Malcolm Subban trade bait?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:

     

    Sign him for 5 million.  

     




    Shupe, you're the best.  Never fail to make me laugh.

     



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7LwbhFsM9k

    You and Shupe. 

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    Feed the core.  That's the window; Chara, Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand & Rask. 

    If Rask is signed long-term, 6+ years and trading Subban (in a package) can land them a top-6 RW, I hope PC does it.

    What could you get for Subban, Spooner & Krug? 

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

    In response to shuperman's comment:

     

     

     

    Sign him for 5 million.  

     

     




    Shupe, you're the best.  Never fail to make me laugh.

     

     

     



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7LwbhFsM9k

     

    You and Shupe. 



    Well played.  Bake em away toys.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

     

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7LwbhFsM9k

     

    You and Shupe. 

     




    hahaha....I always pictured them like this:

     

     

    Not sure who the guy in the middle is, though.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    There is absolutely no reason to trade Subban right now - and really nothing has changed since this same inane converstaion surfaced around using Subban to try and acquire Iginla at the trade deadline. (I remember some here were quite upset about that.)

    The Bruins can get a Top 6 Forward. They don't have to resort to trading away a potentially very valuable asset and potential future cornerstone of the franchise. 

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to stanjon's comment:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

     


    Picture Brando in Apocalypse Now when you read this...

    Volden was nothing.  He was a name on a roster on the internet signed to give the illusion of depth.

     

    I'm not a fan of the highwire act with goalies.  It isn't a position where you have a problem, so you go out and sign a goalie as a free agent - simple.  Or trade for one.  There's a certain chemistry between goalie and team, and the risk of missing that chemistry with an FA who looked good elsewhere?  Not worth it.  There's no guarantee that Subban will  be an NHL starter, but right now the Bruins are only out a first round pick on him.  But because there's also no reason to believe he won't be an NHL starter, this is also probably the best time to deal him.  Two very good goalies with NHL experience moved in the last month, and the returns were a top 10 pick (also known as 40% of the return on Kessel), and an undrafted 26 year old backup goalie, a third line forward, and a second round pick.  You probably don't get a top 10 pick for Subban right now, because that's all about an organization still relying on a 40+ year old without an heir apparent, so maybe you get your first round pick back, and it's higher than the late rounder they used on Subban?  Meh.  I would much rather have some sense that, if Tuukka's hip becomes a problem, or if his back gives out, or if teams do manage to consistently find that spot over his shoulder that was a problem last year pre-lockout...I would rather know there are options that don't involve trying to pry someone else's goalie prospect away.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     



     

    Do you ever write short posts?



    Do you ever write good ones?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from StanleyCuptotheBruinsin2011. Show StanleyCuptotheBruinsin2011's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    I would package Subban with PEV and try to get Sam Gagner and than ...try to sign Ryder 

     

    Lucic-DK-Seguin

    Bergeron-Marchand-Gagner

    Kelly-Ryder-Soderberg

    Spooner-Campbell-Paille

     Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011 & 4 more Cups by 2020

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:



    Close, but it's really THIS.

     

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from biggskye. Show biggskye's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to StanleyCuptotheBruinsin2011's comment:

    I would package Subban with PEV and try to get Sam Gagner and than ...try to sign Ryder 

     

    Lucic-DK-Seguin

    Bergeron-Marchand-Gagner

    Kelly-Ryder-Soderberg

    Spooner-Campbell-Paille

     Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011 & 4 more Cups by 2020



    Trading Peverley would still only give you about 5.5M to sign both Gagne and Ryder. Good luck with that.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:

    Feed the core.  That's the window; Chara, Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand & Rask. 

    If Rask is signed long-term, 6+ years and trading Subban (in a package) can land them a top-6 RW, I hope PC does it.

    What could you get for Subban, Spooner & Krug? 

     



    I don't disagree in principle.  Any time you can make a championship calibre roster better without trading NHL roster players, you can usually count me in. 

    That said, nothing pulls the rug out from under a solid roster like a goaltending collapse, and the Bruins would be woefully thin behind Rask if they traded Subban.  You can look at what Svedberg's done and go either way - is he the goalie who was the best in the AHL all year and clearly a real deal prospect or is he the guy who got out-played when Providence gave back a 3-0 lead?  Rask did the latter in the NHL and was still terrific this year, so there's no way to predict.

