Confirmed with Link: #156 traded to Toronto for 2019 6th Rounder

[stokes84]

All these maybes or replies that there will be something better next year. The principle of this complaint is the value we got for a trade. We LOST value. That 6th should have became a 5th.

Botterill pulled a Jim Benning.

You literally do not know that the 5th was available when we traded.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

Really? Complaining about a 6th round pick? Go complain about the 2014 draft, where Murray walked in with 6 top 74 picks, 4 top 50 picks and will end up with Sam Reinhart. And the longshot chance Olofsson becomes a real NHLer and not some Linus Omark tweener.

At least Botterill can draft outside the #2 overall pick. He made the pick of the draft last year and gets hated on because he didnt trade 34 assets for player X.

I'm surprised someone didnt get angry at Botterill for showing class and respect when announcing the pick. If Murray was here he'd walk up and go say " Buffalo takes Dahlin. " and the people who are honestly crying and complaining about a 6th round pick when we havent drafted a top 6 forward or top 4 D outside the first in 15 years would be applauding Murray on how cool he is and hip for drinking beer and being an abrasive jerk who has no manners or social skills.

 

[sabrebuild]

Because the whole point of late picks is catching fallers. If the guys you were hoping would fall didn't, this gives you another shot to do it next year. I'm sure every year there are guys scouts identify as legit talents that might not get picked up on in the fourth or fifth. If this odd year they did get picked, don't just pick crap to pick crap, give yourself a shot to find someone your scouts are excited about slipping next year.

That's not making small mistakes if that's how you're scouting department sees it. It's maximizing your assets. These picks aren't worth the numbers after them. They're worth the players they bear, and the players are valued by the deeper levels of a scouting department. If Botts' scouts weren't in love with the board and Botts said pick someone anyways guys, gotta maximize our pick 156 and make sure it doesn't nominally turn into a pick 171, he would be the ignorant *******.

I’ll be happy to go with this theory, tho if we agree the numbers are terrible here for success, the idea that your scouting department has any friggin idea what they are doing after the second round is a joke.

But let’s go with the value is irrelevant you just want picks at this point concept. Why wouldn’t you ask for the 6th and 7th round picks in next years draft? Or the 6th this year for Toronto’s 7 for two years in a row.

But hey, Botts has done great so far, so why think about these things on a hockey forum. I’m sure they have an eye on a stud right now.

 

[Sabre the Win]

You literally do not know that the 5th was available when we traded.

Well it should have been or take the pick.

 

[joshjull]

Agreed, so why delay finding out your 6th was worthless an extra year from now a round later than what the market bore within a matter of minutes?

Would you ever teach your players to make small mistakes, because they probably won’t matter?

I don’t think anybody is freaking out about this. It just seems like an odd move, particularly given another team traded a worse pick for better value in the same round.

I don't consider this a mistake so that analogy doesn't apply.

Here is a fun exercise for you and the others bent out of shape over this nothing trade. Show your work. Prove that we got lesser value. Prove that someone else got a better return because they got a 5th rounder.

I'm looking at statistical breakdowns not simply saying omg its just a 6th rounder. Some posters who use numbers quite a lot for arguments on this board seem to be ignoring them right now. In practical terms there is no statistical evidence to support the idea that any pick in the 5th or 6th round has a better chance of making the NHL. Which means arguing we got less back or that someone turned a "lesser asset" into more because they got a 5th rounder doesn't really have much basis in reality.

Add to this Botts stated philosophy of drafting college bound or European players for the extra development time in later rounds and what are we even talking about? That next year he'll draft someone we''ll let develop for up to 4yrs instead of this year? And that matters why exactly?

EDIT: I'm not in the crowd that thinks this is some amazingly shrewd move either. I just see it as a simple moving of an assist to next year based on their board. A nothing burger move.

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

What are you looking for?

They traded the pick because there were no forwards they had on their board left and felt they could get a dman they wanted with their 7th. So they made the trade. There is zero practical difference in value with the pick we traded and the pick we got

What about the difference between a fifth round pick and a late 6th?

There were 5th's traded for lower 6th's than ours.

It would be standard practice to ask for next year's 5th in place of our 6th this year. Other teams clearly did exactly that, and succesfully.

What you're saying is that because the odds of getting a good player are only slightly different, this move is logical, but its not.

Do you want a 5th or a 6th? Who cares? I'll take a 6th!! ... Is still not a sound argument.

Why bother scouting late round players if you don't care if you'll have the chance to draft them?

BPA would very likely be different 30 picks later, so why bother ranking them if you're ok with taking someone lower on your list?

 

[stokes84]

Well it should have been or take the pick.

Now that your logic has been debunked, you are digging in to dig in.

 

[joshjull]

What about the difference between a fifth round pick and a late 6th?

There were 5th's traded for lower 6th's than ours.

It would be standard practice to ask for next year's 5th in place of our 6th this year. Other teams clearly did exactly that, and succesfully.

