I've yet to see a single Sabres ACGM that wants Acciari.

As much as I like Jarry a 2nd + our top prospect is a little heavy for a goalie who hasn't cracked .910 SV% the past couple of years and is signed to 5.375 million until he's 34. Considering all our cap issues (Campbell and Nurse) I don't know if we're going to pay that much for another question mark of a goaltender signed to big money long-term. Campbell would probably have to go back in return for this to be possible

without a doubt EDM has to figure out it's Campbell mess.
But he's not going to come back to PIT.
EDM much like the penguins, has to make other moves to make their Roster work. That's part of GMing.

As for Jarry, he's a 2x all star, who had an absolute garbage defense put in front of him all year.
At some point that just takes a toll. EK doesn't play D, Letang is spotty in the Dzone, the entire 3rd pairing was AHL level.
I mean you could put the best goalie in the history of the game back there, and he would not have performed well.
Situation matters.

As for Broberg, I don't view him as a prospect anymore. He's had 81 games at the NHL level and he's gonna be 23 years old.
He's a young player at this point.
The results aren't exactly thrilling. I think if he could have cracked more ice time this year he would have.
I think you are more likely to call Lavoie an actually prospect as they have only given him 7 games.

Either way, a team like NJ would give up Bahl and a 2nd for Jarry. There are like 3-4 teams looking for a goalie and there just aren't many to choose from.
You have to give to get. Believe me I know the penguins gave a lot which is why their prospect pool sucks too.
For what you want to give, you really aren't going to get much of value. That really isn't an option at this point.

sure you haven't.
https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/5133577

Campbell will be dealt with regardless whether it's a buyout, trade or dump. I like Jarry a lot but it depends on price of other goalie's, Gustavsson mainly who comes at a lower cap hit and younger age. We're going to need Broberg + Holloway next year for cost saving measures and the 2nd is expendable. I would be comfortable with doing 2nd + Akey + Savoie for Jarry if a player like Gustavsson costs too much (I do believe Jarry is much better than Gustavsson)

I think if Broberg is EDM hopes on defense they will have issues. Notice I rode him at the 7th spot here and went to get a 36 year old guy to play D till Pickering is ready.
I don't hold him in such high regard. I mean if it's another decent prospect to come back it is what it is. But I think you are over valuing him to be honest just because he was taken 8th.
I'm sure the pens could send back the rights to POJ if you are looking for a cost savings 3rd pairing guy.
I think at Broberg's age if he was gong to crack that line up he would have by now. Much like PIT the hurdle isn't high.
But I don't view Broberg as making or breaking a trade here that probably needs to be done for both teams as the penguins need to play their young prospects who are really good, and they can't simply bury everyone in the AHL. They have too many good prospects in goal.

Jackets decline. Jackets either just keep Elvis or buy him out. No reason to swap him out for a worse contract

Hadn't seen that one. It's fine, just not exciting to me.

Rakell is 1 year off a 60 point 28 goal season and is only 31.
CBJ is better off retaining 50% and flipping him than buying Elvis out which you will carry for 6 years.

For the penguins, Elvis isn't some sought out contract either man. His contract is just as bad. He's just a vet goalie to help the rookie out a little in a backup role.
Something if they trade Jarry, they would probably pay Ned 2.5 to 3 mil to do anyway.

So this idea that it's a "worse" contract isn't really there man.
Buying Elvis out is a worse option than flipping Rakell who they would be able to flip with retention less painful than an elvis buyout.
For pit paying elvis to be the vet behind Blom at 2 mil more that what they would pay a FA, is better than carrying Rakell.

It's just two teams trying to salvage the best of 2 bad contracts. It's not a "winnable" situation for either team. You already have a bad contract that is virtually the same if not worse, as it's a lot harder to flip elvis than it is to flip Rakell.

