Trades vs. Man-crushes

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

    Trades vs. Man-crushes

    OK here's my vain attempt to out-cynical NAS.

    With all due respect to those who post interesting thoughts on players from other teams, and who will inevitably get tarred here, most of the proposed "trades" I see on the boards these days amount to very little more than "I have a man-crush on player x.  The Bruins should trade Ryder for him."  By the deadline, someone will have expressed their undying passion for every skilled defenseman under 25 and every winger with even a hint of a rep for being able both score goals and play physical hockey.  Most of these posts can be reduced to: boy that Bogosian.  I like him.  Boy, that Doughty.  I like him.  Boy that Erik Johnson.  I like him.  Boy, that Jack Johnson.  I like him.  Boy that Jamie Langenbrunner.  I like him.  Boy that Zach Parise.  I like him.

    Anyone else think that sounds a bit like a pubescent girl's birthday party?

    I have no problem with people posting an analysis of another team's player here.  I'll happily engage in a discussion of how Shane Doan continues to produce with what is basically a limited skill set.  I'm pleased to discuss Ryan Kessler's evolving offensive game. Why do these discussions have to get coopted by fantasies of who the Bruins could give up to get these players?  Because that's just the same thing over and over and over and over.  It goes something like this:

    1. Ryder, Wheeler, Paille or any combination of the three.  (No one wants them)
    2. Picks and prospects (not the Toronto #1) (No cap space - have to shed cash)
    3. Stuart or Ference (for what?)
    4. Thomas or Rask (Need both/endless debate over which one)
    5. Savard or Krejci or Bergeron (deal from strength, give to get)
    6. Chara (over-rated, over-paid, too tall, too passive, vs. cornerstone)
    7. The Toronto #1 (Never! vs. Draft picks don't score goals)
        a. which should just be sent to Toronto for Kessel. (repeat ad infinitum)

    Please consider this condensed version of most trade speculation before posting a discussion of another team's player as a potential trade.  If you cannot envision a discussion different from the outline above, then please re-think what you're about to post.  Bookboy has a five day Christmas hangover and will thank you not to get his blood up. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowboys9. Show cowboys9's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    Right on Bookboy..I have taken a personal stance on not to comment on any trade proposal's because most or all of them are laughable and gives more ammo to much of the same... today's Bogosian one was worth a chuckle.. and why is Ryder always mentioned as a player going back.. PC couldn't give him away if he included sleeping with Scarlett Johansen for a full year..
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

     I cringe every time I see a trade proposal for other team's best players. On another thread I sarcastically remarked that people figure PC can trade his garbage for other teams best players. Trade rumours are fun , when they come from credible sources ! Not when they are made up by Joeschmoe (sorry Joe) sitting in his basement watching reruns of " Let's make a deal ". Most of these made up trade proposals always seem to make sense for the Bruins . But not for the other team they're trading with !

    btw your thread was not in vain . It was a pretty good impression of the cynical one . On the other hand I'm afraid the silly trade proposals will continue despite your efforts of trying to relay some common sense to others.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    Sturm got traded for a bag of pucks, we got Campbell and Horton for Wideman, and what looks to be like 2 lottery picks and ehem..Knight for Kessel.  So really, any trade is possible.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes



    I hate the fantasy league trade talks.  There's no point to them at all.

    A much more worthwhile category of threads  - which are rare - would be of the "what if" variety, if Orr played today, if the WHA didn't happen, etc.

    These talks of trading for Hnidy or Montador drive me nuts.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beezfan4life. Show Beezfan4life's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    OK here's my vain attempt to out-cynical NAS. With all due respect to those who post interesting thoughts on players from other teams, and who will inevitably get tarred here, most of the proposed "trades" I see on the boards these days amount to very little more than "I have a man-crush on player x.  The Bruins should trade Ryder for him."  By the deadline, someone will have expressed their undying passion for every skilled defenseman under 25 and every winger with even a hint of a rep for being able both score goals and play physical hockey.  Most of these posts can be reduced to: boy that Bogosian.  I like him.  Boy, that Doughty.  I like him.  Boy that Erik Johnson.  I like him.  Boy, that Jack Johnson.  I like him.  Boy that Jamie Langenbrunner.  I like him.  Boy that Zach Parise.  I like him. Anyone else think that sounds a bit like a pubescent girl's birthday party? I have no problem with people posting an analysis of another team's player here.  I'll happily engage in a discussion of how Shane Doan continues to produce with what is basically a limited skill set.  I'm pleased to discuss Ryan Kessler's evolving offensive game. Why do these discussions have to get coopted by fantasies of who the Bruins could give up to get these players?  Because that's just the same thing over and over and over and over.  It goes something like this: 1. Ryder, Wheeler, Paille or any combination of the three.  (No one wants them) 2. Picks and prospects (not the Toronto #1) (No cap space - have to shed cash) 3. Stuart or Ference (for what?) 4. Thomas or Rask (Need both/endless debate over which one) 5. Savard or Krejci or Bergeron (deal from strength, give to get) 6. Chara (over-rated, over-paid, too tall, too passive, vs. cornerstone) 7. The Toronto #1 (Never! vs. Draft picks don't score goals)     a. which should just be sent to Toronto for Kessel. (repeat ad infinitum) Please consider this condensed version of most trade speculation before posting a discussion of another team's player as a potential trade.  If you cannot envision a discussion different from the outline above, then please re-think what you're about to post.  Bookboy has a five day Christmas hangover and will thank you not to get his blood up. 
    Posted by Bookboy007

