Utah looking for a young top 6 winger for their 4th OA

[STL fan in MN]

I’d likely only consider trading Kyrou if Kyrou isn’t the best player in the deal. So something like Kyrou + another asset for a player better than Kyrou. I’m not trading him for pieces.

It would have to be a deal that brings back a cornerstone, I fully agree.

I think his max value is right now, the next 24 days. Once he gets his NTC in place and gets "more control than the owner" the way Krug was handed by Armstrong then he loses value even with the cap going up, By the time the cap goes up to make that deal more of a "bargain" he'll be 30 and then nobody will be saying he's at max value. His deal will become more of a "bargain" assuming he doesn't regress in his play but he'll always be a winger.

Agree. His trade value drops by quite a bit on July 1 when he gets a full NTC. But the odds of that perfect deal for him being available for him in the next 24 days also seems pretty low. So I’m not expecting anything.

[Red7]

This is what happens when you legalize pot and allow meth to run rampant in your state. What? Is Army going to set Bill Armstrong with a hooker who gets him drunk and takes incriminating pictures? You wouldn’t get a Top 10 pick for Kyrou, much less a Top 5. In fact, the league would suspect foul play and void the deal. These are deals the Canadiens made in the 70’s, stealing team’s first round drafts. Anyone remember a #1 for Dave Gardner?

ok so just for arguments sake, let's say the Blues and the Mammoth pull off this trade. Under what rule would the NHL have any legitimate right to void that trade?

The league has to approve every trade. Usually, it’s a pro forma thing, but that deal would be so lopsided, it would not be in the best interests of the NHL. It would be similar to your fantasy football commissioner voiding a deal of Karem Hunt for Saquon Barkley.

[rbirules]

Piggybacking on the "only trading Kyrou for an upgrade" idea, Kyrou is a good player on a reasonable and long deal.

In trades like this, in order to "upgrade" the talent you are usually going to get back a player who has less of a track record (but perceived higher ceiling), less control, or higher salary, otherwise why is that team trading for a lesser player?

Brady is an example of less control (though it sounds like he's not being moved). Matthews or another "superstar" that could be moved would be an example of a player with a higher salary. Not saying Matthews will be moved just using him as an example. A trade with Buffalo for a younger player (take your pick) is an example of a player with potentially less track record but "higher upside or talent".

The window before the trade protection kicks in really limits a trade to an undesirable market, like Buffalo who has a very hard time attracting FAs. A player like Kyrou should be very attractive to them as they would get him for several years and they usually can't lure a player like that in FA. Not saying they have a perfect match in a trade though.

Not sure any of this is news to anybody, but it doesn't hurt just to put it all down in writing as a reference.

[TheJackBurton]

This is what happens when you legalize pot and allow meth to run rampant in your state. What? Is Army going to set Bill Armstrong with a hooker who gets him drunk and takes incriminating pictures? You wouldn’t get a Top 10 pick for Kyrou, much less a Top 5. In fact, the league would suspect foul play and void the deal. These are deals the Canadiens made in the 70’s, stealing team’s first round drafts. Anyone remember a #1 for Dave Gardner?

ok so just for arguments sake, let's say the Blues and the Mammoth pull off this trade. Under what rule would the NHL have any legitimate right to void that trade?

The league has to approve every trade. Usually, it’s a pro forma thing, but that deal would be so lopsided, it would not be in the best interests of the NHL. It would be similar to your fantasy football commissioner voiding a deal of Karem Hunt for Saquon Barkley.

The league doesn't get to decide what is and isn't a fair trade. If Edmonton wants to trade McDavid for a 7th dman the league doesn't get to come in and say "No way, you aren't completing that trade" All they are doing when they are approving trades is ensuring that everything is in its proper place, the proper documentation is signed and filled out, ensuring that it doesn't violate such clauses like he doesn't have a no trade clause to a particular team, or that it fits within the confines of the salary cap. There is no "we need to ensure a good trade for competitive sake" clause in CBA.

[Red7]

This is what happens when you legalize pot and allow meth to run rampant in your state. What? Is Army going to set Bill Armstrong with a hooker who gets him drunk and takes incriminating pictures? You wouldn’t get a Top 10 pick for Kyrou, much less a Top 5. In fact, the league would suspect foul play and void the deal. These are deals the Canadiens made in the 70’s, stealing team’s first round drafts. Anyone remember a #1 for Dave Gardner?

ok so just for arguments sake, let's say the Blues and the Mammoth pull off this trade. Under what rule would the NHL have any legitimate right to void that trade?

The league has to approve every trade. Usually, it’s a pro forma thing, but that deal would be so lopsided, it would not be in the best interests of the NHL. It would be similar to your fantasy football commissioner voiding a deal of Karem Hunt for Saquon Barkley.

The league doesn't get to decide what is and isn't a fair trade. If Edmonton wants to trade McDavid for a 7th dman the league doesn't get to come in and say "No way, you aren't completing that trade" All they are doing when they are approving trades is ensuring that everything is in its proper place, the proper documentation is signed and filled out, ensuring that it doesn't violate such clauses like he doesn't have a no trade clause to a particular team, or that it fits within the confines of the salary cap. There is no "we need to ensure a good trade for competitive sake" clause in CBA.

There IS a clause that allows the commissioner to act in the best interest of the league. Also, that investigation might lead to the discovery of some type of illegal quid pro quo deal. It certainly would arouse suspicions.

