they want a second line center if it was scoring they would just keep him

Laine could be had but i think your offering the wrong players. Think of it this way, if you want Laine you'll need to make your best offer consisting of 1 single player along with one pick/prospect. The minute you add pieces 3-4-5 your just trying to compensate for the main pieces that we all know arent gonna cut it.

Only way Laine is moved is if a team offers a deal that makes you go "hmm im not sure we won that trade". Thats how you know its probably fair.

Love what your saying here, cheers.

Ok, I see. What about now?

What about Atkinson, Jenner, 1st & 2nd?
Or Atkinson, Texier, 1st, & 2nd?
Texier, Anderson, 1st & 2nd?

Then buyout Wennberg
Leaving Dubois, Foudy, Jenner, Grigorenko & Nash for C depth.

Not sure, @MisstheWhalers
What you think?

I like those trades but I don't think Cam would ever get traded, his contract isn't favorable. He's put too much money into the growth of hockey in Columbus (Rick Nash lmao, IK). I don't think Cam would waive his no trade clause either.(My Opinion) I'd go with the your Tex and Andy Proposal.

It kills me to give up Jenner and Foudy.

I don't see any way Winnipeg accepts a rental and a player with 2 years of term as main pieces for Laine.

I’m pretty sure any trade for Laine would probably start with Werenski from Columbus, and that’s not worth it for us to give up.

Yeah I bet Chevy is asking for PLD, Werenski, or Jones in return, but there is no way the Jackets would part with one of those players

This seems a lot closer than the previous one. Itll come down to how they value Foudy. If they think hes top6 center next year, might be enough. Maybe remove Jenner and Murray and Anderson instead.

Anderson
Foudy
2020 1st

Not saying itll get it done but this is closer.

Now, if CBJ extended Savard before the deal, so as to give Winnipeg more term... does that change the calculus?

Unfortunately with Savard being 30, no.

So there's not a *direct* comp for a Laine trade but there have definitely been plenty of trades for young star forwards that haven't had that one star piece coming back. It's not gonna be a Taylor Hall one-for-one. These guys (not all at Laine's level, obviously) were all traded for packages with some futures and mid-tier roster players:
- Vincent Trocheck
- Jason Zucker
- Taylor Hall (to Arizona)
- Phil Kessel
- JT Miller
- Mark Stone
- Erik Karlsson
- Mike Hoffman
- Jeff Skinner
- Ryan O'Reilly
- Tyler Seguin
- Rick Nash
- Matt Duchene (to OTT)
- Kyle Turris (before he fell off a cliff)
- Artemi Panarin (to CBJ)

I keep seeing people say "CBJ can't do it without giving up Werenski" and stuff like that, but the truth is that these deals RARELY involve another star player coming back. In all likelihood, WPG will move him for a package that fills a couple of holes right now and includes some future pieces that have long-term value.

Ok but you said yourself these are not direct comps and they arent. So cant use the analogy without giving a partially close comparison with it. Also a few trades that support the idea were also terrible trades that shouldnt have been made, even fans knew it. Sometimes GMs just do stupid things sure but im not sure we should be using them as metrics.

Want a better direct comp that takes a lot of factors into consideration? Ryan Johansen for Seth Jones. Thats the type of deal that will have to get it done IMO. Not saying Seth Jones has to go back the other way but its that type of deal that SHOULD get it done. If Wpg wants to do 1st+prospect+mediocre roster player, be my guest. I wouldn't.

Correct, I did say that, and they aren't DIRECT comps, but there's a pattern of star players getting moved for seemingly underwhelming multi-player packages FAR more frequently than getting moved for a similar player at a different position.



That is literally my entire point. GMs frequently make dumb trades when moving star players. I'm not saying Winnipeg SHOULD do a similar trade, I'm saying that it's completely within the realm of possibility that they WILL do a similar trade, given that it's a template that just about every trade involving a star player follows in this league.




If you're going with the Joey for Jones comp, WPG is Nashville in that scenario. CBJ was rebuilding, NSH was dealing from a position of depth and trying to make a run. And in doing so they gave up the more valuable player. Ergo, you're looking at Laine for Dumba, straight up.

EDIT: Also… the more I think about it… Boston trading Seguin might be the closest comp we have. Young star player at a deep position on a good team with some holes to fill.

Those players were all much older than Laine and some were traded as pending UFA's. Thats why those comps dont make sense the most, aside from their value as players. Seguin might work the most but it was one of the worst trades in NHL history.

As for your comp, Seth Jones was on his ELC. Dumba is 3 years from UFA. Not the same.....At all. Johansen was in his RFA contract and so is Laine.

Laine outproduced Johansen at the same age but Johansen plays center and is better defensively.

The circumstances dont have to be exactly as with that Johansen trade, simply gave an idea of the type of value WPG should be looking for in return.

Anyways im not diagreeing with you on the different types of trades that have happened. Im simply not setting the bar for myself at that bad trade that GM made as the metric for a fair Laine deal. Or else everyone on here will be peddling their Adam Larsson for other teams Taylor Halls.