Ducks would have zero interest in dropping from 3 to 6.

I guess it depends who they are targeting and how they value them.

If they think Leshunov is the second coming of Niklas Lindstrom or Scott Niedermayer... Then yeah... the 6th ovr and Barron is not going to cut it.

the only hope you would have of getting any of these picks is including players that you consider unavailable. No other way to do it. All these theams are going to want quality, not quantity. Piling on mid pieces aren't going to convince a team to trade out of the top 5.

TBF, I consider Newhook/Roy/Mailloux/Xhekaj untouchable.

IMO, habs will just accept whomever is available at their spot. KH is not in the habit of overpaying.

right and its basically impossible to move into the top 5 without overpaying. If your 12 most valuable players are unavailable, then there is no deal to be made.

The Ducks biggest need right now is game breaking top end talent. It doesn't really matter so much if that comes from a forward or a defenseman so they can take BPA at #3. Why risk losing the guy they want by dropping down to #6.

Tuch is kind of on par with Colangelo. Barron is a middle pair guy at best. The 2nd is redundant with the three other picks they have in the 1st and 2nd round. You aren't giving them anything they "need" here. Honestly the play for the Ducks should be trying to trade the Edmonton 1st up in the draft.

Hawks aren't in a position to trade back in the draft. If anything they'll either try to get another 1st or upgrade the tampa first.

If the sharks are 2 or 3, then they likely would be willing to trade back to six. That said—- that package isn’t going to work.

6OA and Guhles is likely needed to do it and then maybe the late first too.

I could maybe see the Jackets biting if there's a player in the late first range they're targeting and they want to make sure they can secure him (such as the younger Jiricek), especially if they really like a likely 5-10 player like Dickinson (especially as Mark Hunter is currently the favorite to get the GM job), Catton, maybe Buium. Barron is not interesting, but multiple firsts could be. Columbus is so hard to predict for this draft because we don't know who the new GM will be yet or what their priorities will be, and the prospect pool doesn't have any glaring areas of need except for "quality." Even now, I could see them equally favoring Lindstrom/Demidov with their pick as much as Levshunov/Silayev.

If the Sharks fall to 3 and Celebrini and Levshunov go 1st and 2nd, I’d be ok with a trade back to 6 while picking up Barron, the Winnipeg 1st, and maybe another pick (a 2nd?).

Well, it's all a question of price. Don't expect two first round pick if we include Caufield.

I'm picking up that SJS and CLB are more likely trade candidates than the Ducks and CHI.

Although, I'm suprised with Ducks fan - They have so much talent upfront and on the back end - I would see them make a switch towards getting a "gamer" like Iginla to balance talent with Grit... and getting paid for it. but hey - I don't follow them as closely.

Trading up is going to cost A LOT more than that. Barron isn't as valuable as some people seem to think he is, and neither is Tuch. Also, a COL 2nd round pick does not really help your case, it might as well be a 3rd round pick.

You clearly meant the Winnipeg first ("25th overall") but you have the Colorado second in your trade boxes, hence the confusion of @Swusc1026 and @Garak.


I can see one obscure scenario where this might happen: Ducks pick third and Celebrini/Levshunov go 1-2, and the two Montreal firsts (2024 and 2025) are the compensation for the move back.

Indeed - I redid the trades a couple times - and I must have made the mistake.

Well, I'm open to counter-offers.

Gamers as you call them are just easier to get. McTavish is one already on the Ducks and we'll see about Gauthier and Gaucher. Just from those three guys I'd say the need for gamers is not any greater than the need for uber talents.

The other point I'd make is that if these trades are "fair value" then the Ducks aren't getting paid to do anything. They are exchanging one asset worth a lot for a collection of smaller assets worth less individually. How is that getting paid?

Hey, anything can happen. A lot of my thought process on this comes from watching Verbeek conduct the last two drafts. He clearly has his list and will take the top guy on it and that list may not match the consensus that floats around. Carlsson vs Fantilli. Mintyukov at 10. Myatovic so early in the 2nd. Picks like those are what I'm talking about.

The other thing is the last time a top 3 pick was traded that was known to be a top 3 pick was like what, a decade ago? I honestly don't remember other than it was a long time ago.

Fair enough - I agree that Verbeek is a man with a plan - so there is a lot of unknown.

I would make a counter offer, but I highly doubt CHI would be willing to trade back unless they are getting a haul, and I highly doubt MTL would be willing to give up what it would take.

You know...I'm kind of interested, especially if Columbus ends up at 4OA, and MTL at 6OA, That's right in the pocket of missing out on the one surefire pick (Celebrini), the elite players that could fill a need (Levshunov, Lindstrom, Demidov), and the next best players available would be a LD like Dickinson or Silayev, or an offensive RD like Parekh, that line up with a lot of what Columbus already has.

I'd be open to it, if for no other reason than we'd probably look to take the top forward available in that range anyway...and that's probably Catton at any of those picks, maybe Lindstrom if we're lucky. If the guy we'd pick at 4 is available at 6 anyway, yes you trade back, but you make it painful for the other team.

I'd preface it with: if Columbus is in the top-3 the trade is off the table (Celebrini, Levshunov, or Demidov), and generally MTL and CBJ are bad trade partners because we have similar things, need similar things (top-end talent), and have similar desired timelines to compete...but if we're landing at 4 and think, for example, Arizona and Montreal want to take D-men, I'd definitely trade back to 6 for:

MTL 1st (6OA)
WPG 1st (assume 25 OA)
COL 2nd (60-ish?)

Anything else Montreal wants to throw in is gravy, but anything else is likely too much to effectively leapfrog one specific team. Again, I'd only see it happening if Columbus is set on Catton or Lindsrom and they think Montreal and Arizona are going with some combination of Parekh/Dickinson/Silayev.

But then again, if Lindstrom is available at 4OA with Columbus on the clock...we probably just do that.

TBH - the top 6 is such a toss up especially before the end of the playoffs, the Memorial cup and the WJC - that a trade up will probably be to secure a very specific player that would be available :

ex:

CLB picks 4th, ARI picks 5th and MTL picks 6th.

Celebrini/Demidov/Lindstrom go 1, 2, 3.

Lets say Eiserman is available at 4 and MTL and ARI REAALLLY wants him, while CLB not so much. Then I could see CLB accepting a deal from MTL to leap frog ARI to secure Eiserman.

It's going to be a draft floor trade for sure.

Yeah that's the exact scenario I could see that trade happening. Even then, though, if Columbus is on the clock and Levshunov is available, we should take him. The only RD in the system with top-4 potential is Jiricek, so that would be both insurance and a long-term upgrade on Gudbranson/Severson.

But, if Columbus does make that trade, and the next picks are Eiserman to MTL at 4 and Levshunov to ARI at 5, I'd still be happy taking the extra draft capital to nab Catton at 6. Definitely going to be interesting.

Draft day is going to be fun.