|
Post by zenseeker on Jan 23, 2003 22:54:33 GMT -5
I would do this trade. we already have 2 offensive defenseman in breezy and markov. Mclaren would fill a huge hole once he got his game legs back. Mclaren is already a solid 2 way defenseman with size and potential.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 23, 2003 22:55:17 GMT -5
Boston would have to add another future asset for me to do it.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 23, 2003 23:07:45 GMT -5
I would do this trade. we already have 2 offensive defenseman in breezy and markov. Mclaren would fill a huge hole once he got his game legs back. Mclaren is already a solid 2 way defenseman with size and potential. Yes, yes and yes. We NEED THAT BIG PHYSICAL DMEN that can play on our first 2 pairs and log good minutes. It's not an option, it's been a problem for 2 seasons, we are going to have to trade for him eventually and we're not gonna get that type of dmen for our everyday stiffs... To get something, you give something. If not, well we're just gonna have to enjoy Traverse and Dykhuis loging 20 some minutes...
|
|
|
Post by darz on Jan 24, 2003 0:59:34 GMT -5
1. some players: the longer they sit, the more their stock drops 2. some players: the longer they sit, the more their stock rises
mclaren is a great example of no. 2. people talk about this guy like he's a great no.2 dman. why??? montreal made bostons defence (including mclaren) look horrible in the playoffs last year (maybe it wasn't bostons bad d, maybe it was the fact montreal was the best offensive team of all time ;D) mclaren is vastly overrated. he's the 2003 version of gord kluzak!!!
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jan 24, 2003 8:59:31 GMT -5
1. some players: the longer they sit, the more their stock drops 2. some players: the longer they sit, the more their stock rises mclaren is a great example of no. 2. people talk about this guy like he's a great no.2 dman. why??? montreal made bostons defence (including mclaren) look horrible in the playoffs last year (maybe it wasn't bostons bad d, maybe it was the fact montreal was the best offensive team of all time ;D) mclaren is vastly overrated. he's the 2003 version of gord kluzak!!! I am foaming at the mouth saying the same thing. It is a Bruinns con job about all those trades that NEVER happened. They were phoney and deliberately misleading. Only some fans bought that pile of garbage. Certainly NO HAB fan falls for THAT type of BS. Right boys?
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 24, 2003 9:19:43 GMT -5
McLAren was a top 10 first round pick, a star in every league he played and every scouting report on him pegs the guy as a stud, an elite guy in the making.
The only setback is his injuries. Time will tell but if he does bloom into a top defender it won't be a surprised for anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jan 24, 2003 9:31:38 GMT -5
Tough call, but I wouldn't make that trade. If we had a healthy Sheldon Souray it would be a non issue (although McLaren is better than Souray) and besides we have Mike Komisarek about 2 years away from becomming a McLaren type player.
I really like the total package that Ron Hainsey (potentially) brings in terms of size, skating, and puck skills. I think he can be a better all-around player than McLaren. That said, if we're going to start dealing our blue chippers, which are mostly on defense, I believe it would be a bigger priority to upgrade our forward lineup.
If you proposed a 3-way deal with the same teams in which we would give up Hackett and Hainsey, and get Patrick Marleau from San Jose, I would be all over that.
|
|
|
Post by Montrealer on Jan 24, 2003 9:49:19 GMT -5
I wouldn't do that trade. In fact, I think that trade looks pretty awful. Who would be stupid enough to do that trade?
(snickers in the direction of San Jose, California)
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Jan 24, 2003 10:33:19 GMT -5
You simply can't make that trade. It only makes sense if you're one d-man away from going deep (think conference final). We aren't close. Mclaren got hyped and pumped. He's good, but my money's on both Hainsey and Komisarek being at least as good and probably better. Both could end up being significantly better.
As for Hackett, if someone had said last week: a third rounder for Jeff, I'd have thought it was fair. We got a third plus a player who can help immediately in a crucial sphere. SJ is paying a quarter of his salary, and Sundstrom is a solid NHLer. So Hackett ends up in Boston. Good for Jeff. I hope they kick the crap out of the Isles, Rags, Bolts, Pens and Canes, etc. And he could've ended up there as a UFA in Junea anyway.
Last, anybody who thinks Hackett was going to bring back a solid blueliner on his own is dreaming in technicolor. Jillson is what brought Mclaren to San Jose. A 4th rounder is what got the Bruins Hackett. San Jose was not going to give us a blueliner because they were trying to add one, and had to give one up to get him.
In the end, we got a very good return for Hackett. We then waive Audette (what will unfold here is anybody's guess, but the fact is we just got:
Cheaper (-Hackett) Younger (-Hackett and -Audette) Bigger (Sunny vs. Audi) Better on PK (Sunny) Faster (Sunny vs. Audi) Deeper (A guy who wasn't playing for a player and a pick)
Frankly, I think the maroons (how's that) and trouts calling for Savard's head don't know very much about the business end of hockey and very little about the on-ice side as well.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Jan 24, 2003 10:41:14 GMT -5
Yes, yes and yes. We NEED THAT BIG PHYSICAL DMEN that can play on our first 2 pairs and log good minutes. It's not an option, it's been a problem for 2 seasons, we are going to have to trade for him eventually and we're not gonna get that type of dmen for our everyday stiffs... To get something, you give something. If not, well we're just gonna have to enjoy Traverse and Dykhuis loging 20 some minutes... For now. We need that guy now. Will we need him a year from now when Komisarek is ready to take on the role that Jillson couldn't handle in SJ? Or when Souray comes back? I wouldn't part with Hainsey for Mclaren. No way. Hainsey's a better prospect than Jillson, for cryin' out loud, and I think San Jose overpaid out of desperation for a player who was pumped, pimped and hyped by people in the media and on these boards. Go back and watch the Bruin's series from last year before the Zednick hit. Tell me if Mclaren was more of a force than Sheldon Souray....He wasn't. He was solid. Souray was more than solid. In fact, until Mclaren wasted Zednick, he'd been about as mediocre as a number of other Bruin d-men. This guy is not the second coming. If we're talking Denis Gauthier, then I start to get interested. But Kyle Mclaren? Please, giveth unto me a break....
|
|