WHY DOES EVERYONE THINK WE WANT OUT OF LUCIC. HE IS ONE OF THE BEST LEADERS IN THE LOCKER ROOM AND WE AREN'T IN A CAP CRUNCH

Value is fine, but NSH shouldn’t be trading picks for aging talent.

That would be incredible for the Sharks to get Vlasic's cap hit off the books. I doubt Vlasic would want to waive his NMC though, so that would be an obstacle. Any interest in Burns or Couture, as painful as it is for me to say?

Fine trading for picks but not all owners want to spend millions all at once - when they just blew an entire season.

Food for thought - 14 picks in a year is a lot. Can you fit 14, 10, or even 8 players in the system? Can you afford 8 players (1st+2nd) all reaching their bridge / extension contracts at once? Might want to get some later year picks

CAR has drafted 33 players over the past three drafts (13 in 2021, 8 in 2020, 12 in 2019). I don't think having lots of prospects is necessarily a drawback. Especially if you're drafting from enough different development leagues/programs (CHL, NCAA, Europe, Russia). Your prospects will have more spread out timelines for turning pro that way.

If Arizona got two or three picks to take Ladd they should get a hell of a lot more then one 2nd to take Vlasic.

Fair - and it's a manageable risk. But I would still rather get 2-3 picks in later years to avert later issues and avoid going all in on one draft year. Really comes down to if you think there are 8 players you really want in one round.

Vlasic won't waive. He made it painfully clear in his exit interview that he signed with SJ with a NMC because "it's the only place I want to play and I want to win here". I'm still hopeful he will regain his old form and become an elite shutdown dman again but that might be too hopeful.

edmonton wont give up that much to ump koskinen, hes way under rated and is a solid backup, if thats what it cost might as well hold him for the year

Lucic has a terrible contract and produces like a league minimum player its a cap world.

Arizona offloaded contracts because they cant afford to pay them. Why would they immediately reload?

I don't mind the cost to move Lucic if we were inclined to - a second makes sense.

However to label Lucic as a horrible player is just wrong. That "horrible player" scored 23 points in 56 games last year while offering great leadership and a undeniable physical presence!

Is his contract good - absolutely not - but he is a very useful bottom 6 player being paid too much.

He is sure as hell no Loui Eriksson or James Neal who were huge Cap hits who provided absolutely nothing of value for their teams!

So when the Flames look at the cap savings of moving Lucic they don't see a $5.25M savings they see a $2.5M savings as they would need to pay @ $2.5M for a comparable replacement player.