2011 NHL Trade Rumors – Rene Bourque to Maple Leafs?

The Calgary Flames are off to a slow start after just two weeks into the NHL season and it seems that the team will either to try to add some quality veterans or scrap the season and go towards a youth movement.

The latest rumor from Bottom Line Hockey has the Flames sending the veteran winger to the Toronto Maple Leafs in a deal that would probably give Calgary some defense in return. Bourques has scored over 50 points the last two years and he has three goals already this season, but the team needs to shake things up and bring in some young players that are hungry and eager to play.

Toronto is always the top name when it comes to trade rumors, but this is one deal that makes sense as the Maple Leafs need some depth and another scorer to its roster. The Flames could use some youth as several of the team’s top payers are in the twilight of their careers and it’s hurting the team on the ice and with the salary cap.

http://sports.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474980640837


24 Responses to 2011 NHL Trade Rumors – Rene Bourque to Maple Leafs?

  1. FlamingHomer says:

    No more trades with the Leafs please.

  2. hockey_lover says:

    Anything hockey related must go through the Leafs, even if it has nothing to do with them.

  3. blaze says:

    ha, Bourque for Finger!

  4. dumbassdoorman says:

    Largest fan base equals largest number of rumours. Even as a Leafs fan I hate reading every article being turned into a Leafs article.

  5. dumbassdoorman says:

    I guess anything is possible, but I don't know where he exactly fits into the team.

  6. albertateams says:

    Don't really see a good fit for a trade. Maybe something revolving around one of Gardiner, Franson, or Gunnerson but trading Bourque for a guy that's currently a 5th or 6th defenseman with up side as 3-4 doesn't really make much sense. The Flames defense is the only part of the team that is reasonably young.

    If Bourque is going to be moved it had better be a trade where the Flames clearly win otherwise he's worth keeping. He's streaky but 2nd-3rd line guys that put up back to back 25+ goal seasons aren't easy to find. His cap hit of 3.3 million is pretty good as well.

  7. blaze says:

    Ya no immediate openings in the top 6, unless he beats out MacArthur for his spot which would push Kadri or Frattin back out of the line-up. A good player but not a great fit at this time.

    As a hypo how bad do you Flames need D? Would you be interested in a Gunnarson or Franson?

  8. albertateams says:

    The Flames D hasn't been great but its OK. Jay-bo and Giordano have been good. Hannan has been reliable defensively. Butler has looked good at times but has struggled with turnovers (like most young D men). Sarich doesn't have the speed to be effective any more. Babchuk hasn't really got a lot of playing time but he's one of those guys that looks brutal defensively for a couple of games and then gets 4-5 points in 2-3 games. I think he's a perfect 5-6 guy PP specialist. Derek Smith has been a real pleasant surprise, moves the puck well and is defensively responsible.

    Like I said below I just don't see those guys as an upgrade that would be big enough to justify moving Bourque.

  9. reinjosh says:

    He'd be a sweet third line add. Trade MacA, put Kadri on the second line, put Bourque on the third line (send Frattin down for top line AHL time) and we have three lines with some serious scoring ability. We really need some scoring depth and Bourque would kill it. 

    I imagine something around Franson and Bourque could be figured out. AlbertaTeams is right that the defense isn't exactly a weak point, but Franson would be a nice long-term piece to add. I'd probably ask for a forward prospect as well though. 
  10. blaze says:

    I wouldn't be totally against that as the Leafs probably get better but I'm not very high on it either. I like Mac and despite his slow start am willing to give him loads of leeway yet. Even as a third liner his cap hit is attractive, and if (fairly likely I'd say) he returns to around last years totals it will be a bargain.

    Kadri has boatloads of skill but he's not there yet his defensive position has him benched tonight. He'll get there but he's done nothing to warrant moving Mac.

    As for Bourque solid all around addition but not really the move I'd be hoping for. While he's no Bourque yet I've really been liking Frattins game. He's very strong on his skates and a good shot, a guy who can play a skill or grinder game. I'd prefer that he stays up and if he does have to be sent down because of an acquisition that it be for a top line player.

