Evaluating TDL rental acquisitions, part 2 (2019-2023)

[Maukkis]

This thread is for the general discussion of the Article Evaluating TDL rental acquisitions, part 2 (2019-2023). Please add to the discussion here.

Click to read more...

 

[JetsFan815]

2019

WPG-NYR: Kevin Hayes for 2019 1st, 2022 4th, Brendan Lemieux.

Starting off with my Jets this time. In an attempt to fix their woes at the 2C position, they opted for spending a first and a prospect in the second year in a row. 13 points in 20 games in the regular season wasn’t terrible, but the same cannot necessarily be said about a first round exit before losing Hayes as a free agent. We’re still dealing with that hole at 2C, by the way.

Verdict: fail. The classic outcome.

What an awful trade this was. Regardless of his decent production, buddy was on the 4th line by the 1st round of the playoffs. Stopped his own shot from going into the St Louis goal.

CBJ-OTT: Ryan Dzingel for 2020 2nd, 2021 2nd, Anthony Duclair.



CBJ-OTT: Matt Duchene, Julius Bergman for 2019 1st, Vitaly Abramov, Jonathan Davidsson (+cond. 2020 1st, condition not filled).

And here’s the other big part of the Columbus fiasco. Given that Columbus “needed” to make a push for the Cup to show Panarin and Bobrovsky that they were serious in Ohio, this certainly was a move that made headlines.

Never understood this thinking... trying to convince a pending UFA to stay by blowing a massive wad of futures. It's like if you are trying to get with a girl and doing desperate stuff like buying her expensive designer purses and jewellery, and begging her to date you while she is being non-committal. At some point that just comes across as desperate to the person you are wooing.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Calling the Giordano trade for Toronto a fail doesn't sit right. He was re-signed to an absurdly below market rate afterwards and has given them a lot of good play for a very reasonable price.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

On the Gavrikov front, it's worth it for him alone being not a rental. The guy was absolutely transformative for our D.

 

[Mitch nylander]

Calling the Giordano trade for Toronto a fail doesn't sit right. He was re-signed to an absurdly below market rate afterwards and has given them a lot of good play for a very reasonable price.

Yea calling Giordano a fail, is certainly not true. He's been a solid piece to our back end for 3 seasons. A heart and soul guy.


-------

Foligno and O'Reilly were fails though.

Foligno was moved for a 1st (Corson Ceulemans) who honestly, doesn't look that great. But Foligno was awful, he was broken-down garbage here.

I think it's really important to analyze who was taken in these moves.

 

[Bounces R Way]

What did we learn? Maybe don’t blow your entire future into Elias Lindholm and Chris Tanev this March. It rarely works out, and unless you’re an elite team already, your chances aren’t great. Stick with more reasonable trades.

First of all, how dare you.
Second is that I genuinely don't think we've learned that at all.

Third is that if you have a clear need and there's a player available for a draft pick or two that fits it and your expectations are win a playoff round it's almost criminal negligence to not try to make your roster better. If Toronto and Edmonton for instance do not acquire at least one other goalie this year I will consider their management to have not done their jobs. GMs don't always have the luxury of thinking 6 years from now, most don't that kind of job security.

 

[kilowatt]

On the Gavrikov front, it's worth it for him alone being not a rental. The guy was absolutely transformative for our D.

For as good as he's been on the ice, by all accounts he's been even better off the ice.

 

[Kevin27NYI]

Palmieri was a pass, huge performer vs Pens, Bruins and Hurricanes this past playoffs. Has injury issues as an Islander but has been a big playoff performer. And Zajac scored a huge goal vs Bruins and an insane defensive play against Penguins or Lightning I forget but he was arguably worth the 4th rounder and we liked him.

 

[hurdemz]

Good write up. Good insight. I actually read all of it too

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Never understood this thinking... trying to convince a pending UFA to stay by blowing a massive wad of futures. It's like if you are trying to get with a girl and doing desperate stuff like buying her expensive designer purses and jewellery, and begging her to date you while she is being non-committal. At some point that just comes across as desperate to the person you are wooing.

But was that the thinking? Panarin and Bob had already made it pretty clear they were leaving regardless. I think it was to try to go deep one time before they left.

