I like it personally

Frp for McLeod seems to much

Not a fan of either of these trades. Kulak is a proven playoff performer and better player than Stecher.
I love M.McLeod but no way he's worth a first. Would rather use that for a top 6 player or dman.

If you want to start with,

“Assuming NJ falls out of playoff contention”

….better flatter us with the trade.

(Devils need McLeod more than a pick….unlikely they move him)

If we did fall out of contention and McLeod is pricing himself out, we would probably look for piece that can help our lineup in 2024-25.

We have a short-term need on blueline and long-term need in net.

I agree that Kulak elevates his game in the playoffs, but I don't agree that he's been a better player than Stecher- at least not this year. Part of that perception may be his poor start, but I really value the thought of a.) improving the 3rd pairing to reduce the burden on the top-4 and b.) freeing up cap space for next year (2mil of Kulak's contract & whatever extra space these trades leave us to take off of Brown's bonuses). Similar could also be achieved post-playoffs, but this is a scenario I want to workshop.

Given their performance since Knoblauch took over, I'm actually quite content with keeping the D corps as is, if I'm honest. In an ideal world, they could upgrade on Ceci but I don't see a way for that to happen in-season as of now (apart from maybe Tanev).

Thanks for the feedback! My counter would be that you could use the extra 1st to acquire someone like Ullmark or Vejmelka (whether that means using the 1st itself or spending other picks more freely because you now have an extra 1st). I think limiting yourself to needing to convert McLeod into what you need directly unnecessarily limits your options. If such an arrangement could be made prior to the trade, would you then be more amenable to it?

I’d like to keep McLeod as our long term 3C but an offer would have to wow me to move him.

Moving a long term 3C in McLeod into a rental option like Vejmelka (who I certainly wouldn’t pay a 1st for) or Ullmark probably not the best idea

If I’m the devils I’d rather acquire Ryan Mcleod

What would be an offer that would 'wow' you?

I really don't know. Honestly depends on a lot of factors, like Mcleods next contract, our spot in the standings, and what it costs to get a stud young goalie like Swayman or Gustafsson

Assuming the worst possible scenario, I can see what you mean. But I don't think there's much reason to think that a guy like Ullmark wouldn't be open to setting up an extension prior to the trade. He'd be stepping in behind a young, very talented team with what will very likely be an elite D corps before long. There's pretty much no scenario more attractive for a 30+ year old high-end starter. However, the particulars aren't super important; the point is that a 1st is a very valuable piece that can get you closer to getting a long-term starter (whoever it may be) than I think McLeod would.

Doesn't mean you have to or should trade McLeod, but that's not what I'm aiming to discuss.

I would not want to extend Ullmark into his mid 30s for big money. The results there are historically bad

We can give you Jack Campbell for him, he might be your long term solution...

I don't imagine MIN is looking to move Gustavsson as he'll form a good tandem with Wallstedt as he settles into the #2 spot next year. As for Swayman, the sense I get is that Boston fans would much rather keep him. The problem you're going to encounter is that teams rarely trade young stud goalies; they much prefer trading their older ones.

Hypothetically, let's say McLeod continues producing as he is and contract discussions pre-deadline have him asking ~4mil for term & NJ ends up being ~8-10 points out a playoff spot by the deadline. On top of that, preliminary discussions with BOS having an established that Swayman is off the table. In that very specific but not entirely unreasonable scenario, what would you require in return for McLeod?

Cory Schneider was traded to keep Luongo
Martin jones was traded to keep quick
Freddy Andersen was traded as he hit RFA

I would be incredibly shocked if we fall that far out of a playoff spot without major injury.

We’ve battled through major injuries and horrific goaltending so far and yet still have a top 10 record in the NHL at 20-16. (Unfortunately we don’t rack up enough loser/pity points).

Goalies are voodoo. So if I believe we should not overpay for goalie playing well…the flip side of the coin is we should be open to goalies not playing well.

So maybe.

Idk, statically and analytically, Kulak has been better, despite his slow start. Salary space is nice, but that is a move you make in the offseason, not in the middle of the season. Your lineup has Stecher in the top 4, which is way out of his playing capabilities. Current d-core we have right now is better than the one that you have imo.

Happy to see a logical fan who is willing to take on Soup's contract with no retention for an NHL player

1.) They literally couldn't move Luongo because he still had 9 years left on his contract. Also, NJ got around 3 years of quality goaltending out of Schneider.
2.) Martin Jones wasn't at the level that Swayman is at right now as he was never the 1A option in LA and also posted a pretty weak season as a backup prior to being moved. Quick was also 28. Also also, Jones provided 3 years of quality goaltending to his new team
3.) Andersen was 4 years older than Gibson. Like the others, he also provided his new team with 3 or 4 years of quality goaltending.

I don't intend to try to convince you of this, but I believe that 3-4 years of quality goaltending is about what you would be able to get out of a 31 year old Ullmark. He has a solid track record behind both elite teams and atrocious ones.

They ended up trading luongo a year later so clearly they could have moved him.

Andersen was a comp for Gustafsson.

Yeah I imagine he does have 3-4 years left. But Ullmark won't be wanting a 2 year extension at a reasonable cap hit. He's gonna be wanting like 6x6, which I don't want to be the one holding when he's 35

He's currently doing it (~17mins/night at 5-on-5) and faring quite well. However, I get the premise you're arguing. Whether he ends up on the 2nd or 3rd pairing, adding Stecher would make our D corps more mobile and would allow the 3rd pairing to take on more minutes. Whether you want them playing more minutes or not depends on the individual, but I'd like to feel like I can rely on them with more minutes over the long haul. As I don't see the drop-off from Kulak to Broberg being all that much and seeing how we have more LD call-up options than RD, this is an effort to balance the D corps.

That's a fair counter on the Luongo bit. What I meant was the market was very limited given Luongo's NMC and that moving him didn't seem like an option. I may be misremembering the details, though. It was more than 10 years ago.

That would be a fair counter if Wallstedt was ~60 games into his NHL career already. Alas, that'll take another 1.5 to 2 years for that to be the case and I don't imagine NJ is gonna wait that long.

That may be true. However, as the league has been trending in the direction of shorter term on goalies (the true elites notwithstanding), I could see him being forced to accept a 4 or 5 year deal. But this is getting too far into the realm of the hypothetical. All I wanted was some input on what McLeod would command on the trade market. As it doesn't look like I'll get that, let's just conclude and agree to disagree

Mcleod I'd go for a 1st+. Don't know what the + would be and doubt he'd be on the market but that's what I'd ask for.

Toffoli is much more likely to be available if we falter to get back a 1st+3rd or so.