Confirmed Trade: [ANA/DAL] Patrick Eaves for conditional 2017 2nd round pick

[CanadienShark]

Ducks do well on this. I figured Dallas would be able to pull a 1st for him, with the year he's having. Maybe they'd have to add slightly, but still.

EDIT: Saw the conditions. Seems fair.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Jim Nill didn't get enough for Eaves. He should've been able to get a prospect in the deal. Reports had 10-12 teams interested in Eaves. While I like the condition that could turn this into a 1st rounder, Dallas essentially just traded their top goal scorer for what will most likely be a 2nd round pick 6-10 spots ahead of where Carolina picks for Ron Hainsey. I'm not even saying the prospect should've been a top prospect. A young, recently drafted, lottery ticket type of prospect would've worked. Jim Nill dropped the ball. 0 for 1 at this year's trade deadline.

Meh.

Patrick Eaves has had a career year after seeing plenty of time on the powerplay with some very talented linemates, and is still likely heading to free agency. Doubt the Stars were going to protect him for the expansion draft, so they could have lost him to Vegas, if not free agency afterwards.

Of course, Eaves could just as well re-sign with Dallas in July, and the Stars gain a draft pick for essentially nothing. I'd take that over a middling prospect who may very well turn out inferior to whoever this 1st or 2nd rounder ends up becoming.

 

[Ragernschnapple]

And yet, not one of them offered more. Hmmm. Sometimes, if you wait until the music stops, you find yourself without a chair.

Maybe Nill just liked the potential 1st rounder over any prospects being offered. While you're right that it's risky to wait, I think he could've worked a better deal. I was thinking 2nd and a prospect from the jump.

 

[Mr Misty]

So you don't compare it to the Hainsey deal?

I don't look at Hainsey as some new thing, it's the established price and reaffirms the principle that Defenseman > Forward. Dallas has a good example from last year with a similar conditional pick plus Jokipakka plus Pollock for Russell. Really awful defensemen like Polak and Hainsey get a 2nd almost every deadline, and the best 5-6 forwards on expiring deals get just a little more than that.

 

[Ragernschnapple]

I don't look at Hainsey as some new thing, it's the established price and reaffirms the principle that Defenseman > Forward. Dallas has a good example from last year with a similar conditional pick plus Jokipakka plus Pollock for Russell. Really awful defensemen like Polak and Hainsey get a 2nd almost every deadline, and the best 5-6 forwards on expiring deals get just a little more than that.

Jiri Hudler for a 2nd & a 4th
Lee Stempniak same

Hard to say Eaves wasn't at least worth that

 

[Mr Misty]

Jiri Hudler for a 2nd & a 4th
Lee Stempniak same

Hard to say Eaves wasn't at least worth that

Would you rather have a 4th or a chance at a 1st? I don't think there's a right or wrong answer there, but I'm not certain that a conditional 2nd is worth less than a 2nd and a 4th. And if it is worth less, you seem to be overly excited about missing out on a low value pick. This is a molehill and not a mountain.

 

[crowi]

I don't mind the trade - just hope Eaves can stay healthy..

 

[Ragernschnapple]

Would you rather have a 4th or a chance at a 1st? I don't think there's a right or wrong answer there, but I'm not certain that a conditional 2nd is worth less than a 2nd and a 4th. And if it is worth less, you seem to be overly excited about missing out on a low value pick. This is a molehill and not a mountain.

I'm sure you know Jamie Benn and John Klingberg were 5th round picks. A 4th round pick has value. I consider 6th's & 7th's low value picks. I personally would rather have the 4th, but I'd rather have what Dallas received and a young prospect. I think that was obtainable. It's not making mountains out of molehills, it about getting full value for your assets. Now I'm worried all Nill will get for Sharp is a 3rd, and a 5th for Oduya.

 

[Mr Misty]

I'm sure you know Jamie Benn and John Klingberg were 5th round picks. A 4th round pick has value. I consider 6th's & 7th's low value picks. I personally would rather have the 4th, but I'd rather have what Dallas received and a young prospect. I think that was obtainable. It's not making mountains out of molehills, it about getting full value for your assets. Now I'm worried all Nill will get for Sharp is a 3rd, and a 5th for Oduya.

