Draft - 1OA for 2OA + 3OA / 2OA + 3OA for 1OA?

[Mac Attack]

I agree with that statement. But I think we should be using the actual picks for this exercise and not who was available. Using hindsight screws woth the exercise. Matthews is better than Laine and Puljujarvi. I take two and three in this draft though. And at the time of the Matthews draft I might have done the same.

 

[Fatass]

If I had pick 1, I would not trade Lafreniere. He’ll be an instantly elite forward, a guaranteed cornerstone for a team.

If I had pick 2 and 3, I would not trade Byfield and Stuetzle/Drysdale. Byfield has the greatest potential in the draft, and you have the opportunity to choose two elite prospects of the same age that could be the foundation of a strong core for a decade.

That made sense in my head.

Byfield and Drysdale could very well become Ottawa’s number one centre and number one D.

 

[Dache]

I agree with that statement. But I think we should be using the actual picks for this exercise and not who was available. Using hindsight screws woth the exercise. Matthews is better than Laine and Puljujarvi. I take two and three in this draft though.

2 and 3 was Laine and Dubois.

 

[Dominance]

2 and 3 was Laine and Dubois.

True, but Dubois was a little of an off-the-board pick. I think a large majority of teams with 2 and 3 would have selected the two Finns.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

True, but Dubois was a little of an off-the-board pick. I think a large majority of teams with 2 and 3 would have selected the two Finns.

I agree, but it's also then inconsistent to judge Laine and Puljujarvi at present as opposed to at the draft, which is what @Mac Attack is doing. If you want to use Laine and Puljujarvi instead of Laine and PLD, you have to judge the players at the draft. I would still say they should all be judged at the draft instead of right now, even if you want to use Laine and PLD, but using either Puljujarvi or PLD, he's being inconsistent to not apply it at the draft. He's applying it the only way that favors Matthews.

 

[ijuka]

#2+#3 have clearly more value than just #1. The only exceptions are cases like Connor McDavid.

Hence, I would trade #1 for #2 and #3, and wouldn't trade #2 and #3 for #1.

 

[Dominance]

I agree, but it's also then inconsistent to judge Laine and Puljujarvi at present as opposed to at the draft, which is what @Mac Attack is doing. If you want to use Laine and Puljujarvi instead of Laine and PLD, you have to judge the players at the draft. I would still say they should all be judged at the draft instead of right now, even if you want to use Laine and PLD, but using either Puljujarvi or PLD, he's being inconsistent to not apply it at the draft. He's applying it the only way that favors Matthews.

Honestly, I haven’t kept up with or read most of this thread. I just dropped in to see how the poll results were turning out, and thought I could clarify MA’s statement.

 

[Dominance]

#2+#3 have clearly more value than just #1. The only exceptions are cases like Connor McDavid.

2019: Hughes < Kakko + Dach
2018: Dahlin = Svechnikov + Kotkaniemi
2017: Hischier < Patrick + Heiskanen
2016: Matthews < Laine + Dubois
2015: McDavid > Eichel + Strome
2014: Ekblad < Reinhart + Draisaitl
2013: MacKinnon = Barkov + Drouin
2012: Yakupov < Murray + Galchenyuk
2011: RNH < Landeskog + Huberdeau
2010: Hall = Seguin + Gudbranson
2009: Tavares < Hedman + Duchene
2008: Stamkos = Doughty + Bogosian
2007: Kane > JVR + Turris
2006: Johnson < Staal + Toews
2005: Crosby > Ryan + Johnson
2004: Ovi > Malkin + Barker
2003: Fleury < Staal + Horton
2002: Nash = Lehtonen + Bouwmeester
2001: Kovalchuk = Spezza + Svitov
2000: DiPietro < Heatley + Gaborik

Hmm, I’d definitely say that history is on your side. Do we consider Lafreniere a McDavid-level prospect, is the question.

 

[Dache]

True, but Dubois was a little of an off-the-board pick. I think a large majority of teams with 2 and 3 would have selected the two Finns.

Maybe. But that wasn’t the point of what that poster was saying.

 

[SympathyForTheDevils]

I agree, but it's also then inconsistent to judge Laine and Puljujarvi at present as opposed to at the draft, which is what @Mac Attack is doing. If you want to use Laine and Puljujarvi instead of Laine and PLD, you have to judge the players at the draft. I would still say they should all be judged at the draft instead of right now, even if you want to use Laine and PLD, but using either Puljujarvi or PLD, he's being inconsistent to not apply it at the draft. He's applying it the only way that favors Matthews.

Based on the rest of his post, I think he simply forgot that Dubois was taken at 3 instead of Puljujarvi.

Not sure there's any reason to look back at draft year value in the context of this thread. Isn't the point here to use hindsight to determine the "true" value of past top 3 picks, in order to evaluate the proposal in the OP?

 

[Mac Attack]

2 and 3 was Laine and Dubois.

Lol thanks. In my head I was comparing to their predraft ranking.

 

[Dache]

Lol thanks. In my head I was comparing to their predraft ranking.

Yeah I remember there being a fair amount of shock at the time

 

[CraigsList]

I'd rather have both picks.