Let me know if you think the moves are realistic, it feels pretty aggressive tbh but I think this would give them their best shot at the cup.

Why do you think Ottawa is interested in depth defenceman Robert Hägg when Ottawa already have seven defencemen expected to be on the opening day roster?

Dorion has talked a lot about what he's hoping to acquire this off-season, so trades are possible... even without trades, we've yet to sign Mete, and I have no idea if Brannstrom is getting moved to the right side. Hagg for a 7th feels like a good deal to me. He would be 2nd among SENS D for hits, and actually has a higher points/60 than Mete. And if Ottawa is going to be spending as much time in their own end as they did last season... size on the blue line never hurts. ADDED TO THIS: Moving Hagg as a rental at the deadline FOR SURE gets us back a better pick than the NYI 7th.

I just want to know why these guys keep trying to dump their trash on Ottawa's doorstep. I wanted to know their reasoning, or if it's just another "need cap space, trade this guy I don't want to get under the cap", and I'm saying, Ottawa doesn't want him either. Your team signed him, deal with it.

Ottawa has no problem acquiring depth defencemen, in fact every team in the league has no problem acquiring depth defencemen.

It might just be the repetitive Hickey/Bellows trade offers that make any depth for pick trades annoying. Other teams don't want Ottawa's healthy scratches, why do they think Ottawa wants theirs, lol.

Bruins decline.

Why are we giving up that much to Seattle?

Welcome to CF🧮

Absolutely they should be in win now mode

Really good 1st agm here

Because y'all shouldn't be in "refine the roster" mode moreso in "acquire interesting assets and see who pans out" mode (not that hagg fits that but yes)

I think this makes the bruins worse and screws up their cap…..and they’re giving up a pick. The hardest of passes.

That is a massive overpay to dump Ghost. Boston's not going to do that either

JVR had a good year but him and Braun really put a hurting on their cap space. Rather have Craig Smith at 3.1 then JVR at 7.

BOS declines easily

I don't think Hagg is garbage. Like I said, he's physical and big enough to move guys out of the crease, AND his points/60 are better than Mete's. He also plays over 15 minutes a night. Would I rather sign UFA Alec Martinez for 2 years? OF COURSE, but if the option is playing someone like Aspirot or Goloubef, OR tossing away a 7th to have Hagg play our 3rd pairing and PK until the trade deadline (and then acquiring a better pick for him) I'll take Hagg.

Is this guy your brother or something? I don't care if it's Hägg, or Hickey, or Boychuk, or Niku, or Butcher, or Deangelo, or whichever guy they don't want, and need to get rid of to get their ACGM under the cap, the player is irrelevant. They didn't say, hey, this is exactly who Ottawa could use, they said, where can I get rid of this guy. I wanted their reasoning. You like Hägg over Mete because of his points/60, great, because a 6/7 defender needs to be chosen on if he'll contribute 7 points or 6 points.

It's not a trade scenario, it's a cap dump to get his ACGM under the cap.

Why you so mad?? haha. And please don't HALF QUOTE what I said to make me sound dumb; it's unfair and lazy. I mentioned Hagg's points/60 because I expected Mete's to be higher, but I ALSO MENTIONED that he's big and strong enough to clear the crease and hits like a mo-fo. These are attributes that Mete is not, so if adding depth in case Mete doesn't pan out - it would make sense to have a guy with different qualities than Mete. And this is not IN ANY WAY comparable to a $6M Boychuk cap dump OR taking in the team nightmare Deangelo. It's a CHEAP depth move that, depending on what Ottawa does this off season with Mete and Brannstrom COULD make sense. Nothing more than that.

Thank you everyone for the replies, it's nice to get a sense of what other fans thought on this. A little too tired to put a description last night...

