Trade Proposals

[foghorn]

I think the proof has to be in the pudding when discussing the " top scouting staff in the league". There has to be pennants and Championship banners hanging in the rafters in recent times to claim that title. It's like a boxing manager saying his boxer is the best in his class and he hasn't won a title yet. I agree the Soo does have a great system in place and scouts out players that fit the mold. I love the way they play the game. Still have to win a championship or two before deciding on a parade route.

dont necessarily believe you need to have banners to say a team has a top scouting staff as to build a winner you have to make those all important trades to add pieces and a great coaching staff as well so more to a banner than just scouting to me anyways. All memorial cup winning teams have added at deadlines you just cant win with drafting alone in the chl

 

[bobber]

dont necessarily believe you need to have banners to say a team has a top scouting staff as to build a winner you have to make those all important trades to add pieces and a great coaching staff as well so more to a banner than just scouting to me anyways. All memorial cup winning teams have added at deadlines you just cant win with drafting alone in the chl

Foghorn good points. Someone else used the term "the top scouting staff in the league". I just responded. Good coon hound, wrong tree. The banners I refer to were recent ones. Rangers have a ton but times have changed.

 

[NOA]

I understand what you are saying but I think many on here are jumping to conclusions with respect to 2001’s in deals. Only one 2000 was traded last year at the deadline and not so coincidentally that was the 19th overall pick.

I am not saying Raddysh is not worth a 2001 but I am saying that Raddysh is not worth Rees +++. Not by a long shot. Sarnia will not give up Rees straight up for Raddysh because it makes no sense for that franchise. Same for Brown.

The point I am making is when posters suggest Sarnia NEEDS to offer Rees for Raddysh otherwise they have no shot at him, that is just plain wrong. I can think of a plethora of scenario’s that would preclude that opinion. One of which had both Stephens and Bracco change teams without 2000’s changing teams. Another could be potential destination conflict with respect to the 2001 not waiving for certain teams or waiving at all for that matter. Another could be injury concerns with respect to Brown. The 19 year old may also request a specific couple of teams and out of respect the organization trading the player agrees to fulfill the request and those teams cannot or will not give their 2001.

So, it is entirely possible that NO team offers Erie a 2001 for various reasons. Does that mean Erie walks away from a trade? Nope. They will still look for best situation and decide if THAT situation is a legitimate offer. One of those offers could very well be a Sarnia pick heavy deal.

Who knows what will actually happen? I don’t think Erie management really knows yet. That said, I do agree the initial ask NEEDS to be the 2001 for sure. Whether they get it or not is the question.

I totally disagree

Erie could have moved Lodnia if they were thinking about the future of their team more. Instead they moved McShane.

Why? Because 16 year olds are often limited come playoff time. I even remember McDavid at 16 in the playoffs, his overall game was still inconsistent. I think I stand by my point that Rees should not be getting top 6 minutes come playoff time. And even getting top 9 minutes is dicey. Whether its a strength issue as a 16 year old, fatigue issue from playing against 17-21 year olds all year, just the experience factor, or the pressure and intensity of playoffs - kids are going to take a small step back. Had erie moved Lodnia last season over McShane they would have been porked in the playoffs. Lodnia played a respectable defensive game that McShane couldnt have replicated at 16.

I stated earlier that unlike london last year in the Stephens trade with Saginaw, Sarnia does not have the same ammo with picks. Their picks alone could not create a package that is over the top. And that would still involve emptying the pick tank. But someone else mentioned it - the main reason they would have to offer Rees, if they wanted Raddysh or Brown, is because some other team will offer their 2001 or a better pick/player package.

Btw I never said Sarnia wanted to move Rees and NEEDED Raddysh (or Brown). Of course nobody wants to move their 2001. And of course no team probably NEEDS one single player in a trade. But teams wanting to win a title sure as hell will consider it.
To say sarnia doesnt NEED Raddysh or Brown is assuming that no other teams add players like that. Sure they dont need one of these guys now, but dang I wonder how they would feel, meaning Sarnia, if they only added a 60-70 point forward (a bit on the cheaper end) and a top 4 defender ---- but then OS, London, and the Eastern teams added and lets say SSM added Raddysh, Headrick, and another top 9 forward.

