Who is attached to a roster player? I am simply pointing out that your dream scenario of trading Bucnevich straight up for an unproven prospect like Lundell is mostly a pipe dream.
Well prepare to hit the pipe, since the Rangers prefer to deal Buch for a young top 6 center "with runway," (ie, not as proven and established as Buch) this offseason. It's goal "A."
Those deals do not happen in the NHL. I am sure they are common place on EA Sports.
Yeah, making this point again doesn't make it any more salient.
Trading Gomez for McDonagh doesn't happen in real life much either. Trading Brassard for Zibanejad doesn't happen much either.
Here's where you object "but those trades are different because Zibanejad was in the league" or whatever nonsense. Yes, every trade is different than every other trade. There is no exact match. Those kind of deals are not standard league logic deal. They are an outlier.
This would also be an outlier. So the entire premise of "have to operate under standard league protocal" doesn't apply. Do you know why teams don't often trade proven top line 26 year old wingers for prospects? Because almost no teams ever have disposable proven top line 26 year old wingers like we do.
So take the whole "this is unprecedented so it can't happen," bit and toss it right in the trash.
We know it's unprecedented. It's still going to be discussed and it still has a solid chance of happening; more than you are giving credit for.
Likely? Still no, of course not.
But worth discussing. If not Lundell, a player like that - similarly unproven in the NHL relative to what he will be projected to become. The Rangers will be chasing that, apparently, first and foremost. I guess they are as delusional as me!
Yes, of course the Rangers realize that their future on the right is more than likely Kakkp & Kravstov. And naturally that means that Buchnevich will be moved. And yes, of course they prefer that they move him for a young-top 6 centerman with "runway". But you are now conflating that center with an unproven prospect. You BELIEVE that such a prospect MAY turn into such a player. But that is not the case today. Conflating a young top-6 center with Lundell is disingenuous. He may become one one year, but that is not for another 3 (at best) to 5 years.
The only thing "disingenuous," here is your preposterous position.
Without even bothering to sit down and think about it for more than ten seconds, I have a perfect example: the Mark Stone trade, where an established, 26 year old, in his prime, top line winger (even better than Buch) was moved for a package centered around unproven high-end defensive prospect in Erik Brannstrom who had never played in the NHL before. Yes, Vegas also sent (along with Brannstrom) Oscar Lindberg and a second round pick, and yes, Ottawa sent low-end prospect Tobias Lindberg the other way along with Stone.
So it's not 1-to-1. You make the deals match by adding on. But yes, it's actually not at all out of the realm of possibility that you can move a top-line forward for an unproven player and does in fact happen.
So, lets just flush everything you've said about the likelihood of this, cause it's all bunk.
If your point is that Florida would need to add the equivalent of a second round pick and Oscar Lindberg to make this work, whatever. I would waive that requirement because it amounts to a hill of beans, but whatever. The framework of the deal would be Buch for Lundell just like the framework of that Stone deal was Stone for Brannstrom.
No one is shouting anyone down. I am pointing out that the reality. If it were much more realistic, you would not have any trouble finding examples to fit your narrative.
I have not had a single ounce of trouble. It was unbelievably easy to come up with a template in fact. That's reality. It has happened, not even that long ago. Basically exactly what we are proposing.
I never said it "must," be 1-to-1 Buch for Lundell. Small adds like the Stone trade would easily be achievable.
What you are doing it is posting about it on the internet, which is a free space. If you do not want people to comment on your posts, then a) do not post anything or b) go to a private forum filled with only people that you want to have the conversation with.
Well, it's not a free space, it's a moderated space, and what you are doing on the subject is beginning to border pathological, but I'm not going to pretend I can stop you. It's just kinda sad and pathetic, but also frustrating, that you invent these "realities" which have no real basis in fact, that you then appoint yourself board sheriff of enforcing everyone's commentary over. And the best part is, your assertions aren't even close to accurate! It took me less than 30 seconds to disprove that established top line players are never dealt for prospects.
