For this year or this year and next?cshea said:Colorado eating half of Talbot's salary.
That helps a little I supposecshea said:Colorado eating half of Talbot's salary.
It's a 6th. The odds of them hitting on that pick are single digits most likely.PedroSpecialK said:Nice, kicking in a pick to get Colorado to pick up some cap hit.
Or, ya know, don't trade for him in the first place but whatever.
Ummm...maybe notcshea said:Talbot is a better fighter than Campbell. So we've got that going for us.
The Mort Report said:I think some are overreacting to this trade because they wanted a top 6 forward or top 4 D. First, look at the deal for what it is. What the hell were you expecting in return for Caron? The guy hasn't been able to prove he belongs on the B's 4th line, yet we got a guy who most certainly can play there for him. The B's are a better team now than they were before the trade, even if it is just a bit. And unlike other sports, especially with the Bruins, they like to roll 4 lines, so each spot on each line provides value. They upgraded one of those spots. When they won the cup it was with additions to strengthen the bottom 6, not the top. Why hate on adding depth and improving the roster just because you wanted a 30 goal scorer?
They actually didn't get better. It was a lateral move at best.The Mort Report said:I think some are overreacting to this trade because they wanted a top 6 forward or top 4 D. First, look at the deal for what it is. What the hell were you expecting in return for Caron? The guy hasn't been able to prove he belongs on the B's 4th line, yet we got a guy who most certainly can play there for him. The B's are a better team now than they were before the trade, even if it is just a bit. And unlike other sports, especially with the Bruins, they like to roll 4 lines, so each spot on each line provides value. They upgraded one of those spots. When they won the cup it was with additions to strengthen the bottom 6, not the top. Why hate on adding depth and improving the roster just because you wanted a 30 goal scorer?
The Mort Report said:I think some are overreacting to this trade because they wanted a top 6 forward or top 4 D. First, look at the deal for what it is. What the hell were you expecting in return for Caron? The guy hasn't been able to prove he belongs on the B's 4th line, yet we got a guy who most certainly can play there for him. The B's are a better team now than they were before the trade, even if it is just a bit. And unlike other sports, especially with the Bruins, they like to roll 4 lines, so each spot on each line provides value. They upgraded one of those spots. When they won the cup it was with additions to strengthen the bottom 6, not the top. Why hate on adding depth and improving the roster just because you wanted a 30 goal scorer?
FL4WL3SS said:This trade is neither here nor there for me. Not sure why they made it, but ultimately I'm not sure it really matters. They're grabbing a 4th line player to replace Campbell/Paille for a reasonable price. Caron was gone after this year anyway and he wasn't going to play much down the stretch.
Not sure the vitriol over this trade. If this is the trade that is pushing you over the edge with regards to Chiarelli then you already had an axe to grind.
PedroSpecialK said:
I had and continue to have an axe to grind - not because of Chiarelli personally, but because of what ultimately led to the trade of the top-4 defender that this team is still missing.
I know it seems like I'm deep-ending/SJHing, but there is a legitimate beef with the roster construction of this team.
burstnbloom said:
This is not true. I didn't expect a 30 goal scorer. I, and I think many others, just hate clogging up the bottom 6 with expensive players who don't bring much more than their league min counterparts. Now, in this instance, I'm not AS mad as i was about it after finding out that the Avs are paying the freight. I don't like Talbot but he is fine at $875k.
I am worried how this plays out when Campbell comes back though. It certainly means Ferlin is going down at the very least. In my mind, the ideal roster right now is:
Marchand - Bergeron - Smith
Loui - Soderberg - Connolly
Lucic - Spooner - Pastrnak
Talbot - Kelly - Ferlin
but I can't see any scenario where Claude doesn't play Paille and Campbell, which makes me think Ferlin and Connolly spend some time in the press box over players that are worse than them.
