Anaheim wouldn't take that deal. Pens shouldn't take that idiot Marchard. I'm ok with the EDM deal, but don't think EDM is.

The first two will never happening. You overvalue both Kuni and Bonino there. Pitt doesn't want marchand or Eriksson and BOS doesn't want two pending UFAs, a defender you didn't make Pitt's team when there defense is a train wreck, and a first round pick. There is also no reason to trade for Scrivens, just don't play scuds this year and then buy him out later. I am sure Palhal will say about the same.

Hi Jacob. You're right about the overvaluing of Kunis and Bonimo. But more a question of RussianFactor really undervaluing Maroon and Vatanen. Maroon is not a big point getting (maybe later) but he does play a grinder LW sometimes on PP, and at 2m a year for 3 years....a true bargain for the Ducks. Vatanen is star in the making.
The Boston trade, although not so bad value wise....doesn't help both teams if that's possible. The Pens who have Cup aspirations would be giving up 2 of their top 8 Dmen, and getting none in return. So that's not happening.
I thought we were finished trying to trade Scuderi, just to give Pens cap room. Pens might have a goalie or two in the AHL who are equal or better than Scrivens.

so are you like the resident trade analyzer in this weird little "hockeys cap armchair gm comments" internet community then I guess? ok then lol

in any case, I've talked to actual fans of the ducks on the HF boards and many were good with a Bonino-Vatanen basis for a trade. I'm actually well aware of their abilities, and was somewhat surprised Ducks fans thought that was even without a small add from PIT. But, again, I proposed it and they were on board so I think I'll go with their opinion on that one. As for the Boston trade, uhh Pouliot isn't one of our top 8 D men? Also it matters that Lovejoy gets traded? You don't think he can be replaced? Look at the D group in the team I made above. Clendening slots in instead of Lovejoy, and Vatanen is the missing top 4 mobile defensemen the Pens have needed. And Scuds for Scrivens makes infinite sense from a PIT perspective. Scrivens costs less and is on the books for a year less and - most importantly - it makes sure Scuderi can't be played.

Overall I don't understand any of your analysis of this at all. If anything, the BOS trade makes the least amount of sense value wise considering contract situations and how good Marchand is but that's the one you apparently have deemed "not so bad value wise" so *shrugs*

Russian Factor: I think your analysis can be summed in in your last line of second last paragraph. "And Scuds makes infinite sense from a PIT perspective. Scrivens costs less and is on the books for a year less and--most importantly it makes sure Scuderi can't be played."

My analysis was that Armchair GMs were trying to offload like Scuderi, (who has little playing value) to teams that have salary cap. Thanks for proving my point. You said it "infinite sense from a PIT perspective". Try thinking of the other teams perspective when making trades.

You don't understand any of my analysis? Great. My explanation of the your horrible Scuderi trade must be too logical for you..

I say I don't understand any of your analysis and have several sentences breaking down why, soooo you intentionally focus in on one sentence at the end? And you missed the point of that sentence anyway, but whatever this is already dumb. Anyway, keep playing make-believe Armchair GM Trade Expert and taking fantasy team trades embarrassingly seriously though, my man. I would just suggest that you try a little harder on the actually knowing what you're talking about part, but then again I'm not the expert with 900 posts of veteran experience in being a pedantic commenter on a site for making imaginary sports teams. Cheers m8