Quoting: sensonfire
If we're factoring in the expansion draft to the Graves trade, then the trade should be viewed as follows:
Donskoi + Graves
for
Maltsev + a 2nd
Whatever motivations Colorado might have had at the time are of no concern or relevance to New Jersey in that trade ...
It’s not fair to say they gave up Graves and Donskoi for Maltsev and a 2nd because they would have lost one of them in the expansion draft anyway, so the trade only cost them one of them. Assuming Seattle would have taken Graves is he was available, which is what Colorado expected, they had two choices:
1) Colorado doesn’t make the trade with NJ, they lose Graves for nothing in the expansion draft, and they keep Donskoi.
2) Colorado makes the trade with NJ, gives up Graves to NJ and Donskoi to Seattle, and gets Maltsev and a 2nd.
They chose 2), so yes, they lost Graves and Donskoi and got Maltsev and a 2nd, but because they would have lost Graves for nothing otherwise, it’s not accurate to view that trade as Donskoi + Graves for Maltsev + 2nd. The difference between 1) and 2) is Donskoi out, Maltsev and a 2nd in, so that’s what the trade meant to Colorado.
My point was that Colorado may have been willing to take less for Graves in a trade because they thought they were going to lose him whether they made the trade or not. You’re absolutely right that this was of no consequence to New Jersey. They wanted Graves and were willing to give up Maltsev and a 2nd to get him. But they probably wouldn’t have got that opportunity if it wasn’t for the looming expansion draft.
It probably doesn’t make sense to compare these trades anyway. A deadline deal is a very different situation from off-season.