won the trade but ultimately the trade benefited both sides.</div></div>

From the Blues perspective, I can see it. If a player got sent down on waivers (Leivo or Sosh being prime candidates), they would likely be claimed close to the bottom of the league, and the Blues would never have had a shot. On the other hand, giving up a fourth round pick, especially for a relatively young player, is probably worth it in the grand scheme of things; most fourth round picks never become as good as Sosh.

The Leafs perspective only makes sense if they were really concerned about the effects of putting Martin on waivers would have in the dressing room, or Babcock put a stop to that notion from the start. That would have likely been a better move than this, save for getting down to 49 contracts.
Forum: Boston BruinsFeb. 15, 2018 at 6:36 p.m.
Thread: An heir to the throne: finding a LHD replacement for Chara
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ON3M4N</b></div><div>So a 21yr old in his 2nd season playing the hardest position and he's already hit his ceiling? I have to call BS on this as most d-men his age are not even playing in the NHL. People seem to use McAvoy as a measuring stick now and he's the exception not the norm.</div></div>

This isn't really a new take. People were saying this last year as the Duchene rumors swirled. Carlo was a second round pick, and even going back to junior he was never a big scorer. Sure, he could develop into a Hjalmersson or a Vlasic, but even Vlasic has a year where he was at a point-per-game with the Quebec Ramparts.

I'm not saying he isn't serviceable, but expecting him to be anything more that a second-paring guy (even Hjalmarsson is a #3) just isn't right.
Forum: Boston BruinsFeb. 15, 2018 at 5:03 p.m.
Thread: An heir to the throne: finding a LHD replacement for Chara
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ON3M4N</b></div><div>I guess I'd pose the question: Do we really need a legit top pairing guy to play w/ McAvoy?

Don't get me wrong it'd be great, but for years Chara was given fridge 2nd pairing guys and more times than not was given 3rd pairing talent or rookies. So why couldn't McAvoy make it work w/ someone that plays a similar style to Chara? A defensive minded guy that doesn't need to be a major offensive threat, but can cover the backend so McAvoy can get engaged offensively.

I personally think that guy is in house and when Chara is set to retire he'll move up with McAvoy. That guy is Lauzon. If everyone develops the way that I'm hope they do, I think the following top 4 could be interesting 3-4 years from now.

Lauzon - McAvoy
Zboril - Carlo</div></div>

I guess my concern with that is that if you pair up an elite player with McAvoy, then you can kill the other team in whatever minutes that pair plays. Giving McAvoy a weaker partner (say, a #4) means that they won't be as effective in the minutes he plays, and you need a better group on the second pair. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think Carlo is going to get a whole lot better than he is now, and I'm not sure I bank on Zboril to be that kinda player on the second pair. Is Krug-Carlo really a plus or a double-plus second pair? I'm not sure the answer is yes.

There's also the separate issue of everyone developing as expected, but I digress.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BreKel</b></div><div>I know Chara is 40, but I think he plays another season. So by then, Zboril and Lauzon would have close to two full seasons at the AHL level, assuming that they don't make the team going into next season (which as of right now, I don't know see a spot, assuming Grzelcyk is here. Chara will be back and Krug is already under contract). Vaakanainen may be young, but he's been playing professional in Liiga 16-17 years old. He currently leads his Liiga team in TOI for defenseman as a 19 year old. playing 22 minutes a night. His game would compliment McAvoy's well. He's a great skater and sound in his own end.

Unless Chara retires after this season, or the Bruins go out and acquire a McDonagh, it's hard to really predict an outside signing/trade right now for the future. By the time we really need to worry about a partner for McAvoy, he'll have, at least, 2 seasons of NHL experience under his belt. By then, he may be able to carry a 'rookie' or a guy with limited experience.</div></div>

That's a good point. I didn't really consider that. I only watched Urho at the World Juniors: wasn't too impressed but that's not really his game anyway. I can't remember him getting walked.

There might also be an interesting discussion to be had (potentially this season, if Chara rests a few games) of pairing Grzelcyk with McAvoy. Grzelcyk plays a very different game from Chara, so it would be an adjustment for McAvoy, but Grzelcyk's numbers in a bottom pairing role have been excellent. Is there a legitimate conversation to be had about him being a good partner for McAvoy?
Forum: Boston BruinsFeb. 15, 2018 at 12:37 p.m.
Forum: Boston BruinsFeb. 15, 2018 at 11:45 a.m.
Thread: An heir to the throne: finding a LHD replacement for Chara
I wanted to pose the question to the Bruins group, because although I have my own thoughts, I would love to get a consensus as to whom the Bruins should focus on.

As we all know, Chara is past the big-4-0 and it's entirely likely that within the next two seasons, he will cease to be a top four defenseman, or retire. This would leave our defense like this:

??? - McAvoy
Krug - Carlo
Grzelcyk - K. Miller

There are plenty of LHD prospects in the pipeline (Lauzon, Zboril, and Urho in particular) but it's probably ridiculous to expect that they will develop into a top two defenseman, capable of playing on a level with McAvoy.

