Quoting: Campabee
Zegras isn't a core peice to the Ducks, if he was there wouldn't be a counter proposal at all. Look at the Leafs, they aren't moving Mathews or Nylander for anything, Florida isn't moving Barkov or Tkachuk for anything. Core peices are those you would absolutely not move.
Edit*** Do I think the offer is weak? Of course it is but that is not what you said, hence my response.
Also I do not think the Habs will do any of Guhle or Reinbacher for Zegras unless they also get back the 3rd pick (where we include the 5th pick and an additional piece or two) since we would need to pick one of the top D men in this draft as a replacement.
Something like
3rd + Zegras for Reinbacher + 5th + Mesar + Jets 1st
The most important point in your comment is that this offer is weak, for which we Anaheim stalwarts thank you.
I'm not sure why you're defining "core piece" as "untouchable" when we define it as "player who is deemed essential to our future success." By our lights, Carlsson and McTavish and Matthews and Nylander and Suzuki and Slafkovsky are untouchable and Marner and Zegras and Caufield are core pieces whose trade would require an equivalent high-value asset in return.
At fifth overall you'll have a choice among most if not all of Silayev, Buium and Dickinson (as well as Parekh and Yakemchuk) because Celebrini, Demidov and Levshunov will almost certainly be three of the first four. (Of course, if Demidov is still on the board at #5 I think that you'll overcome your desire for a defenseman, and you may feel that way about Lindstrom, too.) So I don't see your need to move up, but if Chicago picks Levshunov at #2, I can see Anaheim trading back with you and your proposal is eminently fair and reasonable.
Quoting: GuyGuyGuy
Zegras is 5th on Anaheim forwards depth chart. In Montreal, the fifth player on our forward depth chart is Newhook
Zegras is #1 on our LW depth chart.
The fact that you think that Zegras is our fifth most valuable forward (he's not) and that Newhook is your fifth most valuable forward doesn't mean that they are comparable. You wouldn't trade Suzuki for Carlsson and we wouldn't dream of trading McTavish for Slafkovsky. Nor would we want Caufield or Dach (or Newhook) for their opposite numbers, either.