Also dont dismiss Erie packaging Sambrook and Raddysh. They are more concerned with a 2001 than picks, believe me. So if thats what it takes to do it, they would not hesitate to do a package deal.
How would Sarnia fans feel if it were 4/5 picks and Rees for both of those players?

 

[NOA]

The years of the picks being equal, Erie won't see it that way, I'm very certain of that.

Another way to look at it is that if a team offered a couple of seconds and a third for Fowler, the Hounds would hang up the phone in a second. These high picks are very valuable. Every position counts. A failed first rounder in Liam Hawel got more than that in his second year.

I don't disagree with a lot of what you have to say. I just wanted to point out that you were jumping to some conclusions that weren't really justified just yet.

I said before and I will say again -

Erie would easily take the Cirelli deal from last year as opposed to the Stephens deal. They want a 2001. And if they cant get a 2001 for a +67, 100pt plus player, signed NHL pick and power forward then they will at least seek a 2000 player and/or 7/8 picks. Sarnia does not have those types of picks to not include a top player. Someone else will have those picks or will include that player.

 

[OMG67]

I said before and I will say again -

Erie would easily take the Cirelli deal from last year as opposed to the Stephens deal. They want a 2001. And if they cant get a 2001 for a +67, 100pt plus player, signed NHL pick and power forward then they will at least seek a 2000 player and/or 7/8 picks. Sarnia does not have those types of picks to not include a top player. Someone else will have those picks or will include that player.

Not every team is a good fit for a trade. Like I said previously, if Erie is hell bent on getting a 2001, Barrie wouldn't deal Suzuki. So that means it is unlikely that any team that picked in the top 10 this year will be a good fit because none of those teams would move that player.

Someone paying better attention than me can give the last example of a top 10 pick being moved during the underage deadline. I doubt there are more than 2 or 3 the last 20 years.

 

[OHLTG]

In terms of underagers being dealt the year they were drafted...

The last I found was Middleton from OS to Ottawa on Jan 7, 2013. He was the 8th pick in 2012. He was not alone in the deal, though, as OS also sent Blandisi to Ottawa for Ceci, Janes, and 3rd in '15.

2011-12 - Ryan Kujawinski (4th overall) goes from Sarnia to Kingston on Jan 5, 2012 with a 6th rounder. In return, Sarnia got Nathan Billitier, Jared Steege, and a 2nd in 16.

2008 - One of the bigger deals in Spitfires' history, too. 10th overall pick in 2007, Justin Shugg, gets dealt from Oshawa in a blockbuster that sees Shugg, Kovar, and 2nds in 08 and 11 go to Windsor for Neuvirth and Baldwin.

2006 - Akim Aliu was dealt to Sudbury, but it wasn't near the deadline. I believe it was closer to now-ish.

2004 deadline - Spitfirs acquire Tom Mannino (10th overall pick) from London with Jeric Agosta and a pick for D Frank Rediker.

Back to 1998, that's what there is that I can find.

 

[OSA]

In terms of underagers being dealt the year they were drafted...

The last I found was Middleton from OS to Ottawa on Jan 7, 2013. He was the 8th pick in 2012. He was not alone in the deal, though, as OS also sent Blandisi to Ottawa for Ceci, Janes, and 3rd in '15.

2011-12 - Ryan Kujawinski (4th overall) goes from Sarnia to Kingston on Jan 5, 2012 with a 6th rounder. In return, Sarnia got Nathan Billitier, Jared Steege, and a 2nd in 16.

2008 - One of the bigger deals in Spitfires' history, too. 10th overall pick in 2007, Justin Shugg, gets dealt from Oshawa in a blockbuster that sees Shugg, Kovar, and 2nds in 08 and 11 go to Windsor for Neuvirth and Baldwin.

2006 - Akim Aliu was dealt to Sudbury, but it wasn't near the deadline. I believe it was closer to now-ish.

