Interesting ideas IMO. I think value is pretty close to fair too. I think this would depend how desperate NJ is this year if they want to ship out more assets.

Thats defintely a large enough return to fetch Lindholm, I wouldnt want them to pull that trigger either.

Ullmark deal is interesting, return is definitely not bad, would prefer to use Ullmark to acquire assets involved for a top 6 C, which i guess you kinda did here

So Ullmark, Forbort, Lysell, and a 3rd for Vanecek, Bahl, a 5th, and half a szn of Lindholm........hmmm

Not much interest in Vanecek, and only moving Lysell + 1st +... for a top 6 forward with term so Lindholm would need to extend in BOS

I have him signing 8x8.5 which I think he’s sign? Maybe? Lol

Gotta think NJ declines to add the 1st maybe another 2nd and a 3rd

Move Grizz in a seperate deal for picks.
Move Hanifin into the deal with Lindholm.

I don’t believe Boston trades Ullmark, but if they did … it isn’t going to be for a second and third. Basically makes NJ the favorite. Also, Vanecek is a bad contract for Boston in the offseason. No interest in paying that guy his salary.

That said, I can see it for the three sides.

NJ and Boston fill their biggest voids. Not cheap.

It’s not a negative value contract just a zero value one and bahl is worth a 2nd and a 3rd likely

Boston doesn't have the assets to get both

I don’t believe Vanecek is any better than a goaltender you can get for 1 to 1.5m. He’s athletic enough where maybe working with Essensa creates value, but I think he sucks personally and feels he’s the type of bad goaltender that fools teams to give another chance.

If Calgary values Bahl that way, I’d rather send him to Calgary and keep Lysell. I doubt they do. I’d rather keep Forbort and get pick value

NJD likely doesn't move that much for a goalie at 5 mill. He'd have to be a 9 mill goalie to be worth it, and I certainly don't think he is that.

Maybe if the 1st was conditional on his play or there was retention on him. (Kuemper comp was for him at 3.4)

0.915+ sv%, certain number of starts

Boston isn’t trading him in the first place and certainly not making New Jersey the favorite / weakening their biggest strength for a conditional pick while taking a goalie who makes $1.6m less and frankly isn’t good

If Ullmark is worth what you claim why wouldn't he be able to live up to these conditions?

Sure, but the only reason I’m even contemplating the deal in the first place is to transition the pick and that condition lowers the value of it, I think you also have a condition on the pick already tied to the Meier deal.

If we don't make ECF this year and Ullmark meets playing standards: 24 1st.
If we make ECF this year and Ullmark meets playing standards this year: 25 1st+24 3rd
If we make ECF and ullmark doesn't meet playing standards: 24 2nd
If we don't make ECF and ullmark doesn't meet playing standards, move to 24-25 conditions

24-25 conditions:
If ullmark meets playing standards +team performance conditions, 25 1st.
If ullmark doesn't meet playing standards (back to back years), 25 2nd.

0.915, 60% of starts.

Curious to hear what Calgary fans would think of those conditions. Its like a choose your own adventure book

Again, I don’t think Boston trades a goalie so it is moot

Calgary would probably want a guaranteed 1st for Lindholm, so the conditions would have to be such that your 25 1st transfers if NJD's pick doesn't become a 1st. Or we can just guarantee them a 1st if they send over hanifin too.

NJD gets:
Hanifin
Ullmark

Boston gets:
Lindholm

Calgary gets:
NJD 1st 24/2nd
NJD 1st 25
Boston 1st/2nd
Bahl
Maybe 1 more asset

Conditions on the picks to calgary are basically if Ullmark plays well, the 1st comes from NJD and the 2nd from Boston, if he doesn't the 1st comes from Boston and the second from NJD

In all tho likely sums up as

NJD gives up 1st for Ullmark, 1st+Bahl for Hanifin
Boston gives up Ullmark+2nd for Lindholm
Calgary gives up Hanifin for 1st+Bahl, Lindholm for 1st+2nd

Maybe another depth asset from boston/NJD/both to calgary

Not giving up Ulmark and a first for Lindholm. If you want the upgrade at goalie, you won’t get it without the condition. That’s an easy pass.

Damn, good to know you don’t think Ullmark can sustain a 0.915 or handle a starters workload.

Bc like I said that’s all Ullmark has to do and then it’s Ullmark and a 2nd for Lindholm and NJD provides the 2 1sts

Where are you getting that? My open issue with your deal is you are presenting a downside risk without presenting an upside benefit. It’s one sided.

If Calgary were in (and I doubt they would be), I’d expect upside if I’m giving you downside protection

If he hits .915 and finishes in the top 5 for a Vezina in either of the next two years, Jersey adds another second round pick to Boston in 2026.

If he hits .915 and you win a title or he wins a Vezina in either of the next two years, you upgrade that pick in 26 to a first.

If he fails to hit .915 this year and doesn’t recover in 24-25 to the levels above, you pay only a second round pick in 2024

At that point, I’m OK with the downside risk you are asking me to take.

You get a guaranteed Vezina caliber goalie for a first and a second round pick. If he wins the best goalie in the league or you win a championship, you pay an additional first. If he performs average, you only pay a second only.

Of course they do.
It's if they want to move those assets.

I’d do that , but would only add a 3rd for top 5 in vezina voting.

He’s already a 5 mill goalie. Playing at a top 5 vezina level would have him playing at a 8-9 mill level. So 3-4 mill in surplus value each year. 1st=6 mill, 3rd=2.5 mill approximately. Wins the vezina or the cup and I’d make it a 1st tho

A 3rd wouldn’t be enough surplus value. Conceptually though, it’s feasible as long as it’s balanced.

From my perspective, the conditions on the pick make it less valuable in general to flip which would be the only reason a contending team would make a trade like this during the season. Getting three GM’s to agree on the conditions and who takes what risk seems like a good way to kill a three way deal.

It’s a fascinating discussion, but I doubt Sweeney even entertains it during the season.

1st and 3rd from jersey for an unretained ullmark who plays well in 1 year should be more than enough imo, maybe if he meets standards in both years it could be a 2nd.

And again if he dominates its 2 1sts.

Presumably the conditions guarantee Calgary
1st, 1st, 2nd, Bahl, and maybe a secondary asset from either NJD or Boston (which could also be conditional on Lindholm/Hanifin play)
1st+Bahl for unretained Hanifin
1st+2nd for unretained Lindholm (which Boston can afford by moving out Ullmark)

Then change the condition to top 3 for Vezina or win a championship for a first. A 3rd is not a needle mover for the downside risk. If Boston is taking that risk, New Jersey has to take more a risk that has equal ramifications on the other side.

Either way, I don’t think Calgary does that and can do better in individual trades.