In hindsight I regret adding the pick from the Bruins side, they could use a nice pick for leverage in the expansion draft if they need it. I feel like JVR is still a good player and a great presence to have in front of the net. Should still have enough cap space to re-sign Hall, Krejci, and Rask + depth players. As a Bolts fan I feel like this Boston team would be really hard to play against. Hopefully Braun would bring a veteran presence and depth, his contract is for one more year.

Probably should've added a pick back in the Sens trade as a conditional 6th or 7th round pick if he is not re-signed by OTT.

For the Seattle moves, it is a bit much on paper, but it is to give the Flyers some cap space to work with while moving players who I am personally unsure of. Their production is hard to gauge for the next season or two, and I feel like the Flyers have enough depth to move these players for more freedom to make moves.

Not mad, just not sure why you stepped in when I asked the OP a specific question, and with ridiculous points to support a trade that wasn’t a trade, it was to clear cap to get under the cap. You mentioned p/60, then you mentioned it again in your next response, that makes it not just a point, but a major point. I wrote a response to the p/60 in my first response to you but deleted it because it was such a silly point to need to counter. I then decided to just point out how silly it was without pointing out is wasn’t correct to begin with, because who cares if it isn’t correct, it’s a silly point. Mete’s p/60 was higher, you probably only looked at his 14 games in Ottawa and didn’t include his games in Montreal. Smaller sample size in p/60 will give huge swings up and down.

What I don’t understand is why you need to keep defending your point when it’s still just a cap dump, and the OP still hasn’t responded, but why would he now that you’ve introduced pointless tangents to the clear fact that it was just a cap dump, the only reason I responded in the first place. Give it a rest, I don’t care if Ottawa trades for Hagg or not, he’s just a warm body, just like JBrown or Mete. Can we move on from evaluating a depth warm body and return to the obvious fact that it’s just a cap dump.

Teams, in REAL LIFE, often make trades to get under the cap. Not sure why you feel the rules here should be different. I've liked a LOT of your comments on here. I disagreed with this one and stated why. That's what people do here, it is "stepping in". And whenever I comment on ANY TRADE I'll refers to statistics. Because I love looking at stats to evaluate players and deals. I wonder if NHL teams do that...

You still don't get it. I am honestly trying to explain this.

Imagine creating an ACGM team, and wanting to sign UFA Dougie Hamilton, David Savard, and Zach Bogosian. You now have eight defencemen because you want to play Provorov, Sanheim, and York on the left side, which means you need to "get rid of Hägg". You're not looking to trade Hägg, you're looking to get rid of him. Where are you going to dump him? Which team does everyone dump their crap players to because that team sux, and were expected to finish last in the league that year.

This is a scenario that's repeated over and over, with players like Hägg, or Hickey, or Boychuk, or Niku, or Butcher, or Deangelo. This wasn't about Hägg, this was about yet another ACGM post where the unwanted players were "traded" to Ottawa for picks. So I decided to ask this particular thread starter, "Why do you think Ottawa is interested in depth defenceman Robert Hägg when Ottawa already have seven defencemen expected to be on the opening day roster?" to which you responded making this about Hägg, or Hägg versus Mete, instead of about the question I asked the OP about his reasoning.

This isn't about Hägg, or his p/60, or his size and abilities, it's about the OP reasoning.

This is my last comment about this, and now I don't care why the OP dumped his extra D, or if you finally understand my comment. This was a ridiculous conversation solely because you needed to defend the player, and then your position, instead of actually trying to understand the comments.

I never DIDN'T understand your comment. And I do agree, here on ACGM it gets frustrating when so many MTL fans continue to assume Ottawa will give up a pick for Byron, or VAN fans suggest OTT would take Beagle + Eriksson's contract if they toss us a 4th because "you need to reach the floor". When I see crap like that, like you, I call it out. BUT THIS ONE, to me, didn't feel insulting or all that unrealistic. So I replied to your post to discuss scenarios where this move might make sense for OTT. It wasn't a personal attack... like I said, we generally agree with each other on here... thought we might have a fun discussion. Peace.