Those teams aren't going to give up that high of picks for fringe players. Plus, you don't have OTT losing a player to SEA.

No way either player brings back that kind of return. Neither one would be considered a very valuable trade asset, especially Hogberg.

Also I think a more valuable use of assets this offseason would be in trading assets away to get Zaitsev off the team to Seattle. They can replace his role with a good player in free agency and be far stronger overall than with Zaitsev staying but Soucy in. I would be comfortable with going into the season with a left side of Chabot-Brannstrom-Mete, as I think Victor Mete is a good player, and he can push Brannstrom to be better.

If Ottawa picks up a guy like Jason Demers to replace Zaitsev, I think the Sens are looking relatively solid on the back end.

Chabot-Zub/Demers
Brannstrom-Demers/Zub
Mete- Bernard-Docker

Wikd aren't giving up Carson soucy.

Carson soucy will be exposed along with greenway, & one of them will be taken

If soucy isn't taken , wild will keep A good young d like Carson soucy. If dumba is traded, soucy moves into wild top 4

So in essence, soucy isn't going anywhere. If dumba is traded, very good chance soucy will be protected

These trades are so they can meet exposure requirements. Arizona will be motivated because without a trade they are forced to expose Chychrun
I figure Ottawa likely loses Tierney to expansion in which case Amadio or Bishop easily slide into the 4th line C role.

How is no one talking about the absurdity of those bridge deals????

Tkachuk is getting AT MINIMUM a long term, $7.5 million+ contract. And Zub will likely be between $3-4 million

You're operating from a misconception: all Arizona has to do to present a qualifying defenseman to Seattle is re-sign Lyubushkin or Oesterle (or any of their aging UFA defensemen). If they don't re-up one of those 5 d-men, they can get somebody for a 6th or so.

Tkachuk hasn't earned a $7.5m contract yet. While his intangibles are awesome, he's a 50 point winger with no arbitration rights. Zub will be interesting, but I think you don't have to look any further than his teammate Zaitsev for why you don't give big contracts after one year of apparent success.

Qualifying someone doesn't make them meet exposure requirements, for a defenceman or forward to meet requirements they need to be SIGNED for 2020-21. How many UFA dmen will sign a contract knowing they will be left exposed? I don't think there are many, and the ones that would you wouldn't want on your roster.

???????

Qualifying someone DOES mean meeting exposure requirements. Teams must expose two qualified forwards and one qualified defenseman. In between my post and yours, Arizona qualified Lyubushkin by re-signing him for one year, so they now have the necessary "excess" defenseman to expose.

That's fair. The other team who may want to make a trade is TB who, assuming they protect Hedman, Sergachev and Cernak will be leaving McDonagh and Foote exposed.

Maybe I misunderstood you, I thought you meant giving an RFA player a qualifying offer, which does not make them meet exposure requirements. Again, I don't think players will be willing to sign contracts just to be offered up as fodder in the expansion draft, but I could be wrong.

Yes, you're absolutely right on both counts -- offering a qualifying offer to a RFA doesn't meet the exposure requirements, and that's not what I meant.

I like your Minnesota idea. I'm surprised none of the really knowledgeable Wild guys have commented on it. @Tansor @wabit @OutCold13 sorry I'm limited to three pings and can't tag Lightman13 and jnowariak

I think it's a fair offer for Soucy. Wild probably need to keep him to meet their own qualifying defenseman quota. I know Wild want to re-sign Cole, and Addison belongs in the NHL next year. Wild at the moment probably protect 8 and since there will be a glut of defenseman available in the ED I fully expect the Kraken to snag either Greenway, Sturm, Hartman, or Foligno, best guess Greenway. So even after the ED I think Wild would be willing to do this.

I think MN is just fine in losing Soucy to SEA instead of Greenway or Foligno (4-4-1). Even if they go 7-3-1 (and Dumba isn't available for whatever reason) losing Soucy is better than losing one of their goalies.

Who are they likely to protect, Talbot or Kähkönen? One needs to be exposed.

Guessing Kahkonen because he's much younger, but it's a coin flip imo.