    And maintaining the core in a cap era means being able to support the core with young, EL contract players who can contribute.  The three guys you've mentioned are most important to the organization in that they can deliver high-skill play for a lower salary, allowing PC to pay Bergeron, Seidenberg and Krejci over the next few years.  Can.  Not necessarily will.  So there's some balance required in all this.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:

     

    Feed the core.  That's the window; Chara, Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand & Rask. 

    If Rask is signed long-term, 6+ years and trading Subban (in a package) can land them a top-6 RW, I hope PC does it.

    What could you get for Subban, Spooner & Krug? 

     



    I don't disagree in principle.  Any time you can make a championship calibre roster better without trading NHL roster players, you can usually count me in. 

     

    That said, nothing pulls the rug out from under a solid roster like a goaltending collapse, and the Bruins would be woefully thin behind Rask if they traded Subban.  You can look at what Svedberg's done and go either way - is he the goalie who was the best in the AHL all year and clearly a real deal prospect or is he the guy who got out-played when Providence gave back a 3-0 lead?  Rask did the latter in the NHL and was still terrific this year, so there's no way to predict.

    And maintaining the core in a cap era means being able to support the core with young, EL contract players who can contribute.  The three guys you've mentioned are most important to the organization in that they can deliver high-skill play for a lower salary, allowing PC to pay Bergeron, Seidenberg and Krejci over the next few years.  Can.  Not necessarily will.  So there's some balance required in all this.




    Book- agree that a goaltending collapse is a terrible thing.  If that is a real concern for PC, then he should not be committing to Rask in the number and term that we are hearing.  If he does, Rask is your work-horse, and you need only worry about your back-up situation for the next 6-8 years.  Who knows what Subban will be, my point is that once you commit to Rask, and assuming there is a market for Subban, I consider a deal.

    On Spooner, this is another case of how does he fit in?  He is not going to supplant Krejci/Bergeron (even Seguin) up the middle, and is not taking a spot from Lucic/Marchand on LW.  So where/how does he fit?  They need a RW.   Would much rather PC use the pieces at his disposal to find the next "Horton", rather than sign Alfredsson or Jagr or run Peverley and Caron out there again.

    Trading a couple of prospects doesn't leave the cupboard bare.  You still have Koko, Knight, Camara, Linus Arnesson and others.  Cool thing is there is also a draft every year to replenish.  Heck, Krug wasn't even drafted, nor was Svedberg.  I like the idea of trying to capitalize in the short-term, while Chara still makes a difference.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from stinkman. Show stinkman's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

     

    In response to Crowls2424's comment:

     

     

    Feed the core.  That's the window; Chara, Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand & Rask. 

    If Rask is signed long-term, 6+ years and trading Subban (in a package) can land them a top-6 RW, I hope PC does it.

    What could you get for Subban, Spooner & Krug? 

     

     



    I don't disagree in principle.  Any time you can make a championship calibre roster better without trading NHL roster players, you can usually count me in. 

     

     

    That said, nothing pulls the rug out from under a solid roster like a goaltending collapse, and the Bruins would be woefully thin behind Rask if they traded Subban.  You can look at what Svedberg's done and go either way - is he the goalie who was the best in the AHL all year and clearly a real deal prospect or is he the guy who got out-played when Providence gave back a 3-0 lead?  Rask did the latter in the NHL and was still terrific this year, so there's no way to predict.

    And maintaining the core in a cap era means being able to support the core with young, EL contract players who can contribute.  The three guys you've mentioned are most important to the organization in that they can deliver high-skill play for a lower salary, allowing PC to pay Bergeron, Seidenberg and Krejci over the next few years.  Can.  Not necessarily will.  So there's some balance required in all this.

     




    Book- agree that a goaltending collapse is a terrible thing.  If that is a real concern for PC, then he should not be committing to Rask in the number and term that we are hearing.  If he does, Rask is your work-horse, and you need only worry about your back-up situation for the next 6-8 years.  Who knows what Subban will be, my point is that once you commit to Rask, and assuming there is a market for Subban, I consider a deal.