2010 is in its 7th year. 2 4th rounders have more than 82 games in the NHL and 5 more have made more than 5 appearances. It's a rounding error.

 

[Ragernschnapple]

2010 is in its 7th year. 2 4th rounders have more than 82 games in the NHL and 5 more have made more than 5 appearances. It's a rounding error.

Who are Colton Sceviour and Jamie Wright? What do I win? Now do it with 5th Rounders. Still need to get full value when making trades. Just compare it to the Erik Cole trade. It's a W if it's Eaves for a 1st round pick. It's a W if you had told me Eaves would get Dallas a 2nd round pick at the TDL before this season started. It's just not a W right now if it's just a 2nd.

 

[WhatWhat]

I'm sure you know Jamie Benn and John Klingberg were 5th round picks. A 4th round pick has value. I consider 6th's & 7th's low value picks. I personally would rather have the 4th, but I'd rather have what Dallas received and a young prospect. I think that was obtainable. It's not making mountains out of molehills, it about getting full value for your assets. Now I'm worried all Nill will get for Sharp is a 3rd, and a 5th for Oduya.

and for every Benn and Kling there are hundreds of no names that dont make it. 4ths dont have that high of value

 

[The GM]

I'm sure you know Jamie Benn and John Klingberg were 5th round picks. A 4th round pick has value. I consider 6th's & 7th's low value picks. I personally would rather have the 4th, but I'd rather have what Dallas received and a young prospect. I think that was obtainable. It's not making mountains out of molehills, it about getting full value for your assets. Now I'm worried all Nill will get for Sharp is a 3rd, and a 5th for Oduya.

I disagree about the 6 and 7 round picks having low value because Detroit drafted datsuyk and zetterberg in the 6 and 7 rounds.

 

[Mr Misty]

I disagree about the 6 and 7 round picks having low value because Detroit drafted datsuyk and zetterberg in the 6 and 7 rounds.

2010 Draft: 1 good player from the 6th and 1 good player from the 7th. 60 picks gives 7 players with >10 NHL games after 7 years. This is what low value means.

 

[Rec T]

Late to the party but I like it for both teams. Conditions seem quite fair too. Dallas can get the first but only if Eaves is productive for the Ducks (assuming that the Ducks just don't healthy scratch him in the playoffs for a few games to keep him under 50%...)

 

[Sojourn]

2010 Draft: 1 good player from the 6th and 1 good player from the 7th. 60 picks gives 7 players with >10 NHL games after 7 years. This is what low value means.

I could be wrong, but I think the poster you were responding to was going for irony with that statement. Ragerschnapple was saying a 4th round pick has value, and used Benn and Klingberg as an example. GM just took that and went a step further, using a more extreme example.

Really, a 4th round pick doesn't have much in the way of value. It's loose change. You don't necessarily want to just throw it away, but it isn't valuable either. The question is, do you value it higher or lower than a chance at a 1st round pick. Personally, I'd value a 4th round pick lower, if you have even a 10% chance of getting the 1st round pick.

Gems can be found in any round, and often it comes down to just being lucky.

 

[Ragernschnapple]

and for every Benn and Kling there are hundreds of no names that dont make it. 4ths dont have that high of value

We could debate draft pick values all night. The point is, IMO, a 1st round pick for Eaves is an overpay, a 2nd round pick is an underpay, and a 2nd + a prospect or another draft pick was what I expected. Hopefully it turns out to be a 1st. GO DUCKS!

Before Sharp and Oduya are traded, what do you think is the least Dallas fans should expect in return for each? Same question for you Mr. Misty.

I've Got
Sharp for a 3rd + a prospect

Oduya(If healthy) for a 2nd

Salary retained on both if needed

 

[Sojourn]

Late to the party but I like it for both teams. Conditions seem quite fair too. Dallas can get the first but only if Eaves is productive for the Ducks (assuming that the Ducks just don't healthy scratch him in the playoffs for a few games to keep him under 50%...)

They wouldn't. If Anaheim thinks Eaves makes them a better team, and that's a good bet since they just traded for him, they'll keep him in the line-up because the wins are more important than a potential 1st round pick in a meh draft.

