While I doubt CGY is trading Andersson (as Tanev and Hanifan are both on way out), its an intriguing offer

this help both side to be on par with their window

I like Andersson, but I don't believe in him the way you seem to. This is too much IMO, as we can also continue to develop Barron. No to mention that Mailloux & Konyushkov are looking good too.

If we trade picks and defensemen, we need to pickup a RW or a Center to play in the top 6.

it's an overpay I agree, but having the likes of Matheson Savard and Andersson to emulate the vet game into our youngster d-cor is a must. For RW we still have CGY 1st and our youngster middle sixer to spend on to get an asset. Drafting Lindstrom and signing Lindholm can also help too. Trading for Andersson will also benefit to attract UFA like Lindholm.

I don't understand how you see this as an overpay. Like Zegras, they would want quality pieces coming back not more mid pieces.

the upper hand of the rookie's pool (top 6 in the league) is always better quality than those so-called mid-pieces that you try to point out. Also, CGY is going into blow-up mode, so even late 1st or middle 1st are great pieces for their rebuild/retool. Barron and Harris are already NHL-ready and could be better than only 1 aging Andersson for the CGY window. Geez we do need a value sheet to express how this whole thing work in real AGMing

My opinion is not that it's an overpay, but that Andersson, while worth this return, is not that important for the Habs to take a big step. We're better off keeping Barron and waiting another 1-2 seasons to see how our prospects develop before acquiring support on D.

If we are spending the equivalent of 3 late 1sts (because I firmly believe Barron is worth a late 1st), then then I would prefer we use it to acquire a forward for our top 6 because we don't have any prospects who seem to have a clear path to becoming a top 6 forward next season.

show me how many teams out there would try more than that and offer 2 d-men that CGY direly needs for their future?!

Barron & Harris are NHL players at this point, but are "maybes" to play in a top 4 role. They have not proven they can do it and will need to continue to grow and evolve their respective games.

I will remind you that on one of the worst defensive teams in the league, Barron is playing in Laval and Harris is often a healthy scratch.

Projecting them is fine, but asking teams to agree with your projections as though they are facts is not right. Let them prove it in Montreal and then by all means trade them.

I wouldn't say they direly need those two guys but I understand what you mean. Pretty much every team would be in on Andersson and likely offer more quality.

Pretty much what I was thinking but I have no credible familiarity with their games to make this statement.

2 young cost-controlled PMD in this era is really valuable. I do thin that Andersson will be in on market soon

You value them today ... I value them in the future. This is the high marks between us here.

So if I were to offer you say Veleno and Berggren plus two mid firsts for Suzuki, you would have to take it right? Because those two players have high potential, I value then in the future.
Both players will probably get a bit better but likely are close to their ceiling now.

Some serious food for thought:

Rasmus Andersson (2nd round, 53rd overall, 2015)
Through age 22:
2G - 17A - 19P - 90GP - (+15)

Justin Barron (1st Round, 25th overall, 2020)
11G - 18A - 29P - 87GP - (-9)

Where might Barron be in 3 more years?

I do thin in CGY window here. Not habs.

this is the question here that no one seem to see

If Harris and Barron are going to be better than "an aging Andersson" then why are you trading them? Also who says Calgary is going into "blow up mode"? Cause they sure as hell don't plan on it, even if I feel they should. Considering my reputation on AGMing and yours, your last comment is completely irrelevant.

That Andersson at the same age had a greater positive value to his team than Barron? Hence why you want Andersson over Barron and are willing to add a couple picks and another player to try and get him?

window and opportunity + experience vs development window + rebuild .... we pay a big price to get a now suitable top 4 and offer a possible top 4 + to be sure to win a biding war in such a trade ...

it makes sense for a Habs wishing to win now and retool/rebuild CGY.

Maybe Im confused, but with the ton of impact prospects that MTL has, half are a yr or two away, maybe I dont think MTL's window is 23-24 or 24-25, so why do some MTL fans not want picks (assets) and just want players for now? Wouldn;t you rather have the assets (picks) for addressing weaknesses at the end of 24-25 or 25-26 than a quick fix that might fit the bill this yr and next?

Farrell, Reinbach, Maillot, Mesar, Heineman, Mysak, Barron, Tuch, Kidney, Hutson (great prospect pool) are all just arrived in minors or are not there yet? And the established youngsters in the NHL are hardly aging in Suzuki, Beck, Caulfield, Slaf, Guhle, Struble and X.

Im just unsure why some MTL fans are looking for what they call "aging players" or when theyre talking about their window, what is that window?

I gues IMO, their window hasn;t really opened yet, they're still riding out the bad deals/contracts/situations of Anderson, Dvorak, Price, Armia, Pearson, Gallagher and having the youth arrive in a steady stream. Why trade 2 young dmen and 2 picks for an aging Andersson?

And while I agree that Barron and Harris are probably the odd men out as the higher end youngsters arrive, how they can be so good and expendable at the same time?

MTL’s 1st without protection is serious overpay.Two years down the road Andersson could be 2nd or third pairing dman.

Maybe to show that Market Value and fan expectations are 2 things.

But you are asking teams to pay for your projection. That's not how it works in reality. GMs don't do that.