Flyers GM is an idiot if he does that . Retaining money on a 8-year contract isn't the smartest move

These trades don't make much sense for NJ, they don't need another C or another LD.



Retention would be on the current contract.

Luke Hughes isn’t a trade piece and even if he was, he’d get you far more than Larkin

The retention applies to extension too...it uses the same percentage (not same dollar amount).

For example, say player X is traded with 25% retention.
He is in the final year of $4m AAV and has 3-year, $8m extension starting next year, the retention would be...

2022-23: $1m (25% of $4m)
2023-24: $2m (25% of $8m)
2024-25: $2m (25% of $8m)
2025-26: $2m (25% of $8m)

Man.
Red Wings pass.

On Luke Hughes? Okay

Yeah. Larkin is a top center.
Luke Hughes would be just another puck-moving LHD in our system, joining:
Edvinsson, Wallinder, Al. Johannson, and Walman (excluding Maatta since he's stay at home).
It's not an issue of value (even though 8 year retention is absolutely absurd), but the position of the return.

Wings pass. Hughes doesn't fill the need to replace Larkin. A package of Mercer, B prospect and a 1st may get it done. I am assuming you meant that Detroit retains 1.5 this year and then the Devils resign him to the 8 year deal. I can't see any team retaining money for 8 years.

I think the extension would be after the trade, so the retention would only be for this year. I understand having too many LD but you could just move one for a center to replace Larkin. I feel like it's ridiculous to decline any offer with Hughes in it.

wings happily accept

So we'd move one of our current LHD prospects to get a 1C (probably only Edvinsson could fetch a 1C, maybe Wallinder + a 1st, but whatever), to take in another LHD since we traded our 1C?
I understand Hughes is a phenomenal prospect, but Yzerman has no desire to trade Larkin, and therefore jump through the loops to replace him.
Obviously everything has a price, but when the main piece of the return is something that the Red Wings have a lot of, there really is no point.

Larkin would have to indicate that he's walking. Obviously NJ doesn't do this anyway so moot point.

Not to say it's a bad deal. It's a bad deal for both teams. New Jersey obviously overpays with players, but that 8 year retention would be a *****, and replacing Larkin would be a longer process than you may think.