What you're saying is that because the odds of getting a good player are only slightly different, this move is logical, but its not.

Do you want a 5th or a 6th? Who cares? I'll take a 6th!! ... Is still not a sound argument.

Why bother scouting late round players if you don't care if you'll have the chance to draft them?

BPA would very likely be different 30 picks later, so why bother ranking them if you're ok with taking someone lower on your list?

There isn't one. Thats the point.

 

[sabrebuild]

I think it's a fine move, and I think the criticism is coming more from a place of irrational logic and/or from those with an axe to grind... than anything constructive.

Since we are not in the business of having Botts listen to us one way or the other, nothing we do here is constructive.

I think you could ask the main board or neutral fans who just know hockey from a management perspective and they would question this in the same manner most of us are. It’s weird. Not a huge life changing issue. Just odd within the context of every other transaction in the league.

 

[Sabre the Win]

Now that your logic has been debunked, you are digging in to dig in.

Logic debunked? Its clear the big headed idiot in office doesnt know how to wheel and deal. Its clear we lost value, that's simple logic staring you in the face.

So what was debunked? You say "You don't know if the 5th pick was there". I call that logic ignorant of the situation because if the pick wasnt there he should have hung up the phone til it was there or until they offered something of positive value in the trade.

 

[Dreakon13]

I think you could ask the main board or neutral fans who just know hockey from a management perspective and they would question this in the same manner most of us are. It’s weird. Not a huge life changing issue. Just odd within the context of every other transaction in the league.

The weirdness/uncertainty should be all but gone, the moment the reason the trade happened came out.

The fact that people can't get over the idea that one number is higher than the other, excluding all other rationale and context, is the reason this conversation is going nowhere. I also place very little value in the ability of the main board to think clearly... Toronto fans are there after all.

 

[sabrebuild]

I don't consider this a mistake so that analogy doesn't apply.

EDIT: I'm not in the crowd that thinks this is some amazingly shrewd move either. I just see it as a simple moving of an assist to next year based on their board. A nothing burger move.

There’s no work to show. Another gm got a better return in the same round, a couple picks apart.

I think it’s weird that you vociferously argue that it is not a bad move because their board is out of selections by round 6, but they will have a better idea next year at a worthless pick.

However, others post it’s a shrewd move, which you disagree with as well, but no comments on that.

But who cares Botts is killing it so far as a gm so no reason to look into things,

Faith in Botts for the win!

 

[sabrebuild]

Really? Complaining about a 6th round pick? Go complain about the 2014 draft, where Murray walked in with 6 top 74 picks, 4 top 50 picks and will end up with Sam Reinhart. And the longshot chance Olofsson becomes a real NHLer and not some Linus Omark tweener.

At least Botterill can draft outside the #2 overall pick. He made the pick of the draft last year and gets hated on because he didnt trade 34 assets for player X.

I'm surprised someone didnt get angry at Botterill for showing class and respect when announcing the pick. If Murray was here he'd walk up and go say " Buffalo takes Dahlin. " and the people who are honestly crying and complaining about a 6th round pick when we havent drafted a top 6 forward or top 4 D outside the first in 15 years would be applauding Murray on how cool he is and hip for drinking beer and being an abrasive jerk who has no manners or social skills.

Oh Cassandra, I feel for you.

 

[sabrebuild]

The fact that people can't get over the idea that one number is higher than the other, excluding all other rationale and context, is the reason this conversation is going nowhere. I also place very little value in the ability of the main board to think clearly... Toronto fans are there after all.

Ya I heard the reason. I wasn’t impressed. I also heard the reason why the team did lots of stupid moves. A rational reason to do something does not mean it is smart or wise.

And the reason given does not bear on the reason ppl are annoyed by the deal.

 

[truthbluth]

We’re done here

 

[haseoke39]

I’ll be happy to go with this theory, tho if we agree the numbers are terrible here for success, the idea that your scouting department has any friggin idea what they are doing after the second round is a joke.

But let’s go with the value is irrelevant you just want picks at this point concept. Why wouldn’t you ask for the 6th and 7th round picks in next years draft? Or the 6th this year for Toronto’s 7 for two years in a row.

But hey, Botts has done great so far, so why think about these things on a hockey forum. I’m sure they have an eye on a stud right now.

Um... Why not ask for next year's first? You can ask.

 

[Montag DP]

the big headed idiot in office

This comment tells me everything I need to know about your level of objectivity.

At first I was puzzled by the level of outrage about this deal. Now it makes sense. It's pure confirmation bias and people playing armchair GM without having any idea about the actual context of the trade (and refusing to accept valid explanations due to said confirmation bias).

 

[Sabre the Win]

This comment tells me everything I need to know about your level of objectivity.

At first I was puzzled by the level of outrage about this deal. Now it makes sense. It's pure confirmation bias and people playing armchair GM without having any idea about the actual context of the trade (and refusing to accept valid explanations due to said confirmation bias).

