Bruins aren't dumping Hall on Chicago without paying for it. Same with Edmonton and Yamamoto.

I know the Compher deal is an overpay, but thinking of it like AA. Helps get a short deal with higher money when Compher is in the age range to get paid in a weak market

Thinking of the Fleury deal in the Yamamoto deal.

I would usually ask for a 2nd, but the Bruins are strapped for picks. This deal is like getting him for free, but agree that there should be a sweetener

I don't think that CGY trade occurs. In KD's latest interview he publicly said they weren't chasing any goalies this year. Besides that the only trade I'd truly consider is the BOS trade. His cap is too high, but he's still a former Hart winner and if we retain 50%...we can potentially get a good pieces back. It's all potentially, but it's also something for nothing. I can respect the side that says don't take cap dumps for free, BUT there are also exceptions to the rules too. IMO, Hall falls in that category that I'd take a risk on.

With 2 years @ $6m and his supposed locker room issues, I don't think I'd want Hall for free. Without a decent sweetener, the Bruins can keep him.

Not that this means a whole lot, but Elliotte Friedman is reporting that CHI and BOS are indeed talking about taking on Cap from BOS. No specifics, but thought it was worth mentioning.

Based on the other ACGMs, I think there's enough interest in Peeke that he could fetch a 2nd (young RD with term on a team-friendly deal that blocks shots). If Chicago is willing to move one of those, CBJ easily accept.

I would send the Rangers 2nd to make it happen

Calgary declines. They'll get better offers for Vladar than this. Boston declines as well. Same reason. They'll get far better offers for Hall. And CBJ declines. Peeke is worth more than a late 3rd. Other than the Edmonton deal, these trades are all skewed in favor of the Hawks.

So your ok w/ using pick #55 on a 3rd pair RD? Doesn't seen like a smart move to me.