 

[Ragernschnapple]

I could be wrong, but I think the poster you were responding to was going for irony with that statement. Ragerschnapple was saying a 4th round pick has value, and used Benn and Klingberg as an example. GM just took that and went a step further, using a more extreme example.

Really, a 4th round pick doesn't have much in the way of value. It's loose change. You don't necessarily want to just throw it away, but it isn't valuable either. The question is, do you value it higher or lower than a chance at a 1st round pick. Personally, I'd value a 4th round pick lower, if you have even a 10% chance of getting the 1st round pick.

Gems can be found in any round, and often it comes down to just being lucky.

http://www.tsn.ca/playing-the-percentages-in-the-nhl-draft-1.206144

 

[Sojourn]

http://www.tsn.ca/playing-the-percentages-in-the-nhl-draft-1.206144

You just showed that the difference between the 4th round and the 6th round is pretty small, while the 1st round is, by far, the best place to find an NHL player. After the 3rd round it's a crapshoot, and the drop off after the 1st round is not small. This isn't news.

Edit: and if you're arguing for the package stats, the numbers suggest about 55% for a 2+4 combo, vs. just a 45% chance with just a 2nd round pick. So that's not bad, but it still doesn't factor in the 80% chance if it turns into a 1st round pick, and that doesn't factor in the chances that a 1st round pick turns into more than just a marginal NHL'er.

 

[Ragernschnapple]

You just showed that the difference between the 4th round and the 6th round is pretty small, while the 1st round is, by far, the best place to find an NHL player. After the 3rd round it's a crapshoot, and the drop off after the 1st round is not small. This isn't news.

Edit: and if you're arguing for the package stats, the numbers suggest about 55% for a 2+4 combo, vs. just a 45% chance with just a 2nd round pick. So that's not bad, but it still doesn't factor in the 80% chance if it turns into a 1st round pick, and that doesn't factor in the chances that a 1st round pick turns into more than just a marginal NHL'er.

I'm not arguing anything. A good argument could be made for both sides. I'm just providing some statistics. There is no right answer. To figure one out you'd have to come up with a formula that predicts the odds of Anaheim making the conference finals, with an injury-prone Patrick Eaves playing in 50 percent of the games. Good luck to you.

 

[The GM]

I could be wrong, but I think the poster you were responding to was going for irony with that statement. Ragerschnapple was saying a 4th round pick has value, and used Benn and Klingberg as an example. GM just took that and went a step further, using a more extreme example.

Really, a 4th round pick doesn't have much in the way of value. It's loose change. You don't necessarily want to just throw it away, but it isn't valuable either. The question is, do you value it higher or lower than a chance at a 1st round pick. Personally, I'd value a 4th round pick lower, if you have even a 10% chance of getting the 1st round pick.

Gems can be found in any round, and often it comes down to just being lucky.

Correct - I was just having a little fun.

 

[Slush]

I think Anaheim won this trade since they didn't have to give up any young prospects especially young D.

 

[Vipers31]

I think Anaheim won this trade since they didn't have to give up any young prospects especially young D.

As a Ducks fan who has no strong feelings about this trade one way or another, that's a weird reason to declare us winners. Surely nobody could ever expect one of the Ducks' good young prospects or defenders to be on the table for a rental, let alone Patrick Eaves.

I think Dallas did quite well, value-wise. Probably win-win, but the Ducks assume a fair bit of risk of Eaves not translating the offensive output that got his value to this level.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

As a Ducks fan who has no strong feelings about this trade one way or another, that's a weird reason to declare us winners. Surely nobody could ever expect one of the Ducks' good young prospects or defenders to be on the table for a rental, let alone Patrick Eaves.

I think Dallas did quite well, value-wise. Probably win-win, but the Ducks assume a fair bit of risk of Eaves not translating the offensive output that got his value to this level.

If the Ducks slot him in an offensive role, Anaheim fans will like the deal.

If not...it will be ugly.

 

[Unholy]

If the Ducks slot him in an offensive role, Anaheim fans will like the deal.

If not...it will be ugly.

He'll play with either Getzlaf or Rakell so pretty good chances there. Powerplay I'm not so sure yet. Perry only has 3 on the PP so he should get bumped down but it's RC so..