I don't like the Duchene trade but the rest looks doable

Ottawa is NOT getting that first back.

Duchene trade seems fair, maybe you can get more. Vegas trade isn't bad but I believe they rejected a similar deal. Colorado wouldn't trade that first round pick knowing you guys are rebuilding. Arizona trade is the worst one. Makes zero sense for them

for stone, yeah they would.

No, they would not. Stone is not nearly elite enough for that.

So all the reports from Avs beat writers who have commented on Sens wanting their pick back, the Avs have asked for Karlsson or Stone, which the Sens arent willing to do.
I guess they must all be wrong

This is ridiculous. People are acting like there's nothing in the world they would take from OTT to give them their pick back. COL adds Stone and still has their own first round pick this year? Why wouldn't they do that?

Even if Ottawa is a dumpster fire this year and finish last in the league, there's an 81.5% chance they DON'T get the first overall pick. I just don't get how anybody thinks there's no way they get that pick back.

I would never do OTT 1st for Stone. It's called FA next year...

We'll just have to wait and see, won't we?

Love to laugh at ottawa.
Av's are in the drivers seat and can handcuff the Sens for a 20% chance of getting Jack Hughes lol

How about Stone for the 2019 OTT 1st, but have it lottery protected that if it's the 1st, OTT gets next year's colorado pick and COL get's Hughes.

There is no way that Arizona does that deal. Hossa+Steenbergen+3rd for Ryan (-$2.25M)+5th.

Hossa is exactly what Chayka wants/needs, a $5.275M cap hit for $1M in salary (possibly payed by insurance anyway). $5M in both cap hit and salary for Ryan is not what Chayka is looking for. The extras in that deal are 100% reversed. If Ottawa wants to eject Ryan, even with -$2.25M, they are the ones that will need to add.

You need to be more at a 5th for Ryan (-$2.25M) + one or two high prospects + picks. Ottawa will need to pay A LOT to move Ryan (and his 4 years remaining), and they will not get anything of value in return.

These look all very fair

Remember the Tavares Rule: Get value! GMs are supposed to be responsible asset managers....we shouldn’t see teams losing high-end players for nothing anymore.

You forgot some other rules. Players are heading expecting to be UFAs, don't want to see long term deals without exploring all their options....31 teams. Good assets management is to sign UFAs not to give up a punch of equal assets just to acquire one. Biggest rule, there very few trades where an upcoming UFA get their true playing value in return. All of these trades overvalue the what the Sens will get back into trades. Five stars fo wishful thinking, one star for not acknowledging the contractual situation of the Senator players.

I hate Duchene, but the MIN trade is fair. I don't like the fact we'd be losing our only right shot in our entire top 9, but perhaps a separate trade could be made to address that.

I'm pretty sure Joe would do that deal every day. I'd be hesitant to give up the OTT 1st even for Stone but I'd have to consider it if it was a sign and trade. Top two protected maybe. Then even if not Hughes you could add another (potential) elite future winger in Kaapo Kakko, but I'm just being greedy.

Every single deal says “Subject to extension...”

Which means that all of these players have to agree to sign long-term with the new team they’re headed to. And that only happens if they like the team, money, and term of the deal; otherwise these deals don’t happen! These pending UFA players have control of where they end up, both short- and long-term.

Sure, a pick could probably come down/off a few of these deals, but I would be quite confident that each of these teams would be OK paying the above prices if they had long-term contracts worked out with the player. And OTT is only getting optimal value from that type of deal.

Either way, Dorion doesn’t have the chops to get OTT a fair value for all three of their big UFA names.

Subject extension, just another term for, "I can't think of a reasonable trade, so I'll make this caveout which almost never happens."

So, when the rumors came out that LA and MTL had a deal to move Pacioretty, but then Patches killed the deal because he couldn't come to terms on an extension with LA....that just never happens, eh?

Or like when Panarin is throwing down drop-dead dates to his own club to either extend, trade, or "rent him" for his final year.....that just never happens, eh?

Elite players in the final year of their contract have immense leverage in directing where they end up for the next contract, even if they don't have an explicit NTC/NMC. Teams don't want to pay for uncertainty.

