[NYR/VGK] Who won the Reaves for 2022 3rd trade?
- Thread starter GFS
- Start date
Canadiens Ghost
Mr. Objectivity
DearDiary
🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷
- Aug 29, 2010
- 14,767
- 11,636
Did it? Reaves on the Pens did nothing to stop Wilson. Same thing with Vegas in the finals against the Caps
You need a Matt Cooke type player to punish Wilson's teammates, then you send Reaves over the boards to fight.
Buck Naked
Can't-Stand-Ya
- Aug 18, 2016
- 3,753
- 5,659
We don't know what that pick is or what it will be used for, so until we do NYR is the clear winner since they got a player who provides something they need.
Shouldn't the trade be assessed based on the info available at the time of the trade? So a 3rd round pick would be between 65th and 96th overall and how you think the Rangers will do in the standings next season. What Vegas does with the pick afterwards should be irrelevant to this discussion.
Buck Naked
Can't-Stand-Ya
- Aug 18, 2016
- 3,753
- 5,659
Wouldn't that be evaluating the GM's drafting skills? This is more about determining who won the trade based on what each team got back in value. I simply look at Vegas' return as a third round pick, as vague as that may seem.
Voight
#winning
You can acquire a much better player than Reaves for the 3rd. Nate Schmidt, Alex Tuch & Brandon Montour for example.
Based on the level of talent you could find there and based on Reaves current level. Otherwise why not trade 4 3rds? Or a 1st?
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 26,570
- 33,814
How many 3rd round picks have NHL careers? 12%.
So basically a 1 in 10 shot that draft pick will be an NHL player.
Ranger's win this because they needed to add toughness and Reaves will provide that. Even if it's for 9 minutes a game on the 4th line for 41 games vs certain teams.
So basically a 1 in 10 shot that draft pick will be an NHL player.
Ranger's win this because they needed to add toughness and Reaves will provide that. Even if it's for 9 minutes a game on the 4th line for 41 games vs certain teams.
GoldenSeal
Believe In The Note
Alexander the Gr8
Registered User
Rangers spent precious cap on a useless player that’s only there in reaction to a single incident last year.
Wilson will show how useless Reaves is next time the Caps and Rangers meet. As someone else mentioned, Reaves never did anything to slow down Wilson when he played for the Pens or in the SCF against Vegas.
Wilson will show how useless Reaves is next time the Caps and Rangers meet. As someone else mentioned, Reaves never did anything to slow down Wilson when he played for the Pens or in the SCF against Vegas.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 26,570
- 33,814
Oh no....What are the Rangers ever going to do with Reaves taking up 1.75 in cap space. Probably going to have to trade Fox now.
Best part is, the Ranger's have their entire roster signed for the season and we still have 9M in cap space. Good try though?
Scandale du Jour
JordanStaal#1Fan
The team that did not acquire a guy who cannot play the game effectively and is a relic of the 1980s.
Alexander the Gr8
Registered User
They’ll have to move him next summer to make room for all the RFAs coming up. The cap is so tight for most teams that 1.75 makes a difference.
Buck Naked
Can't-Stand-Ya
- Aug 18, 2016
- 3,753
- 5,659
Sure, but they didn't and that won't affect the outcome of this trade. Does VGK win now because you assume that a 3rd round pick could've granted NYR a better player? What if VGK spend that pick on a player that never reaches the NHL? Did NYR win the trade then?
Of course. But how do you determine that right now? How can you say that one is better than the other without looking at what you have in front of you? A trade involving a pick for a player will always be a win for the team that gets the player (as long as it's not just a cap move) until you know what that pick is or what it's used for.
VGK win just by clearing cap space on one of the worst players in the NHL. He can't skate so he isn't going to solve their Tom Wilson problem. Getting a 3rd back to take a flyer on a young player is just an added bonus. I'm puzzled as to why this wasn't Reeves + 3rd for nothing, yet they get back a third?
DudeWhereIsMakar
Bergevin sent me an offer sheet
Buck Naked
Can't-Stand-Ya
- Aug 18, 2016
- 3,753
- 5,659
No. I think a 1st in theory is worth more than Reaves because the chance of you getting an NHL-player is high enough. But until I know that for sure I wouldn't try to argue a winner in the trade, in case it happened.
So why are you refusing to recognize people see a 3rd the same way when discussing reaves?
Your evaluation of Reaves could be different but based on what you were saying before it seemed like you didn't even understand where people were coming from. But thus tells me you do understand but have a different value you put on this specific player and pick.
So your argument is more "I just think Reaves is worth a 3rd" not "any nhler is worth a 3rd bc any warm body is better than any future"
Buck Naked
Can't-Stand-Ya
- Aug 18, 2016
- 3,753
- 5,659
My argument is that I find it odd to discuss winners and losers of a trade where we know nothing about the outcome when what's involved is most likely marginal. Do you win because a 12% chance of drafting an NHL-player is worth more than what Reaves can give you, or what?
Yet if someone traded a 1st you'd know it was a losing trade? How bout if it was 2 1sts? 3? I don't get why you're pretending to be confused here when you definitely do get that picks have immediate value based on potential. So to put numbers on it, if you squander a value of 50 on a player who's value is 20, you can lose the trade bc you should've gotten say Reaves and a 4th.
The Rangers squandered so much immediate value here that it can be considered a loss. If you value Reaves that highly then that's your evaluation of him as being worth the immediate value(based on potential)a 3rd possesses
CharasLazyWrister
Registered User
I think everyone has called a spade a spade at this point. The Rangers gave up a third rounder to acquire one of the worst players in the league who also has the ability to potentially TKO/KO Tom Wilson. And I don’t blame them. Watching the Rangers “push back” against the Caps in the second to last game this past season was one of the most depressing things I’ve seen on the ice in a while. They tried, but had nothing...and I mean nothing....to stack up to Wilson or any other player on the Caps considered even remotely tough. This offseason they had to do something, everyone knew they were going to do something and they did.
Now, my team (the Bruins) did a very similar thing a few years back in trading away a third to acquire an “enforcer”. It was Zac Rinaldo. While it could be argued that Rinaldo was a more capable hockey player, I’d rather make that deal for Reaves than Rinaldo.
As of now, I think it’s pretty even. The odds of the Rangers regretting trading away that third are fairly slim and they know (or at least should know) what they are getting in Reaves. A guy who can majorly intimidate and otherwise play limited minutes if at all. Inevitably expectations will be way too high with some and you’ll have a percentage of the fanbase ripping the transaction within five games or so because Reaves is yet to kill a guy on the ice.
Now, my team (the Bruins) did a very similar thing a few years back in trading away a third to acquire an “enforcer”. It was Zac Rinaldo. While it could be argued that Rinaldo was a more capable hockey player, I’d rather make that deal for Reaves than Rinaldo.
As of now, I think it’s pretty even. The odds of the Rangers regretting trading away that third are fairly slim and they know (or at least should know) what they are getting in Reaves. A guy who can majorly intimidate and otherwise play limited minutes if at all. Inevitably expectations will be way too high with some and you’ll have a percentage of the fanbase ripping the transaction within five games or so because Reaves is yet to kill a guy on the ice.