I think that's about right. I'll say 2 steps forward, 1 back, though... If They are right on Connolly that will outweigh the other moves. Maybe that is giving them too much credit.The Four Peters said:Connolly is a fantastic pickup for the Bruins. If Chiarelli had ended the day with that, he could have walked away saying he got a cost controlled top 6 player (upside) without giving much from an asset perspective. That's a great deadline.
But when you factor in losing Cunningham for nothing and bringing in Talbot, it's like 2 steps forward and 2 steps back. Cunningham is no great shakes but he is exactly the type of player they need. Young, cheap, hard working and a little skilled.
Do you think in two years we'll be missing Craig Cunningham? Honest question.The Four Peters said:Connolly is a fantastic pickup for the Bruins. If Chiarelli had ended the day with that, he could have walked away saying he got a cost controlled top 6 player (upside) without giving much from an asset perspective. That's a great deadline.
But when you factor in losing Cunningham for nothing and bringing in Talbot, it's like 2 steps forward and 2 steps back. Cunningham is no great shakes but he is exactly the type of player they need. Young, cheap, hard working and a little skilled.
PedroSpecialK said:
I had and continue to have an axe to grind - not because of Chiarelli personally, but because of what ultimately led to the trade of the top-4 defender that this team is still missing.
As illustrated in another thread, the Bruins had every opportunity to go into the season with the young, revamped fourth line they had preached all offseason - while keeping Boychuk - and didn't do it. They compounded the fourth line's speed issue by signing an ancient Simon Gagne. They lost Fraser to waivers - which is defensible, as he isn't doing anything for you if he isn't in the top 9 - then they lost Cunningham to waivers, the only forward on the fourth line who seemed to warrant a regular spot. He also happened to be the most affordable member of the unit.
Look at the team as currently constructed - do we not think the aggregate $3.775 cap hit on Paille - Campbell - Talbot right now could not have been better allocated? The players were in-house before the season to construct a fourth line that could not have been worse than the current unit, at less than half the cap hit. Florek ($600,000) - Cunningham ($600,000) - Caron ($600,000) = $1.8m.
I know it seems like I'm deep-ending/SJHing, but there is a legitimate beef with the roster construction of this team. The way Claude allocates ice time is perfectly conducive to developing young talent on the fourth line, given they generally see 9-12 minutes/night depending on the penalty situations. Instead of using that line to blood and develop players like Spooner, Ferlin, Lindblad, Cunningham, etc it's been given to zero-upside vets. I don't doubt that in the end, Talbot can help down the stretch and may even be an asset going into the postseason. My issue is with sacrificing Boychuk for the fourth line when the marginal benefit of a veteran fourth line is much less than the marginal benefit of Boychuk over Miller.
Sidenote: I don't put Kelly quite into the camp of overpaid fourth liner - yes, he's a mucker and plays a gritty game, but he also has some level of skill and is a solid fit as the most defensively-responsible forward on the 3rd line of a contending team.
Last, the 6th rounder itself in the Talbot trade doesn't particularly irk me, more that it's an asset surrendered up for a superfluous player on an already-crowded fourth line.
/rant
Claude works for Chiarelli. If Chiarelli has a plan in the offseason then ditches it in the preseason because he can't get his coach to buy in then that's on him.Dummy Hoy said:
But didn't Claude 86 the young 4th line? I think that's on him more than Chia. I mean, it may be both of them, but Claude's preferred style of play is to have a 4th line that grinds and mucks with gritty muscle. I felt like he was the one with the short fuse on having a speed 4th line at the beginning of the season and his preference to have piles of Campbells around. And Chia is guilty as sin for some of the deals he gave the guys, but he and Claude are hand in hand.
My track record for suggesting break out threads is poor, but I'd be curious what people think of Chia/Claude chicken/egg.
