Value of: General positional value?

[Critical13]

How do you weigh position when you are looking at a trade. For sake of argument, imagine each player being the "average" quality for each position.

This would be my hierarchy:

1. 1st line C
2. #1 D
3. #2 D
4. 2nd line C
5. 1st line W
6. #3 D
7. 2nd line W
8. Starting Goalie
9. 3rd line C
10. #4 D
11. 3rd line W
12. Bottom pairing D
14. 4th line players
15. Backup G

I think in general, positions that are within 1 spot are close, but jumping 2 spots is a big difference, and the difference is usually made up by age/contract.

To me, the toughest value comparison is between 3, 4 and 5. That's where I see a lot of hyperbole on HFBoards, when someone compares or makes an offer involving players of that tier. Positions 1 and 2 are almost never traded, and shouldn't be unless it's a 1 for 1 or you are getting an elite player from one of the lower positions.

I started thinking about this because I am bored at work and I was reading the Douggie Hamilton thread. To me, Douggie is a perfect #2...not trending towards #1, but also better than most 2nd pairing D.

Based on this, his value would a 2nd line C or 1st line W of similar age. Someone like Nylander or possibly a player like Huberdeau.

Click to read more...

 

[McFlash97]

A legit starting Goalie who is consistent. Without one it's pretty much a crapshoot. Then a number 1 Center, followed by a number 1 Dman.

 

[rent free]

This is pretty much my list as well.

 

[xNogaitx]

My only change to that list would be a solid starting goaltender being at #4 on my list.

(Although one can make the case to make it slide down to #5 for an average good goaltender.)

 

[BleedBlue14]

I would switch backup goalies with 4th liners. But it's tough because backup goalies range so far and some 4th liners excel at certain little things giving them a niche value

 

[c_robio]

I'd put top line wingers over 2nd line centers based on how drafts go. It's the top line Cs that are very rare

 

[north49er]

Sam Pollock one of the greatest GM's ever said you build from the goaltender out.

 

[93LEAFS]

Sam Pollock one of the greatest GM's ever said you build from the goaltender out.

He also built his team in a pre-cap era, and for most of it without a draft. The cap dramatically changes how you choose to allocate cash.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Sam Pollock one of the greatest GM's ever said you build from the goaltender out.

There's more passable #1Gs than there are #1Ds. A strong D can hide a mediocre goalie, but a strong goalie can't always hide a bad defense, just look at Price this year.

 

[ConnorMcMullet]

I don't fully agree, but good list.

In my opinion, the difference in value between wingers and centers isn't nearly as big as it is thought to be. The thought is that wingers are complimentary players and have less defensive responsibility. The center leads the line. What about players like Taylor Hall, Nikita Kucherov, and Patrick Kane? They can play with mediocre centers and still lead their line. And there are players like Stone, Schwartz, and Marchand who are also better defensively than most top line centers in the league. I think the reason that wingers are thought to have less value is because they are usually snipers, and their shots are best utilized on the wing. Players like Hall, Kuch, and Kane, are the exceptions. So IMO playmakers have more value than snipers, it is not so much based on their position.

I would also have #1 Goalie a bit higher.

 

[go4hockey]

To me it’s #1 defenseman then #1 center, #1 goalie #2 center and defenseman then everyone else.

 

[north49er]

He also built his team in a pre-cap era, and for most of it without a draft. The cap dramatically changes how you choose to allocate cash.

Everything is relative. I'd still start with a good goaltender. Three of the top teams left in the playoffs have Vezina nominees. Yes, they have good D-men too but it starts in goal.

 

[north49er]

There's more passable #1Gs than there are #1Ds. A strong D can hide a mediocre goalie, but a strong goalie can't always hide a bad defense, just look at Price this year.

Look at the Jets last year and this year. Strong D-men with weak goalies(s) and out of the playoffs. This year strong goalie and D-men and they're in the playoffs.

 

[nickschultzfan]

1C
1D
2D
1G
2C
1RW
1LW
3D
4D
2RW
3C
2LW
5D
2G
3RW
3LW
6D
4C
7D
4RW
4LW

 

[Martin Skoula]

Look at the Jets last year and this year. Strong D-men with weak goalies(s) and out of the playoffs. This year strong goalie and D-men and they're in the playoffs.

What would be worse, replacing Byfuglien with Hainsey or replacing Helle with someone like Bishop or Smith? Average and better goalies will get the job done, the Jets did not have even an average goalie last year.

 

[Ogelthorpe]

top tier starting goalie has to be top 3. Look at the goalies left in the playoffs this year. Holtby, Vasilevsky, Fleury, Rinne, and Hellebuyck.
It’s very rare to win it all with a Niemi in net.

