Take Boyd and the picks out of this deal and "maybe" the Caps do it to relieve salary, maybe...but not with Boyd in there. Caps brass loves him or they would have flipped him last year.

Completely agree. The Caps are giving up the best two players in this trade, the best pick, and the best contract. What am I missing?

oh just the fact that nick ritchie is by far the best player in the trade...

Except that Boyd is top 100 in points/60 and in cost/point, and there's a salary cap. Ritchie seemed like a great bargain when he signed that deal, but Boyd's really doing great on offense this year, and some of his more obscure stats are just off the charts good. So, no. Definitely won't happen. Stop trading Boyd.

well but by those efficiency statistics...rocco grimaldi is the best player in the league...smh. Don't just look at weird stats that prove your point. you have to understand asset management. Burk's value is submarining and it won't rise anytime soon. Ritchie is having a great year and plays hard and physical and can provide stability to that third line. Something which has been hard to attain this season. To get a player who is solid night night out and on a great contract, i'd take that over boyd and burky any day. You gotta understand that hockey is not necessarily an efficiency game. Its a marathon. Don;t talk to me about p/60 ..those are nonsensical and ignore the fact that players have to be durable for large swaths of time night in night out.

Yeah. Only tough guys understand ice hockey. What could Travis Boyd teach Nick Ritchie about winning the Stanley Cup?


Also, Ritchie has missed ten games this year. I do think he's a pretty good player on a pretty good contract, but so is Boyd. Ritchie is tougher than Boyd or Burakovsky, in terms of hits, but Burakovsky is pretty tough in terms of playoff multiple goal games while playing through pain from multiple fractures. We did this thing last year, where we tried to trade Orpik to everyone on this board, and it became a running joke, to the point that Orpik got bought out. The only good possible outcome from doing it again with Burakovsky would be re-signing Burakovsky next summer as a $1M UFA. But that won't actually happen, I don't think? Although at this rate... Hmmm. Carry on, then.

i don't even know what you mean? I never said anything about tough guys "only understanding hockey." Those efficiency statistics you use are ridiculous and irrelevant into a player's ability or sustainability. Oh and let me use your logic...Pheonix Copley should teach Henrik Lundqvist about how to win a stanley cup. Once again, your ridiculous comments are...well...just that...ridiculous

Well, I mean, Boyd played in one playoff game, so....

Ritchie might not be bad. But his 62% offensive zone starts this year with 49% corsi say he's not exactly keeping the cycle game going forever. He's getting a lot of assists in a small sample of games, but I'm not sure it's significant. His career zone starts, at 56%, match Burakovsky's. His career points/60 at 1.62, is a fifth lower than Burakovsky's, at 2.05. That looks like a significant difference. It's also lower than Burakovsky has posted in any single season.

Burakovsky is struggling, right now, but I think he rushed back from a wrist injury and he's playing a career-toughest 46% offensive zone starts, while Ritchie's getting easier minutes than Ovechkin has posted in any season. Unless Ritchie will keep getting 62% offensive zone starts on Backstrom's line, which currently gets 50%, Ritchie's decent showing in a couple months on a top line is not convincing me that you should trade Burakovsky for him, straight up, let alone add a little guy like Boyd, who might turn out to be nothing, or might have to try to replace Connolly's production next year, depending on how big they go on Vrana's new deal.

I like his hits, age, contract, and draft position. Other than that, Burakovsky's a 23 year old clutch hero with three playoff multiple goal games who got 0.50 p/gp more in his last playoffs than Ritchie got in his last playoffs.

This is a good cap trade. Short term, it's fine because Ritchie is playing a little better than Burakovsky. Long term, assuming Burakovsky's wrist is back to 100% next year and Ritchie is back to being a chippy middle six player no one notices, Anaheim wins so, so big it's ridiculous.

Could this offer get Faksa, who will also end up underappreciated, but is more of a difference maker?