I actually think Talbot is a better player than Caron for the B's. The biggest downside to the deal for me was his cap hit next year. Since Colorado is eating half of that, it definitely moves this trade into the category of "whatever" and not nearly as horrible as I thought it was yesterday. Talbot is another bottom 6 guy who I'd rather have playing than Campbell (fat chance, though). I do think there is something to needing more veteran leadership in the locker room where Talbot will help, but not sure how much of that is quantifiable or if it's worth the cost.FL4WL3SS said:They actually didn't get better. It was a lateral move at best.
You would think, with lines like those, that they would be able to manage whatever defense issues Spooner's line has.The Four Peters said:I actually think Talbot is a better player than Caron for the B's. The biggest downside to the deal for me was his cap hit next year. Since Colorado is eating half of that, it definitely moves this trade into the category of "whatever" and not nearly as horrible as I thought it was yesterday. Talbot is another bottom 6 guy who I'd rather have playing than Campbell (fat chance, though). I do think there is something to needing more veteran leadership in the locker room where Talbot will help, but not sure how much of that is quantifiable or if it's worth the cost.
Marchand - Bergeron - Smith
Eriksson - Soderberg - Connolly
Lucic - Spooner - Pastrnak
Paille - Talbot - Kelly
Ferlin/Campbell
I think that's a pretty good lineup right there.
I don't believe there was any speed on the 4th line at the beginning of the season either. Caron is no speedster, and the other guys they rotated in didn't do anything either.Dummy Hoy said:
But didn't Claude 86 the young 4th line? I think that's on him more than Chia. I mean, it may be both of them, but Claude's preferred style of play is to have a 4th line that grinds and mucks with gritty muscle. I felt like he was the one with the short fuse on having a speed 4th line at the beginning of the season and his preference to have piles of Campbells around. And Chia is guilty as sin for some of the deals he gave the guys, but he and Claude are hand in hand.
My track record for suggesting break out threads is poor, but I'd be curious what people think of Chia/Claude chicken/egg.
Salem's Lot said:Claude works for Chiarelli. If Chiarelli has a plan in the offseason then ditches it in the preseason because he can't get his coach to buy in then that's on him.
lexrageorge said:I don't believe there was any speed on the 4th line at the beginning of the season either. Caron is no speedster, and the other guys they rotated in didn't do anything either.
There are a number of reasons the Bruins struggled this season, some of which have nothing to do with Chiarelli (injuries to Chara and Krejci, inane LTIR rules, lockout, opaque salary cap calculations by the league), and others for which Chiarelli does deserve some blame (Seguin trade). Then there's the Iginla overage, but it's hard to "blame" anyone for that. But none of these really have anything to do with the 4th line or how much Campbell is being paid.
Huh? The 4th line has been an absolute black hole. Yes they're the 4th line so their negative impact is minimized but making or missing the playoffs could come down to a goal here and there, and the Bruins have played a large number of close games.lexrageorge said:I don't believe there was any speed on the 4th line at the beginning of the season either. Caron is no speedster, and the other guys they rotated in didn't do anything either.
There are a number of reasons the Bruins struggled this season, some of which have nothing to do with Chiarelli (injuries to Chara and Krejci, inane LTIR rules, lockout, opaque salary cap calculations by the league), and others for which Chiarelli does deserve some blame (Seguin trade). Then there's the Iginla overage, but it's hard to "blame" anyone for that. But none of these really have anything to do with the 4th line or how much Campbell is being paid.
The Four Peters said:I actually think Talbot is a better player than Caron for the B's. The biggest downside to the deal for me was his cap hit next year. Since Colorado is eating half of that, it definitely moves this trade into the category of "whatever" and not nearly as horrible as I thought it was yesterday. Talbot is another bottom 6 guy who I'd rather have playing than Campbell (fat chance, though). I do think there is something to needing more veteran leadership in the locker room where Talbot will help, but not sure how much of that is quantifiable or if it's worth the cost.
Marchand - Bergeron - Smith
Eriksson - Soderberg - Connolly
Lucic - Spooner - Pastrnak
Paille - Talbot - Kelly
Ferlin/Campbell
I think that's a pretty good lineup right there.
