I know its not really a big deal, but why is O'Gara on the right side?

Also id be shocked if Adam Mcquaid was still on the team in a year

I think John Carlson would be an interesting ufa. I doubt they'd have the cap space for him though

O'Gara on the right because he's our best option to play there IMO. I am aware he's a left shot and prefers the left side, but I could see him growing into a role of playing alongside Grzelcyk, kinda like a Krug / McQuaid type pairing. Big guy + Little guy type stuff. Ideally we'd have more right shot defenseman and be able to go RHD / LHD on every pair for the foreseeable future, but it seems as if we like the LHD's better in recent drafts. In my mind I remember 2 top 2 round RHD's (Carlo McAvoy) in the last 3 years and 4 LHD's (Vakaanainen, Lindgren, Lauzon, Zboril,) That might not seem like a big thing, but when you add in the later round guys and the holdovers from Chiarelli, the situation becomes rather unbalanced.

I have yet to hear if Cassidy is as much of a believer in LHD / RHD pairs as Claude was, but if he is we might not be finished in the trade and UFA market yet. Gotta think we could grab someone for cheap as a LHD off the scrap heap in UFA or swing a deal with Vegas, who has too many NHL LHD's right now. If Vegas was willing to take McQuaid, I would offer them a 3rd round pick for Merrill or Schmidt. Maybe an obscure prospect as well, but I believe they only have really 2 RHD's on the team and one of them is nearing the end of his career. That type of stuff isn't for me to decide or get involved in, but I suspect Sweeney has been smart enough to place a call in with George McPhee about their given situations.

I don't see how you could be shocked if Adam McQuaid is on the team in a year. He's only slightly lesser than Kevan Miller and he's about the perfect match to play with Torrey Krug. If he craps his pants this year he's got negative value, so to get rid of him we'd have to buy him out Jimmy Hayes style. If he plays good than why wouldn't we want him back on the team? These 2 things lead me to believe that you think we're just going to buy him out in a year lol. I believe he's an NHL caliber defenseman and will be solid this year, but I don't think anyone wants him at the price he's being paid. He literally wouldn't be on the team right now if there was any type of market for him. We would have easily flipped him and a pick for a middle aged LHD with NHL experience to play the left side already. I clearly don't believe that we're hoarding Adam McQuaid right now and that including him in a trade would be a deal breaker from our side. He's been on the table for awhile I imagine and especially when the Bruins were shopping for Scandella or other LHD's that had considerable value. If we were to get someone dependable like Scandella, I would have given Spooner + McQuaid for him, even though I'm not a huge Scandella fan. I just don't see a ton of value in the type of game Spooner plays, or the reliability that McQuaid brings, given he gets hurt every year.

I never mentioned John Carlson so I don't know why you would bring it up. Is he a possibility? Yes. Will we be outbid by a large amount? Most Likely. I don't think he has any relevance to our team moving forward. That's not the type of guy we've won in UFA under don Sweeney. I'd basically ask you right now, "who is better, Backes or Carlson?" to which you'd reply "Carlson" if you weren't on drugs. I'd say to you "yes Carlson is better and it's common knowledge as well as the fact he is 4 years younger than Backes was when he signed with us." so you would say "yes I know this" and I'd ask you "If Carlson is clearly that much better than Backes, as well as younger and in his prime, why wouldn't his price be much, much higher?" and you would say something like "I believe Don Sweeney can get him for cheap" so I'd say "you must be dreaming, he's clearly better and just starting his prime, there will be a strong market for him and it wouldn't be prudent for us to bring in a 7 or 8M defender when we'll have to pony up the big bucks to McAvoy and Carlo very soon." and you'd reply something to me that suggested you were angry. That's kinda what could happen in conversation and I think the main point is that we're better off just saving money for McAvoy and Carlo than risking having to lose one in a season just to acquire Carlson, who I think atleast McAvoy could grow to be a better player then him and Carlo should be a cheaper alternative to him. Both McAvoy and Carlo have better qualities to them and add up to more value IMO than winning a top UFA like Carlson at a very high price, for very long term.

A.) I mostly asked you why O'Gara was on the right side out of all people because Lauzon has played on the right side in the past
B.) Adam Mcquaid is no where near the perfect match for Krug. He has been holding Krug back for years and is the main reason krug gets looked down upon by the rest of the league. If Krug played with Carlo or even McAvoy, his game would be a lot better
C.) I mentioned John Carlson because you mentioned that there where no must have options for UFA
D.) You're off your trolley. I dont know what that last paragraph back and forth was with yourself, but you take this **** way too serious. No more internet time for you

Adam McQuaid and Krug make an above average pair. Krug is a liability in the D zone, but McQuaid steps up. If Krug plays with someone other than McQuaid or Kevan Miller, he's going to show how trashy he is in the Defensive zone. McQuaid isn't holding him back at all in the D Zone and actually compensates for Krugs lack of size and awareness quite well.

