No thanks. Ristolainen isn’t good

He actually kind of has been? Basically 2 years straight of well above average defensive results, has taken a toll on his offensive numbers but he's still turned himself into a net-positive player.

I'd look at it this way: Risto is probably overpaid by 1.5 AAV per year at this point, Anderson is overpaid by about 4 AAV per year at this point

1) Flyers don't need Knight, and Ersson is already the more proven goalie. Ersson, Kolosov, and Fedotov all already over here no reason to bring in Knight now. Let Kolosov and Fedotov challenge Ersson for 1A 1B combo. To add to that Brink, Laughton, Zamula a 1st and a 3rd are more valuable than Lundell currently + a throw in bottom 6 player.
2) we aren't getting rid of Risto without retaining IMO. Too much term left. Montreal isn't paying a 2nd for him plus other assets without retention.
3) I don't think anyone is taking Atkinson, buyout incoming.

and anderson is?

1) I think you might be missing the bigger picture with this trade.

The whole point of this one is really simple: get Lundell however you can. Florida has no real reason to move him unless a team really, really makes it worth their wild. I honestly believe that even if you offered a 1st + 2nd + Brink for him that they'd say no, they'd be losing the most valuable asset by far in the deal with no upside that really helps them. So how do you get them to justify trading him?

Well, at this point Knight is bad cap against their books. He's been in and out of the assistance program and has really struggled hard this season. He certainly needs a change of scenery, but it's fairly easy to understand that Florida probably simultaneously doesn't want to move him in a trade for "nothing", and also understand that his value is *real* low right now. You're right that Ersson is the better asset right now, but with Fedotov and Kolosov now in Philly, Zavragin having a monster D+1 season, and the fact that Knight really does have enormous upside if he pans out, does it make sense to do that 1-for-1 swap if it helps convince Florida to also move Lundell? I 100% think so

Luostarinen and Laughton/Zamula are more or less a wash in the trade, but the important key here is Luostarinen plays LW and C, two areas the Flyers are weak in, while also being 6'3 and having experience playing for a contender while also only being 25 years old. I think he's a guy who makes more sense to have in the lineup than the other 2 players mentioned.

Basically, I know from a pure value perspective Philly is losing this trade. If they want to acquire a U25 Center this summer, they're going to lose the trade from a pure value perspective, I can just about guarantee that. But this trade puts them in a situation where they at least have the potential to walk away with 2 other guys who still could be longer term pieces of the future in Knight and Luostainen, while also avoiding giving up any truly premium assets

2) Josh Anderson is bad, like really bad. The idea behind this trade is we accrue a couple of additional assets to downgrade a roster player significantly, and pray that Anderson can even get a fraction of his old self back under a coach who he thrived under in the past (and if he does, then adding a bigger forward who can play LW and is a strong F1 on the forecheck is a great stylistic fit for what we need). I'm not totally gung-ho on moving Risto, I just think for a team that's planning on spending a lot this summer he's the most logical candidate to be moved to try and get value back based on a number of factors

3) I don't necessarily disagree, but saw an Ottawa fan post a trade like that and thought it kind of made sense for both side

Sens can't be taking on Atkinson's full contract, especially with the 1st just being Colorado's

Sens accept

Good suggestion for the Habs, trade is fine, we just dont need to do. Rather keep the pick and buyout anderson after next season

His buyout is accually pretty cheap for how bad his contract is.

A bad forward is 100X better than a bad D

Wasn’t aware he made such change but he is still pretty bad. A bad D is really much harder to give him limited ice time than a bad forward

Ristolainen is averaging 19:00/game with 2mins short-handed, and by advanced stats he's actually positive/neutral value player for Flyers. Starting equally in all three zones, so they're not really hiding "bad D" on ice.

He is bad tho. It’s a known fact. With only 6 D on ice, having a bad D is much more impactful than having a bad forward. And I’m not even talking about the young guys he would block

Just watch some games and you might find out that Torts & Shaw have been working their magic. He's defensively completely different player than what he was when Fletcher made that deal. Not worth 5,1M but around 3-3,5M he'd be actually valuable player for many teams. And compared for Anderson he's even on a bargain contract. And that's what the OP was addressing i guess.

But then again the only reason Flyers should do that is to get draft pick, Anderson wouldn't even crack the lineup unless Torts ("don't get too attached on players") really likes him for some reason. Current Anderson is just a ghost of the player he used to be.

josh anderson is more than bad though

OTT declines, that dont get chych