Now that's my kind of trade!

with retained salary like that will cost way more than that. Ekholm makes Toronto a worse team Reilly is a puck mover ekholm is not hes a shutdown D.

Nashville already said forsberg will not be moved.

Not even without retention. Awful return for NSH.

@Zmach 's implied conclusion is 100% accurate: you've added offense to a team which is already too much offensively for most teams in the NHL, but you've subtracted substantially from a defense that doesn't impress too many observers as a playoff defense. But take out Forsberg, Reilly and the Ekholm retention and the exchange makes sense.

I don't think Nashville would be high on the list of teams needing Rielly, considering they would still have Josi and Ellis after moving Ekholm.

If anything wouldn't Nashville want a star forward back if moving both Ekholm and Forsberg in a deal?

Rielly is the flashy name on defense, and gets points, absolutely elite offensive dman, but ekholm is unquestionably better defensively than Rielly. Figured improving the defensive play of the defense while sacrificing some of Mo's offensive made sense if you can also get forsberg back.

I wasnt sure if the trade made sense for nashville, but If the sticking point is cost to retain that can be solved.

The problem that I see is that with nothing but Tenacious D's on defense, that wonderful offense is likely to spend large parts of games withering on the vine.

You can argue whether Toronto needs more on defense, but I don't think anyone can rationally argue that the Maple Leafs need more offense.

what part is awful?

I could be wrong, but Mo / Forsberg seems like bang on value to me. Not making sense for nashville would be understandable

Ekholm for 1st hallander and abramov is pretty close to the muzz trade, which elliotte said they are looking for

is the value just off on the retention? that's an easy fix.

i get moving rielly takes away a puck mover on the back end, but adding better defenders means we probably spend even less time back there. This part is debatable, i get where you're coming from. Puck mover to engage the forwards vs improving the ability to stop the attack is a good debate.

Your second part about adding offense makes no sense. You're completely exaggerating that it cant be rationally argued, it can be rationally argued for absolutely any team out there, and the "insiders" have rumoured about adding a top 6 fwd addition to the leafs for over a month.

No, Reilly doesn't make sense for NSH. A smaller, offensive defenseman is much less of a need than Ekholm is for them. Reilly wouldn't be getting prime ice time or PP opportunities over Josi and Ellis, and it puts NSH right back in the position of needing to protect 4 dmen in expansion. Except now it's a more expensive player that doesn't compliment what they already have at all.

The value's off too though. Forsberg's a much more skilled and complete player than Reilly. Asking NSH to retain on Forsberg just widens the gap.

Ekholm for a 1st, Hallander, & Abramov is more or less what TOR paid for Muzzin, but you're asking NSH to retain on Ekholm this year and next. They'd need to be compensated for that.

While Forsberg wasn't officially on the rumoured "untouchable list" that's been floating around, Poile has stated more than once of late that it would have to be an offer too good to say no to for him to consider trading Forsberg. This offer doesn't have anything NSH would want badly enough to think about moving on from him.

https://mobile.twitter.com/PierreVLeBrun/status/1371861059833901059?s=20

Lol less than a day later you have Dubas saying they've been focused on forwards.