2004 deadline - Spitfirs acquire Tom Mannino (10th overall pick) from London with Jeric Agosta and a pick for D Frank Rediker.

Back to 1998, that's what there is that I can find.

That trade was for Ryan Spooner, not the players you listed

 

[OHLTG]

That trade was for Ryan Spooner, not the players you listed

My fault, was looking at the wrong Kujawinski deal.

 

[OMG67]

In terms of underagers being dealt the year they were drafted...

The last I found was Middleton from OS to Ottawa on Jan 7, 2013. He was the 8th pick in 2012. He was not alone in the deal, though, as OS also sent Blandisi to Ottawa for Ceci, Janes, and 3rd in '15.

2011-12 - Ryan Kujawinski (4th overall) goes from Sarnia to Kingston on Jan 5, 2012 with a 6th rounder. In return, Sarnia got Nathan Billitier, Jared Steege, and a 2nd in 16.

2008 - One of the bigger deals in Spitfires' history, too. 10th overall pick in 2007, Justin Shugg, gets dealt from Oshawa in a blockbuster that sees Shugg, Kovar, and 2nds in 08 and 11 go to Windsor for Neuvirth and Baldwin.

2006 - Akim Aliu was dealt to Sudbury, but it wasn't near the deadline. I believe it was closer to now-ish.

2004 deadline - Spitfirs acquire Tom Mannino (10th overall pick) from London with Jeric Agosta and a pick for D Frank Rediker.

Back to 1998, that's what there is that I can find.

Add Chmelevski as a #10 pick to Ottawa in the Konecny deal. So that is unofficially 6 players in 20 seasons.

So if Brown and Raddysh both apparently will go for a 2001+++ then that would be classified as abnormal.

That is my whole point.

 

[OHLTG]

Given Rychel was in on the bigger deal involving Neuvirth, it wouldn't shock me if he tries for an 01. He's never been the guy to hold back when he swings the deal.

 

[NOA]

Not every team is a good fit for a trade. Like I said previously, if Erie is hell bent on getting a 2001, Barrie wouldn't deal Suzuki. So that means it is unlikely that any team that picked in the top 10 this year will be a good fit because none of those teams would move that player.

Someone paying better attention than me can give the last example of a top 10 pick being moved during the underage deadline. I doubt there are more than 2 or 3 the last 20 years.

nobody said they were hell bent on getting a 2001. And adding Barrie to this scenario is stupid because a) they arent as close as Sarnia is to being a title team --- Barrie is far too young. and B) Suzuki was the first overall pick. You say the difference between Rees at 9th and Fowler at 19 is huge..well the first overall pick to 9th is practically the same distance. Nobody is trading their 16 year old first overall pick. Cant even compare those scenarios.

of course Erie will look entirely at a 2001 first though. and if that somehow cant happen then they will surely seek a 2000. If you cant get a 2000 or a 2001 for Raddysh then you as a GM deserve to be fired. My point with Sarnia is that means the only worthy names in that is Hinz and Rees. Just saying. Erie will want a player - and likely a forward - and Raddysh is damn good enough to deserve a player in return. That's my point. It will either be a 2001 and not as many picks for him or 1/2 2000s and double the picks. But if some team offers up that 2001, erie will jump on that rather than a pick heavy deal with no 2001. Thats just almost a certainty. They traded away McShane and Neumann last year. And they havent had 2nd/3rd round picks in like 2-3 years. They need to make up for it. They are at least getting a player. Whether it is a 2000 or a 2001 is the only question. But if 5/6 teams are buying, and 3/4 of them dont necessarily have a ton of picks - there could definitely be some 2001s on the market.

 

[NOA]

In terms of underagers being dealt the year they were drafted...

The last I found was Middleton from OS to Ottawa on Jan 7, 2013. He was the 8th pick in 2012. He was not alone in the deal, though, as OS also sent Blandisi to Ottawa for Ceci, Janes, and 3rd in '15.

