This is a modified version of the trade I put out in the ACGM where a NJD fan suggested they'd be interested in picking up Georgiev half-retained. Part of my thinking was that a 3rd round pick in 2025 might be appealing to COL, since they don't pick until the 4th round that year, and it would be good to get that from a team picking up a retained Georgiev. Unfortunately, the Devils don't have a 2025 3rd rounder right now, but I tried to make the value as close as I could by having BOS send out multiple 3rd rounders. I don't think the 2024 picks are in play here, because COL needs to re-sign Mittlestadt for them to feel comfortable trading a young center prospect, and that might not happen before the 2024 draft. But once that happens, I think the kid is completely blocked (McKinnon, Mittlestadt, and Colton).

In summary: BOS uses its best trade asset, cap space, and multiple mid-round picks to get help improve its prospect pipeline, COL gives up a promising center prospect to get a goalie upgrade without taking on cap space and moves up in the 2025 draft, and NJD gets a starter to pair with Allen on a value contract without breaking the bank on assets.

I see your thought process but as an Avs fan I'm a bit skeptical - Ullmark is better than George, for sure, but in the Avs' system, under a greater workload, is he that much better? Maybe but I dunno... then it becomes Ritchie for a 3rd which is a downgrade.

I’d accept as NJD for sure

don't think the bruins would have an ounce of interest in this.

I just think Boston needs a little bit more in return but definitely one of the better trades I have seen on this site.

Bruins likely have zero interest of retaining salary on a player, moving two 3rd round picks and moving a vezina goalie for Calum Ritchie and 2nd. Makes absolutely no sense for them to do this deal and likely would get Sweeney fired.

What do you anticipate the Bruins will get for Ullmark straight up? I would guess they get at best a late 1st round pick, probably in 2025. I think the rumors we have heard about gettinf a top 10 pick this year or more sound completely ridiculous.

This trade not only nets a prospect who was a late 1st round pick on a positive trajectory in a position of need, but that prospect will be ready to contribute much sooner than any pick made in the 2025 draft.

Also, moving the 3rds was a bit annoying, but I described in the top comment why it was necessary. I want the 3rd team to provide the 3rd rounder to the Avs and Boston sends no picks. You could reduce the Georgiev retention or have a mid tier prospect come back to BOS from NJ, but that is all in the noise.

The accompanying ACGM for the original trade provides a bit more context too. The goal is to rebuild the pipeline and let the kids play, picking up only one major UFA signing this year. 1 more year of honest retool, basically, with retention being the tool we use to accelerate the retool given our lack of tradeable assets.

To be honest, I am not sure what the Bruins will land for Ullmark - we have had goalies get traded for 1st round picks and more (in the past).....not lot of goalies get traded as most teams realize the importance of having a good one.

But you are basically suggesting the Bruins retain salary for another team, move 3rd round picks, a Vezina winning goalie for basically Calum and a 2nd. The two 3rd round picks are more valuable to the Bruins as they need more picks not less rebuild their prospect pool.

So you are saying retain salary and move a vezina goalie for Calum? Not going to fly. Bruins will basically hold on to both goalies to start the year if that is the best offer they get and try to move him at the deadline. Varlamov and Schneider both got top 11 overall picks in a trade. Heck even Darcy Kuemper got a 1st, prospect and a 3rd as a return.

I get rebuilding a pipeline, but retaining valuable salary, moving out 2 draft picks to get 1 that is moderately better and moving a very good goalie for 1 prospect doesn't move the needle for the team. There are pieces that can be worked with here, but the Bruins aren't making that deal above.

I can understand where you are coming from, but I respectfully disagree. The Bruins prospect pool doesn't lack guys that can crack an NHL lineup, it lacks guys that can crack the top 6 of an NHL lineup. They need talent. In my opinion, two 3rds is not worth as much as a 2nd for addressing their needs.

It helps to break it down a bit into the constituent parts:

Ullmark with retention for Ritchie+Georgiev is not enough for the Avs even to me as a non-Avs fan. I threw in a 3rd to try to smooth over the gap. Again, I estimate the current best return for Ullmark to be a 2025 late 1st rounder (you can disagree, but that is my logic). I value Ritchie over a 1st round 2025 pick because he will be ready to contribute 2 years sooner, and he gets a slight bump from his 20OA status for performing well in the OHL for 1 season after being drafted.

