Fallschirmyager
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2009
- 5,481
- 866
I'm guessing Bura better know when Wilson is arriving in the corners or his season could be rather short.
GMBM held weaker positions Varlamov, Grubauer, Orpik, and Burakovsky in that they had to move those specific guys and got great returns, with Mojo they needed cap space and he was the best choice but they could have made a different move or played hardball with Kuzy or let Oshie go. So when you or anyone declares an immediate trade winner when you have all the subsequent information you've introduced bias. It's like with the Wilson deal the hockey media thought it was a joke but a year later it's a great deal, so what was the upside of Yahoo or ESPN mocking it?The "why was it so urgent" was rhetorical. I fully understand the history of the contracts and cap situation at the time. I posted on this subject at the time as well.
The point I was making is that GMBM sacrificed his trade leverage in the Johansson deal by painting himself into a salary cap corner, and that getting an almost identical return for a lesser player highlights that.
Agree to disagree. I think a pick in a vacuum is just a number. It's what you do with it that matters. Not knowing that Kempny would be available is irrelevant. Either they trade the pick for someone else or they use it at the draft and those players become the return on the original trade.This is ridiculous, though. You have no idea that Kempny is going to be available for trade for a 3rd rounder at the time of the Johansson trade. Heck, they don't even know where in the 2012 1st round that Colorado's pick is going to fall at the time of the Varlamov trade (June 2011), let alone that Filip Forsberg would slide to them at 11.
Trades are evaluated with the information you have in the present. Using hindsight about future usage of assets is not a good way to evaluate them. Using hindsight to grade professional scouting is fine to an extent (barring things like unsuspected injuries), since its the scout's job to assess what players will do in the future. But it's nobody's job to be a telepath and determine what a draft pick is going to be traded for in 9 months time.
*Both their seasons could be very shortI'm guessing Bura better know when Wilson is arriving in the corners or his season could be rather short.
If you count the picks you’ve got to count how the players and team does, so like Dale Hunter for a 1st is fine, for Sakic is awful, but then Quebec is so bad they remove hockey from the province and the Caps immediately win their 1st series and make the playoffs every year with Hunter so who won it?Agree to disagree. I think a pick in a vacuum is just a number. It's what you do with it that matters. Not knowing that Kempny would be available is irrelevant. Either they trade the pick for someone else or they use it at the draft and those players become the return on the original trade.
Agree to disagree. I think a pick in a vacuum is just a number. It's what you do with it that matters. Not knowing that Kempny would be available is irrelevant. Either they trade the pick for someone else or they use it at the draft and those players become the return on the original trade.
I can't even follow this.If you count the picks you’ve got to count how the players and team does, so like Dale Hunter for a 1st is fine, for Sakic is awful, but then Quebec is so bad they remove hockey from the province and the Caps immediately win their 1st series and make the playoffs every year with Hunter so who won it?
Jurcina for Broadie isn't something to be proud of IMO. But I also guess you don't know what agree to disagree means.So you think trading a 4th round pick for Milan Jurcina was one of the worst trades in Capitals history, because that pick eventually was used to pick TJ Brodie?
edit; Great point by @Silky mitts Completely forgot the 1st traded for Hunter turned into Sakic
I do, but it also doesn’t force me to drop the topic.Jurcina for Broadie isn't something to be proud of IMO. But I also guess you don't know what agree to disagree means.
I'm saying I'm totally confused by all of these hypothetical scenarios and just don't care enough to try and figure it out.I do, but it also doesn’t force me to drop the topic.
It was Milan Jurcina for a conditional 4th round pick. The pick just happened to work out for Calgary. To illustrate this point further, if Jurcina had averaged 20mins for the Caps, it would have been a 3rd round pick. That 3rd round pick would have been Jacob DeSerres (a goalie who never made he NHL). Are you saying giving up a 3rd round pick is better than giving up a 4th round pick?
. But I also guess you don't know what agree to disagree means.
That sucks. After losing to Canes because of lack of secondary scoring, I expected they will search more offense, but now it's getting worst since core players need to bring more while getting older.What did you expect to happen during a cap crunch? The only question was who the Caps would lose, not whether it was gonna happen...
Quebec made a lopsided deal trading Dale Hunter for the pick that was Sakic but with him they were the worst team in sports, so it’s impossible to say they won the trade. For that reason evaluating a trade purely by what is known at the time + knowing what happens with the picks is worst thanI can't even follow this.
Jurcina for Broadie isn't something to be proud of IMO. But I also guess you don't know what agree to disagree means.
That sucks. After losing to Canes because of lack of secondary scoring, I expected they will search more offense, but now it's getting worst since core players need to bring more while getting older.
Hunter for Sakic was a win for the Nordiques. Quebec just sucked at being a hockey organization.Quebec made a lopsided deal trading Dale Hunter for the pick that was Sakic but with him they were the worst team in sports, so it’s impossible to say they won the trade. For that reason evaluating a trade purely by what is known at the time + knowing what happens with the picks is worst than
Evaluating based on just what is known at the time or
Evaluating based purely on the trades impact on team performance
That sucks. After losing to Canes because of lack of secondary scoring, I expected they will search more offense, but now it's getting worst since core players need to bring more while getting older.
The UFA they got has pretty meh AHL numbers. I hope they don’t sign him and send him to Hershey to take a veteran spot
They lost because Vrana had zero points and Kuzy was coasting. Secondary scoring would have been nice but A well timed goal from Vrana, just one, and they win
Kind of have to wait to judge the overall blend for next season for another week or so until free agency comes and goes. You've got to expect they'll sign at least one scoring-line winger and then perhaps more depth forwards on the cheap to at least compete with what they've got on the fourth line.That sucks. After losing to Canes because of lack of secondary scoring, I expected they will search more offense, but now it's getting worst since core players need to bring more while getting older.
Not correct. You're adding another step in the story. The return for Varly was Forsberg just as the return for Mojo was Kemps and Fehervary. The pick is only as good as what it's used for.