So am I supposed to ignore that Pastrnak played 7 less games than Draisaitl last season? Are we now supposed to ignore the development of players and what they may project to be? For example, should I look at Mark Scheifele's first two seasons (34pts, 49 points) and say he is not a superior player to so and so even though he broke out last season and became/is becoming one of the league's best centermen? Is Seguin not a great player because of his playoff points?
Draisaitl had an amazing playoffs, and Edmonton was a better team than the Bruins last season. I didn't deny any of that. Nor did I deny that Draisaitl didn't have more value than Pastrnak. If you read my post, I even said Draisaitl had the edge in value because of his versatility of playing center and wing. Nor did I say there wouldn't have to be some sort of add to Pastrnak to make value match.
What team wouldn't want a player like Draisaitl? What you fail to understand are other teams' needs and that a scoresheet doesn't tell the whole story.
The Bruins have Bergeron and Krejci at center. Pastrnak is their #1 RW. The Bruins will have McAvoy and Carlo make up both of their top 4 RD.
Would getting Draisaitl be great for the Bruins? Absolutely. At the cost for Pastrnak + McAvoy/Carlo? No, and I'll explain.
Pastrnak is a #1 RW and was in the top 5 RW last season in scoring. After Pastrnak, the Bruins are looking at Backes, who is okay but not a driving force on offense, and prospects to fill on the right side. On defense, the Bruins will have McAvoy and Carlo makeup their top 4 on the right side going into next season. As good as Draisaitl is, for a team with Bergeron and Krejci as their top 6 centers, it is not worth creating more holes to improve an area that is not needed. The Bruins need Pastrnak and McAvoy/Carlo more than they need to improve at center. Even if Draisaitl would be brought in to be a RW and replace Pastrnak, the cost of losing a potential first-pairing replacement for Chara in McAvoy or shutdown cost-controlled defenseman in Carlo is too costly for a Bruins team also in need of defense. Hypothetically speaking, the closest example, which may not be a very good one, I can think of is Edmonton offering Draisaitl + Klefbom for someone like Scheifele or Backstrom. Does Edmonton do it? Hell no because as good as a Scheifele or Backstrom is, they lose a very important part of their defense in Klefbom for only a slight improvement at center.
On projections and value, I never said McAvoy or Carlo have 1st-pairing value. You are putting words in my mouth.
Do you think that prospect/player projection is not taken into account at all in trades or in how a team values its players? Nico Hischier was drafted 1st overall this draft and projects to be a #1C. You don't think New Jersey would covet him as one if a team asked New Jersey what the cost would be to trade for him? You think New Jersey would be like, "well you know...he was drafted in the 1st round so a 1st rounder will do"? The answer to that is no. The same goes for McAvoy and Carlo. What they project to be for the Bruins means a lot to them value-wise especially given the holes they have and will have on defense once Chara retires. Sergachev was just traded for Drouin, and that trade happened without Sergachev playing a single game in the NHL. McAvoy and Carlo don't have "top-pairing" value like you insist I was saying, but they do have value around the league especially to the Bruins.
I think you should spend less time getting your knickers in a twist, praising stat lines, and putting words into other peoples mouths.