[Hypothetical] We win the McDavid lottery next year...

[EagleShield]

So, say we have another bad season next year, wind up with a high pick and win the lottery...

Buffalo offers 2nd overall, 3rd overall, 13th overall and their 2016 1st for that pick. Do we do the deal?

Hanafin, Eichel, Crouse and a shot at Sean Day for McDavid.

[Warhippy]

Buffalo has a solid stock of centers and possibly Reinhart this year. Not worth it really. I mean it's attractive but they have other items i'd be looking at.

And in 2016 I want Jakob Chychrun.

[PlayStation]

Nope.

Lets look at the 2005 draft. (I dont know any of the other kids you listed very well)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NHL_Entry_Draft

Crosby or

2 - Bobby Ryan

3 - Jack Johnson

13 - A bust

2016 first

Crosbys something special and rare that does not come very often, they are hyping up McDavid as the same.

[TheRussianRocket.]

McDavid is on a different level, I wouldn't. Similarly like how Ekblad is this year, same goes for Connor next year. Those solidified #1 overalls are generational players and it's hard to pull the trigger unless you have another almost guaranteed player besides that first overall player that you can get which is rare and only in very few drafts.

[Langdon Algur]

Nope.

Lets look at the 2005 draft. (I dont know any of the other kids you listed very well)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NHL_Entry_Draft

Crosby or

2 - Bobby Ryan

3 - Jack Johnson

13 - A bust

2016 first

Crosbys something special and rare that does not come very often, they are hyping up McDavid as the same.

Good point, although I think a more realistic expectation for McDavid is John Tavres if you look at the draft (2009) the trade would be

Tavares for

2- Victor Hedman

3- Matt Duchene

13- Zach Kassian

A another 1st round pick

Would you do that trade? As good as Tavres is I likely would.

[shiznak]

I would make that trade, no questions ask.

Even if McDavid is the same type of calibre player as Crosby is (I doubt he will be), he's just one player. Having the 2nd, 3rd and 13th overall picks in next year's draft, plus a two 1st round picks (our's and Buffalo's) in 2016, would make losing the Sedins, Kesler, etc a lot easier.

[PlayStation]

Good point, although I think a more realistic expectation for McDavid is John Tavres if you look at the draft (2009) the trade would be

Tavares for

2- Victor Hedman

3- Matt Duchene

13- Zach Kassian

A another 1st round pick

Would you do that trade? As good as Tavres is I likely would.

Nope I would not make that trade, Tavares cap hits 5.5 million, and he takes up one roster spot.

Hedman 4 mill

Duchene will be 6 mill next year

Kassian 1.5 mill?

At 3 roster spots.

Well caps going up anyways, but 3 roster spots versus 1 to a player who could potentially be more effective than all 3 of them combined... (Given that the hype for McDavid continues to grow and such) then I pick the generational talent.

[Blömqvist]

No. I'll take the generational player, please. We already have some good offensive players coming up in the system. A potential Kesler or Edler trade and this year's first round pick would add even more good young players. What we need is a legit game breaker/superstar, and McDavid has that written all over him.

Gaunce - McDavid - Jensen

Shinkaruk - Horvat - Kassian

Not bad! Speed, skill, size, and two-way ability.

[canucks155]

How would we be worse than Buffalo is the better question...

[Pears]

That would be a really tough decision. I think what we would get in return would be better for us than McDavid IMHO. Another potential top line forward (not on McDavid's level of course), a potential top 2-4 defenceman (don't know too much about Hanafin), another solid draft choice, and a chance at Day or Chychrun in 2016. That sounds really nice.

[The Stork]

How about McDavid for 2015 1st round pick, Hansen and a future 1st round pick

[Lychees]

Really bad hypothetical as I don't see the Canucks being in the trenches of the NHL barring some idiotic trades and mismanagement and injuries all thrown together.

However... depends on whether or not we have the appropriate pieces to go with Connor (IE. Legit secondary scoring to take total pressure off, proper wingmates to play with etc.)

[Cameron88188]

Take McDavid 100%. You can always add pieces later through trade, ufa's or with in house depth / proper development. McDavid is one in a decade type of player. The 2015 draft is deep, however I'm sure the Nucks won't due a proper rebuild and look for a quick fix.

