I have to think the cost to move Campbell is higher than that, even at 1.5 retained. Broberg isn't a can't miss prospect and the 2nd isn't for another two years.

There's a strong possibility, though, that the 2026 2nd is a higher draft selection than the 2024 one. Canes have made a million draft picks in recent seasons and have the luxury to wait a bit for their prize. Even with the rising cap, the Oilers are going to have a LOT of cap issues after they pay McDrai the UFA bucks.

A weak prospect for a position the Canes have no need for, a 2nd 2 years in the future to take on Campbell with 1.5mil retained? You do realize that Campbell has struggled to even be a competent AHL goalie this year, right? Even if the Oilers were to eat half of Campbell’s deal, any team acquiring him will likely have to keep him in the AHL in hopes that he can turn his play around to potentially be a backup option at some point in the remainder of his term, there is still a penalty for burying him. Even if that were to happen, the Oilers are still looking at giving up, at bare minimum, a 1st for the term alone, regardless of the cap hit.

I highly doubt any team even considers keeping talks going on potentially taking on Campbell if there is not a 1st coming with him. Edmonton made a terrible signing that continues to look worse when they were already in cap hell, no team is going to help them for cheap.

I don't think DeAngelo is the kind of guy the Sharks want around all of their developing prospects.

Retaining 1.5mil on Campbell's contract is untenable from an EDM perspective. They'll just buy him without burning assets.

While I agree with your overall point, I feel the need to counter signal the narrative that's arisen about Broberg being a "weak prospect". He's a year 22 old that has, by all accounts, been dominating play in the AHL and just so happens to be stuck behind a strong & healthy LD group (missed a combined 1 game to injury). Everything about his development has him in-line with most young Dmen and he would absolutely be in the NHL if not for the strength of EDM's left side (as he was prior to the Ekholm acquisition). He's not on the 'immediately emerge as an elite Dman' trajectory, sure, and maybe that's your threshold for calling a prospect "not weak", but he's perfectly on-track to becoming a valuable contributor to an NHL team (hopefully EDM). If he were selected 5-7 picks later, I don't think this narrative would exist.

1.5 million is the value of the buyout years 4-6. The only year 1.5 million would cost more than the buyout is year 1, by 350k.

Making a slightly costlier trade than this one, Edmonton gains atleast 2.3 million in cap space to make a move for this season and saves on the cap of a buyout years 2 & 3 (around a million), and without having to worry about years 4-6.

Yes, they lose 400k in space in a year where their success will be of paramount importance. Their success or lack thereof will likely influence the willingness of Draisaitl (and thereafter, McDavid) to re-sign so I'd place higher value on a smaller amount of extra cap next year than I would more the year following. Further, they save just 800k in year 2 and 1.1mil in year 3 when compared to the buyout and I don't think the benefit conferred during that span of time (the final years of McDavid's contract) is worth the cost of losing Broberg- an important piece in the Ekholm succession plan and EDM's longer term success.

In a raw value calculation for what it ought to cost to dump Campbell, I get where you're coming from and would even say that you likely could demand more in return. Further, I think you could make a compelling case that they should go all-in this year due to the momentum they have. My issue with the proposal is on EDM's side of the equation due to the specific roster/contract considerations & a belief that going all-in rarely works out and it's better to build a team that will last to maximise the opportunities to contend for a Cup.