So what you're saying is just flat out wrong here. Sure, it's a bit lazy on my part to say "subject to extension"....but I'm giving $ and term for the extension and picking teams that I think these players would agree to play for long-term. And you can bet that the prices shown above are in the ballpark when the acquiring team knows the money and term they have that player for.

Really? There are about 90 upcoming UFAs. Do they all get traded? And who do they get traded if your theory is so definite that teams don't want players upcoming UFAs.
No, I'll stick to the historical facts. There are very few "sign and trades". And you expect Ottawa to pull off three. Almost always, contenders for the the playoffs or and certainly the Cup do not trade their good players even at TDL, they acquire players. Why would the Coyotes want to trade for very ordinary Ryan at 5m? It's not like LTIR Hossa is costing them money.

The title "Hold my Beer" should make it pretty clear that the entire post is unlikely to occur. What you're looking at above -- and let me be clear here -- is a set of 3 trades that would make sense to OTT, and the acquiring team, for each of those players. I think I mentioned in comments above that there's a snowball's chance in hell that Dorion pulls off all three, or anything close to it.

The theme of the post is to update how this all works in today's reality. You can carry on thinking that elite players are going to keep showing utter loyalty to their current club, even if said club is trending in the wrong direction. Go ask any NYI fan what they think of the Tavares situation. Every last one of them would tell you they were certain Tavares wouldn't walk away for nothing. The difference today is that: 1) the NHL is getting younger at a fast rate (I think Travis Yost and some others have done interesting analytical pieces about the change in age across the league), and 2) elite players (and their agents) are borrowing from the playbook of other leagues, like the NBA. If careers are leaning towards younger ages and elite players realize their window to win Cups is closing, why wouldn't they push to give themselves the best chance to win? Any professional athlete who isn't thinking in a win-first mode isn't long for this league.

Tavares is a new precedent in the league. And we're going to see more of it. As a result, expect just about every GM to start pushing hard to extend their franchise players a full year in advance of contract expiry to avoid all the chatter. Panarin and Pacioretty are related examples. And don't forget Drew Doughty interviews last summer. Paraphrase: "I want to play for a team that wants to win now". Maybe it was a bit of a negotiating tactic to land the big $11M x 8 year deal, but I'm willing to bet there was truth to the comment and he's counting on LA's short-term plans to boost the team (adding Kovalchuk was a start; trying to acquire Pacioretty is another attempt).

Sure, there are 90 pending UFAs. How many are elite? 3-5 at most. These are the players I'm referring to here.

RE: Ryan -- I think Ryan still has plenty of playable value and I'm sure at least half of the league GMs would agree. But not at $7.25M. If OTT retains some salary, why wouldn't a team be keen to bring him in? Especially a team like ARI that has lots of younger talent and could afford the cap hit to bolster their scoring. Heck, they've got a great looking blueline and a very respectable crease as is. Have to think that OTT would be keen on the deal since it'd offload most of Ryan's salary and they don't have major cash payments to make to Hossa. Maybe the price is a bit rich, but OTT would likely land at least one of those "types" of assets (prospect or middle pick) to retain salary on Ryan.

No you got all wrong, I'm not saying players are utterly loyal to their current club not at all, It's for that reason that upcoming UFAs want to explore being a UFA, not agreement to all these phoney "sign and trades" You're the one that thinks players have the loyalty to their rights holders.
It seems that you think "sign and trades" are the norm, they certainly are not. Certainly I don't expect Ottawa to resign those three upcoming UFAs. Logic would say they trade them. Historical logic says they trade them as short term rentals not as signed extensions.
Sure I'm sure Ottawa would like signed extension so Karlsson, Stone and Duchene would play for the Sens. But if those players don't want to extend, it certainly is not logical too think a "sign and trade" is the next step. It's trade as a rental. The out of playoffs Habs will motivated to trade Patches. Columbus who are contenders, might want to hold onto Panarin for their playoff push, and not trade him.
As you indicate the trades make sense to the Ottawa, but they don't make sense to the teams.....They are just lateral trades, and paying a premium for UFA cap hit.
For the reasons you gave Ottawa want to trade Ryan, is the exact reason Arizona hates it. There is no way Ryan is a 5m player. Arizona does acquire bad contracts which actually cost them money, they acquire LTIR players for cap purposes.