I thought Spooner and Koko and even some other guys like Florek and Cunningham could have provided some youth, speed, and a bit of offensive punch on a 4th line, but that got shut down right away. Maybe it was because none of those guys were ready for that, but Claude sure as fuck didn't give it a real chance.
Most importantly, the 4th line may not be the biggest reason the team is underperforming, but it is the easiest to improve. You're not going to undo the Seguin deal or find a top 4 D to replace Boychuk, but Campbell's contract could be cleared with just one year left and they could find any number of players to step in for less money. This could have happened in the offseason or RIGHT NOW.
Unless Claude has been the one begging for guys like Paille and Campbell, which I don't think is improbable.lexrageorge said:
Spooner is not your typical 4th line player. And the other guys mention may have actually been worse than Campbell, short sample sizes of Corsi ratings notwithstanding. It's not Julien's job to "give it a real chance" except in training camp. He's under pressure to win now, no excuses, and that's coming from the very top of the organization. Can't blame Claude for Campbell being on the team or overpaid in his position.
When Paille was extended, he was one of the team's better penalty killing forwards. Similarly, Campbell had good chemistry with Paille on the PK unit.Dummy Hoy said:Unless Claude has been the one begging for guys like Paille and Campbell, which I don't think is improbable.
I'm not so sure about this. Campbell hasn't gotten so much as one night off even as they rotate through other options (until he was hurt). They could put him on waivers and see if anyone bites. Going back a bit, they could have used their compliance buyout on him.lexrageorge said:We're assuming that there was a trade market for Campbell in the offseason that did not require the team giving up an asset or eating much of the contract. I'd much rather have Boychuk than Campbell, and if that was the choice in front of Chia and Co, that's probably what they would have took. I'm assuming that such a choice never really presented itself.
While in hindsight they probably should have used their compliance buyout, I doubt that alone would have allowed them to keep Boychuk on the team. And I'm guessing the team thought the 2013-14 Campbell may have only been a slight overpay in 2014-15.Toe Nash said:I'm not so sure about this. Campbell hasn't gotten so much as one night off even as they rotate through other options (until he was hurt). They could put him on waivers and see if anyone bites. Going back a bit, they could have used their compliance buyout on him.
But they LOVE him. We don't know for sure but I don't think they seriously considered dealing him.
Why? Wouldn't everything you know about Claude tell you he's more comfortable with those guys?lexrageorge said:When Paille was extended, he was one of the team's better penalty killing forwards. Similarly, Campbell had good chemistry with Paille on the PK unit.
I highly doubt Julien told Chiarelli to avoid trading either one this past offseason.
Two entirely different questions.Dummy Hoy said:Why? Wouldn't everything you know about Claude tell you he's more comfortable with those guys?
We're getting all crossed up here.lexrageorge said:Two entirely different questions.
If Chiarelli asked Julien what he thought about Paille and Campbell, he would have likely gotten positive reviews; keep in mind neither were this bad in 2013-14.
If Chiarelli asked Julien for permission to trade these guys, then Chiarelli would not have lasted one day as GM in any league.
Re: being hurt: Is that true? He obviously had the broken leg in the 2013 offseason but they could have bought him out in the 2014 offseason -- was he hurt then and I'm forgetting?The Four Peters said:Campbell was hurt at the buyout window and therefore ineligible.
I don't think anyone saw the absolute cratering of his game coming this year, but they've sure been slow to adjust to it, which is the problem.
Agree on all points. I'd still like to see Ferlin on that line - with Talbot, not instead of him.The Four Peters said:Honestly, after a few games now, I actually really like this move so far. I don't know if you can contribute it solely to him, but the 4th line actually doesn't suck anymore and individually he has been contributing on and off the scoreboard. He's been better than I expected, we'll see if it continues.
I would still hate the deal at the $1.7 million, but at $800k+ I'm much more ok with it.