Not a single explanation from the Botterill defensive was solid

This is about the value we got for the return, there is no positive reasoning to losing a trade that you had the high ground in.

If Toronto really wanted that prospect at 6th they would have gave up a 5th next year or we moved back to a later 6th and got an extra 7th.

Its pretty standard value.

 

[joshjull]

There’s no work to show. Another gm got a better return in the same round, a couple picks apart.

You do get that the value of a pick comes from the probability it will produce an NHLer. If there is no practical difference in that probability then there is no difference in the value. If you recall you agreed with that in a previous response. I'm amazed this is even being disputed.

I think it’s weird that you vociferously argue that it is not a bad move because their board is out of selections by round 6, but they will have a better idea next year at a worthless pick.

If I'm arguing vociferously about anything its the ignorance over pick values.

But who cares Botts is killing it so far as a gm so no reason to look into things,

Faith in Botts for the win!

Now you're being petulant.

I haven't been praising him over this trade. I think its a nothing burger move thats neither good nor bad.

 

[haseoke39]

Scout Joe Dick: well, guys, this year we think the talent pool of prospects with a real shot is around 125-140 kids. After that it's pure crapshoot.
Scout Jim Rod: well, that's pretty normal, but since most teams tend to disagree about who the last 40 or so kids are, let's hope some fall to us in the sixth and seventh. /// Well, that's a little less than usual, maybe it was a thin year. Anyways, let's hope for the best.

..... On the day ....

Scout Joe Dick: Well, bad luck this year, we're at 150 and the only kids we have left on our list are probably crapshoot types that we're either indifferent between or nobody else is likely to take.
Scout John Wang: you know, all things being equal, this wasn't a lucky year. Apparently too much consensus around that top 125-140 or so. Usually we can still find a kid we actually like here, but I'd be just as happy to see if we can push the pick back a year. These picks are all interchangeable in terms of value at this point.
Jason Botterill, who has spent zero minutes scouting any kids in the 140+ range: MAKE THE PICK. GET US FILLER. THE OPTICS OF MOVING BACK IN SIXTH ROUND INEXCUSABLE.

 

[joshjull]

Its hysterical reading some of the Murray defenders in here either hating on this trade or liking posts hating on this trade. Murray they defend, the guy who threw away 1st rounders and prospects in trade overpayments. But don't you dare mess around with 6th rounders.

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

Look. If you just dont care about the value of late picks because the statistical hit rate is only slightly different, that is fine. But to act like people wanting a higher pick than we got, when that higher return was standard and actually available, are "irrational," is ridiculous and insulting.

Just because statistically two picks are likely to produce similar results across all GM's, eras, and contexts doesn't mean that our GM yesterday was wise to take a lower pick when higher picks were available for the same price. You are welcome to that opinion, but dont insult my intelligence.

Honest question, if you were a GM, would you only scout the top rounds? Why not use some public list and just go on autodraft? Would save lots of time and money. If you dont think late picks matter enough to try for the best result, why bother thinking about it? Why not trade all your picks for 7ths to build good will with the other "chump" GMs. Actually, forget good will, why not do it for no reason at all!!

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

Its hysterical reading some of the Murray defenders in here either hating on this trade or liking posts hating on this trade. Murray they defend, the guy who threw away 1st rounders and prospects in trade overpayments. You know things far more valuable than a 6th rounder. But don't you dare mess around with 6th rounders.

No one who is participating in this discussion is doing so because they think 6th round picks are super valuable.

Should i make up a stupid argument you didnt make and then criticize you for it? Is that how "rationality" works?

 

[stokes84]

Look. If you just dont care about the value of late picks because the statistical hit rate is only slightly different, that is fine. But to act like people wanting a higher pick than we got, whken that higher return was standard and actually available, are "irrational," is ridiculous and insulting.

Just because statistically two picks are likely to produce similar results across all GM's, eras, and contexts doesn't mean that our GM yesterday was wise to take a lower pick when higher picks were available for the same price. You are welcome to that opinion, but dont insult my intelligence.

Honest question, if you were a GM, would you only scout the top rounds? Why not use some public list and just go on autodraft? Would save lots of time and money. If you dont think late picks matter enough to try for the best result, why bother thinking about it? Why not trade all your picks for 7ths to build good will with the other "chump" GMs. Actually, forget good will, why not do it for no reason at all!!

It's been shown that you can't possibly know that. I'm done here if all we are going to do is repeat the same logical fallacy over and over.

 

[joshjull]

No one who is participating in this discussion is doing so because they think 6th round picks are super valuable.

Should i make up a stupid argument you didnt make and then criticize you for it? Is that how "rationality" works?

You seem quite worked up over something not directed at you. I didn't quote you and unless you're a big Murray defender that I'm not aware of, that post isn't about you.