I was never convinced that they would trade both to get first overall. But I do think it is a very real possibility that they will offer a package including one of those picks to the Rangers. The ideal situation is keeping 3rd overall and trading 5th overall in a larger package. But if they stick at 3 and 5 that will be good as well.
Another way to look at this (which is more speculative) is to see this as a public relations play. Someone from the Rangers organization may have tried to push the narrative of 3 + 5 for 1st overall strategically to build a negotiating anchor. Basically if the rumor is that the Sens are willing to offer 3 + 5 for 1 then it creates the impression that other teams will have to offer more value than that to even get consideration. The concept of anchoring is about setting the price from which negotiations will begin. If the other party does not like the anchor then the best tactic is not to offer a counter proposal but to scoff at it and dismiss it as ridiculous and then try to establish a new anchor.
The quote from Melnyk is as follows:
“The idea of trading our 3rd and 5th picks for the No. 1 pick is nonsensical,” Melnyk said in an email to Postmedia on Monday. “We’re very excited to welcome our many new Ottawa Senators that will come to us via the upcoming draft.”
From what I have stated thus far, this could be part of a public relations play. The Senators didn't like the anchor price and wanted to get rid of it to put themselves in a better negotiating position. Therefore they have Bruce Garrioch write an article not only dismissing the idea but having a direct quote from the owner scoffing at the idea as ridiculous and saying the Sens are perfectly happy to stick with what they already have.
Overall it is a smart move from the Senators organization. They reacted quickly to ensure that anchor didn't hold and that other teams wouldn't offer equally compelling or superior offers. This gives the Senators more control over any potential negotiations and clearly communicates to the Rangers that any notion of a price of 3 + 5 or something equivalently expensive is an absurd ask. Therefore if the Rangers are contemplating parting with the pick they will know that they will need to lower their expectations.
In addition, if the Rangers value having a top 5 pick in this draft then they are heavily reliant on the Senators as a potential trading partner. Both the Kings and the Red Wings are arguably less viable trading partners. The Kings seem high on Stutzle but may also be considering Byfield, publicly they don't seem particularly interested in trying to make a deal for 1st overall. They also don't have a ton of picks and they likely aren't willing to part with other coveted assets. The Red Wings also lack draft and are somewhat lacking in quality players and prospects that they may be willing to part with, they also have not really made a public claim of trying to get 1st overall and they had rumored interest in Stutzle as a possible number 1 pick prior to the draft lottery.
That leaves the Senators with a ton of picks and a ton of prospects/assets that they are willing to part with that also has expressed a strong interest in Lafreniere. So it makes sense that there would be some rumors around what the Senators are willing to part with but that also means relying on anchoring is an important negotiating tactic because the Rangers would want to control the base price to begin any possible discussions and the Senators would be comfortable scoffing at that anchor because they come to the table with a position of strength.
It will be interesting to see how things play out from here. My guess is we will hear a new rumor relatively soon which could be an anchor from the Sens.
