I understand that you’re referring to a “future” as someone on their ELC only, but if you’re saying a 22 year old player is not considered a “future” you’re off your rocker. Just because a player isn’t on their ELC still does not mean that they can’t be considered a “future”.

Also, Boston isn’t in need of a complete rebuild considering Pastrnak is Boston’s future star to build around and is 25. You’re not telling me that a 22 year old possible future star defenceman is someone that Boston would pass on just because he’s not on his entry level contract. Give it a rest bud, you’re making yourself look bad.

Sheeeesh. Is pastrnak a future? He’s only 25. No. A “future,” refers to an asset that is not yet an NHL hockey player. This is just simple terminology.

Sandin is not a future. He is an NHL player, and he’s not a star or potential star.

The point is, Boston isn’t in a “rebuild now” type of mode therefore as long as the pieces they’re trading are bringing in younger players to fit in with their other younger players, then it’s a win win scenario. I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with talking about “futures” but nobody wants to hear it so take your complaining elsewhere.

They are if bergeron is retiring. That’s the whole point.

If bergeron is gone, what they need it the ability to get a long term 1C solution - IE - a future asset.

The bruins are currently 5 deep on the left side of their blue line. Adding sandin does nothing. By the time they were ready to be a real contender again sandin would be nearing a UFA contract. There’s no way it makes any sense.