Georgiev with retention probably deserves more than I took back now that I think about it. Maybe a 2nd outright. I was initially thinking a 3rd, but that is probably fair value without the retention. When I had this as a trade with LA in my ACGM, where retention makes more sense, I was taking back a prospect which was probably closer to the equivalent of a late 2nd.



I think I value Ritchie more than you do. We can disagree, but hopefully you understand my logic above.



Looking at the details, it was a likely late-round 1st (32 OA in the end) + Connor Timmins (2nd round pick, not a blue-chipper). The 3rd was conditional on winning the cup, which was always a long-shot, but they did it! I am not seeing a significant gap between late 1st vs. late 1st + mid-tier prospect + 3rd conditional on winning the cup. Also in Colorado's situation, they were a contending team who was desperate for a starting goalie, as they had just lost Grubauer, so they might have needed to throw in some sweeteners. You could argue that NJ and LA are in a similar position and would be better trade partners, but I am not sure that they have a big-bodied C prospect with as high of a pedigree on a similar timeline.



We've touched on why I feel the 2nd is much more important than 2 3rd, and I also conceded that maybe we should only be sending out a single 3rd. Also, I don't see retaining salary for a single year as much of an issue. We aren't signing any impact players to 1 year deals this year, so any UFA signings we make will impact us for years. I think the Bruins can be competitive with maybe 1-2 key signings this offseason, but even if they signed a 3rd guy I don't think it puts them over the top into true cup contender status. I'd rather maintain cap flexibility to re-sign our guys without being leveraged and to see who is available in the 2025 offseason. And in terms of ways to use cap space for a single year, I'd rather spend the left over cap space on improving the prospect pipeline through 1 year of retention than just letting it accrue for a deadline trade or adding more low-impact guys on 1 years deals.

I do agree with some of your points and it is fair that you may have more value for Calum than I do. I get and understand he had a great year in the O. Given the sample size of goalie trades is slim, you have some trades that have top 11 OA picks included. some with mid level picks included and some with late round picks in round 1. Under most circumstances you take your chances on a 2nd over a 3rd for sure. But given the actual chance of a round 2 or 3 player playing over 250 isn't very high. Given the Bruins don't have a wealth of picks, its better served for them to take two swings on 3rd rounders vs 1 swing on a mid to late 2nd rounder.

There are bones and pieces that can work, just having retention on a player when cap is so valuable these days, giving up multiple draft assets when they have limited to begin with to only get 1 lack luster pick back all while moving a starting goalie who has won the Vezina for a Calum. Bruins need to be efficient with their cap space as they are still trying to win now. So retaining $3.3 million and moving the assets for Calum is not in the books for them. That being said, its also where the teams place value on the players and what their needs are.

They are better served moving Ullmark to the Sens for Chychrun and a 2nd (what many rumours are saying) or exploring a dance with the Devils knowing their 1st rounder is in play etc. Time will tell for sure and I am excited to say the last for July 1st and the NHL draft.

The points of view you have laid out are valid and get where you are coming from, but we just have a difference on where the Bruins place their value to make the aforementioned trade make sense.

Gotcha. I think we disagree on roster building strategy for this year, so of course we'll disagree on specific individual tactics. I think they will be competitive either way, but they will be more competitive this year if they do as you propose at the cost of delaying the pipeline rebuild.

One of the key things shaping my strategy is that I think they'll never be able to get a true 1C unless they draft and/or develop a young player for the role, but I'd love to be proven wrong. The nice thing about maintaining cap flexibility for next year though is that you leave your options open just in case a long shot (i.e., a Draisaitl) magically shakes free in UFA. I'm not sure I even view Ritchie as a future bonafide 1C, but I could see him and Poitras being responsible two-way players in top 6 roles within 4-5 years.

Yeah its hard to say because Calum is smaller (regarding being a number 1C and he played RW a lot in junior so he will likely play the wing to start at the NHL level). I do think the Bruins may over pay to land Lindholm, which is ok, as long as the term isn't insane given his age. That will lock the 1C for now, should they go that route.

Lets hope everyone, aka fans, get some fireworks this off season with trades and signings

One of the first dominos fall - Markstrom to the Devils for a 2025 1st rounder that is top 10 protected and Kevin Bahl