That PHI trade is diabolical. Barabanov is a contract. Hes a AHL/NHL tweener and every team in the nhl has 5-6 of those guys. NAK is probably the most value player in that deal. Andersen really has NO value higher than Elliot, and Philly adds 3 high picks? Why does PHI do that? Why would Philly want those players? And why would they add good picks?

Other than the Rakell deal, all those deals are Maple Leaf junk. Engvall is similar to Barabanov and Brooks, Rosen have value?

Doubt DET does that Fabbri deal, its a bunch of okay players for one good one. Whenever you have 4 pieces for 1, you have ask yourself if its just quantity for quality.

Theres ideas and then theres offensive proposals thrown out to irritate people

While I think your are overly critical of much of the value here. I will say this is all needless nonsense that doesn't make TO better and changing 4 roster players with 10 games to play would more than likely back fire since who knows how players react to the new system. This is all dumb

Tooo much for Rakell. A first or second (depending upon your evaluation) and Topi Niemela is sufficient.

So you’re really going all in, tbh I like the team now how it is

Yes, youre reight, I was overly critical, but the Philly trade is diabolical. And it doesn;t really even think about what PHI wants/needs.

and way too many trades list a bunch of never-weres, newver-will bes as value. In this Leaf example, these guys like Brooks, Rosen have pretty much no value (same with marincin) but mean the other team loses another contract space, and presenting guys like Barbanov and Engvall as value is pretty false as well. Sometimes you get the right guy in the right spot, but engvall, barabanov are AHL/NHL tweeners (like MTL's Weal) who every team has a handful of these guys, but they don;t move the barometer in trades for value.

Its the same names over and over, with this false belief that they are not who they are, or that teams will trade value for players who have less, its Jeremy Bracco-itis....

Engvall is a good player. He's very strong defensively but doesn't offer much offense. I am happy with him.

Detroit doesn’t touch that. Fabbri is our stop gap 2C (he’s paced in the 50s in Detroit) so why would we trade him for a bunch of quantity?

Yes let's bring in 6 new roster players at the deadline lolol. Help in net and top 6/middle 6 forward is our priority. Then we could also bring in a depth dman to sure up the 3rd pair like Merrill or Kulikov for 3rd, probably even a 4th will get get one of those deals done. We bring in maximum 3 new guys at the deadline. I think realistically it will be 1-2.

What would you want to swap Niemela for Liljegren?

Agree, but it would be wise to make a trade or two to add depth IMO.

Yep, incase someone like muzzin goes down like last year

A second and Liljegren would be thrilling. We would retain 50%.

In truth, in the real world it might take as little as Liljegren and a fourth.

Exactly, and if we can add a top 6 forward it will push everyone down creating better depth/quality.

That sounds very reasonable too me. I would make it a second because I think that's fair or at the very least split the difference. I'm also still high on Lilly, however, I admit his ceiling is lower than previously anticipated. He will IMO be a serviceable NHL player, most likely a a bottom 4 d but still valuable. That being said I don't think our FO is that high on him anymore and if so I'd like to see him go to a team that will give him a chance.