 

[Critical13]

I don't fully agree, but good list.

In my opinion, the difference in value between wingers and centers isn't nearly as big as it is thought to be. The thought is that wingers are complimentary players and have less defensive responsibility. The center leads the line. What about players like Taylor Hall, Nikita Kucherov, and Patrick Kane? They can play with mediocre centers and still lead their line. And there are players like Stone, Schwartz, and Marchand who are also better defensively than most top line centers in the league. I think the reason that wingers are thought to have less value is because they are usually snipers, and their shots are best utilized on the wing. Players like Hall, Kuch, and Kane, are the exceptions. So IMO playmakers have more value than snipers, it is not so much based on their position.

I would also have #1 Goalie a bit higher.

I think exceptional wingers like Kuch and Kane break the mold a bit, my rankings are just based on the guys huddled around the "average" mark for each position. For example, an average #1 winger might be a guy like Connor or Arvidsson. In that case, the average 2nd line C is just as valuable IMO, or in most cases, more so. I think it is easier to find 60 point winger than a 55 point C. Not claiming to be right, just how I feel. I would agree that playmakers, especially the ones who can control the entire ice (Scheifele, Marner, Kane, Barkov, Marchand) are more valuable than snipers.

top tier starting goalie has to be top 3. Look at the goalies left in the playoffs this year. Holtby, Vasilevsky, Fleury, Rinne, and Hellebuyck.
It’s very rare to win it all with a Niemi in net.

This is based on players who are near the averages of each position. A top tier goalie is probably the hardest thing to predict, and that really screws with trade value.

 

[GregSirico]

Top end goalie is not the most important but it sure is top 3 important.

 

[Stuzchuk]

1C
1D
2D
1G
2C
1RW
1LW
3D
4D
2RW
3C
2LW
5D
2G
3RW
3LW
6D
4C
7D
4RW
4LW

pretty much this for me as well

 

[boredmale]

I would switch backup goalies with 4th liners. But it's tough because backup goalies range so far and some 4th liners excel at certain little things giving them a niche value

Goalies seem to have the least amount of trade value

 

[Critical13]

pretty much this for me as well

My problem with this list is that I've seen "average" #1 goalies traded for 2nd round picks or worse, but I can't remember ever seeing an average 2nd line C dealt for a 2nd or worse.

 

[boredmale]

My problem with this list is that I've seen "average" #1 goalies traded for 2nd round picks or worse, but I can't remember ever seeing an average 2nd liner dealt for a 2nd or worse.

Probably the best return I seen for a goalie(in recent memory) was 9th pick overall for Schneider. Overall though the return for top (but not top 5-6) goalies is much less then you would expect for top but not 5-6 players in any other position

 

[93LEAFS]

Everything is relative. I'd still start with a good goaltender. Three of the top teams left in the playoffs have Vezina nominees. Yes, they have good D-men too but it starts in goal.

Good goaltending can be erratic. Look at Carey Price this year. Positional players tend to be more consistent year to year with less variance. Yes, you can use the example of this year with Vezina finalists, but last year none of the final 4 were nominated. In 2016 one of the finalist was in the final 4. In 2015, none of the finalists made it, same with 2014 and 2013. So, this year seems to be a statistical aberration against current trends. You need competent and good goaltending, but not elite.

The big thing is, if you are saying goaltending is your centerpiece are you paying him the most, due to him being of the highest value in your opinion? Pretty much every-team that wins highest paid player is a center. I think Doughty made more than Kopitar one of the Cups and Chara made the most on the Bruins. But, Pens and Blackhawks (tie between Toews and Kane) who account for 6 of the last 10 cups highest paid players were their franchise centers. No team won with their goalie being the most expensive piece.

Edit: To be fair, I stopped looking after 5 years of seasons, but just for fairness, I'll mention the finals in 2012 was between 2 Vezina nominated goalies.

 

[Critical13]

Probably the best return I seen for a goalie(in recent memory) was 9th pick overall for Schneider

At that time, though, he was a young top end #1 who the whole hockey world believed would be in the top 5 for a long time. Definitely not average. Now he is average, and there is no way he gets a top 10 pick. He might get a late 1st, but even that I doubt.

 

[DRW204]

I think OP needs to provide some stats/player or trade examples of the positions to clarify what parameters he is using for each position/depth ranking and what constitutes as average? I’d take an “average” top line W (Ehlers/M. Stone both ranked 15th in scoring for LW and RWs) over an average 2C. They are ranked one after the other so it's not like it is way out to lunch.

Team needs play a huge part in these rankings too.