Not saying it was a good idea. They should have kept all those assets and added to them by moving Panarin and Bob for futures.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

no love for Carolina's vaunted rental trades over this period. I am shocked. /s

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

First of all, how dare you.
Second is that I genuinely don't think we've learned that at all.

Third is that if you have a clear need and there's a player available for a draft pick or two that fits it and your expectations are win a playoff round it's almost criminal negligence to not try to make your roster better. If Toronto and Edmonton for instance do not acquire at least one other goalie this year I will consider their management to have not done their jobs. GMs don't always have the luxury of thinking 6 years from now, most don't that kind of job security.

If a GM is trying to build a PO team or a contender at the Trade Deadline they have already failed to do their jobs. The off-season is the time for building your roster. The TD is good for adding a little depth and some injury insurance.

 

[Adam da bomb]

I think you failed to mention the Jets TDL deals of picking up Nino and Names who have been major victory per price.

 

[TheImpatientPanther]

Fun thread.

Only trade your 1sts in July IMO
You get the player the whole year/term of current deal.

Move 2nds and/or prospect for depth pieces at trade deadline.

Hoping Zito learned his lesson and will more go Reinhart way of dealing a 1st than Chiarot and Giroux way.

 

[LarKing]

I appreciate the write-up and read all of your post agreeing with most. The only quarrel I have is that using the team's playoff success seems like it would make almost every acquisition a fail by default since only one team can win the Cup. I get that that's the point of the acquisition but there's so many factors to that, I don't think you can call a rental a failure if they perform well but their team doesn't and they're eliminated early.

 

[Raspewtin]

Copp trade was great for both teams. really wish Copp didn’t get hurt in the playoffs, he was useless and a half against Tampa and totally gimped that line right when Panarin woke up. no regrets on the lost picks or Barron, who Gallant didn’t like from day 1

 

[Weezeric]

By this logic, the majority of shots taken don’t lead to goals, so why shoot the puck at all? Oh right, because you have to shoot to score, just like all Stanley Cup winners make additions at the trade deadline.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

Rentals are not the way I would go if I were GM.

 

[Aashir Mallik]

Good write up, enjoyed reading it and seeing the takes, which are pretty sensible

maybe it’s my leafs bias, but I think gio can be considered a pass, sure we haven’t had a lot of success, but we got him for 3 years, he has given us quality minutes in the second and third pair, and he helped us advance to the second round. Two seconds is a steep price, but idk I feel we got decent value out of him

Completely agree on foligno and orielly.

 

[Lolonegoal]

I'm a little confused because in your title you specifically refer to the trade assets as rentals, but then give a team a fail or soft pass if the guy leaves in free agency, even if the team makes it far into the playoffs or wins the Stanley Cup? Isn't that just the definition of rental and what the team is seeking?

I like the concept of this thread and you obviously went into a lot of depth but I'd also like to see what those picks traded were/turned into. I don't really consider trading a 2nd rounder for a rental a loss if the 2nd rounder doesn't play a game in the NHL. Seems like good management of assets, to be honest.

You didn't give a single passing grade so I'm wondering what it takes to please you lol. Tampa gave their 32nd overall pick to Columbus (who later gave it to Chicago) and they drafted Nolan Allan who has 7 points in the AHL and regressed since the draft. Sure Savard or Lashoff didn't have a huge role in the team, but winning the cup is extremely difficult and who's to say that depth didn't make enough of a difference? Trading what eventually becomes nothing for something and winning the cup should at least be a win in my opinion; you really didn't lose anything.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Year	Cup Winner	Notable Mid-season/Deadline Moves
05-06	Carolina	Recchi, Weight
06-07	Anaheim	May
07-08	Detroit	Stuart
08-09	Pittsburgh	Kunitz, Guerin
09-10	Chicago	Johnsson (Didn't play in the playoffs)
10-11	Boston	Kaberle, Kelly, Peverley
11-12	L.A.	Carter
12-13	Chicago	Handzus
13-14	L.A.	Gaborik
14-15	Chicago	Vermette, Desjardins
15-16	Pittsburgh	Daley, Hagelin, Schultz, Lovejoy
16-17	Pittsburgh	Hainsey
17-18	Washington	Kempny
18-19	St. Louis	-
19-20	Tampa	Bogosion, Goodrow, Coleman
20-21	Tampa	Savard
21-22	Colorado	Manson, Lehkonen
22-23	Vegas	Barbeshev, Blueger, Quick

Bold denotes 1st for a rental.
Italics denotes hockey trades (player for player).

