Hahaha since when has on ice value been the only determine factor? Happy you got to use your word of the day though, just sad you used it on a statement that's half-witted and lacking of knowledge of the sport

It's actually closer to 5 1sts as despite the image of Josh Anderson online among fanatics and not hockey managers.
Josh Anderson at 50% retention for 3 years that is almost assuredly another 1st despite you being emblematic of the myopia that afflicts many Ducks fans.

Frank Seravalli already confirmed this a year ago for a power forward that consistently scores 20 goals but you focus on 1 bad year of Josh Anderson and not the 1 bad year of TZ.

Make it, make sense.

Do you REALLY think that someone is going to give you a 2024 first-round draft pick for any of those three prospects?!?

And this is before we get into the discussion of the difference between a 2024 first, whose placement if not completely fixed is at least known within narrow parameters, and a 2025 pick which, in some instances, may not even be that pick at all (i.e., the Calgary first) or even that year (in the case of top-10 protection).

By the way, the Eichel trade included Alex Tuch, who would be a top-10 pick from his draft were that selection held today.

By the way, Jack Eichel, was a 2nd overall pick and is an elite centerman. (Trevor Zegras' value is quite below Eichel's, by quite a margin)

(For Filip Mesar and Owen Beck. Yes. Some of 32 teams would. Maybe not Anaheim, but yes.)
(You could gamble on Barron, Pittsburgh might with Sidney Crosby to help Barron get his confidence back up.)

We don't want a bunch of late firsts, the pieces you get with those picks (middle/bottom 6) Anaheim is already well stocked with. A quantity return only works for a team like Boston or Pittsburgh who's prospect pipeline is empty.

The reason Caufield is being brought up is to point out if you were offered 4 bottom 6 pieces for Caufield, you would baulk at the offer too.

As to what we would take for Zegras, this has been discussed as nauseum. Select one of the trades below.

MTLs 24 1st + Beck + Kovacevic
Reinbacher + MTLs 25 2nd
Slavkovsky

Those are the trade options that would have any interest or likelihood of success. Offering "four firsts" and assuming that means there is value is just pissing on us and trying to tell us it is raining.

Do you think Slafkovsky for Zegras (one for one is equal?)

The Slafkovsky offer sound like this:
Ducks get Cole Caufield, in exchange for, Mason McTavish & Anaheims's 1st in 2024

At this point, Anaheim would be adding a piece, but these discussions have been going on for so long that they proceeded Slaf's breakout, and MTL would have been the ones adding.

I am pointing out pieces on the habs roster/pipeline that would be worth moving Zegras for at all, and the comparables are there from this season moving highly drafted players from there original teams. Gauthier got Drysdale and a 2nd, Mittlestadt got Byram. Both dealt in trades where the return was an equally high end piece.

I agree the Ducks want a high end piece in return. They are better off keeping him.

I apologize for making you look it up, but I console myself with the fact that by doing so, I made you measurably smarter than you were yesterday.

In what world is McTavish + 3OA equivalent to Reinbacher + ~40 OA? Or are you imagining that Caufield is somehow significantly higher value than Zegras despite Z having a better Pts/game average across his entire career?

The point we're making is that the offer you're providing for Zegras would be the same as us offering the Edmonton 1st, Nathan Gaucher, Brayden Tracey, and Nico Myatocic for Cole Caufield. Hey man, it's 4 firsts, you should just take it right? No, you would be insulted by the offer, and rightfully so.

Equating Mason McTavish, who was the third overall selection in his draft and has already proven himself a top-6 NHL center, with the untested David Reinbacher is bad enough, but saying that Anaheim's top-5 draft pick in 2024 has the same value as Montreal's second-round draft pick a year from now is simply idiotic.

And the idea that the difference between 0.57 PPG Mason McTavish and 0.5 PPG Juraj Slafkovsky is Anaheim's 2024 first is equally counter-factual.

According to this year's statistics 100%. (Over the first 200 games, Imo Caufield is worth more as a goal scorer, to each their own)

We both know McTavish and 3OA is outlandish, but that is sorta how the Slavkovsky one made me feel. (I misspoke regarding Reinbacher, but still he can't be moved) I understand the one for one was before Slaf broke out. It was meant to be an extreme, albeit too extreme.

Just to understand how you value Zegras:

Is Casey Mittelstadt + Colorado 2nd 2026 enough for Zegras.

Or let me ask you this:

What is Zegras worth in this years draft OA?
And what is Caufield worth in this years draft OA?

I'd say Zegras would return anywhere from 2-7 oa as a main piece, and Caufiels anywhere from 5-10 as a main piece. I value Zegras higher for his ability to play center, higher career points, and less likely to have his career cut short from injuries due to his size.

I also understand outside Celebrini, it's a pretty meh draft, no real consensus on 2-10, there are going to be good players, but there's not really any star power outside Macklin.

I never said all firsts are the same, but a low 1st is still a 1st and 3 first round prospects are still 3x1st.

Don't blame me for what others said.