    I had posted something similar a while back on this very subject Bookboy. Had some interesting responses......some quite negative in fact. My point was.....nobody was going to give me their, $10 for my $5 ( go figure ) , so trading Ryder, Paille and whoever for an elite player from another organization, isn't happening either. It's nice to dream up lopsided trade proposals, but some people need think a little, before throwin it down on here.........just sayin!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    Right on Bookboy..I have taken a personal stance on not to comment on any trade proposal's because most or all of them are laughable and gives more ammo to much of the same... today's Bogosian one was worth a chuckle.. and why is Ryder always mentioned as a player going back.. PC couldn't give him away if he included sleeping with Scarlett Johansen for a full year..
    Posted by cowboys9

    No,you're wrong.Scarlett would put any deal over the top.People would take the rights to Soderberg and Schaefer too if she's part of the deal.I know I'm rambling.It's just that she's my favourite player.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    Sturm got traded for a bag of pucks, we got Campbell and Horton for Wideman, and whats looks to be like 2 lottery picks and ehem..Knight for Kessel.  So really, any trade is possible.
    Posted by bim09


    Yep!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    Possible isn't the issue.  Many things are theoretically possible.  It's possible for dez to sleep with Scarlett Johannsen given the opportunity and the right pharmaceuticals, and he wouldn't even have to sleep with Soderberg and Schaefer (or is that not what you meant?).  But if anything is possible, talking about it is interminable and quite likely pointless.  That's the issue.

    Now, someone will inevitably say "so don't read those threads!"  To which I say "they offend me.  I know they're there.  Reading them isn't the issue."

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stuke50. Show Stuke50's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    Hey Bookboy !  Trade fantasy is part of being a hockey fan, and a Bruin fan. Although some trade combinations you read in this forum are real fantasy, it's all fun. Glad to be a Bruin fan. Keep posting !!!

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

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    Ahhh so Book what are you saying? A forum discussion is only for hybrid posters on what was or what is and never on what is to be?  If so then I will stick to the standard THN or TSN or whatever.  Paralysis by analysis is the best quote for this thread.  Give me a break. Posters are speculating because they are Bs fans. I remember back in March during the trade deadline.  The Horton positngs were deemed a joke.  Not.  Most trade banter is just sharing of one's hockey knowlege not acutal trade reality.  BTW Happy New Year.  
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    Possible isn't the issue.  Many things are theoretically possible.  It's possible for dez to sleep with Scarlett Johannsen given the opportunity and the right pharmaceuticals, and he wouldn't even have to sleep with Soderberg and Schaefer (or is that not what you meant?).  But if anything is possible, talking about it is interminable and quite likely pointless.  That's the issue. Now, someone will inevitably say "so don't read those threads!"  To which I say "they offend me.  I know they're there.  Reading them isn't the issue."
    Posted by Bookboy007

    You're right.The pharmaceuticals are the key.And no,I meant someone would even take Soderberg and Schaefer along  with Ryder(but I suspect you knew that).
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    Hey Bookboy !  Trade fantasy is part of being a hockey fan, and a Bruin fan. Although some trade combinations you read in this forum are real fantasy, it's all fun. Glad to be a Bruin fan. Keep posting !!!Posted by Stuke50


    Very true and the one "trade proposals for fun" thread BadHab put up with BookBoy participating in he got right "Hunwick for college defenseman". I concur Stuke those threads are fun to participate in for realistic speculation and fun to read the crazy proposals as well.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    I admit I posted on the Bogosian trade thread ! !  Call it a man-crush if you want . 
    It's the only trade talk I've done .  Foot in mouth
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from -sabot-13. Show -sabot-13's posts