  11. hockey_lover says:

    I know :)  Just a not so subtle dig 😛

  12. reinjosh says:

    Personally, I'm just not a fan of Mac. I think Kadri would be a better fit on that line. The defensive game is negligible. He would be playing on a line with Grabovski and Kulemin. Who cares if his defensive game sucks, they can cover for him. He would be their to be the playmaker on that line (which Mac does somewhat effectively, but a player with more talent would do a better job on that line. I'm still surprised Wilson hasn't tried that yet). 

    I like Frattin to, but he's not helping the scoring depth issue were facing. I say if he's not helping, send him down to learn how to hit his shots at the pro level. 
  13. mojo19 says:

    Josh I am 100% disagreeing with you. Who cares that his defensive game sucks? They can cover for him???? NOOOO! You are only as strong as your weakest link. Hockey is a TEAM game. I really hate that logic. I look at it as this: As good as Kuley and Grabo are defenisively, one missed assignment from the other guy on their line is the difference from getting the puck out or getting hemmed in for a shift (and maybe resulting in a goal against).

    Sorry buddy, but as you know I coached minor hockey in Oakville (against you as a player I believe?) And I just can't agree with that kind of logic. There is a system that breaks down. On this topic I will not budge.

  14. mojo19 says:

    Well, to be fair Bourque is 30, so I don't really see him getting any better than he is, so I don't see why he would warrant a top pairing d-man like Gunnarsson or a great up and comer like Gardiner. I would personally hate if we dealt one of those two for Bourque. Franson, sure.

  15. mojo19 says:

    So basically I'm agreeing with you about there maybe not being a good fit for a trade.

  16. blaze says:

    I knew you had to be a coach somewheres, not too many regular hockey watchers pick up things like missed defensive assignments. Frattin didn't look out of place because he always picks up his man.

    No need to rush Kadri he can take all the time he needs. This whole 'depth' thing is pretty nice for a change.

  17. blaze says:

    I never ever watch the Marlies so mojo you or anyone really can answer this. Is Eakins running the same system or atleast similar to what Ronnie is running in the NHL?

    The Leafs blue liners stand up at the offensive blue line an awful lot I could see how that could be a tough transition coming up from the Marlies.

  18. mojo19 says:

    Ya, Kadri has magic hands, no question about it. And he deserves to get some NHL games in this season but no need to keep him up on a 2nd line role all year long, especially if we want to put forth our best team possible.

    And ya, I coached house league Juvenile (17-18 year olds) in Oakville for 2 seasons. Won award for coach of the year losing in the finals my first year, very proud of that. My father has been a fixture in Oakville hockey for 20 years, but recently left Ranger's system to take a team in Port Credit.

  19. mojo19 says:

    Can't help you. I don't watch the Marlies either, I think I saw parts of 2 or 3 games last year. But ya, they should be running the same sytem (I would hope)…

  20. alpalstewart says:

    i think they should wait till the deadline and get basically the same as what the oilers got for penner, a prospect,roster player and a 1st round pick. some1 will pay it at the deadline, maybe LA again lol

  21. dumbassdoorman says:

    Yes he would fetch more at the deadline for sure, could be a very nice addition for a team then

  22. albertateams says:

    Gunnarsson as a top pairing guy is a bit of a stretch he may play there but that doesn't mean long term he belongs there. I think he is better suited for 3-4. Gardiner has shown promise but he's no guarantee to be anything more than 5-6 d man. Franson same thing.

    With Bourque a team knows what they are going to get 25-30 goals 50-55 points, power forward with good speed that can play PP and PK. He's also signed reasonably for 4 more years.

    I wouldn't trade Bourque straight across for either Gunnersson or Gardiner. It's not a slight on either one of then its just I don't see either one as a significant upgrade over what Calgary has right now.

  23. reinjosh says:

    Haha fair enough. I suppose that makes sense. I've never coached so I wouldn't know. I see things differently, I suppose from more of a player's perspective. I will concede to you having more knowledge that I do on that (granted as a defenseman I should probably agree with you. Nothing I should hate more than defensive breakdowns by a forward. Granted I'm a very mobile dman lol).

    And yes you did coach against me. I do remember you screaming occasionally 😛
  24. mojo19 says:

    haha, I'd scream, throw water bottles, everything. lol no joke.

Leave a Reply