Islanders have Dobson-Pulock-Mayfield down the right side. Assuming they even have their 1st round pick at the draft why would they trade for a more expensive Mayfield?

If Catton is gone and there's a chance of Iginla still being available with Philis pick I'd do it.

Isles decline, Don't need him and his salary. Not an upgrade to move down to basically the las pick in the 1st round (Florida's pick)

Easy no from the islanders. Pageau contract is up sooner and is better than Risto. So no

Echoing that here, but Risto is not an asset the Isles would be targeting with the RHD depth chart they currently have and while moving Pageau is helpful, I don't think they would move him at a loss the way the got rid of Josh Bailey last summer.

Difference between a pick in the 28-32 range and the 12-16 range is equivalent to an early 2nd rounder (#36-40 range). So, assuming that the picks were lined up the way they are today, you would have to give up Florida's 1st and CBJ's 2nd to move up to the Isles 1st. I would consider dropping that 2nd round pick and doing JGP/Isles 1st for Morgan Frost/Florida 1st, but that's about as far as I think I would want to go on that.

Flames will probably keep there pick

Exactly this. How many rebuilding teams have traded down?

Happens quite often, usually with later lottery picks (#11-16). The first 10 picks have a huge amount of predictive value so they usually don't get moved, but once you get past that, the difference in expected value between picks is smaller and easier to move out of.

In this trade, if I'm the Flames and I don't see a player I'm absolutely in love with at my pick, I would 100% take it. Calgary's pick right now is #11OA, which per Dom@theAthletic's draft pick chart, has an expected GSVA value of 5.7. Philly's pick is at #17OA(4.5) right now and the Leafs' is at #24OA(3.5) - meaning the Flames would be bringing in 8.0 future GSVA and netting 2.3 excess by making that move, and getting an extra lottery ticket in the 5th round to boot.

A team in a full rebuild should be all about amassing as many assets as possible, and this trade would do that. Slam dunk for Calgary to make that deal here.

I was asking for examples, Rebuilding team trading down in 1st round... And go

2022: Sharks trade out of #11OA and get back #27OA, #34OA, & #45OA
2021: Chicago trades #12OA, #44OA, Adam Boqvist, & a future 1st for #32OA, #173OA, & Seth Jones
2021: Dallas trades #15OA to get back #23OA, #48OA, & #138OA
2019: Philly trades #11OA to get back #14OA & #45OA
2018: Ottawa trades #22OA to get back #26OA & #48OA
2016: NJ trades #11OA to get back #12OA & #80OA

6 times in the last 8 drafts - the only years it didn't happen were last year (stacked top 10), 2020 (COVID ruined scouting), and 2017 (Vegas expansion draft chaos). It happens quite often, and smart GMs will take advantage of another team's desperation to stockpile more assets - both at the deadline and on the draft floor.

So Sharks sure that's one example. Chicago that was a "over the rebuild" move for Seth Jones so doesn't really apply. Dallas literally went to the cup finals the year before, not a rebuilding team . So Philly moved back 3 spots and Ottawa moved back 4 spots, NJ moved back 1 spot.

Only one really comparable is SJ and if anything that's an example of why you shouldnt. It's early but this will likely end up looking bad with all the players they chose to pass over.

Ottawa already had a 4th overall so sure trade back your later first why not.

At the end of the day Calgary needs high end talent, which is usually at the front of the draft. I see them more likely as a team to combine there 1sts to trade up rather then down.

Calgary would pick #14 if the draft were held today, so I think we can safely plug them into a pick in the 12-16 range (as OP did.) The 1st they have from Vancouver is going to be in the mid-20s; let's say it's #26OA for the sake of argument.

Do you know how many times, in the last 20 drafts since the lockout year, that a team has traded up from the teens into the top 10?

It's happened twice: In 2007, San Jose gave up #13, #44, & #87 to move up to #9. And in 2005, the Sharks traded #12, #49, & #207 to move up to #8.

So which do you think is more likely to happen: the type of trade that has happened a handful of times in the last 8 years, or the type of trade that hasn't happened in nearly 17 years?

Well literally on everyone of your examples theres a team on the other end of it trading up... So it's happened more then twice

I simply said move up didn't say to which spot.