NOA
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2015
- 3,136
- 1,479
oh so the point then becomes that 16 year olds are actually traded more. top 10 picks would not be traded as much because top 5 picks are far too talented to be moved and generally speaking...teams that just got a top 10 pick, but especially a top 5 pick, are not going to be "going for it" the following season - they are rebuilding - hence the top 5 to top 10 pick... those guy thus are bound be less likely to be moved. And Rees at 9 is on the closer end to being outside a top 10 pick then being a top 5 pick.We were assessing Top 10 picks, not first rounders. It was for the purpose of the likelyhood of Sarnia trading Rees.
16 year olds are not that rare to seen move. its a unique circumstance when a team like sarnia picks 9 then might be going for it the following season. But if thats the price it will take to land Brown/Raddysh, which could be the case if SSM/OS/PBO/LDN or just one team is willing to part with their 2001, then Sarnia will either have to trade Rees or be on the outside looking in. No they dont need Raddysh/Brown but I wonder if they would feel differently in April if the other teams in the West spent for those big time difference makers. Because generally when big time players are moved to teams that already are considered a top 3 to top 5 contender in the league, that usually puts them over the top...compared to teams that decide to be a bit cheaper