if the isles would consider i deal like this, id rather include a piece into a deal involving boychuk, who is younger, signed to a longer contract and quite frankly who id prefer.

grabner+donovon for boychuk
- LetsGoIsles

I would imagine they'd want another forward instead of Donovan, having 9 (well 8 if they trade us Boychuk) NHL defensemen under contract.

if the isles would consider i deal like this, id rather include a piece into a deal involving boychuk, who is younger, signed to a longer contract and quite frankly who id prefer.

grabner+donovon for boychuk
- LetsGoIsles

Boychuk only has 1 year remaining as well

It's not that we can't live without Grabner, but the risk would be in Martin only having one year remaining. I don't disagree with your logic, on the surface, but it's the Islanders and we consistently have trouble signing people. Now most of the guys that came here, even the ones that didn't originally want to, ended up loving it and re-signing but it still worries me a little. And, frankly, at 33...I don't even know if I want to re-sign Martin.

It's not the idea of losing Grabner or that I don't like Martin's game, but to essentially piss away Grabs for a full-year rental or to give an aging 33yr old d-man a multi-year contract doesn't make enough sense to me.
- eichiefs9

I understand what you're saying. My thinking is that there are not many 1st pairing defensemen available out there, without giving up a kings ransom. Yes, he is essentially a rental, but Martin would step in and be the best defenseman on the Islanders. Bringing someone in like that, without giving up any of your prized prospects (Strome, Reinhart, etc) would be something worth looking into.

Boychuk only has 1 year remaining as well
- Vukota

Right but Boychuk is 30 and just hitting his prime in the last year or two. I would have zero issue with extending Boychuk 5-6 years. I wouldn't do that for Martin, who is likely looking for his last big contract before he's over the hill and forced to sign a couple cheap, one year deals to be a bottom pairing guy and then retire.

I would imagine they'd want another forward instead of Donovan, having 9 (well 8 if they trade us Boychuk) NHL defensemen under contract.
- eichiefs9

donovan was meant more as "donovan", i threw him in there figuring he could use another year to develop and on a team like the bruins where they have players currently in place, he may be nice to have in a holster once injures or retirements/bla-bla-bla occur.

forward standpoint they could have a donovan equivalent, martin, conacher(?)

also lets not forget, the bruins will need to get under the cap ceiling.

I understand what you're saying. My thinking is that there are not many 1st pairing defensemen available out there, without giving up a kings ransom. Yes, he is essentially a rental, but Martin would step in and be the best defenseman on the Islanders. Bringing someone in like that, without giving up any of your prized prospects (Strome, Reinhart, etc) would be something worth looking into.
- cap1681

Like I said, it's definitely not the worst proposal. Grabner, while not a particularly deft scorer, is still a solid versatile player. To toss him away for what could equate to a rental is a little scary to me. It's definitely something I'd consider.

Right but Boychuk is 30 and just hitting his prime in the last year or two. I would have zero issue with extending Boychuk 5-6 years. I wouldn't do that for Martin, who is likely looking for his last big contract before he's over the hill and forced to sign a couple cheap, one year deals to be a bottom pairing guy and then retire.
- eichiefs9

Of course but its getting Boychuk to sign that would be the issue

Boychuk only has 1 year remaining as well
- Vukota

how many times do we have to tell you, go take your google and shove it!! stupid facts!!

in any event, between martin and boychuk id prefer johnny boy.

edit: i could have sworn he had a 2 year deal; maybe rick can pick up this argument on my behalf

donovan was meant more as "donovan", i threw him in there figuring he could use another year to develop and on a team like the bruins where they have players currently in place, he may be nice to have in a holster once injures or retirements/bla-bla-bla occur.

forward standpoint they could have a donovan equivalent, martin, conacher(?)

also lets not forget, the bruins will need to get under the cap ceiling.
- LetsGoIsles

Boychuk is going to be the hardest defenseman to pry out of Boston. I'd guess something more like Grabner and Lee is going to be a realistic offer for him.

how many times do we have to tell you, go take your google and shove it!! stupid facts!!

in any event, between martin and boychuk id prefer johnny boy.

edit: i could have sworn he had a 2 year deal; maybe rick can pick up this argument on my behalf
- LetsGoIsles

http://capgeek.com/player/239

http://capgeek.com/player/239
- eichiefs9

Spoiler Alert: i use google

...i was dripping with sarcasm.

edit: point being, i could have sworn he had a 2 year deal, then i googled it and the facts smacked me across the face.

how many times do we have to tell you, go take your google and shove it!! stupid facts!!

in any event, between martin and boychuk id prefer johnny boy.

edit: i could have sworn he had a 2 year deal; maybe rick can pick up this argument on my behalf
- LetsGoIsles

Damn bully

It's not that we can't live without Grabner, but the risk would be in Martin only having one year remaining. I don't disagree with your logic, on the surface, but it's the Islanders and we consistently have trouble signing people. Now most of the guys that came here, even the ones that didn't originally want to, ended up loving it and re-signing but it still worries me a little. And, frankly, at 33...I don't even know if I want to re-sign Martin.

