'NucK™ Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 19 hours ago, The Lock said: And this is exactly what I mean. We overvalue our top prospects and think they are worth more than #1 or #2, even if they aren't. This is the bias we have because it's our player. Automatically, people on this forum think "NYR would take Pettersson for the #2 in a heartbeat" and then ignore who that #2 potentially is. Needless to say, I maintain my stance. Has nothing to do with being our player or not... we're talking about a guy here who is #1 on every single redraft for his draft year. Obviously, any team would take a guy who has proven he deserved to be a #1 pick, over an unknown #2 pick.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, 'NucK™ said: Has nothing to do with being our player or not... we're talking about a guy here who is #1 on every single redraft for his draft year. Obviously, any team would take a guy who has proven he deserved to be a #1 pick, over an unknown #2 pick.. Except each draft is not equal. This year's draft is considered to be better overall than Pettersson's draft class. Plus, once again, that 2nd overall pick means you can pick ANYONE you want that's not the 1st overall. It's not just one player vs another player and you seem to want to ignore than element of choice which is extremely valuable. It's why draft picks are often so coveted in the first place. Also, once again, we are the ones trying to get that pick which means it will take more than just a 1 for 1 swap. We would be at the disadvantage. So no, it's not obvious and yes, this evidently has everything to do with Pettersson being our guy. I'm not saying every team wouldn't want him. I'm saying that 2nd overall draft pick has more value than him as any team that has that pick is at an advantage in the trade negotiaions. It's their pick to lose and not the other way around. Edited April 26, 2019 by The Lock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 I would not trade Pete for the first pick. Draft picks, no matter how high, are an educated guess/gamble, where Pete has played a year and has shown his ability. Even if the first was Mario, I'd have to think about the trade. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 33 minutes ago, The Lock said: Except each draft is not equal. This year's draft is considered to be better overall than Pettersson's draft class. Plus, once again, that 2nd overall pick means you can pick ANYONE you want that's not the 1st overall. It's not just one player vs another player and you seem to want to ignore than element of choice which is extremely valuable. It's why draft picks are often so coveted in the first place. Also, once again, we are the ones trying to get that pick which means it will take more than just a 1 for 1 swap. We would be at the disadvantage. So no, it's not obvious and yes, this evidently has everything to do with Pettersson being our guy. I'm not saying every team wouldn't want him. I'm saying that 2nd overall draft pick has more value than him as any team that has that pick is at an advantage in the trade negotiaions. It's their pick to lose and not the other way around. The element of choice only appears valuable because every GM will think they are making the best selection. More often than not, that isn't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 13 hours ago, richado said: I can give you some Kak 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 4 hours ago, 'NucK™ said: The element of choice only appears valuable because every GM will think they are making the best selection. More often than not, that isn't the case. That doesn't change the value of the pick though. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 1 minute ago, The Lock said: That doesn't change the value of the pick though. lol Uh.. it's the reason that I "seem to want to ignore than element of choice which is extremely valuable". It really isn't.. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 (edited) You haven't said anything though that changes that. Just because a GM might not pick right doesn't mean that ability to choose whoever he wants doesn't up that value. It absolutely does up the value. Edited April 26, 2019 by The Lock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 13 minutes ago, The Lock said: You haven't said anything though that changes that. Just because a GM might not pick right doesn't mean that ability to choose whoever he wants doesn't up that value. It absolutely does up the value. the element of choice is only relevant and valuable if there are multiple seemingly equivalent options available. there is no choice at #2. all 31 teams would pick whichever of hughes or kakko isn't taken at #1. the #2 pick is for all intents and purposes a known commodity, not a blank cheque. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 12 minutes ago, tas said: the element of choice is only relevant and valuable if there are multiple seemingly equivalent options available. there is no choice at #2. all 31 teams would pick whichever of hughes or kakko isn't taken at #1. the #2 pick is for all intents and purposes a known commodity, not a blank cheque. Again, we don't know that for certain. There's the chance that all 31 teams would pick either Hughes or Kakko, but past drafts have shown all of that goes out the window come draft. Otherwise, why was Zadina picked 6th overall? Or Puljijarvi dropping to 4th? Fowler to 12th? To say there's no choice at #2 isn't true at all as, as Nuck said earlier, GMs are not always of the same mind as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 21 minutes ago, The Lock said: Again, we don't know that for certain. There's the chance that all 31 teams would pick either Hughes or Kakko, but past drafts have shown all of that goes out the window come draft. Otherwise, why was Zadina picked 6th overall? Or Puljijarvi dropping to 4th? Fowler to 12th? To say there's no choice at #2 isn't true at all as, as Nuck said earlier, GMs are not always of the same mind as everyone else. you're grasping, man. every draft is unique, and in this draft, hughes and kakko won't drop past #2. none of your past examples relate to a player who was the consensus #1 overall pick for literally years, or the player that made a fierce challenge to try to knock him off that mantle. got any examples like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 4 minutes ago, tas said: you're grasping, man. every draft is unique, and in this draft, hughes and kakko won't drop past #2. none of your past examples relate to a player who was the consensus #1 overall pick for literally years, or the player that made a fierce challenge to try to knock him off that mantle. got any examples like that? Hughes is clearly first. The kid is amazing. Byram could move up to two. Kakko rhymes with crappo. I could see him dropping. