As a community I think we need to accept that there are truths about both speculative value and actual value when determining how 'good' a trade is. Seldom does anyone conflate cap space with another characteristic, and the same for chemistry. We may not value it as highly, but everyone generally acknowledges its existence. Its really only speculative value and actual value that get mixed.
You can make a trade: Patrik Berglund, Vladimir Sobotka and Tage Thompson, a first-round pick in the 2019 NHL Draft, and a second-round pick in the 2021 NHL Draft for ROR. The speculative value of the trade is low, an expected late 1st, a 2nd, a decent prospect with long shot odds of becoming the missing value in this trade. The actual value is low, Berglund and Sobotka will contribute little to nothing to winning games for this organization. However, the actual value isn't fixed until the trade is fully realized because the actual value of the trade takes into account outcome. The outcome, however unlikely the speculation was at the time the trade was made, is that Thompson far surpassed any reasonable expectations and we all agree that this was now a good trade based on value. We all agreed at the time it was not a good trade for speculative value and it is correct for us to maintain that opinion because speculative value takes into account the likelihood of outcomes.
Which is a long way of explaining why Botteril was wrong, you are right, and everyone who says "well we don't know that answer yet" needs to just answer the question because no one is asking you what the actual value of the trade was. Do you think Vancouver got more speculative value from the trade or the Isles?