If I've learnt anything on here it's that Columbus fans are not going to part with sillinger even though hes buried on their depth charts and they don't have a roster spot for him.

This time has come and gone. The Flames are set to go into this season trying to convince these guys to stay and use them as their own rentals or will offload at the deadline.

He is not really buried. It is just simply the Jackets have too many forwards on the roster with no waiver flexibility.

Lindholm would be a massive upgrade on him. Especially if they could work out an extension. Boqvist is buried and is most likely the odd man out on the backend now and vladar gives you some security in net in case Elvis goes down again.

This move on top of what they did so far in the off-season would make the jackets a solid playoff contender.

Unless you plan on using him on the 4th line he's buried at center or on the wing on your current roster.

if there's anything I've learnes from seven years on CF, its: 1) group think on this site is often different from reality, & 2) unexpected trades happen quite often in real life.

Don't worry about hert feewlings!

Bruins don’t need left D

"Joined: Jan. 2019" -> The math ain't mathing. You are 100% right though!

Sillinger is also 20 and waivers exempt. He's not buried, he's a young prospect who likely needs seasoning not at the NHL level. That can be solved by simply sending him to the AHL.



Lindholm would be a massive upgrade on Sillinger. Boqvist is buried, and could be the odd man out on the back end. Vladar would give some security if Elvis goes down (or Tarasov), in theory. That's missing a ton of context though.

Sillinger still projects to be a top-6 center, and showed flashes of it his first year. It's really unlikely he has a repeat of last season, especially under a competent coach with a new system. If he struggles, he goes to the AHL. If he develops, the ceiling appears to be a Lindholm-like player in a few years, but with more years of team control. Regardless, I actually don't have an issue making him the centerpiece for a Lindholm trade.

Lindholm with an extension severely eats into Columbus' cap situation next year. We've got ~$28M (if the cap goes up $4M) to sign 9 NHL-level RFAs (8 if Sillinger is traded), 2 of whom are already playing in the top 6. Even if those two only get $4M each, there's $20M to sign at least 6 guys before Lindholm, and probably only $12M to sign them after an extension. So now we're shipping prospects out the door to trade for him and losing someone like a Chinakhov or Texier due to cap concerns in all likelihood. There's opportunity cost on top of actual cost.

Boqvist is buried until we end up having to play 7 RD in the NHL like we did last season. Peeke, Blankenburg, or Gudbranson could all (and should all) sit before him anyway.

Vladar, Elvis, and Tarasov are all not waivers exempt, so unless we're carrying 3 goalies, we're risking losing one to waivers. It doesn't make sense when what we really need is a veteran backup on a 2 way deal (or that at least won't get claimed).

And finally, the value of the trade is off. Sillinger, Boqvist would all likely return a 1st in individual trades, so you're asking us to trade the equivalent of 3 1sts for what amounts to one year of a cheap 1B center in a year that we have no business going for it, just so we can extend him to be (if it goes well) an expensive 2C for years 3-8 that doesn't quite fit the window at the cap cost and actual cost of pieces that should be part of that window's core going forward. It doesn't make as much sense if you dig past the surface.

Lindholm would be an upgrade, and Sillinger could absolutely be part of a trade for him, but it's more complex than that and we're not going to overpay for him.

I agree. Silly is waiver exempt but others are not. It is the same reason why Chinakhov is likely starting in Cleveland as well.

I'd give that up for Limdholm but not Hanifin. Hanifin isn't really a need for Boston.

Avs decline. No cap space for Backlund even if they were wanting him.