    Too many Chara haters

    A lot of Chara haters recently.  In print, on the radio, here…  So much so I feel the need to defend him. Chara is not the posterboy for Superstar.  He’s not an attention hound, nor is he a highlight reel guy.  His play is not exciting and his public demeanor is quiet, professional, almost shy.  Whenever I hear a hater discussing him, I picture some 16 year old without the benefit of wisdom.  He’s not a Ferrari or Porsche, he’s an old school Hummer. Chara is the rock.  The foundation you build on.  Steady, reliable, solid. “He should fight more!”.  No, he shouldn’t.  He’s more valuable on the ice than off.  He’s the good cop who has to talk to the refs after a fight.  Another aspect people don’t discuss is that with his size and strength,(PR wise) if he was to hurt somebody in a fight, he’d be the bad-guy.  Circumstances wouldn’t matter, he’d just look like a bully.  Remember when Kyle McLaren knocked out Zednik?  Clean play-off hit, but Kyle was the bad guy in the media. “He should hit more”.  Maybe, but I don’t want to see him out of position because he went for the big hit.  Let the others just bounce off him.  That’s good enough. “He’s not a leader in the locker room.”  Really?  How do you know what is said behind closed doors?  When CJ is done and leaves the locker room and it’s just the players, nobody knows what’s said in there except other Bruins, and they don’t talk about it. He’s not injury prone and his play doesn’t make me swear at the TV like Wideman did.  So all you haters relax and try to see the long term, big picture. My favorite was (Felger and Mazz, I think):  “He should be stripped of the C and give it to Tim Thomas”Ahem… IIHF and NHL rules do not permit goaltenders to be designated as captains.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    isla, don't be an extremist.  I think I'm being pretty precise in what I'm criticizing. I have no problem discussing players, even when the discussion trips the line into fantasies of "wish he was a Bruin," and I don't mind trade talk in principle, but where it turns ugly for me is when people start mixing up the two and discuss the logistics of making their dreams realities and get all double rainbow.  And like I said in the second part of my post, what bores me is it's the same discussion over and over again.

    Hey, young star player X is pretty good.  That team needs scoring.  The Bruins should trade... (insert sequence above) to get him!

    Stuke - the fact that this is an acceptable part of being a hockey fan is the problem, not a justification.  I'm on a crusade to change it!  It's Leaf Talk Radio fodder!  NOT IN THIS HOUSE!

    [Doing the Ray Lewis Dance]

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

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    No, there doesn't "have to be".  And you can't forget about moving players on the present roster, because you need cap space to pay a $7M/yr defenseman.  And the only top end guy who might, just might be available via trade is Weber if Nashville panics and thinks they can't sign him. But you know what?  That beeping is them backing up the dumptruck full of money.

    As long as Milbury and Keenan are talking heads, no one is going to trade you a Bogosian, a Doughty, a Johnson, a Pietrangelo, or any of the young franchise defenseman.  Was there ever a package of picks and prospects you thought was a fair deal for Ray Bourque?  Has any team ever improved by dealing Pronger away?  Hm.  Oilers?  Nope.  Cup finalists with him, DNQs without.  Anaheim?  Nope. Cup winners with him, speed bumps without. 

    Sorry, matt, but in the end?  You're just at #7 on the generic list of trade discussions: The Toronto #1.  I'm out before someone takes us to #7a.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from FairbankAK. Show FairbankAK's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    there r only a few that start threads on trades trades trades .  it is e-harmony.
    so did you think this forum would be any different than any other ???
    of course people will talk trades  it's sexy .

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

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    I voted for "I hate the guy". 

    Is that okay?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    isla, don't be an extremist.  I think I'm being pretty precise in what I'm criticizing. I have no problem discussing players, even when the discussion trips the line into fantasies of "wish he was a Bruin," and I don't mind trade talk in principle, but where it turns ugly for me is when people start mixing up the two and discuss the logistics of making their dreams realities and get all double rainbow.  And like I said in the second part of my post, what bores me is it's the same discussion over and over again. Hey, young star player X is pretty good.  That team needs scoring.  The Bruins should trade... (insert sequence above) to get him! Stuke - the fact that this is an acceptable part of being a hockey fan is the problem, not a justification.  I'm on a crusade to change it!  It's Leaf Talk Radio fodder!  NOT IN THIS HOUSE! [Doing the Ray Lewis Dance]
    Posted by Bookboy007

    Was not trying to be an extremist actually a realist in that most here are not connected to the NHL pipeline excluding Kennedy97 maybe SanDog.. ha.  The reality is the best discussions are players some of us including myself have little knowlege of in any capacity other than data.  For instance if Chowda starts a conversation on a player, my eyes are keen to his rationale.  Some live in Florida, some live in Edmonton, some are Bostonians but all have knowledge of certain players that I do not possess.  I enjoy the bantering around trades!  A learning tool if you will.  I will agree some are tools.  

