[article]2nd round picks overrated? In Defence Of Jim Benning Trading Away Picks

[cuporbust]

Interesting article about Bennings willingness to trade picks , and why he's doing it. I really believe he's doing a great job rebuilding this team so far. 

We can see that JIMBenning is taking advantage of an inefficiency in the marketplace to improve the team.

Here’s the facts behind the hubub: the best pick that Benning has traded away to date was #33, this year. According to Scott Cullen’s excellent look at draft picks & future production, #33 is somewhere around a 13% chance of producing a top-6 F, a top-4 D, or a starting goaltender. The pick, historically, has an 84% chance of being a regular 4th liner, 7th defenceman, or spot goalie—or worse. Barely over 1 in 3 players picked at this spot (34%) will play 100 games in the NHL, almost all as replacement-level players. Yet, most GMs are willing to trade away a 3rd liner/4-6 D for a second round pick, when there is an 84% likelihood that the guy they choose in return will be worse than the guy they gave up, to get a chance for that 13%. "You can’t win if you don’t buy a ticket".

Therefore, second-round picks are over-valued.

If you can trade lottery tickets that are highly unlikely to pan out for a proven NHL player with a statistically-proven floor that is higher than the likeliest value of the draft pick, then you are winning the trade. If you can see other marketplace inefficiencies (an over-reliance on statistical models that stats analysts admit do not correctly account for usage and the effect of teammates on the statistical models,

thoughts ?

 

 

[nergish]

Honestly, name the last time we traded away a pick that became a player we desperately wished we had kept?

 

But that's not the isse - we've already seen what Benning can do at the draft podium. His scouting is remarkable. So, even if we give up picks that end up being used on 'nobodies' it still means Jimbo doesn't get to flex his drafting muscles. You know, the one thing that makes him stand out in any capacity as a GM. 

 

But really, for our top young guys, is it better to ship out role model, locker room guys like Hansen, or to a lesser extent Burrows, instead of a 2nd rounder? As a sweetener, it's typically better to use a pick like that over a roster player, especially for a team icing a lot of very young players.

 

Also Gudbranson was exactly what we needed. Not a top D likely, but a solid young player ready to get noticed on a much larger scale. He's a smart guy, he knows this is a huge opportunity for him in a big Canadian market that hasn't had a lot of star Dmen over the years. 

[Dral]

There's more to it then just trading a lotto ticket for a player... if there's no room on a team's roster, they may very well lose a player for nothing (via waivers or free agency)...

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

I don't agree with Scott Cullen on this at all.  Taking a mean to value 2nd round picks is like stabbing one of your eyes out.  Every draft is different.  In a predicted shallow draft, yeah, trade the pick for value.  In a deep draft, you are taking a risk.  Placing a percentage on a specific pick number doesn't seem very intelligent to me.  Each draft needs to be evaluated individually and weighted based on that year's talent.

 

Alexandre Mallet - Overrated

Tyler Tiffoli - Underrated

[Warhippy]

Are 2nd round picks overrated?

We'll never know under Benning.  he keeps trading them 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

I think every year is different. If Jim Benning feels there are a bunch of players after round one that will not make a tremendous impact in the NHL, then it is better to just trade that second round pick. Otherwise, keep it.

 

That second round pick in 2015 for Sven Baertschi was a great deal, so was keeping the second round pick in 2014 and drafting Thatcher Demko.

[TU90]

We all see it as he traded a second round pick.

 

Benning sees it as he traded the player they were going to pick there.

 

So in the Guddy case, he thought that Jared + mystery pick (to us, not him) + 4th rounder was worth it.

 

I trust his judgement.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, nergish said:

But that's not the isse - we've already seen what Benning can do at the draft podium. His scouting is remarkable. So, even if we give up picks that end up being used on 'nobodies' it still means Jimbo doesn't get to flex his drafting muscles. You know, the one thing that makes him stand out in any capacity as a GM. 

Scouting (his strength) includes pro scouting of players he's trading for. It also likely includes scouting the guys we'd be picking in the early 30's and concluding the pro he's scouting/trading for is likely to be better than any of them.

 

 

[Qwags]

I'm just glad we didn't trade the 2015 2nd, or else no Demko.

[cuporbust]

5 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Scouting (his strength) includes pro scouting of players he's trading for. It also likely includes scouting the guys we'd be picking in the early 30's and concluding the pro he's scouting/trading for is likely to be better than any of them.

 

 

Exactly 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

3 minutes ago, Qwags said:

I'm just glad we didn't trade the 2015 2nd, or else no Demko.

Do you mean the 2014 second round draft pick? Thatcher Demko was drafted in 2014. We did trade the 2015 second round draft pick for Sven Baertschi.

[VanGnome]

Here's the thing. Due to a near decade of terrible drafting pre Benning, there was next to nothing left in the cupboards. Benning still has a job to do to make this team as competitive as he can now, in order to try and gain success sooner than later.