     

    On Spooner, this is another case of how does he fit in?  He is not going to supplant Krejci/Bergeron (even Seguin) up the middle, and is not taking a spot from Lucic/Marchand on LW.  So where/how does he fit?  They need a RW.   Would much rather PC use the pieces at his disposal to find the next "Horton", rather than sign Alfredsson or Jagr or run Peverley and Caron out there again.

    Trading a couple of prospects doesn't leave the cupboard bare.  You still have Koko, Knight, Camara, Linus Arnesson and others.  Cool thing is there is also a draft every year to replenish.  Heck, Krug wasn't even drafted, nor was Svedberg.  I like the idea of trying to capitalize in the short-term, while Chara still makes a difference.



    Don't forget Koko and Bartkowski were almost traded for Iginla. I am not saying move Subban but maybe other prospects that would not fit or would not get a lot of playing time with the bruins. They may be more valuable with another team. Then maybe you could get a 25-26 year old in his prime. I like Alfredsson would take him. If the Sens continue to play around with him he is coming here. I like redden as a depth DMan as well. PC said he has a couple of deals on the table that he is thinking about what and who don't know.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:



    I don't disagree in principle.  Any time you can make a championship calibre roster better without trading NHL roster players, you can usually count me in. 

     

    That said, nothing pulls the rug out from under a solid roster like a goaltending collapse, and the Bruins would be woefully thin behind Rask if they traded Subban.  You can look at what Svedberg's done and go either way - is he the goalie who was the best in the AHL all year and clearly a real deal prospect or is he the guy who got out-played when Providence gave back a 3-0 lead?  Rask did the latter in the NHL and was still terrific this year, so there's no way to predict.

    And maintaining the core in a cap era means being able to support the core with young, EL contract players who can contribute.  The three guys you've mentioned are most important to the organization in that they can deliver high-skill play for a lower salary, allowing PC to pay Bergeron, Seidenberg and Krejci over the next few years.  Can.  Not necessarily will.  So there's some balance required in all this.



    This is pretty rare, but I disagree with you here, Book.  Backup goalies are a dime a dozen.  Barring major injury, of course.  If a backup gets into 24 games, he'll win half simply because the team is that awesome in front of him and he'll likely be playing against Florida, Tampa, and Calgary.  If he's great, he'll win many more.  If he's awful, he'll win a few more.  We're talking about four or five games. 

    It might be the difference between an eighth place finish or golfing, but if the team can only muster that level of success, it's really not built properly anyway.  Yeah, I know the Kings did it a couple of years ago, but no other team with such a lack of regular season success has.  If they trade Subban for a good draft pick, or use him with another asset to fill a need, they can stick any JoeBlow from the UFA pile should the young guys not be able to cut it.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    Great idea !

    Trading away a team's top goalie prospect always works out.

    See: Rask and the Leafs.


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    Great idea !

    Trading away a team's top goalie prospect always works out.

    See: Rask and the Leafs.



    Great idea !

    Keeping two good goalies always works out.

    See:  Luongo and the Canucks

    See:  Quick and the Kings

    But seriously, Chowda, if the B's plan on keeping Rask for another six years or more, what's the point of hanging onto Subban?  If he's worth half the salt many here believe him to be, his return in trade would be a lot more useful than his value sitting at the end of the bench, right?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    Volden was nothing.  He was a name on a roster on the internet signed to give the illusion of depth.



    So were Svedberg and Soderberg...and Krug for that matter.

    How is working out for them ?

    You don't know but you invested something in them, you still pay the scout that said take this guy. Krug is a regular on the blueline, Soderberg has a 3 year contact and one decided t yodel.

    As Bernier is, Subban is performing well at each leavel. Can't say I wouldn't trade him for the right deal though.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    My point on Rask is the same one others have mentioned - you're one Raffi Torres net drive away from watching your season go up in smoke, and if it starts a DiPietro-like decline due to multiple injuries, well...there's nothing harder than finding a starting goaltender.  I agree - you can grab a backup.  But even then, quality backups seem to matter - Bruins won the cup with Thomas and Rask, then the Kings with Quick and Bernier, and I think Emery lost one game last year?  And on the flip side, the scenario where Subban comes in and shines every bit as much as Rask did his first year, letting the Bruins move a big ticket Rask and bolster the roster elsewhere, has its appeal.