    I am taking the opportunity here to wish BadHab, LRH, Try to Bear It, I like hockey, NAS, chowda, TuukainNet, CarolinaClamMan, Goat, and others ( quite of few) who I read often the best of New Years.  Hope Stanley is correct for once in 2011.  

    PS  I voted for eharmony... diva time.  haha, not really... enjoy your insight
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsCountry. Show BruinsCountry's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    No, there doesn't "have to be".  And you can't forget about moving players on the present roster, because you need cap space to pay a $7M/yr defenseman.  And the only top end guy who might, just might be available via trade is Weber if Nashville panics and thinks they can't sign him. But you know what?  That beeping is them backing up the dumptruck full of money. As long as Milbury and Keenan are talking heads, no one is going to trade you a Bogosian, a Doughty, a Johnson, a Pietrangelo, or any of the young franchise defenseman.  Was there ever a package of picks and prospects you thought was a fair deal for Ray Bourque?  Has any team ever improved by dealing Pronger away?  Hm.  Oilers?  Nope.  Cup finalists with him, DNQs without.  Anaheim?  Nope. Cup winners with him, speed bumps without.  Sorry, matt, but in the end?  You're just at #7 on the generic list of trade discussions: The Toronto #1.  I'm out before someone takes us to #7a.
    Posted by Bookboy007


    Book:  I think we all get your point about ridiculous trade proposals or pining for players no team will A) either give up or B) we shouldn't want here.  I too am quickly bored by such unrealistic (lopsided in B's favor) thoughts, which is why I try not to put anything out here that's essentially fan-boy crap. 

    Having said that, I reiterate that the possibility of landing Bogosian idea is not without at least some merit, but would depend largely on things we have little idea about at this point, such as:

     - What is B's assessment of Bogosian relative to what's likely to be available in the 2011 draft?

     - What is Atlanta's potential motivation in acquiring B's potential lottery pick via Toronto?  Such as:  

     A) Is there someone high in the 2011 draft that Atlanta specifically wants? 

     B) Is there a player the Thrashers feel they could acquire by landing the B's #1 Toronto pick?

    We do know that Atlanta's young D PP tandem of Byfuglien and Enstrom have reduced Bogosian's numbers this season, which likely indicates that the Thrashers are in pretty good shape for offensive defenemen for the next 5-6 years.  His reduced numbers also play to your point above about having to pay $7 million to acquire a top offensive D, as that is precisely why I think Bogosian might be a reasonable target for the B's to pursue. 

    With his reduced numbers this year, Bogosian's not likely to command more than $3-3.5 million per year on his next contract which will go into effect next season.  He's young, he has all kinds of upside, he's a player the B's could own throughout his prime, and he's been nudged aside this year by Byfuglien and Enstrom.  And with what many pundits predict to be a less than stellar 2011 draft on the horizone, maybe...just maybe...the stars are aligning so that a young offensive D like Bogosian might become available to the B's without costing them $7 million per year.  Or too much in the way of picks and prospects. 

    I think this is a legit possible scenario as opposed to more of the same-old same-old.   
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from wallydouglas. Show wallydouglas's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    someone stoled bookboys account,, thats not him posting this.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    1) Hate you too, NAS.  Happy new year!
    2) isla, you know, that's fair enough, and if that was the majority of those threads - a chance to talk about players we don't see that often - I'd be okay with them.  But misinformation is worse than ignorance, and there's plenty o' that out there too.
    3) I get your point BC, and Bogosian would be a fine pick up, but I still can't see why Atlanta would give up on him for a high pick in what is, as a necessary part of your argument, a weak draft.  Maybe if the Bruins could all but guarantee Larsson, and the Thrashers thought Larsson = Bogosian but younger, and so probably coming into his own around the time they need to make tough decisions on Enstrom or Byfuglien, I could see them thinking.  But they have the same point total as Boston right now, with a goaltender who is doing a pretty good shadow job on TT, and some nice pieces.  Having a mobile, talented top three D isn't a dilemma, it's a luxury.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from CafardoSaysTradeBrady. Show CafardoSaysTradeBrady's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    how exactly do you vote in these polls? i don't actually see anywhere to vote. thx.Tongue out
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes

    In Response to Re: Trades vs. Man-crushes:
    I voted for "I hate the guy".  Is that okay?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    Not if you have to ask.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share