Seems like way more than it should take.

What should it take?

1st and a 3rd

So less than Manson?

No.

With Friedman saying he believes Hertl isn't available Giroux is the best available rental forward. He can play both wing and center, can play both PK and PP and is top 5 in faceoffs and salary is being retained. He's worth more than a first and third

Ya. I think he’ll be highly sought after, but I’m not going to forget all precedent set by the previous 15 trade deadlines.
1st and a 3rd should be the absolute max.

Nick Foligno got a first and a fourth last year if the only difference between him and G is moving up a mid round pick theres something very off about the market

There is something wrong with the deadline rental market…there’s a clear cap. You can tell me until you’re blue in the face that lesser players got almost as much, but you’re going to have a really hard time funding more than one or two players that ever got more. Duchene is probably going to be as close as you get, which was a 1st, and a conditional first. That said, it wound up being just the first, an exchange of low level prospects.

So it seems pretty simple to me, the floor is to high, and the ceiling is too low for rental prices.

To say it's a first and a third is a bit simplistic at this stage. Giroux is not showing any signs of breaking down or being injury prone to end his career. He just turned 34 unlike many other UFA rental deals that involved players like Iginla at age 36.

And iginla got a 1st, and two very low level prospects. Pretty similar to a 1st and 3rd.

Two low level prospects do not equate to a 3rd. Iginla is not the comparison to this trade. Iginla was injured the year of his trade and not doing that well in particular. The Flames were also more motivated to move the player. I could see the Flyers not trading Giroux at all if the best offers are a first and third.

The trade to compare to is more likely the Marian Hossa trade in 2008. That yielded a 2008 First, the PENS 2007 first round pick, and a B level player.

The trade on this post is likely too much I'll agree with you there. But there's no reason to think the Flyers could got get Behrens, the 2023 1st round pick, and Bowers for Giroux. Behrens is a recent 2nd round pick, 2023 is next year's first not this year's, and Bowers, who is more likely a project or B level prospect at this stage.

If that was the case, there would have never been a single story about giroux getting moved. You think GMs are sitting there saying, “hmmmm, lets go ahead and ignore all precedent, comparable etc and ask for the moon!”

No, GMs aren’t crazy. They know a 1st and a 3rd is on the high end of standard for a top six player.

I don't think GM's go into trade talks limiting their trade return values because of precedents that do not fit perfectly. If you think that Giroux's value is dropping because he has not been traded yet it actually has to do with the fact that he is about to play his 1,000th game as a Flyer and he wanted to hit that milestone.

Okay. I want you to think about this for a second. Lets just start with it taking you 14 seasons to find something that you think supports your case before showing how the two scenarios are nothing alike. 2008…..if you can’t find anything in the last decade, don’t you think its time to tap out on this one?

Now, for this, so called, “comparable.”

Hossa’s season prior to the trade was a 43 goal 100 point season. What was he, 28 or 29 at the time of the trade? He was also elite defensively, and overall just one of the best players in the league. Not to mention, he wasn’t alone. He came with pascal dupuis, who only spent a decade in Pittsburgh.

Not sure where you got the two first round picks thing. Hossa and Dupuis got a 1st, a prospect, and two third liners. Definitely a very big return, but so were the assets moved. Giroux hasn’t been a point per game for his last three seasons. He hasn’t scored more than 22 in four seasons.

In short: try again. Maybe if you go back 20 years you’ll find something.

When did i ever insinuate that Giroux’ s value was dropping?

He just is what he is, and we know what guys like that get in trade.

I mean you did bring up the last 15 Trade Deadlines yourself so it seemed relevant to mention, but I do apologize for pointing out a deal that did not fit your narrative.

Hossa got dealt for a 2008 first round pick and Esposito (the prospect) was the Penguins 2007 1st round pick. That's essentially 2 first round picks. Dupuis at the time of the trade was mostly a swap for Colby Armstrong. I know the Penguins end up getting the better end of that deal just in Dupuis, but he was mostly just a swap in depth players at the time as he had not been doing much of note with Atlanta.

You are right on Giroux not being Hossa. He's also not Iginla. The odds the Avalanche can re-sign Giroux are substantially higher as well. A next year's first round pick, a season ago 2nd round pick, and a B level prospect in Bowers is quite fair.

No no no. That’s not how it works. Once a draft pick is made, they aren’t a pick anymore. They’re a player. Draft picks have objective value. Players have subjective value. Lets take a moment to trash recent Bruins drafting. Giroux for Senyshyn, frederic, Beecher, and zboril. That’s FOUR first round picks, right? Of course not.

You notably left out Boston's 2021 1st round pick Fabian Lysell. Remember, the Hossa trade was in March 2008. The 2007 first round pick player did not lose that much value turning age 18 to 19.

It’s not about losing value, its about how the rest of the league views a player. Lysell seemed like he fell into one of those situations were 5-10 teams just had one guy ahead of him. That happens some times. For a lot of teams, i would be willing to bet they had him valued higher than they had the 21st pick valued. Similarly about 8 seconds after Zach Senyshyn was selected, he didn’t have anywhere near as much value as the 15th overall pick had.

This is why its really dumb when people list off a bunch of prospects taken in the first round and say, “this is basically three first round picks.” No, it isn’t. Players are subjective. Draft capital is objective.