Conditional Picks

[Generalsupdates]

I've always wondered this so maybe someone has an answer for me. Why are conditional picks always far less than the picks for other years?

For example:

Stillman today was traded for 2 2nds, 3rd and then conditional 3rd+4th.


So half a year of Stillman this year is worth 2 2nds and a 3rd. But if he comes back next year then that year is only worth a 3rd and a 4th? Seems weird since Stillman would be a year older and you'd think he'd be even more of an impact. And if he doesn't come back then those conditional picks never change hands so why are the conditional year picks so much less than the ones for this year?

That's just the example I'm using because it's the most recent but it seems like the majority of trades are this way.

Click to read more...

 

[OHLTG]

Sometimes the "conditionals" will increase, depending on what the conditions are. I've seen where it could be a 2nd, 2nd, and conditional 7th, where if X-number of goals are scored, it goes up to a 3rd. (for example)

Sometimes conditionals are just a matter of whether they play that year or not. When Windsor acquired Addison, it was Addison/15th for 15th and pair of conditional picks. Those were 2nds, depending on whether he played OA season and production.

In Stillman's case, it could be a matter of production, too. The cost is two 2nds and a 3rd, but if Hamilton reaches 3rd round, the cond. 3rd is added. If they win the OHL, the 4th is added, too. I don't know, but it's an option.

 

[OMG67]

Or, more simply put, the acquiring team has a reasonable certainty that a player will return for an OA season but they are trying to mitigate against that by not paying all assets up front.

Using your Stillman example, the acquiring team is willing to pay two 2nds, two 3rds, and a 4th for Stillman because they believe he is going to return as an OA. But, if he doesn’t, that team wants to be able to “recoup” some of that cost. So, the “Conditional” picks help reduce that cost.

You could also look at the Travis Konecny deal between Sarnia and Ottawa. A half season of Konecny was worth their 1st rounder (Chmelevski) and a boat load of picks. Yet, he is then only worth two 2nds for his entire 19 year old year? Sarnia obviously felt Konecny would have a reasonable chance of returning to the OHL and not staying with Philadelphia. But, what if? On the other side, Ottawa didn’t want to take that risk so they got most of the assets up front.

It will always be a little give and take. All it really boils down to is risk mitigation. The selling team wants as much as possible but to get that, they need to do it through conditionals, otherwise the acquiring team will simply not pay as much without some sort of guarantee.

 

[AttackSound]

Most conditions of deals are put in place due to expectations that a player will suit up or produce X number of points in his time with the corresponding club.

For examle a top player would have conditions that he would produce X number of points by the end of the season. On the flip side a low condiion pick would be a expectation that he would play so many games in the season.

Most condition deals usually turn into mid round picks unless a a big name player is involved.

 

[Generalsupdates]

Most conditions of deals are put in place due to expectations that a player will suit up or produce X number of points in his time with the corresponding club.

For examle a top player would have conditions that he would produce X number of points by the end of the season. On the flip side a low condiion pick would be a expectation that he would play so many games in the season.

Most condition deals usually turn into mid round picks unless a a big name player is involved.

I know. I was talking about the "if he returns for his OA season" condition ones

 

[OHL4Life]

Or, more simply put, the acquiring team has a reasonable certainty that a player will return for an OA season but they are trying to mitigate against that by not paying all assets up front.

Using your Stillman example, the acquiring team is willing to pay two 2nds, two 3rds, and a 4th for Stillman because they believe he is going to return as an OA. But, if he doesn’t, that team wants to be able to “recoup” some of that cost. So, the “Conditional” picks help reduce that cost.

You could also look at the Travis Konecny deal between Sarnia and Ottawa. A half season of Konecny was worth their 1st rounder (Chmelevski) and a boat load of picks. Yet, he is then only worth two 2nds for his entire 19 year old year? Sarnia obviously felt Konecny would have a reasonable chance of returning to the OHL and not staying with Philadelphia. But, what if? On the other side, Ottawa didn’t want to take that risk so they got most of the assets up front.

It will always be a little give and take. All it really boils down to is risk mitigation. The selling team wants as much as possible but to get that, they need to do it through conditionals, otherwise the acquiring team will simply not pay as much without some sort of guarantee.

this is always what I thought. the original price is higher because there’s a high chance he goes as an OA. they are paying 80 perfect of the price upfront vs 50 percent year one, 50 percent year 2

 

[Generalsupdates]

this is always what I thought. the original price is higher because there’s a high chance he goes as an OA. they are paying 80 perfect of the price upfront vs 50 percent year one, 50 percent year 2

Yeah that makes sense