Additionally, with an aging forward core (Bergeron, Krecji, Marchand, and Backes are all close to or above 30), we really should aim to keep this window open to the extent we can. The players will eventually get replaced, but cap dynamics could be tricky, the players might fall off in skill, or the prospects won't develop to their same skill level.

This leaves the Bruins with a few options:

1) Wait for prospects to develop, and hope one of them can step in there
2) Pair Krug or Grzelcyk with McAvoy, and fill in the second/third pair
3) Trade for an established No. 2-quality defenseman
- Obvious trade candidates include, but are not limited to: Ekman-Larsson, McDonagh

What do you think we should do?
Forum: Boston BruinsFeb. 12, 2018 at 4:20 p.m.
Thread: Patrick Maroon, Boston Bruin?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BreKel</b></div><div>1.) Beleskey was good his first year in Boston, so I'm not sure why I see Bruins fans bring this one up. He had a career year in assists, and points on top of 15 goals. He got him for under 4M, which was something most people expected he would get. I don't blame Sweeney for Beleskey's regression. The guy was signed in his prime. Sweeney can't predict injury of a player, and thus falling off a map.

2.) Hamilton didn't want to be in Boston. The Bruins offered him 3 similar contracts to what he ultimately took in Calgary. Was it a great trade? Meh... It wasn't great but it wasn't terrible. Taking those picks, and turning them into Senyshyn, JFK, and Lauzon has potential to be a great return. Do you use them in deals for NHL talent or let them develop? We'll see, but at the end of the day, Hamilton didn't want to be here and Sweeney made a move to get rid of a guy. Plenty of GM's have made worse trades.

3.) The Jimmy Hayes trade involved a player in Reilly Smith who was horrendous his last year here. That trade also involved getting rid of the Savard contract. Jimmy Hayes was coming off a 19 goal season. Smith had a good following year in FLA, signed a fat contract, and was so bad, that FLA decided to trade him to Vegas for cap relief. Jimmy Hayes sucked here, 100%. There's more to that trade though.

4.) Please get out of here with this nonsense 2015 first round. At the end of the day, the Bruins reached on one player and that player hasn't busted yet, so I'm sick of people making it a "negative" for Sweeney. DeBrusk is a top 6 forward with plenty of potential to be more. Zboril has a load of potential to be a top 4 defenseman, and Senyshyn, while a reach, is intriguing with his elite speed and size combination. Also, drafts aren't just one round. That draft is a main reason the Bruins are so deep. Save me the Barzal, Connor, Chabot, Boeser, Konecny, or any other hindsight pick ****..... Plenty of teams passed on Barzal besides the Bruins. I can give plenty of examples of the teams passing on player X, for Player Y....Revisionist history does nothing for me when arguing about Sweeney.

5.) Backes contract is a year too long, but that's really it. He's a very good player, helping fill a huge role on the 3rd line, providing significant depth. Nothing wrong with this signing.

6.) Malcolm Subban was garbage here in Boston. Sweeney tried to trade him before waiving him as well. It's not like Subban was showing anything close to what he's doing in Vegas, a team where everyone is playing out of their minds.

7.) Everyone had to lose someone in the expansion draft, and Kevan Miller is a damn good #5, which is what Colin would have been here. He's still brutal in his own end, so I don't even consider Colin Miller. It's not like Boston is the only team to lose a good player to this expansion draft.</div></div>

1) He might have been good for Matt Beleksey, but that certainly doesn't mean he was worth 3.8 million per season. Again, this wasn't a hindsight thing. People were saying immediately came out that it was an odd thing for the Bruins to do, even if it was for a "surprisingly reasonable" cap hit, considering free agency: <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/matt-beleskey-takes-surprisingly-reasonable-five-year---19-million-deal-with-bruins-001909875.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/matt-beleskey-takes-surprisingly-reasonable-five-year---19-million-deal-with-bruins-001909875.html</a>

2) A lot of GMs who have made worse trades have been fired. At the end of the day, Hamilton was an RFA. The Bruins had control, and could have gotten more.

3) Still not a good trade.

4) Again, yeah, plenty of teams passed on Barzal, and Connor, and Chabot, and Boeser....but there's also the teams that got them. And it wasn't hindsight either; arguably, things look <a href="http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2507895-nhl-draft-grades-2015-report-cards-for-every-pick-in-round-1" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">BETTER</a> in hindsight.

5) Not a fan of the NMC/NTC clauses either

6 and 7) It's less about the fact that he lost Subban and Miller rather than he could have simply traded them instead. They were both worth more than just giving away for free. Furthermore, with Subban, it exposes a serious problem within the organization that goaltending has, across the board, been poorly developed. There is no backup plan past Rask.

All that said, I actually agree with you about Maroon. I can understand the acquisition but anything more than a second round pick seems like a poor decision. I'd honestly hope they pursue a much smaller fish (4th line LW, defensive depth) or a much bigger fish (top six RW, top pairing LHD) than this awkward middle ground.