[Baka]

Good point, although I think a more realistic expectation for McDavid is John Tavres if you look at the draft (2009) the trade would be

Tavares for

2- Victor Hedman

3- Matt Duchene

13- Zach Kassian

A another 1st round pick

Would you do that trade? As good as Tavres is I likely would.

Depending on the teams needs and scouting the players can come up differently outside of the order they were actually drafted. You could also say something like Stamkos for Doughty (#2), Pietrangelo (#4), and Karlsson (#15).

Taylor Hall for Seguin (2), Johansen (4), and Gormley (13)

RNH for Landeskog (2), Huberdeau (3), Baertschi (13)

Nail for Murray (2), Galchenyuk (3), Faksa (13)

People are pretty quick to anoint McDavid a sure thing for the next great player while dismissing the rest but you never know. Plenty of players fall off and even if they don't plenty of other players can drafted behind can be damn good. I would be tempted by such an offer myself. If you draft and develop well you can really build up a strong core.

Nope I would not make that trade, Tavares cap hits 5.5 million, and he takes up one roster spot.

Hedman 4 mill

Duchene will be 6 mill next year

Kassian 1.5 mill?

At 3 roster spots.

Well caps going up anyways, but 3 roster spots versus 1 to a player who could potentially be more effective than all 3 of them combined... (Given that the hype for McDavid continues to grow and such) then I pick the generational talent.

The cap hit argument doesn't make sense because none of those players are destined to sign those contracts. Different teams, different players, different scenarios. The Isles had the luck of talking him into a long term contract that exceeded the production he was giving at the time but when he developed he exceeded that easily. If that doesn't happen he bends them over for 9+ million a year ether this year, last year, or next year. Or maybe the other players get locked into better contracts before they can cash in.

[PlayStation]

Depending on the teams needs and scouting the players can come up differently outside of the order they were actually drafted. You could also say something like Stamkos for Doughty (#2), Pietrangelo (#4), and Karlsson (#15).

Taylor Hall for Seguin (2), Johansen (4), and Gormley (13)

RNH for Landeskog (2), Huberdeau (3), Baertschi (13)

Nail for Murray (2), Galchenyuk (3), Faksa (13)

People are pretty quick to anoint McDavid a sure thing for the next great player while dismissing the rest but you never know. Plenty of players fall off and even if they don't plenty of other players can drafted behind can be damn good. I would be tempted by such an offer myself. If you draft and develop well you can really build up a strong core.

The cap hit argument doesn't make sense because none of those players are destined to sign those contracts. Different teams, different players, different scenarios. The Isles had the luck of talking him into a long term contract that exceeded the production he was giving at the time but when he developed he exceeded that easily. If that doesn't happen he bends them over for 9+ million a year ether this year, last year, or next year. Or maybe the other players get locked into better contracts before they can cash in.

Well it still matters how much they make, as that one generational player may cost less than the 3 others combined, yet do as much as if not more than them as well. With roster spots comes salaries. Your plays may not pan out, but thats still something to consider in decisions (at least for myself it would be).

Also going off the board and looking at picks other than 2, 3, and 13 in the past sort of ruins it since you dont know what the players will turn out to be. You are going to get busts, and players who dont live up to expectation, and that is a risk you take by making that trade, so Johansen, Pietroangelo, and Karlsson shouldnt even be mentioned. Sure certain teams have different needs, but for this purpose I think it ruins it.

[JE14]

I take the generational player ten times out of ten. Look at Crosby and Tavares. They make other players better and that's what McDavid does. Also he has sick chemistry with Fox. Having McDavid would allow the Canucks to put a player like Fox into a top six position (somewhere he doesn't belong) to play with McDavid.

[R3aL]

Nope I would not make that trade, Tavares cap hits 5.5 million, and he takes up one roster spot.

Hedman 4 mill

Duchene will be 6 mill next year

Kassian 1.5 mill?

At 3 roster spots.

Well caps going up anyways, but 3 roster spots versus 1 to a player who could potentially be more effective than all 3 of them combined... (Given that the hype for McDavid continues to grow and such) then I pick the generational talent.

