Coleman > Jarnkrok no thanks

Ekholm does not have that kinda value.

I mean, they're extremely comparable. Over the past 3 seasons, Jarnkrok has more points but Coleman has more goals. Jarnkrok also has better possession numbers and comparable defensive numbers, plus he has the better contract at only $1m when retained. I get not wanting to make the trade if you don't want to give up a 1st, but Coleman and Jarnkrok are extremely comparable. And it would give TOR an extremely cheap and versatile middle 6 forward which is exactly what they need. Also, Goodrow got a 1st too...

Boston will take Jarnkrok too.

I can't wait for the sale to begin. This team lost its mojo a long time ago. Can't keep doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I'd pass on that. Jarnkrok isn't what the Leafs need, imo, especially at the expense of a 1st.

penguins would accept if they can actually make it to the playoffs with like 0 defense.

You guys look like you need James Neal back to get your mojo again.

If they can get future considerations for Tinordi, I hope they jump on that too.



If it's more than you want to spend that's one thing, but it's actually not enough for him. Look at the Muzzin trade. A first and two 2nd round prospects for half a season of Muzzin at $4M. You'd be getting a comparable defenseman for a season and a half at $2M, and a 4th thrown in too. At such a ridiculous cap hit, BOS could flip him for more than they paying here at next year's deadline, if they're not contending then.

That trade was a first and two prospects i believe.

Yes that's correct. Two prospects that had been recent 2nd round picks (I was trying to add some context as to their value around the time of the trade). Sorry if that was unclear.

Okay, well once they’re a prospect, they’re no longer a pick.

For example, this would be like saying that this particular trade is two firsts and a 2nd. A year and a bit of ekholm isn’t getting two firsts and a second.

B's say no for Ek...
It is 2-firsts as stated above and a second.
Moreover, it's conveniently in NSH favour that the "1st-as-a-pick" is next years draft which is supposed to be stronger...
-PASS-

Yeah I get that. And I wouldn't consider this two 1sts and a pick. I can't see anyone trading a 1st for Urho right now.



This part I disagree with. No a lottery team like OTT, DET, or CHI wouldn't give up that much, For a contender like BOS, where they'd have the expectation of going far it's different. If a strong team like them is buying at the deadline, they're doing it with the mindset their picks will be late in the draft. At the $2M cap hit with the retention, late round 1sts and a 2nd aren't unreasonable at all.

It also means losing grzelcyk. So two firsts (using your method), a 2nd, and grzelcyk for a year and a bit of ekholm is an exceptionally horrid idea for boston.