Dude these are absurdly bad. They make no sense. Why would the Canucks trade Petey for two picks and a limited 4/5 dman? And then trade our first to get Granlund. You are putting a lot of effort into writing these out so I don't want to come across too harsh but these are insultingly bad. You trade Petey for like Barzal, Larkin, Suzuki type of base, and then they add a first and you still probably cant win that trade. Lets alone for some nothing dman.
Agree to disagree, I suppose. I can't imagine NYI wanting EP, but offering Barzal for him. Same with Larkin, Suzuki, etc... If you're DET, it would only make sense to acquire EP to end up with him + Larkin. If WPG acquires him, it would be to have Schiefele + EP at C. If CAR did, it would be to have Aho + EP. As I have said, I don't actually think it's a good idea to trade him unless they really do
have to get one of EP or Miller off the team. Don't forget, it is 100% VAN being pressured into making a deal to resolve this situation, if it really is that bad, so they don't have the advantage. I'm
only proposing EP deals because I expect any Miller return to be very underwhelming relative to his raw value on the ice (age + contract + full NTC).
All I'm suggesting is that these barriers with a hypothetical EP trade could be overcome, simply because VAN is not obligated to keep what they get in return for EP if it's not a fit with staying competitive in a 3-6 year window, as they were shaping up to be when all this nonsense started.
And again, you seem like you're not looking at those trades in totality. DET's 1st will likely be in the 6-11 range, even if they add EP, which is extremely valuable (whether VAN makes the pick or not). The "1st for Granlund" deal includes clearing Desharnais as well, which is worth a fair bit (again, not saying it's 100% fair, just spitballing, really). The Romanov deal involves (for example) keeping the WPG 1st and Perfetti along with him, etc etc...