The deal fell through due to retention. But it was reported a 1st and Holtz was the package

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/4891763

also you know Mcdavid can resign right? it's more than 3 years

McDavid is a UFA at that point he can sign anywhere he chooses, and we have no control over it. If we wanted to we could sign him in 3 years even if we don't trade for him. It does not add value to him.

I literally told you to do the legwork yourself. I told you the source, listen to the podcast and maybe you'll learn something or enjoy it and then you can get the same information everybody else does before making these

Just cuz he's a UFA doesn't mean he leaves.

Bro exactly listen to this man here. Beside how the hell are you a Devils fan and not keeping up with news on your team?

My question is how often do you watch hockey?

It also doesn't mean he stays.

Connor McDavid has 3 years of control on his contract. Outside of that he can go where ever he wants and nobody can stop him.

If he wants to come to Jersey he can come here whether we trade for him or not. Therefore anything beyond the 3 years he is under contract would have no bearing on his trade value

You can literally say the same thing about RFAs. If Nemec woke up and decided he doesn't want to be a Devil anymore, theres nothing you can do about it. you can trade him but you won't get equal value back for him since he wants to leave

If Nemec decided he didn't want to be a devil we own his rights for the next 7 years and would match any offer sheet up to and into the 4 1st round pick threshold. So in 3 years if Nemec decides to leave we get significant value back.
If McDavid decides to leave we get 0.

I just listened and didn't hear Alexander Holtz' name mentioned once. I assume you are talking about this Podcast link episode. Again, if I missed it, please provide a timestamp
(again unless it was in the first half of the episode and they randomly talked about it in the middle of the Reilly Suspension talk)

The link wasn't to the episode, but I was mistaken. He didn't mention Holtz in that episode of the Jeff Marek show. It was on 32 Thoughts where he expanded on comments he made on Hockey Night in Canada on Saturday. In none of it does Freidman mention Holtz by name. The speculation that he was part of the package comes from his elevation to the first line when the Devils played Calgary and that Calgary is very interested in him specifically. But another insider Seravalli also suggested something similar. Again nothing mentions Holtz directly by name as a part of the package just references to high end prospects and the cost being too much for NJ. Here's an article that covers Freidman's words on Sportsnet, https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/nhl-rumour-roundup-can-the-devils-work-out-a-big-trade-for-markstrom-or-saros/. And then the timestamp from his podcast, 32 Thoughts and its the Monday episode timestamp is 31:59.

But my original point still stands all you have to Google is Elliot Freidman Markstrom Trade Rumors and the first five articles reference what I'm telling you, and they're mostly NJ Devils fan sites so this information is readily available and constantly referenced by serious reporters and insiders. Take the time to do some research or listen to the insiders' podcasts so you can understand that no one on here is throwing stuff out there because they thought it up. Most of these ACGMs are based on rumors from well respected insiders or reported on fan site articles that do the same

I have seen all of the rumours and such. Since the claim was that NJD put holtz+1st on the table, I expected something meaningful rather than speculation jumbled together from various different articles and comments combined.

I have seen Holtz thrown around in speculation. I have seen a 1st+package thrown around in different speculations.

From what I can see it seems like fans are trying to combine the speculation around 2 separate packages into getting the best of both worlds.

And so I have still yet to see anything to suggest that Holtz+1st would be on the table, let alone without retention like the other user claimed.