2011-12 - Ryan Kujawinski (4th overall) goes from Sarnia to Kingston on Jan 5, 2012 with a 6th rounder. In return, Sarnia got Nathan Billitier, Jared Steege, and a 2nd in 16.

2008 - One of the bigger deals in Spitfires' history, too. 10th overall pick in 2007, Justin Shugg, gets dealt from Oshawa in a blockbuster that sees Shugg, Kovar, and 2nds in 08 and 11 go to Windsor for Neuvirth and Baldwin.

2006 - Akim Aliu was dealt to Sudbury, but it wasn't near the deadline. I believe it was closer to now-ish.

2004 deadline - Spitfirs acquire Tom Mannino (10th overall pick) from London with Jeric Agosta and a pick for D Frank Rediker.

Back to 1998, that's what there is that I can find.

did you forget McShane last year???

 

[NOA]

Add Chmelevski as a #10 pick to Ottawa in the Konecny deal. So that is unofficially 6 players in 20 seasons.

So if Brown and Raddysh both apparently will go for a 2001+++ then that would be classified as abnormal.

That is my whole point.

add McShane?

But can you honestly say the trade market was the same in the early 2000s vs now?

You say it is 6 in 20 seasons, forgetting McShane somehow. So its actually 7 in 20 seasons. But really..come on.. trades in the early 2000s to even later 2000s dont compare to the crazy prices of today.

Looking further at it, it is actually 4 in the last 6 seasons. Had one in 2011-12, had one in 2012-13, had one in 2015-16, had one in 2016-17. So more common than you think. Especially when you consider only maybe 4-5 teams really buy each year. So right off the bat there are 10-15 teams a year that would never consider trading their 16 year old because they are rebuilding/selling/or not buying. And generally speaking only 2/3 teams empty their banks and buy big. So let's say each year only 2.5 teams on average empty their banks with big time buys (the types of buying that MAYBE would require a 16 year in return). So over the course of 6 seasons that is 15 teams (again I am just making an average) that bought so big they would have considered moving their 16 year old. 15 teams. And we have seen 4 young 16 year olds moved in this 6 year span. So about 25% of big time buyers have departed with their 16 years in the last 6 years. (idk just giving a rough not even close figure that is not being backed with true scientific data - so dont knock me on this)

and this year just seems like a year we could have more buyers. Hamilton, Kitchener already did their shopping. Might not be done. Missy, London, PBO could easily make the case to buy. And Sarnia, SSM, OS almost certainly will

You also have to consider the other assets teams have in terms of picks or maybe 2000 born players. For instance: McShane was only moved last year because Erie didnt have the picks to get a Cirelli type player. London didnt have to move Foudy or a 17 year old for Stephens because they had the picks. The potential bigger buyers - OS, SSM, Missy, Sarnia, PBO don't have an over the top amount of picks like London and PBO did last year

 

[dirty12]

Lately, there is usually one 16 yr old dealt at the deadline; ocassionally two. I would not be surprised if Brown & Raddysh both return a 2001 1st or neither do because the otters and spits probably need 2018 draft picks more. The way prospect sites are describing the upcoming draft, early 2018 picks won’t be parted with cheaply. I know some think the year of picks does not matter as much as the amount of picks; but, no 2018 2nds & 3rds have been traded away since the season began. That might be a telling sign that 2018 picks are valued.
London holding SBY 2nd & 3rd and Flint 3rd and KGN 3rd just might be in control at the deadline again. Kitchener is sitting pretty too.

 

[OMG67]

add McShane?

But can you honestly say the trade market was the same in the early 2000s vs now?

You say it is 6 in 20 seasons, forgetting McShane somehow. So its actually 7 in 20 seasons. But really..come on.. trades in the early 2000s to even later 2000s dont compare to the crazy prices of today.

