we miss leo k
Joined: Feb. 2018
Posts: 6,028
Likes: 5,148
-Islanders wouldn't be trading 7 years of Pulock for one year of Brodie and a pair of prospects, including one who hasn't been able to stay on the ice at all. Pulock's full NTC kills this anyway.
-Why would the Hawks do this? Jarnkrok has no value to them as a 32 year old with term remaining; I'd argue that you'd have to staple a strong asset to him just to get Chicago to consider. Liljegren for Murphy *might* be something interesting to them, but add on the retention and the poison pill you're adding with Calle and I think they easily pass.
-Both teams say no. On the Toronto side, this actively makes them very, very much worse with the hope that Anaheim's pick winds up being a big one - although I'd argue that by giving them the clear-cut best player in the deal you're probably tanking the value of that pick, too. On the Ducks side, why would they give up a potential lottery pick for a rental? Nylander will help them win more games, sure, but not nearly enough to justify falsely accelerating the rebuild by giving up this year's 1st. If they really think he's a good fit, they can try and convince him this summer - and it'll be even easier to do that if they have another shiny new 1st round prospect in the pipeline. Both sides pass.