Im not against this, but using the 1st you could definitely get a much better defenceman for a bit more (Tanev, DeMelo, Murphy, etc) and Peeke really isn't worth a 1st. Losing Jarnkrok leaves a void in that T9, Robertson is very unproven and injury prone, Puljujarvi is coming off hip surgery, and at this point in time isn't a T9 forward on a contending team

Agree with all that.

I think Peeke could be a sneakily good acquisition. He has horrible stats and analytics but he was playing top pair minutes on a horrible Columbus team.

He hits, he's big and 3 years at $1.3M could be a steal for him if he can be a solid player.

I really think PJ is a great pickup, give him 3/4 months to see if he can hack it, if not make a deadline move.

Tanev would be great as well.

Please no to that Columbus deal

If we're giving up a 1st for Peeke, the trade should be similar to what we offered for McCabe.
Needs to be mid round picks coming back maybe 2 4ths or 2 5ths.
A 7th doesn't do any justice.
On top of that a serviceable 3rd/4th line player.

But if I were TOR, I'd trade a 1st for a veteran top 4 defensive defenseman like (i.e Tanev, DeMelo)

Keep the prospect; Columbus doesn’t need him. The first pays not just for Peeke himself but also the opportunity cost of tying up a retention slot for three years which could potentially be very valuable to a small market team.

It's also $4M in real money for Columbus which is really something that matters to them.

If it were me from CBJ, I would say yes. If Jarmo was offered this deal though, I could see him turning it down for purely money reasons. 1) CBJ historically don't like paying real money or retaining, and 2) our cap space is a lie.

Fantilli, Johnson, and Marchenko are all on ELCs, but Johnson and Marchenko are due big raises next season, and all three have heavily performance-bonus-laden contracts. It's anywhere from $3-5M combined depending on how well they do, which puts us into overages next year if we're retaining/near the cap this year. Plus we've got to re-sign Johson, Texier, Marchenko, Chinakhov, Sillinger, and likely some of Roslovic, Foudy, Bemstrom, and Robinson. There's a chance they look at it like we're a competing team operating near the cap instead of a bottom-feeder looking to add picks by weaponizing cap space.

I wouldn't be worried about bonuses it's only $1M for performances max per player the other $2M is for awards. Maybe Jireck or Fantilli can win the Calder (highly unlikely with Bedard/Cooley/Hughes) and unlike other teams you aren't expected to win the cup so won't end up in a position like Chicago in 2010 where the Con Smythe winner is on an ELC and the bonus kills your cap.

I'm personally expecting a Fantilli Calder, Marchenko Rocket Richard, and Johnson Art Ross, thank you very much!

Like I said, I would definitely accept this deal. The spending-averse Columbus ownership may say otherwise. To build off another one of your comments though, I think Peeke could have actually peaked. Yes he had horrible stats and analytics playing huge minutes for a horrible and injured Columbus team, and I think that showed his limitations. He's big, hits, and blocks shots, while having a good shot himself; but he's slower, overly aggressive, and often out of position. He's never going to get as many minutes (and thus as many shot blocks or hits) as last season, and I don't think there's much room for him to grow. He's probably an ok 3rd-pair ceiling, who can (but shouldn't) play up the lineup if there's injuries.

Marchenko is going to win the Rocket one year with a 60g 0A season lol. The shoot first mentality he has is crazy. I really don't mind it tho, I think more.players should bias towards taking the shot, too many nowadays want the perfect play.

I disagree a bit on Peeke, I assume you've seen him more than me so you are likely right but I like to give D about 300 games before saying they have hit their ceiling.

Lots of guys like Karlsson, Hanafin, Hamilton, Werenski, Severson, etc took about 3-4 full seasons to really hit their stride. Forwards tend to be able to show what they can do pretty quickly then slowly progress then fall, more predictable than D. I'd want at least 1 more year to see Peeke in a shutdown pair or at a #2 before saying he can be the support to a star or a #4 with a strong defensive partner in a shutdown pair.

The raw skills are all there, stuff just seems as you say a step behind but many guys like Gudas were like that for a while then it clicks in their late 20s.

I definitely hope you're right! Especially about Marchenko. The things Peeke does poorly are at least somewhat coachable, too, so maybe he rounds out under Vincent (or in this alternate reality, Keefe). He's on an okay contract right now as-is, so there's definitely the potential that it's really good in a year or two.