Looking further at it, it is actually 4 in the last 6 seasons. Had one in 2011-12, had one in 2012-13, had one in 2015-16, had one in 2016-17. So more common than you think. Especially when you consider only maybe 4-5 teams really buy each year. So right off the bat there are 10-15 teams a year that would never consider trading their 16 year old because they are rebuilding/selling/or not buying. And generally speaking only 2/3 teams empty their banks and buy big. So let's say each year only 2.5 teams on average empty their banks with big time buys (the types of buying that MAYBE would require a 16 year in return). So over the course of 6 seasons that is 15 teams (again I am just making an average) that bought so big they would have considered moving their 16 year old. 15 teams. And we have seen 4 young 16 year olds moved in this 6 year span. So about 25% of big time buyers have departed with their 16 years in the last 6 years. (idk just giving a rough not even close figure that is not being backed with true scientific data - so dont knock me on this)

and this year just seems like a year we could have more buyers. Hamilton, Kitchener already did their shopping. Might not be done. Missy, London, PBO could easily make the case to buy. And Sarnia, SSM, OS almost certainly will

You also have to consider the other assets teams have in terms of picks or maybe 2000 born players. For instance: McShane was only moved last year because Erie didnt have the picks to get a Cirelli type player. London didnt have to move Foudy or a 17 year old for Stephens because they had the picks. The potential bigger buyers - OS, SSM, Missy, Sarnia, PBO don't have an over the top amount of picks like London and PBO did last year

We were assessing Top 10 picks, not first rounders. It was for the purpose of the likelyhood of Sarnia trading Rees.

 

[OMG67]

nobody said they were hell bent on getting a 2001. And adding Barrie to this scenario is stupid because a) they arent as close as Sarnia is to being a title team --- Barrie is far too young. and B) Suzuki was the first overall pick. You say the difference between Rees at 9th and Fowler at 19 is huge..well the first overall pick to 9th is practically the same distance. Nobody is trading their 16 year old first overall pick. Cant even compare those scenarios.

of course Erie will look entirely at a 2001 first though. and if that somehow cant happen then they will surely seek a 2000. If you cant get a 2000 or a 2001 for Raddysh then you as a GM deserve to be fired. My point with Sarnia is that means the only worthy names in that is Hinz and Rees. Just saying. Erie will want a player - and likely a forward - and Raddysh is damn good enough to deserve a player in return. That's my point. It will either be a 2001 and not as many picks for him or 1/2 2000s and double the picks. But if some team offers up that 2001, erie will jump on that rather than a pick heavy deal with no 2001. Thats just almost a certainty. They traded away McShane and Neumann last year. And they havent had 2nd/3rd round picks in like 2-3 years. They need to make up for it. They are at least getting a player. Whether it is a 2000 or a 2001 is the only question. But if 5/6 teams are buying, and 3/4 of them dont necessarily have a ton of picks - there could definitely be some 2001s on the market.

You are arguing my point for me. Thanks.

 

[Wolfman Jack]

Lately, there is usually one 16 yr old dealt at the deadline; ocassionally two. I would not be surprised if Brown & Raddysh both return a 2001 1st or neither do because the otters and spits probably need 2018 draft picks more. The way prospect sites are describing the upcoming draft, early 2018 picks won’t be parted with cheaply. I know some think the year of picks does not matter as much as the amount of picks; but, no 2018 2nds & 3rds have been traded away since the season began. That might be a telling sign that 2018 picks are valued.
London holding SBY 2nd & 3rd and Flint 3rd and KGN 3rd just might be in control at the deadline again. Kitchener is sitting pretty too.

You have no idea how much depth is there in the first 4 rounds this year.

WJ

 

[dirty12]

You have no idea how much depth is there in the first 4 rounds this year.

WJ

You are correct. Just going by consistent descriptions of upcoming draft. One says picking in the 30’s could be like a 1st round pick last draft. You are aware, and can inform me of the depth in the first 4 rounds this spring?

 

[OHLTG]

Yep, I forgot McShane, but it further adds to the point, thanks.

 

[OMG67]

Yep, I forgot McShane, but it further adds to the point, thanks.

But McShane wasn’t a top 10 pick.

