Ekholm

Zero percent chance.

Elaborate.

I know some BOS fans don't like the idea of an Ekholm trade because of the expansion draft implications, but putting that aside I feel like the structure of this deal makes sense. A 1st + Vaak almost seems like a given in any Ekholm to BOS trade. Lauko seems like a good prospect, but safely in the B prospect range I think (maybe some BOS fans would disagree with that assessment). Is Vaak still considered an A prospect? Was he ever -- has he Tolvanen-ed a bit? Legit just asking to get a frame of reference here as I know he was a 1st rounder a few drafts ago -- but the structure of the deal makes sense. If BOS feels it's one-sided, I could see NSH taking back the Moore contract or something I guess.

It is way too much. Assuming the Bruins don't make the trade to let Seattle Claim him. That means they lose Gryzelcyk too. So they lose 4 years of Grzelcyk, 6 of Vaakaninen and Lauko, plus the pick. I don't think it makes them that much better. Lauzon has been very good. I think Eckholm is better obviously, but I am not sure how much of an improvement over the way Lauzon has been playing.

Point being the Bruins could have dealt with their LD "issues" in the offseason. They chose to go young, and they haven't been let down, I see no reason to bail now. They would love to add Eckholm, but they won't give up that much. It's a year and half before he gets a huge payday. It's just not worth it.

Grzelcyk is criminally underrated too.

I also believe Lauko will be a Star in the league. A Poor man's pastrnak 25g 35a

Is the problem it is way too much or its not a good trade because of the Seattle issues? Lol.

If Grz is taken you still have Ekholm, Lauzon, and Zboril, right?

I think that's fair value trade wise, but I'm sure Nashville would consider retaining a bit.