If Meier didn't get Holtz why would Keller get Holtz and Casey?

5 years at one of the best value contracts in the league might be part of that

This is VERY rich for a winger, I don't see any reasonable comps to warrant that sort of return.
If one of Holtz or Casey was dropped from the deal it could make sense, preferably Casey as Keller would likely take Holtz's spot on the Devils roster going forward.

It's rich but I don't think it's as far off as it seems? Keller is on a pretty sweet deal and is younger than all reasonable comps. I would probably do this.

Supposedly the Sharks dumb GM wanted Muk bad. More than Holtz.

I would be shocked if it was "more than Holtz" but I can see him wanting Muk over Casey. Muk has actually developed into something much better than he showed at draft time.

Keller is signed on a good deal for 5 more years. Meier had an easy route to UFA status in 1.5 seasons

I can easily see (dumb) GMs getting enamored with Muk’s size and tools and prefer him to a winger who they might think is stagnating in development (he’s not but they might think that)

It is rich but very few wingers are in great contracts locked up for 5 years. And these next 5 years are THE most important years for this team.

This would give the Devils what? The best top 6 in the entire league? Top 3 at least. A solid bottom 6 too that can be swapped out in a couple years.

We’ve kicked open our contention window so 1st should be moved basically every year. Casey has almost no path to playing for this Devils team.

All in all, two A or B (not S tier) prospects, what is likely a late first and an extra high-ish pick seems like a pricey but worth it deal for a point per game winger on a surplus value deal for 5 years.

Hey buddy. This top 6 would be insane.

This doesn't change the fact that your suggest trade is still not consistent with any recent 1st line winger trades with team control, such as Fiala, DeBrincat or Meier.
You're suggesting an overpay.

I'd love to get Keller in, there's a clear logic behind targeting him in a trade, I don't disagree with that.
I disagree with moving 1sts for the sake of moving 1sts, if anything contenders has a bigger need for a steady supply of rostered ELCs than non-contenders. That's how contenders stay contending (in this instance I don't mind trading the 2025 1st though, I do mind trading both Casey + Holtz on top of that).
Which brings us to Casey. I think there's a fairly clear path to him playing a huge role on a contending Devils team throughout the 20s'. Not next year, and maybe not the year after that, but in 25/26 there's a very good chance that Casey will have developed past John Marino as a hockey player. As such there will be many amazing future opportunities to trade Marino while not sacrificing any overall ability in the Devils RHD corps.
As a freshman, Casey was probably the best defenseman throughout the NCAA (even better than Luke Hughes) and if he keeps that the Devils have yet another dynamite young D to add to their future lineup. Dealing him now would be nothing if not premature.

None of those guys were signed for 5 years on a good contract nor were any coming off over point per game seasons (Fiala was actually). But sure, I tend to add more than what would probably be required as to not have fans of other teams screaming about underpaying. Realistically, it might not cost this much.



I'm not sure there's a very good chance that a 21 year old Seamus Casey is a better defender than a 28 year old John Marino. Maybe offensively, but certainly not defensively, which, with the influx of high end offensive defensemen like Hughes and Nemec, sound defensive guys are going to be even more important.

48 points in 39 games playing the 1D role for Luke vs 29 points in 37 playing 2nd pair. I'm not sure you have a convincing argument that Casey was a better defenseman that Luke, and certianly not the best defenseman in the NCAA (nor best freshman defenseman when Lane Hutson exists)

You're not wrong on the need for ELCs on contending teams, so sure, one of Holtz or Casey probably doesn't have to be in this deal. But again, I like to make these slight overpays to avoid the classic ACGM bias towards your favorite teams own players.

It's not due to points I believe Casey was the best NCAA defenseman, it's due to tracked data from overall play.
Fitzgerald got a major steal in the 2nd round last year. Casey is a stud.

Supposedly it was.

Obviously I wasn't in the room.

I’ve seen Lassi’s work and it’s great don’t get me wrong, but him scoring a 99 OA doesn’t make him automatically the best defenseman in the NCAA. I’m not saying he’s not a stud. I loved the pick and hopefully he can find a way onto the team someday.

I’m just skeptical given Fitzy’s preference towards bigger and longer defenseman, and also defensive guys that can support his offensive defensemen. I think it’s far more likely that Fitz views Casey as expendable because of that.