Yeah, Canes will pass on that. Ullmark is good, but it’s not worth sacrificing Bunting and Drury, who both have really found their games of late.

The Canes are giving up significant assets for a depth winger and a goalie with one year of team control.

Calgary is giving up a top-six C, a top-four D, and a Backup for two pending UFAs who provide no value to the Flames, a okay prospect, and a 2nd that’s years away.

The depth winger has 9 points in 11 games since being moved to center and put in a bigger role.

Boston does not trade him for Bunting. Remove those 2 and you probably have the basis for a trade. Drury is a bottom half of the roster type who would have a difficult time pushing anyone out of lineup in Boston. Boston could add mid to late pick or meh prospect. Fairly even. Or better yet just remove Drury too. 1st for Ully.

The Calgary trade is embarrassingly bad. But that’s the norm from the OP.

In what world does that trade provide value for Calgary.

Hard pass, they can get a better return on those players individually.

Do you think Boston should trade a top 8 goalie locked into a well below market contract for 1.5 years for not significant assets?

I’d also argue your definition of significant assets is flawed. The only significant asset being discussed here is that first rounder and that only has real value if it’s flipped to Calgary or San Jose in a trade for a center. No real interest in Drury unless another team wants him and I’d rather allocate money to the free agent of our choice next offseason than take Bunting at all.

I could see a Ullmark and Lysell for Necas, Raanta, and a second rounder in 24

If Necas is off the table, maybe that first round pick surrounded by cap filler. Unfortunately, DeAngelo would need to be in for cap reason (hold my gag reflex) and my assumption is so would a goalie whether it be Kochetkov Or Raanta. I’d also guess a defender going back to Carolina like Zboril (with retention to make him a minimum player) or Mitchell.

The Calgary Trade is bad and frankly should be removed from the discussion because it is not even remotely realistic.

The Canes and Bruins had the opportunity to sign both Bunting and Geekie over the summer, and I see no reason for them to swap now just 6 months later. I agree Drury and a 1st doesn't really entice Boston to move Ullmark, but frankly I'm not sure the Canes picks are high enough on their own, and they don't have enough stand out prospects to warrant moving one of them for a goalie.

Canes pass. 1st, and bunting retained for 2.5 seasons, and Drury for a guy who will play 4C and a goalie with no control?

It’s a top-six winger with term, a young defensive 3c with upside, and a first - I would consider that a pretty significant package. Goalies probably have a bit more value than usual because of the market, but they historically have never been very valuable in trades. There are way too many question marks (whether they benefit from systems, how they’ll handle a change in workload, how well they’ll work with goalie coaches). There’s a reason people always say “goalies are voodoo”, It’s impossible to gauge future performance from them.

Not even close to fair value for the Flames.

It’s a top 6 winger with term for a team that has the cap position to secure a similar player with the same cap room and a young defensive forward that is well behind other options already in the org. People say goalies are voodoo because they expect mediocre goaltenders like Anderson, Raanta, Vanecek to perform. Teams generally don’t trade goaltenders the caliber of Ullmark. They generally extend them

The Hurricanes only have two other wingers on their roster signed past this season, if they trade Bunting they’ll need to sign/re-sign almost an entire wing corps.
Drury’s ice time has been increasing as the year has gone on, he’s not being passed by within the org.

Dayum ok my bad!!!!