Ya but its more players and of course its more roster spots , it is a team sport is it not?

I would do that trade in hindsight, Duchene is a superstar still getting better every year, Kassian is on the verge of taking the next step, Hedmen had an amazing year, has shown he will be the guy in tbay in their future,

I would take an elite top line talent capable of 90+ pts in the future, a 40+ point dman who can equally shut top players down as he can score and QB the PP, a developing PWF with raw tools and a likley high future all for a 75+ point sniper who is capable fo 100 pt season in his future.

I would do that trade without hesitating. Duchene could even end up being better or having a better career then tavares, it is possible, and he in a better environment to succeed because of other roster spots filled by other players

[R3aL]

I would take ELITE quantity over 1 generational talent any day, depth, leadership and heart are what wins championships

[Azzy Mahmood]

Good point, although I think a more realistic expectation for McDavid is John Tavres if you look at the draft (2009) the trade would be

Tavares for

2- Victor Hedman

3- Matt Duchene

13- Zach Kassian

A another 1st round pick

Would you do that trade? As good as Tavres is I likely would.

The drop from Tavares to Duchene isn't that great. 20-25pts a season. Add in Hedman, a top D man now, and Kassian, a blossoming PWF, plus the additional 1st rounder, that's a no-hesitation YES to that particular example.

I'd probably do the deal. I hear a lot more bandwagon stuff about McDavid than actual reports on his talent. I don't see him as Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin/Tavares level.

[Baka]

Well it still matters how much they make, as that one generational player may cost less than the 3 others combined, yet do as much as if not more than them as well. With roster spots comes salaries. Your plays may not pan out, but thats still something to consider in decisions (at least for myself it would be).

Also going off the board and looking at picks other than 2, 3, and 13 in the past sort of ruins it since you dont know what the players will turn out to be. You are going to get busts, and players who dont live up to expectation, and that is a risk you take by making that trade, so Johansen, Pietroangelo, and Karlsson shouldnt even be mentioned. Sure certain teams have different needs, but for this purpose I think it ruins it.

Yes, salary matters but what I am saying is in this scenario it shouldn't be relevant because predicting a players salary is as hard to do as predicting a players potential. For example could you tell me how much McDavid will make when he gets extended? Or the #2, #3, and #13 picks? Yes, Tavares has an amazing contract but at draft day you have no way of knowing you could lock him in that deal. That is why I am saying it doesn't make sense.

As far as generational talents go though I think you are overrating it. Team depth and a range of stars has more of an effect. Sidney Crosby is the best player in the NHL and probably the best generational talent we will see in this era. Some could even say the Penguins have 2 generational talents. While they did get one cup this has been a team built on underachieving. They have a strong team with a few areas that can be exploited as bad as any other teams flaws. Because of this a few teams manage to dominate them and come playoffs this has now developed into a regular occurrence.

Look at Ovechkin in Washington, never won more than 1 round in the playoffs in his entire career and despite another amazing season of goal scoring his team is prone to miss the playoffs. The Islanders are still struggling to build a playoff team around Tavares. Tampa is still trying to establish a legit contender with Stamkos.

Generational talents are great to have but it's still a team sport and if you can get your hands on a few star players it makes your team better than just having the one.

As far as my references go it was showing the realistic possible returns. I am not saying a team will always pick 3 studs but draft boards are not the same for every team. Just because a player goes 2nd or 3rd or 13th does not mean every NHL team would make the same selection as many teams rank the players differently based on their own scouting. Even team need is not always relevant. Some teams openly admit to just taking the player they deem best on the board no matter what the position. Players like Johansen, Pietroangelo, and Karlsson are relevant because they were taken 1-2 spots after the mentioned picks and some teams would have this players higher ranked on their draft boards than the selected players.

The point being you give up what scouts consider a sure star player for the shot of getting up to 3 star players in return. Even if you don't get 3 and just get 2 its a win in my book or even 1 star and 2 strong core players. I take depth in high end talent over individual star top tier talent any day.

Success of prospects and drafting also often varies by teams. Many teams do a much better job of it than other teams. It comes off as more than just luck in most cases.