Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Provost

True Value of our 1st Round Pick

6 posts in this topic

I posted the 2009 version of this story, but it has been updated.

This shows you the historical perspective on how first round picks turn out. Once you get out of the first few picks, you are really just gambling.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=455673

For those of you who don't understand math and just point out the crazy exceptions where someone in the 7th round becomes a top line player... well there isn't really anything to say to convince you. Your chance of getting an elite player beyond the lottery picks is getting low.

At #6, we have a less than 50% chance of getting a player who would play in the top half of our lineup.

Amusingly it points out Cody Hodgson as one of the best #10 picks in the past 20 years (for some reason #10 has been snakebitten and been really unlucky)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So With our 6th we have a 70% chance of a player that will play 100+ games. an almost 50/50 chance he will be a stud.

With Hunter we have a 60% chance he will play 100+ games and a solid chance in a deep draft he will be a solid talent.

With Horvat an 85% chance to be a 100+ game player and a solid chance in such a deep draft to be a top 6 player.

Screw trading these guys to move up. It's a team game won on depth not individuals.

This also doesn't take in to account development programs which we now have which only increase those odds. GMMG might have actually struck gold last year for once. Let's see where they go.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So With our 6th we have a 70% chance of a player that will play 100+ games. an almost 50/50 chance he will be a stud.

With Hunter we have a 60% chance he will play 100+ games and a solid chance in a deep draft he will be a solid talent.

With Horvat an 85% chance to be a 100+ game player and a solid chance in such a deep draft to be a top 6 player.

Screw trading these guys to move up. It's a team game won on depth not individuals.

This also doesn't take in to account development programs which we now have which only increase those odds. GMMG might have actually struck gold last year for once. Let's see where they go.

I'd actually be down to move Hunter (NOT Horvat though) if we can get another winger like Emerson Etem, who's actually further on the development trajectory, having played in the NHL already and boasts a similar shot and speed.

Let's say it's Etem, Rakell and preferably the 10th for Kes + low pick/ prospect (take 24th if that's the best we can get).

Then we trade Tanev's R.F.A. rights, Shinkaruk and our 6th for the 1st.

We'd get: Reinhart, Rakell, Etem, whoever's at 10th (24th)

We'd give: Kesler, Tanev, Shinkaruk, 6th, low prospect.

I'd say that's not too far off if we're building for the future since we'd get 3 guys who are nearly NHL ready (the Ducks wanted to dress Rakell as their 2nd line center if they can't get one of the stars available, Reinhart's supposedly NHL ready and Etem's been there and can replace Shinkaruk); losing Tanev sucks but if Corrado's ready I'd readily do that deal. We might actually be more prepared to move forward after a fell swoop like this, since we'd be stocked with young talent.

Burr - Hank - Jensen

Daniel - Rakell/ Reinhart - Kassian

Etem - Horvat - Higgins

Richardson - Matthias - Hansen

Hamhuis - Bieksa

Garrison - Stanton

Edler - Corrado

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd actually be down to move Hunter (NOT Horvat though) if we can get another winger like Emerson Etem, who's actually further on the development trajectory, having played in the NHL already and boasts a similar shot and speed.

Let's say it's Etem, Rakell and preferably the 10th for Kes + low pick/ prospect (take 24th if that's the best we can get).

Then we trade Tanev's R.F.A. rights, Shinkaruk and our 6th for the 1st.

We'd get: Reinhart, Rakell, Etem, whoever's at 10th (24th)

We'd give: Kesler, Tanev, Shinkaruk, 6th, low prospect.

I'd say that's not too far off if we're building for the future since we'd get 3 guys who are nearly NHL ready (the Ducks wanted to dress Rakell as their 2nd line center if they can't get one of the stars available, Reinhart's supposedly NHL ready and Etem's been there and can replace Shinkaruk); losing Tanev sucks but if Corrado's ready I'd readily do that deal. We might actually be more prepared to move forward after a fell swoop like this, since we'd be stocked with young talent.

Burr - Hank - Jensen

Daniel - Rakell/ Reinhart - Kassian

Etem - Horvat - Higgins

Richardson - Matthias - Hansen

Hamhuis - Bieksa

Garrison - Stanton

Edler - Corrado

See now THAT is feasible.

But JUST doing that trade for 1st is...just so not worth it

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'd get: Reinhart, Rakell, Etem, whoever's at 10th (24th)

We'd give: Kesler, Tanev, Shinkaruk, 6th, low prospect.

That's awful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is still the issue of value. Tanev + Shinkaruk + whoever we get at #6 is still worth more than Reinhart alone, who it must be reiterated has not played a single NHL game. People here are willing to take much less for Kesler, who's a PROVEN NHL star.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.