 

I don't recall the specific context, but I think it was a Benning quote during the Gudbranson trade talk where he said something to the effect of "Once we get our core group to where we want it, we will be keeping these kinds of picks in the future".

In other words, Benning is trading away a very modest amount of near term future to establish a young, physical and skilled core group in the 23-25 year old range. Once this core has been assembled to his liking, it will be set for the better part of 5+ years. This genesis should be complete by the expansion draft next off season.

 

From that point on, our aging veterans will be gone and off the books (more than likely), and we will be left with a good young core group aged 23-27, at which point Benning can then focus his attention on signing UFA veterans to complement the young core and stockpile his draft picks and prospects to build a pipeline for the future.

 

A couple of 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round picks here and there makes no difference, not even 4-5 years down the road, especially when it significantly improves our team in the here and now, while also remaining young and skilled.

[Guest]

What's the source for the article?

[Bob Long]

This is a good article that puts things in the right perspective. I think people tend to forget that the recent college signings and getting Rodin back here made some picks expendable and allowed the GudBranson deal to happen. I also think Benning will be recovering some picks as well. Picks are good as currency too if the team is improved, which it was imo.

[Katobaron]

21 minutes ago, nergish said:

Honestly, name the last time we traded away a pick that became a player we desperately wished we had kept?

 

But that's not the isse - we've already seen what Benning can do at the draft podium. His scouting is remarkable. So, even if we give up picks that end up being used on 'nobodies' it still means Jimbo doesn't get to flex his drafting muscles. You know, the one thing that makes him stand out in any capacity as a GM. 

 

But really, for our top young guys, is it better to ship out role model, locker room guys like Hansen, or to a lesser extent Burrows, instead of a 2nd rounder? As a sweetener, it's typically better to use a pick like that over a roster player, especially for a team icing a lot of very young players.

 

Also Gudbranson was exactly what we needed. Not a top D likely, but a solid young player ready to get noticed on a much larger scale. He's a smart guy, he knows this is a huge opportunity for him in a big Canadian market that hasn't had a lot of star Dmen over the years. 

Scouting isn't only applied when it comes to picking at a podium. I'm sure players like Baertschi, Vey, Pedan, Etem, Granlund etc were all scouted just like Benning would for any draft pick. If he sees something that makes him believe he's getting a better deal than what's in the second round then it makes sense to pull the trigger.

[spook007]

Don't know, but he has to make the team competitive in order to keep people in the seats..

He's slowly building a team that may be able to play... maybe even a playoff wild card.

He may be good at scouting talent and make good picks, but if the team stays uncompetitive, he probably won't be around to see them blossom...

[-Vintage Canuck-]

3 minutes ago, Captain Woodget said:

What's the source for the article?

It was a comment made by Neil B on Nucks Misconduct.

http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2016/6/1/11832606/why-is-jim-benning-trading-draft-picks#378566499

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

It was a comment made by Neil B on Nucks Misconduct.

http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2016/6/1/11832606/why-is-jim-benning-trading-draft-picks#378566499

I swear VC, you're not human. How could you possibly remember seeing that? 

[coastal1]

28 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Are 2nd round picks overrated?

We'll never know under Benning.  he keeps trading them 

Which only means one thing: JB believes that they are overrated.

[khay]

25 minutes ago, Raymond Luxury Yacht said:

I don't agree with Scott Cullen on this at all.  Taking a mean to value 2nd round picks is like stabbing one of your eyes out.  Every draft is different.  In a predicted shallow draft, yeah, trade the pick for value.  In a deep draft, you are taking a risk.  Placing a percentage on a specific pick number doesn't seem very intelligent to me.  Each draft needs to be evaluated individually and weighted based on that year's talent.

 

Alexandre Mallet - Overrated

Tyler Tiffoli - Underrated

I agree with you. Each draft should be valued differently, some sort of weighted mean, depending on the depth of the draft, would be better. But then, Cullen is a statistician wannabe, not a real one. So I take whatever Cullen says with a grain of salt (the same goes with Yost but Yost at least does a bit more research and tries to put more thoughts into his posts, so I like him slightly more than Cullen). 

 

I agree with the general theme of the original post. Generally speaking, the second round pick is an overvalued currency. It mainly has to do with the fact that, the second round pick gives you a chance to pick what you like from the first round leftover pile. And in a deep draft year, the leftover pile could very well be made up of Duncan Keiths, Shea Webers and Patrice Bergerons. But generally speaking, every draft is different and the leftover pile often does not contain Keiths, Webers, and Bergerons. The value of the 2nd round pick in any given year should be evaluated differently and maybe the OP is correct in saying that it is overvalued this year? Maybe not?

 

One thing that is obvious is that the high 2nd round pick this year is worth a lot to Florida. Maybe there is a player they really like, whom think will be available at 33rd overall? I think JB also thought that it was a high price but one that he was willing to pay to get a defenceman that he liked.