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, tas said: you're grasping, man. every draft is unique, and in this draft, hughes and kakko won't drop past #2. none of your past examples relate to a player who was the consensus #1 overall pick for literally years, or the player that made a fierce challenge to try to knock him off that mantle. got any examples like that? The thing is, you have to put yourself in that person's shoes who has the #2 slot. He has the negotiating power. Do you think he is going to consider the value of the pick to be without the ability to choose who he wants? It would literally be shooting himself in the foot if he did that. Remember. He is going to try and get whatever he can for that pick if he is even willing to trade that pick. It doesn't matter who people really pick in these drafts. That ability to choose is part of the selling point. You can't think just in terms of hockey in this. You have to think like a businessman as these are business transactions we are talking about. This isn't a "matter of fact" ordeal when we start talking about negotiations, which is also why 90% of the proposals in trade talks are not ideal for 1 or both teams. At the end of the day, it's a business and you have to think like that if you want to get anywhere. Yet, here we are talking about us getting the #2 overall pick as if it's a EA game and somehow about value for value because who cares what the other GM wants. It's all about us! Edited April 27, 2019 by The Lock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 9 minutes ago, The Lock said: The thing is, you have to put yourself in that person's shoes who has the #2 slot. He has the negotiating power. Do you think he is going to consider the value of the pick to be without the ability to choose who he wants? It would literally be shooting himself in the foot if he did that. Remember. He is going to try and get whatever he can for that pick if he is even willing to trade that pick. It doesn't matter who people really pick in these drafts. That ability to choose is part of the selling point. You can't think just in terms of hockey in this. You have to think like a businessman as these are business transactions we are talking about. This isn't a "matter of fact" ordeal when we start talking about negotiations, which is also why 90% of the proposals in trade talks are not ideal for 1 or both teams. At the end of the day, it's a business and you have to think like that if you want to get anywhere. Yet, here we are talking about us getting the #2 overall pick as if it's a EA game and somehow about value for value because who cares what the other GM wants. It's all about us! what you're saying certainly applies, in certain situations -- trades early in the season, when there's still uncertainty about the draft order; cases where the pick falls in a grouping of players where nobody particularly stands out; later in the draft when there's far less consensus when it comes to scouting; cases where a team has a strong enough read on a player and they're worried someone else is going to poach him -- but not in this one. hughes and kakko are a level above everyone else available and everyone knows it and everyone agrees. you're making a hypothetical argument about a tangible, specific topic. the logic is sound on paper, but it's still wrong. for the record, I'm not saying one way or the other whether pettersson is less than, equal to, or greater than the 2nd overall pick. all I'm saying is that it wouldn't be a trade for A 2nd overall pick, it would be a trade for THE 2nd overall pick, in 2019, which will effectively be made by default, no decision necessary. thus, the element of "choice," in this instance, adds no tangible value to the pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Blough Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 There's virtually no question that if Benning offered up Pettersen straight across for this year's #2 pick, that the deal would be done instantly. It's not much of a reach to presume that every GM in the league would regard Pettersen as more valuable than the #2 pick. As was said, he's played a year in the NHL and is an already highly regarded, as close to sure fire elite player at the NHL level as you can get. It's pretty obvious to see with his skill, IQ, vision, character and work ethic. Every hockey pundit across the league universally agrees on this. He will almost certainly be winning the Calder this year. I would argue Shero would also do that trade for the #1 straight up. It has nothing to do with us as fans overvaluing Pettersen as a Canuck. That is Pettersen's value across the league. It doesn't matter if you have choices with the pick. There is no player in this years draft that will clearly be as good, let alone better, than Pettersen. I'm not saying it's not possible Hughes or Kakko, or even another prospect will end up being a better player in the long run, but it sure would be a gamble at this point to speculate on that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheJudge Posted April 28, 2019 Share Posted April 28, 2019 On 4/26/2019 at 5:52 PM, Joe Blough said: There's virtually no question that if Benning offered up Pettersen straight across for this year's #2 pick, that the deal would be done instantly. It's not much of a reach to presume that every GM in the league would regard Pettersen as more valuable than the #2 pick. As was said, he's played a year in the NHL and is an already highly regarded, as close to sure fire elite player at the NHL level as you can get. It's pretty obvious to see with his skill, IQ, vision, character and work ethic. Every hockey pundit across the league universally agrees on this. He will almost certainly be winning the Calder this year. I would argue Shero would also do that trade for the #1 straight up. It has nothing to do with us as fans overvaluing Pettersen as a Canuck. That is Pettersen's value across the league. It doesn't matter if you have choices with the pick. There is no player in this years draft that will clearly be as good, let alone better, than Pettersen. I'm not saying it's not possible Hughes or Kakko, or even another prospect will end up being a better player in the long run, but it sure would be a gamble at this point to speculate on that. Interesting but next years #1 is supposed to be much better, the kid they have been talking about for two years now, that Alex kid. That is the pick to package Horvat for, the pick and prospect (s), Horvat even at 24 is starting to age out of the new NHL.By the time this team has enough good players he will be much older. So get more for a proven talent right now, maybe two firsts the 2020 and 2021. There is no deal that cannot be done. The cap should not be an issue for another 6 years, both Boeser and Pettersson are RFA's and while good, the long term big money deals should be around the age of 25/26. Ni ether is McDavid or Mathews. So use the capspace available to buy a pick, the Rangers are a team that sells out and they need winners now not projects. Make an offer for the #2 and take Kakko, Canucks 1rst, Tanev, retain 1/2, Sutter retain 1/2 and Gadovitch/Juolevi to get good faster now and have enough players in the right age levels over paying is a requirement. If all those were traded what would be the difference, most aren't playing a season a year or at all. To have a player for Pettersson to play with free's up Boeser to go back with Horvat then the team only needs one more star forward in the 20 year old age group. Make the phone call, but for the #2 pick and try to keep the team's #1, offer all but Virtanen, Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes (this year) and Tryamkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vannuck59 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 Horvat, Virtanen, Juolevi for # 1 Jack Hughes. final offer. We Draft Hughes and Broberg # 1 and #10. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now