The whole point I was making was:

1> There seems to be a consensus in this thread amongst Windsor and Erie fans that both Raddysh and Brown will garner a 2001 in any trade.
2> The consensus from Windsor and Erie fans is if Sarnia wants either Raddysh or Brown, they will need to trade Rees.
3> My opinion is that the difference in value between Fowler (#19 pick) and Rees (#9 pick) is vast; therefore, any deal that Sarnia makes would probably be heavily pick based.
4> It is rare that top 10 underage 16 year olds get traded during their trade window in January. There have been six incidents of those players being traded over the last 15+ years.
5> Players picked deeper in the 1st round generally don’t make an impact on their club roster in their first two seasons. Their impact is usually as an 18 or 19 year old; therefore, teams in buyer mode are more likely to use those players in a deal as opposed to teams that picked int he top 10 because those players usually make an impact in their first season.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, we did see three significant deals last year for arguably the top 3 forwards on the market and only one of those players went for a package including a 1st rounder (McShane #19). Therefore, it is not a certainty that Brown and Raddysh will be traded for a 2001 1st. Erie and Winsor will definitly ask for that but it doesn’t mean their best package will include that piece.

That is my point. I am sorry if I have bogged down the topic. I jsut found it interesting that there was so much force behind the value of player A and player B in relation to 2001 compensation. The reality is there needs to be a proper fit. A team that picked in the top 10 is not normally willing to part with that player; therefore, there may not be a solid fit. IT happens. No sense square pegging a round hole.

 

[HF92]

But McShane wasn’t a top 10 pick.

The whole point I was making was:

1> There seems to be a consensus in this thread amongst Windsor and Erie fans that both Raddysh and Brown will garner a 2001 in any trade.
2> The consensus from Windsor and Erie fans is if Sarnia wants either Raddysh or Brown, they will need to trade Rees.
3> My opinion is that the difference in value between Fowler (#19 pick) and Rees (#9 pick) is vast; therefore, any deal that Sarnia makes would probably be heavily pick based.
4> It is rare that top 10 underage 16 year olds get traded during their trade window in January. There have been six incidents of those players being traded over the last 15+ years.
5> Players picked deeper in the 1st round generally don’t make an impact on their club roster in their first two seasons. Their impact is usually as an 18 or 19 year old; therefore, teams in buyer mode are more likely to use those players in a deal as opposed to teams that picked int he top 10 because those players usually make an impact in their first season.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, we did see three significant deals last year for arguably the top 3 forwards on the market and only one of those players went for a package including a 1st rounder (McShane #19). Therefore, it is not a certainty that Brown and Raddysh will be traded for a 2001 1st. Erie and Winsor will definitly ask for that but it doesn’t mean their best package will include that piece.

That is my point. I am sorry if I have bogged down the topic. I jsut found it interesting that there was so much force behind the value of player A and player B in relation to 2001 compensation. The reality is there needs to be a proper fit. A team that picked in the top 10 is not normally willing to part with that player; therefore, there may not be a solid fit. IT happens. No sense square pegging a round hole.

I dont think that Raddysh values for. 2001 package deal, i put forward Fowler because i believe SSM management uses Fowler to put their deal above the rest, because we are in a position to do so.

 

[OHLTG]

Regardless of whether McShane counts in there (my memory is bad and I didn't look him up), the point remains that dealing an underage top-10 pick before the January trade deadline is rare but it does happen. Could we see it happen this season? Sure. Guys like Brown, DiPietro, and Raddysh could justify it under the right deal. Is it likely to happen? Who knows. Watch, there will be a few this season to throw this entire discussion into chaos lol

 

[Wolfman Jack]

You are correct. Just going by consistent descriptions of upcoming draft. One says picking in the 30’s could be like a 1st round pick last draft. You are aware, and can inform me of the depth in the first 4 rounds this spring?

No do your own scouting and research!

WJ

 

[HF92]

No do your own scouting and research!

WJ

Muuaahhahahhahahahahahahahahah

 

[dirty12]

No do your own scouting and research!

WJ

Probably won’t get to see vast majority of these kids more than once; so, I’ll take the written account of those scouting and reporting. It seems 2018 Ontario kids are better than they have been in a while.