I’d rather just keep Elvis than take on rackell. They can flip him half retained after next season or buy him out. Doubt they get much from rackell who is 31, owed 5 million over the next 4 years and is coming off a bad season. Elvis isn’t the problem the jackets defense is. If Rakell is worth as much as you think he is just have the pens retain on him and flip him yourself

The pens won't retain on him. Hell they wouldn't even retain 1 year on Smith. So that's why that isn't going to happen.
As for Elvis I don't think you can flip him. Even retained.
The Jackets would retain on Rakell though. They move out Elvis and save almost 3 mil in cap, and get a return for flipping Rakell. That's not a bad salvage for Elvis. It beats paying him 5.4 this year and then paying him the next 4 years in a buyout. If you can't understand that there is nothing left to say here.

I think you are just opposed to change. Elvis isn't the future in CBJ he had his shot at that it didn't work out. The reason PIT takes him is they will need a backup and it doesn't make a huge difference to get one in FA, or take Elvis if it saves 1.5 mil in their total cap. (Elvis + replacement rookie) - (rakell salary + cost of Ned) .

There is nothing sexy in it for either team, it just helps both save on their cap.

Jackets don’t need the cap space. Elvis isn’t the future but he also won’t be moved if it takes taking on a worse contract or giving up a premium asset. Buying Elvis out after next season would be cheaper than half retaining on Rakell for the next 4 years and eating 10 million in dead cap for like a third round pick. Plus it gives them time to see what tarasov, greaves, and Ivanov can do. Guess we will just have to agree there isn’t a deal to be done here

the buyout on Elvis is 4 years 1.5 2.8 1.6 1.6
You could retain 1.5 x 4 on rakell drop his salary to 3.5x4 and he's flipped.
Someone will pay 3.5 mil on a guy who's 1 season out of 60 points, and put up almost 40 points in a down year. Those numbers add up.

Like I said you are just reluctant to change.
You think everyone else is a worse contract.
Elvis is actually a worse contract for CBJ here. It's not hard to see that. You complain about dead space, you just spent 7.5 mil on dead space + another 5.4 on a backup goalie. That's even more dead space.

Again, if you are reluctant to change and this everything on another team is worse, when what you have is bad, then you will never gain. Hence you will wall yourself off on deals.

This is a smarter move for CBJ than it is for PIT.
I just showed you why.
As far as CBJ not needing money, you are wrong on that too. Those young player's contracts are starting to come up. They will get paid. The cap will tighten faster than you think.
So you'll be paying Elvis for 5 years, 1+ 4 years of buyout. Instead of Rakell for 4 at a lower cap hit.
I mean this isn't rocket science maybe try doing the math instead of being resistant to change.

Again I’d agree to disagree. Don’t think teams are lining up to pay a 31 year old coming off a disappointing season 3.5 million for 4 more years. If that’s the case the pens should just trade him themselves.

Also Elvis buy out number is 6.5 million over 4 years. If the defense plays better I think he could definitely put up average to slightly below average starter numbers. He’s been behind a bottom 3 defense in the league the last 3 years.

Maybe from Buffalo
Probably not for a 4th though

apparently you can't add because I just gave you the numbers. 1.5 + 2.8 + 1.6 + 1.6 = 7.5

If you don't think anyone will take on Rakell at 3.5 just wait to you see someone pay inconsistent 40 point winger DeBrusk 5.5 mil on a long term contract and it will make Rakell at 3.5 look like a steal.

Again, you just here trying to be difficult. CBJ takes takes.
Have a good day.

Debrusk is 4 years younger and is a 3 time 25+ goal scorer. Rakell has done that once since 2017 and is past his prime. If you were offering Debrusk at the same contract as Rakell for Elvis I’d take that in a heartbeat

DeBrusk is an inconsistent 40 point guy who's been disgruntled in the locker room.
Lets not build him up into something he's not. Hell even BOS acgms aren't resigning him for the amount Rakell is getting paid. They know better.
So yes, a 40 point guy on a bad year, at 3.5 is not only inline salary wise.... as that's what a team would pay for a 40 pt player, if not more, but it's also a great bargain because he's capable of much more.

Again, you just arguing to argue, no thought in it at all.

Well yeah no duh they aren’t signing him to amounts that Rakell is getting paid. Rakell is overpaid lol. You just proved my point that even a younger and better forward isn’t worth 3.5 so why would anyone want Rakell at that amount?

and that's where you are wrong, because DeBrusk is going to get 5.5 on a multi year deal.
but keep arguing to argue.