I think your problem is that you only see ideal Kuznetsov instead of the reality, which is far more of a mixed bag. How do you account for GSVA projecting both Tarasenko and Bertuzzi more favorably than Kuznetsov next season? Is it realistic to hold on to a Theoretical Kuznetsov Ceiling in the face of, at least according to that model, three seasons of decline? It would seem, at least according to that model, that a one-for-one swap is actually pretty achievable and that your valuation may be what's skewed. Elsewhere Dom's model projects the likes of Hyman, Krejci, Danault and Tatar more favorably next season. Kuznetsov could break out again. It's possible. But trading from a position of what-this-player-could-possibly-be-if-the-stars-aligned will of course lead to him staying. I've seen other models that put Kuznetsov more along the lines of a lower-end 2C rather than the franchise 1C or substantial upgrade that according to some is the bar that must be met in order to trigger a worthwhile trade.
He's most likely getting traded because of that unrealized upside. Because he could be so much more dominant and just isn't close. Their bear a fair share of responsibility for where they find themselves but the reality is this is a very mixed bag player whose value is not exclusively driven by what he can do on his best day alone.
I don't actually project Kuznetsov having a great year next year, on average. I've stated multiple times that I think he's more likely to have a disappointing season next year than a great one, and that I'd prefer that he be traded for a high-upside 1C with more consistency. Unlike others, I would trade the farm and/or some current high perceived-value roster players for this high-upside 1C because I don't care about the post-Ovechkin Capitals and any futures that the Capitals have now likely won't be key contributors during the period where Ovechkin is still active. And at least in the case of John Carlson there is a better option as a UFA available in Dougie Hamilton. Make Carlson available, for instance, and there are perhaps some more intriguing 1C options available than some of the names you mentioned. Make Carlson, McMichael, and a few first round picks available and maybe the list gets even bigger.
Right now the Capitals are a fringe NHL playoff team in my estimation, with question marks throughout key positions on their roster. I think they need a spectacular performance out of their 1C in order to have success in the playoffs, especially with question marks regarding Backstrom's health and most of the core getting worse due to the effects of aging. Even if they acquire a player that is, on average, a better player than Kuznetsov (and I have no doubts that models are correct in saying players like Hyman, Tatar, Danault, and Krejci are better on average than Kuznetsov) is their ceiling high-enough to make the Capitals a contender? That needs to be the consideration IMO, not whether on average they are better players.
We already know that Kuznetsov is capable of being a Conn Smythe winner, even if the odds are low that he repeats such a performance. But I'd rather take that slim chance of greatness re-emerging than basically no chance at all, as I see with players like Danault, Krejci, Johansen, etc.
I think the main difference between myself and others is that I don't see this team as close right now talent-wise. And the past 3 postseasons seem to support this position. I don't think altering the second pair on defense, or getting a little more buy-in from the team, or acquiring a low-upside 2C, or Laviolette and the players having a full offseason to get on the same page does anything to make this team a contender. They need more talent.
It's why I've advocated for drastic moves to alter the complexion of the core and to have a net-infusion of talent, at the expense of the post-Ovechkin era starting out more painfully. Again, I'd prefer Kuznetsov be gone next season because I want a player with a similarly high ceiling but with much better odds of actually achieving said high-ceiling. But I don't want a replacement center like Krejci, Danault, or Johansen who cannot achieve that level of greatness no matter how hard he tries. I'd rather roll the dice with Kuznetsov than acquire any of those names or similar, especially since Kuznetsov did show significant improvement under Laviolette last year on the ice. It probably was just a blip on the radar but maybe it was actually legitimate improvement that can be built upon next year. Perhaps Kuznetsov just didn't work under Todd Reirden.
Basically, if the Capitals need a home run to win the Cup like I think they do, then I'd rather send out a slugger who may strike out a lot but can sock a dinger rather than send out a contact hitter incapable of going yard, even if the contact hitter has a better on-base percentage.
