Big rebuild means big trades

If Carolina wants the Kings to take back Darling's contract, I think they need to add more than just two 2nd round picks. All three pieces going Carolina's way are quality pieces. Upgrade one of the picks to a 1st or add in a decent prospect then maybe.

The rest of the trades are fine.

Pesce AND Faulk for Quick and to shed Darling? No thanks chief this aint it

Kempny's Czech. Burakovsky's an Austrian-born Swede. Orpik's from California. Nobody's Russian, here.

Giving up Kempny and Orpik without bringing back a defenseman is a bad move for the Capitals. It leaves the Caps' LHD, by experience, at: Orlov, Djoos, Ness, Siegenthaler. They have some good prospects, but Ness is a small, defensively unreliable #7, and Siegenthaler has played two NHL games, both this month.

Taking on a 35 year old on a $19M 3 year contract who has one more point than Brett Connolly in much more ice time and exponentially more power play time seems unlikely. By current production, Kovalchuk fits in Washington at 4R, and I kind of like Smith-Pelly.

I don't think Kovalchuk is moving without some salary retention or a bad contract dumped the other way. I thought Kempny would be a bad signing this summer, at 10M over 4, but his offense is holding steady at the level it was in the playoffs, he's still blocking shots, and his puck possession and penalty killing are improving. Plus he assisted on the Cup-winning goal. He's looking like a half-price Martinez. That leaves the caps without any really bad contracts. Orpik and Burakovsky are not having an amazing year, but they're on one year deals, and they were both huge playoff heroes this Spring, so trading them for a guy signed through 38 t over 6M doesn't make sense.

I think Burakovsky for Kovalchuk at 50% is still shortsighted, but might be tempting enough for Washington to give up a player a dozen years younger with one less even strength NHL playoff goal (4) than Kovalchuk (5). If there's an injury and Kovalchuk gets a chance on the Caps' top power play, he could help out a bit this year. Otherwise, by next year when they're 36 and 24, they'll end up missing Burakovsky.

I'd rather trade Burakovsky to Edmonton for Puljujarvi, Garrison, and Kassian, because Garrison and Kassian have more shorthanded experience than anyone in this conversation except Orpik, Garrison moves pucks pretty well, and Puljujarvi can finish out his ELC in Hershey, but Kovalchuk at 50% seems doable. There's a chance he plays 3R on a line with Shumakov and Kuznetsov, spreading out the offense and making the team pretty tough to defend against. He's not going to suddenly turn into Tarasenko there, who is also available, but he could score some goals.

I get that LA would prefer to dump the whole 19M contract, but I don't see a team with zero cap space, hoping to defend a championship, as able to get too sentimental about adding a guy who used to score a ton of goals but hasn't played in the NHL in a few years.

Also, if the total cap hits in the trade equalize, but you're trading with a team with zero dollars, the only way they can afford that is to start carrying a 21 player roster instead of 23. That doesn't give them enough flexibility to deal with day-to-day injuries, or to bench guys having bad weeks.

Never mind that Montreal already has 5M of LHD in the AHL.

I think Washington could use Kopitar more than Kovalchuk or Burakovsky this year. Their penalty killing has been really inconsistent, and Kopitar is one of the best at that, getting like five shorthanded points a year, to keep opponents honest. Any chance Kopitar is available? If so, want to build it from Washington's side and find a way they can have him on a 23 person team? I think he'd play 2L,, PK1, and PP2. No idea what he'd cost, but he's good enough to justify giving up any prospect or pick the Caps have, if there's a way they can afford him without taking away from their current top PP of Ovechkin, Kuznetsv, Oshie, Carlson, Backstrom, or their top PK of Niskanen, Orlov, Eller, Wilson.

I don't think that there is any good way they can afford Kovalchuk at any more than 50%. To get him at 50%, barring injury, they would trade Burakovsky. But they're already looking at a cap crunch next summer where they might have to trade Burakovsky away in order to extend long term offers to Vrana and Djoos. Trading Burakovsky for someone a dozen years older would make that worse. So even at 50%, I think LA has to add to that trade to get Washington to accept it, because worst case, if no one wants Burakovsky, they can just not sign him, and let him walk. Worst case, if no one wants Kovalchuk, it would cost about a 2nd round pick to dump him next summer, at 50%.

Way out of the box, I, think Wilson has replaced Oshie at 1R and Oshie is signed until he gets almost as old as Kovalchuk, but is currently younger and much more effective. Kovalchuk at 50% for Oshie at full price could give Washington some cap space to justify making the roster older. I don't think Kovalchuk is as good as Oshie right now, at Oshie's role of tips, rebounds, and faceoffs on PP1, and I think Oshie has brought a lot of mellow leadership and positive attitude to the Caps, so this would be a bad trade, right now, but if there's a salary cap crunch next summer it's possible that Washington looks at it as a way to sign long term deals with Djoos and Vrana, plus another bridge with Burakovsky, LA has to sweeten it a little,but not much.