It's not the idea of losing Grabner or that I don't like Martin's game, but to essentially piss away Grabs for a full-year rental or to give an aging 33yr old d-man a multi-year contract doesn't make enough sense to me.
- eichiefs9

Would you do Grabner for Sutter and Philip Samuelsson?

Boychuk is going to be the hardest defenseman to pry out of Boston. I'd guess something more like Grabner and Lee is going to be a realistic offer for him.
- eichiefs9

Martin also adds the added wrinkle of playing the powerplay, which Boychuk doesn't do. Plus, he wouldn't cost any other pieces.

Boychuk is going to be the hardest defenseman to pry out of Boston. I'd guess something more like Grabner and Lee is going to be a realistic offer for him.
- eichiefs9

Not without a contract extension. I would hate to trade Lee because I can't remember the last time they had a legit power forward and he is the best thing we have as far as fitting that type, but at the same time you have to give to get

Boychuk is going to be the hardest defenseman to pry out of Boston. I'd guess something more like Grabner and Lee is going to be a realistic offer for him.
- eichiefs9

harder than chara, seidenberg, hamilton?....i dont know about that.

Would you do Grabner for Sutter and Philip Samuelsson?
- YouMeAndDupuis9

I'm assuming Samuelsson is a D prospect. If that's the case I would pass because we have a ton of legit D prospects coming in the next year or two

Would you do Grabner for Sutter and Philip Samuelsson?
- YouMeAndDupuis9

Sutter is the guy I see almost every Pens fan on here praying gets dumped. If you want to get rid of him that badly I'd trade you Grabner for Sutter and your choice of Harrington or Dumoulin.

But realistically, no. We're plenty deep down the middle and frankly we have a really nice amount of high(er)-end defensive prospects.

harder than chara, seidenberg, hamilton?....i dont know about that.
- LetsGoIsles

Harder out of the guys that might realistically be moved, I meant. They can dump guys like McQuaid, Bartkowski or Miller cheap and quick.

Boychuk clears the most cap space but he's also the best of the bunch where there is a possibility of trade.

Martin also adds the added wrinkle of playing the powerplay, which Boychuk doesn't do. Plus, he wouldn't cost any other pieces.
- cap1681

I just love Boychuk's game. He managed to put up a respectable number of points for a guy who averages 00:18 PPTOI/game. Plus he can stick around for a few years.

Harder out of the guys that might realistically be moved, I meant. They can dump guys like McQuaid, Bartkowski or Miller cheap and quick.

Boychuk clears the most cap space but he's also the best of the bunch where there is a possibility of trade.
- eichiefs9

id counter that argument that so is grabner...

of the 3 guys that are mentioned on here as trade bait, id trade (obviously subject to the return, but at least in theory) in order:
1) neilsen
2) bailey
3) grabner

I just love Boychuk's game. He managed to put up a respectable number of points for a guy who averages 00:18 PPTOI/game. Plus he can stick around for a few years.
- eichiefs9

You can't give up anything important without an extension in place before a deal is done. That's the issue

Sutter is the guy I see almost every Pens fan on here praying gets dumped. If you want to get rid of him that badly I'd trade you Grabner for Sutter and your choice of Harrington or Dumoulin.

But realistically, no. We're plenty deep down the middle and frankly we have a really nice amount of high(er)-end defensive prospects.
- eichiefs9

I'd give you Sutter and Dumoulin for Grabner, but you'd have to throw in a 2nd round pick.

Sutter is the guy I see almost every Pens fan on here praying gets dumped. If you want to get rid of him that badly I'd trade you Grabner for Sutter and your choice of Harrington or Dumoulin.

But realistically, no. We're plenty deep down the middle and frankly we have a really nice amount of high(er)-end defensive prospects.
- eichiefs9

Sutter gets an unfair shake from Pens fans haha. I threw him out there because he is replaceable on our roster now with some of our new signings.

I would give you Sutter and Harrington. Most Pens fans I think would see that as over-payment on our side...but I would do it.

id counter that argument that so is grabner...

of the 3 guys that are mentioned on here as trade bait, id trade (obviously subject to the return, but at least in theory) in order:
1) neilsen
2) bailey
3) grabner
- LetsGoIsles

Nielsen being mentioned as trade bait on here is inconsequential to me because I cannot possibly fathom a realistic scenario in which Snow see's it fit to trade him. Unless the Hawks want to move Seabrook I can't imagine Frans being seriously considered to be on the move.

I could maybe see him being moved next year, in the final year of his incredibly cheap deal. But frankly I'm hoping by then we're buyers at the deadline and not sellers.