[TheJackBurton]

This is what happens when you legalize pot and allow meth to run rampant in your state. What? Is Army going to set Bill Armstrong with a hooker who gets him drunk and takes incriminating pictures? You wouldn’t get a Top 10 pick for Kyrou, much less a Top 5. In fact, the league would suspect foul play and void the deal. These are deals the Canadiens made in the 70’s, stealing team’s first round drafts. Anyone remember a #1 for Dave Gardner?

ok so just for arguments sake, let's say the Blues and the Mammoth pull off this trade. Under what rule would the NHL have any legitimate right to void that trade?

The league has to approve every trade. Usually, it’s a pro forma thing, but that deal would be so lopsided, it would not be in the best interests of the NHL. It would be similar to your fantasy football commissioner voiding a deal of Karem Hunt for Saquon Barkley.

The league doesn't get to decide what is and isn't a fair trade. If Edmonton wants to trade McDavid for a 7th dman the league doesn't get to come in and say "No way, you aren't completing that trade" All they are doing when they are approving trades is ensuring that everything is in its proper place, the proper documentation is signed and filled out, ensuring that it doesn't violate such clauses like he doesn't have a no trade clause to a particular team, or that it fits within the confines of the salary cap. There is no "we need to ensure a good trade for competitive sake" clause in CBA.

There IS a clause that allows the commissioner to act in the best interest of the league. Also, that investigation might lead to the discovery of some type of illegal quid pro quo deal. It certainly would arouse suspicions.

Yes, but not when it comes to trades.

Would it arouse suspicion? I mean I guess, but if Edmonton wants to trade a player to a team, and that team offers a package, it's not up to the NHL to decide whether or not that it is a fair package to Edmonton. They are only there to ensure it isn't breaking any contractual rules.

[netboy65]

I’d likely only consider trading Kyrou if Kyrou isn’t the best player in the deal. So something like Kyrou + another asset for a player better than Kyrou. I’m not trading him for pieces.

It would have to be a deal that brings back a cornerstone, I fully agree.

I think his max value is right now, the next 24 days. Once he gets his NTC in place and gets "more control than the owner" the way Krug was handed by Armstrong then he loses value even with the cap going up, By the time the cap goes up to make that deal more of a "bargain" he'll be 30 and then nobody will be saying he's at max value. His deal will become more of a "bargain" assuming he doesn't regress in his play but he'll always be a winger.

It’s just a NTC not a NMC. Teams hand those out like candy

[bluetunehead]

This is what happens when you legalize pot and allow meth to run rampant in your state. What? Is Army going to set Bill Armstrong with a hooker who gets him drunk and takes incriminating pictures? You wouldn’t get a Top 10 pick for Kyrou, much less a Top 5. In fact, the league would suspect foul play and void the deal. These are deals the Canadiens made in the 70’s, stealing team’s first round drafts. Anyone remember a #1 for Dave Gardner?

ok so just for arguments sake, let's say the Blues and the Mammoth pull off this trade. Under what rule would the NHL have any legitimate right to void that trade?

The league has to approve every trade. Usually, it’s a pro forma thing, but that deal would be so lopsided, it would not be in the best interests of the NHL. It would be similar to your fantasy football commissioner voiding a deal of Karem Hunt for Saquon Barkley.

The league doesn't get to decide what is and isn't a fair trade. If Edmonton wants to trade McDavid for a 7th dman the league doesn't get to come in and say "No way, you aren't completing that trade" All they are doing when they are approving trades is ensuring that everything is in its proper place, the proper documentation is signed and filled out, ensuring that it doesn't violate such clauses like he doesn't have a no trade clause to a particular team, or that it fits within the confines of the salary cap. There is no "we need to ensure a good trade for competitive sake" clause in CBA.

There IS a clause that allows the commissioner to act in the best interest of the league. Also, that investigation might lead to the discovery of some type of illegal quid pro quo deal. It certainly would arouse suspicions.

Yes, but not when it comes to trades.

Would it arouse suspicion? I mean I guess, but if Edmonton wants to trade a player to a team, and that team offers a package, it's not up to the NHL to decide whether or not that it is a fair package to Edmonton. They are only there to ensure it isn't breaking any contractual rules.

Also just on its face… the idea that Kyrou for the #4 is some preposterous move totally out of balance in value is just silly. He’s a very good player with a contract that will become pretty reasonable over the next few years. #4s are not guarantees. You can end up with Cale Makar or Mitch Marner or you could end up with Jesse Puljujarvi or Griffin Reinhart. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[TheHighHat]

If you're trading up to #4 you're drafting a center this year.
Centers drafted at 4th overall in the last 20 years (cap era).
2006 N. Backstrom
2010 R. Johansen
2014 S. Bennett
2022 S. Wright
2023 W. Smith
2024 C. Lindstrom

Backstrom was a 1C and won a Cup.
Johansen was considered a d-bag and a waste of talent but still played over 900 games.
Bennett will print money in a few weeks like the Federal Reserve.
Wright showed a pulse this past season and is only 21.
Smith had a nice rookie season for a 20-21 year old.
Linsdtrom has to overcome back surgery at such a young age.

Expect Utah to keep that pick and add another potential 2C to go with a potential 3C (Beaudoin) from last year.
Very feasible to see Utah running these 4 guys out in a few years as their centers:
1C Cooley
2C Desnoyers, Frondell, or Hagens
3C Beaudoin
4C McBain

Hayton is their 2C right now, but he can also play LW if the above scenario plays out.

I think the fun debate we have about Kyrou and other potential moves cones down to the many that actually think the Blues are Cup contenders right now vs those that think the Blues won't be a Cup contender until they get a legit 2C.
History has shown that Cup winning 1C's & 2C's centers are acquired via draft or trade (not UFA).
Drafting top centers also gives you a longer runway to be Cup contenders than trading for or signing a veteran center.