I'm aware that the 31 thoughts ad libbing put out this silly silly idea but there is no way on the planet CBJ is getting Dach. Swap him with Strome and its an interesting conversation

Hawks decline and just sign him next season.

Hawks hang up laughing

Unfortunately Strome isn't enough for me. If we swap out Strome for Dach i think we would need something more.

You obviously don't know how this works

Doesn't matter what's enough for you, CBJ doesn't have that kind of leverage.

Phi is already out of it because Jones isn't willing to sign extensions with most teams, which makes him a rental and rentals don't get much more than 1st rounders.

What a horrible deal for Chicago.

Now that's original. Remember the trade has to work both ways

Sure we do. We still have the player under contract and any team can have him for entire season. Plus the opportunity to resign him. I'd call that leverage. Savard got 1st round pick at the trade deadline. What do you think Jones will get for an entire season regardless if he signs with the team? I'd assume someone is willing to pay for that. Also Chicago isn't a playoff team so if they are serious about trading for him I'd hope they also sign him. That's a big win if he's their guy.

I saw the 31 thoughts...nothing stops Jarmo from asking. He better as for a lot. So should Stan. Stan should counter with Strome and Zadorov for Jones and all three 1sts in the 2021 draft. CBJ has zero leverage here. Seth Jones has said he's out. He's not staying in Columbus. The clock is ticking for Jarmo. Make sure you get what you can. It won't be Dach as Bowman has said Dach and Debrincat are untouchable. He's said that...so forget anything a 31 thoughts podcast says.

Even if he signs

Because keeping him for a full season on a team that isn't getting anything and losing him for nothing is SUCH an option.

A rental is a rental and unless Jones is willing to sign an extension, which we know for most teams is not the case, he is a rental.

We know explicitly that multiple teams are not moving for him because he isn't signing with them, so saying "Plus the opportunity to resign him" is just make believe.

The only person you are fooling is yourself.

But this is for an entire season. Which i think makes a difference plus in my notes i have said that he signs an extension. To get Jones plus the extension i think the trade is fair.

I assume that you meant to have a question mark there.

Yes, even if he signs. Jones' top-level effectiveness is unlikely to be more than 6 years. Dach looks to be a franchise cornerstone for 10 years or more, like Kane and Toews. Mitchell is a useful RD (I wish I could have him on the Ducks!) and the first could also be a long-term asset equal to Jones' expected on-ice life.

Do you think Jones is your guy?

1 season is a rental. The only difference between the offseason and the TDL is leverage shifts and options are different.

Unless Jones signs an extension before hand, which he wont, then what happens after the trade means nothing to CBJ nor Jones trade value.

And its clear that you think the trade is fair but you are delusional and not based in reality, but overly wishful thinking

Regardless if we trade Jones now or at the trade deadline..........we are getting a 1st rounder and probably a good prospect. Plus this years draft is extremely weak. We shall see.

I think one of Jones, Lindholm, Rielly, Pulock, Klinger, Nurse, etc... will be our guy. WAY too many quality pending UFA dmen available next summer.

I'd send CBJ quality pieces. BUT those are going to be pieces CHI is willing to give. Not the pieces CBJ wants. CBJ could end up losing him for nothing. CHI can take a different Dman. This is why everyone is correcrly saying CBJ has very little leverage.

I agree. His value as a rental is a mid-round first and a prospect . . . not a top-3-drafted franchise center prospect, a first-round pick in the top third and an A right defense prospect.

Take Kirby Dach out and I can see the argument for making that trade, although I wouldn't like to see it for Chicago. The risk of having nothing after one year is too big, when losing even Mitchell might be significant. Add to that the risk that the #11 selection becomes the next Matt Barzal or Dylan Larkin and it really doesn't make sense, at least to me.

Think everyone is in agreement that you in fact "don't know how this works".

P.S. Don't buy into the idiotic "this year's draft is extremely weak" canard. That's a conflation of several comments made at the beginning of the year (before all the leagues that eventually resumed play did so) to the effect that "this is a tough draft to handicap" or "there aren't any clear choices for the top three places in this draft." People who don't know any better misunderstood that to mean that it's a weak draft year. Not so.

Was 2015 a "weak draft"? Boston had pick nos. 13 (Jakub Zboril), 14 (Jake DeBrusk) and 15 (Zack Senyshyn) in succession. For them it was a weak draft. It wasn't for the Islanders, who took Mathew Barzal immediately after at #16 and Anthony Beauvillier at #28. And I don't think that Ottawa (Thomas Chabot) or Washington (Ilya Samsonov) or Vancouver (Brock Boeser) think it was a weak draft, either.

Look back at the drafts from 2011 through 2017 (more recent draft years are too early to judge). About half the first-round picks in each draft have turned out pretty well. So as a philosophical matter, I don't think that there IS such a thing as a "weak draft," because generally each team gets an average of one first-round pick every year and it all depends upon how well you scout and select.

colorado is really the only team that will take him as a rental and you wont get byram or newhook prob just get a first rounder and a meh prospect if columbus wants a greater return then theyll have to look towards dallas and chicago the only teams hed sign with and that gives those teams leverage in that sense so u arent getting dach or debrincat like friedman said youll get strome suter or barrat at best for a center that is young

From the stuff i've been reading/hearing it's not that deep. Not saying you can't find value.

11