....

There's just a lot of FOMO at the deadline, from fans to pundits to organizations even. If you were to rank players 1-20 in importance, there are few Top 5s there. Save for Weight, the high priced rentals didn't provide impact consistent with the price paid; Kaberle and Savard played 3rd pairing roles, while Vermette was actually a healthy scratch at times.

Buyers are good teams and good teams already have talent in core roles. The expected impact is inherently marginal in many cases. It's up to the team's existing best players to perform in crunch time in the end.

 

[Gurglesons]

I appreciate the write-up and read all of your post agreeing with most. The only quarrel I have is that using the team's playoff success seems like it would make almost every acquisition a fail by default since only one team can win the Cup. I get that that's the point of the acquisition but there's so many factors to that, I don't think you can call a rental a failure if they perform well but their team doesn't and they're eliminated early.

This.

If a team does nothing they would be criticized for that being the reason they missed winning.

 

[j c petit]

we got him for 3 years, he has given us quality minutes in the second and third pair, and he helped us advance past the second round.

He did?

 

[Aashir Mallik]

He did?

Whoops, meant to the second round, too excited in dreamland

Either that or I’m predicting the future. Stanley cup 2024 here we come

 

[Lolonegoal]

Year	Cup Winner	Notable Mid-season/Deadline Moves
05-06	Carolina	Recchi, Weight
06-07	Anaheim	May
07-08	Detroit	Stuart
08-09	Pittsburgh	Kunitz, Guerin
09-10	Chicago	Johnsson (Didn't play in the playoffs)
10-11	Boston	Kaberle, Kelly, Peverley
11-12	L.A.	Carter
12-13	Chicago	Handzus
13-14	L.A.	Gaborik
14-15	Chicago	Vermette, Desjardins
15-16	Pittsburgh	Daley, Hagelin, Schultz, Lovejoy
16-17	Pittsburgh	Hainsey
17-18	Washington	Kempny
18-19	St. Louis	-
19-20	Tampa	Bogosion, Goodrow, Coleman
20-21	Tampa	Savard
21-22	Colorado	Manson, Lehkonen
22-23	Vegas	Barbeshev, Blueger, Quick

Bold denotes 1st for a rental.
Italics denotes hockey trades (player for player).

....

There's just a lot of FOMO at the deadline, from fans to pundits to organizations even. If you were to rank players 1-20 in importance, there are few Top 5s there. Save for Weight, the high priced rentals didn't provide impact consistent with the price paid; Kaberle and Savard played 3rd pairing roles, while Vermette was actually a healthy scratch at times.

Buyers are good teams and good teams already have talent in core roles. The expected impact is inherently marginal in many cases. It's up to the team's existing best players to perform in crunch time in the end.

Yeah, but the consistent theme here is that almost every team that wins the cup gets a rental. I believe the only reason St.Louis didn't is because they didn't actually believe they were a contender. You seem to be expecting teams to be getting a superstar that plays 10 years for them. Those players traditionally aren't available at the deadline. Most of these teams are picking up the best piece available and aren't paying much.

You keep giving teams a fail for trading a 1st, but like I said in my other post have you tracked what that 1st became? The teams drafting last in the round and that usually isn't a NHL player. I just don't see how giving a way a pick with like a 30% chance of become a fringe NHLer is a fail if it results in a cup win. A team would trade several years picks away for that chance.

The goal isn't to get some superstar player but to get that one extra piece to make you better than your opponent. You mention Vermette was scratched, but he was brought it mainly for vital faceoff situations and was 59% on the draw that playoffs and played 20 games and had 3 game winning goals. How is that not a massive impact? For Colorado Lehkonen had 8 goals and 14 points and 4 game winners, including one that sent to the finals. That's an entire quarter of the game winners to get to the cup, more than any other two other players on the team combined. Twice as many as Mackinnon, Makar, Rantanen, and Lankeskog combined. And the guy is still with the team, often on the first line.

Some of these other trades were also phenomenal. Gaborik had 14 goals and 22 points for LAK. Next highest goals that year was 10 from Jeff Carter, coincidentally a deadline acquisition from two years prior that's still with the team...