John Calrson is a pipe dream. I assume you partook in that action before you posted and didn't consider his age / value and what he'll cost on the open market. Oh, but somehow you'll make McQuaid and maybe Beleskey disappear, so we'll have the cap! Great dreaming buddy, but in reality you can't get rid of things no-one wants without taking the buyout penalty or surrendering big assets, which we aren't likely to do.

Much more internet time for me. All day in fact, I'll be here to answer you so please stay. You are good, but sometimes unrealistic. You comments are not always right and that back and forth was what I was assuming you would say. I believe it was done rather well and if you would like we could do it out now, so I could prove to you how foolish an Idea it would be to bring in John Carlson as the team is now. You could also show me your magical devices that will allow you to just teleport McQuaid and probably Beleskey off to another team without losing anything. I think I really need to learn that magical technique or get the item that'll let me do that as well as you and other Bruins fans do. I believe it costed us a lot to get rid of Marc Savard's dead weight contract that wasn't going to affect us in season after he goes on LTIR. We pulled a Jesus move and turned Reilly Smith into Jimmy Hayes. I'm sure you can tell the difference between them pretty well, so let that amount of value sink in. Then it costed NJD a 2nd to trade him a year later. Average those values out for an unproductive player that can't go on LTIR and the price goes up. Beleskey would cost a 1st to get rid of right now and McQuaid's atleast a 2nd + .

It's just silly to think someone would want Beleskey or McQuaid right now and it's silly to think we wouldn't want them if they play well and increase their value. There is only a small placement of value where they play good enough to be moved, but not good enough to be kept. If they land in that area you will be exactly right, but it's a less than 10% shot so I look down upon that methodology.

I just said that John Carlson would be an interest ufa lol. There is no way in hell they could afford him with there current cap situation.
You also couldnt be any more wrong about krug

Krug sucked the first 20 games, but no-one remembers that. They just remember McQuaid sucking for 40 games. They think Krugs better offensively than he is and even sources on the Bruins and that cover the Bruins refer to Krug as a #6 guy and that they'd like to keep him there. Sure he gets a mad amount of PP time, but he's a friggen #6 defensively, please tell me which defenseman he's better than in the Defensive zone, which is the priority of being a defenseman. That's like square one of playing defense. Protect the house. It's evident you never played at any level and just get you knowledge from watching. I don't give a crap that he can produce points if he's that bad defensively and ends up -10. His Corsi and Fenwick are great, but the stats that matters is PDO 96.4% which his is brutal because he gives up close chances and he produces shots in the O zone from far away. That's the telling statistic and that's how he ends up a minus player with a 56% corsi lol. His Ozs are also that of which someone would have if they weren't to be trusted defensively. I believe we put Torrey in the best situations possible for him and try to make him succeed and other players get the tougher minutes. He's a #6 that gets #4 ice time because of the PP.

interesting that you say that hes a #6 defensmen, since he finished 3rd on the bruins in EV TOI/GP. Hes also a fairly good shot suppressor. obviously shot suppression doesn't tell the whole story. Heres how some of his stats stack up to 19 other dmen
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1U5gF9iypiqQ4sfNiwI0XEpaWRCYiSQ9ri5cQqUIwKxg/edit#gid=0
feel free to give it a look
Playing with Carlo or even McAvoy in a few years would be better for him

That document is worthless. It's showing of his offensive talents, which I don't dispute. He's not as good as any of those players defensively which is the issue and why he's a #6. He's not good and didn't play great last season. He was lesser than his stats showed and I told you PDO% is the key. I don't care how many shots he generates if they don't go in the net. He lets up more shots into the net than he scores in the opposing net counting all players on the ice at the time. Thats the damning fact and data, not that he can shoot his little heart out without scoring as much as he lets up.

I guess we cant agree on everything which does lead to good discussions. I used to be down on krug but I came around. Hes a big part of this team. Saying he didnt play great last season is just not true. It wouldn't be beneficial for the bruins to give him #6 defensmen minutes either.

He won't get #6 minutes. He'll get 21 mins of ice time, but 3 or 4 of which will be to QB the PP. McQuaid and Kevan Miller should end up with less ice time than him no matter what happens. He's still considered a #6 type guy who's on the back of your lineup and isn't as good 5 on 5 as he is on the PP. He had a good year, but his stats made it look like a great year. I wasn't saying he is a terrible asset or that he's bad all around, but he was 7th in scoring for defenseman and I personally wouldn't consider him a top 60 defenseman league wide. I'm sure you'll disagree, but that's where you will be wrong. If he's the 7th highest scorer and he's not a top 60 defenseman, it's blatantly obvious he's not average or better in the other end of the ice. Look at him for what he is as a total package, not just the offensive side of things.