    So the fear isn't really a drop off in Rask's performance for no reason so much as an injury that can't be foreseen.

    My point on Volden, Dog, isn't that they shouldn't be signing these guys.  It's that he's done nothing to show whether we should care if he's gone or not.  He's a ghost, a phantom.  Maybe he develops, maybe not.  But the same decision makers who drafted him elected not to qualify him.  Oh well.  The impact of his departure on the goaltending depth is mostly apparent on paper.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hanrahan1. Show Hanrahan1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    What can he bring you think. I know PC said he won't trade him but Tuukka closing in on a long term deal that might change.


    I'd hold on to him to see how he develops along with Svedberg. Because even with Rask possibly signing long term, your a high ankle sprain away from trouble at the position.



    Defenitely and with a pretty good resume so far. Led the OHL in a few goalie stats, started for Canada at worlds and as Book mentioned you have already used a 1st round pick on him.

    Develope the kid!




    Totally agree. We don't want another Ken Dryden on our hands.

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:



    I don't disagree in principle.  Any time you can make a championship calibre roster better without trading NHL roster players, you can usually count me in. 

     

     

    That said, nothing pulls the rug out from under a solid roster like a goaltending collapse, and the Bruins would be woefully thin behind Rask if they traded Subban.  You can look at what Svedberg's done and go either way - is he the goalie who was the best in the AHL all year and clearly a real deal prospect or is he the guy who got out-played when Providence gave back a 3-0 lead?  Rask did the latter in the NHL and was still terrific this year, so there's no way to predict.

    And maintaining the core in a cap era means being able to support the core with young, EL contract players who can contribute.  The three guys you've mentioned are most important to the organization in that they can deliver high-skill play for a lower salary, allowing PC to pay Bergeron, Seidenberg and Krejci over the next few years.  Can.  Not necessarily will.  So there's some balance required in all this.

     



    This is pretty rare, but I disagree with you here, Book.  Backup goalies are a dime a dozen.  Barring major injury, of course.  If a backup gets into 24 games, he'll win half simply because the team is that awesome in front of him and he'll likely be playing against Florida, Tampa, and Calgary.  If he's great, he'll win many more.  If he's awful, he'll win a few more.  We're talking about four or five games. 

     

    It might be the difference between an eighth place finish or golfing, but if the team can only muster that level of success, it's really not built properly anyway.  Yeah, I know the Kings did it a couple of years ago, but no other team with such a lack of regular season success has.  If they trade Subban for a good draft pick, or use him with another asset to fill a need, they can stick any JoeBlow from the UFA pile should the young guys not be able to cut it.

     



    Rask was a backup for the stanley cup conn smythe winner TT.  

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:



    Close, but it's really THIS.

     

     

     

     



    This was just great.  I watched it 3 times.   

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    Mmm Donna Dixon!





     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from huntbri. Show huntbri's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to jmwalters' comment:

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Great point, Sman.  If Rask signs a six or seven year deal, Subban will certainly be on the block.

     




    Might be better to keep him in the system in case Rask craps out a few years into a long deal and needs to be moved (the Brygalov scenario)

     

    Definitely too early to consider trading Subban.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to shuperman's comment:



    Rask was a backup for the stanley cup conn smythe winner TT.  



    Yes he was.  If Thomas hadn't turned into Mr. Whack-a-Mole, Rask would probably have been backing him up again this past season.  Thomas' age allowed a reasonable time for Rask to be seen as the heir apparent.  Rask's age (and coming contract) suggests that the heir apparent is nowhere in sight or needed anytime soon.

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban trade bait?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:



    Rask was a backup for the stanley cup conn smythe winner TT.  

     

     



    Yes he was.  If Thomas hadn't turned into Mr. Whack-a-Mole, Rask would probably have been backing him up again this past season.  Thomas' age allowed a reasonable time for Rask to be seen as the heir apparent.  Rask's age (and coming contract) suggests that the heir apparent is nowhere in sight or needed anytime soon.

     

     



    My pt was that subban only needs 20 gms and he will be worth 7m.  Trade him quick.  

    Im all for trading subban in the right type of deal.  Bring dipietro in so we can be reminded how goalie contracts for unproven players are a bad idea.   Ricky can look up from the bench at PC and say i told ya so.  

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share