Proposal: Joshua Ho-Sang to Pittsburgh

[TS Quint]

Before it was a contract spot AND a roster spot. Now it can be only a contract spot.

You think NYI would have taken him back? They finally got rid of him and they would have taken him back and given him a NHL roster spot? That's what you are telling me?

 

[A Pointed Stick]

I wonder if Ho-Sang is who the Pens were reportedly dangling Juuso Riikola for. It makes sense, money-wise. Think the Isles would have to add, though.

I’m not trading for anyone named after a cough drop.

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

This is post #46...... I'm thinking there are a lot of fantasies here.

You are thick lol. 440 as in 440 pm. Here's reasons why players pass through waivers easily at the beginning of the season, as cited by the Athletic:

Contract limits, Salary cap and liking current players: At the beginning of the season teams have love-affair with their prospects, a majority of which will be tossed back to minors or juniors with ease after the shine has worn off. Contracts are already on the books, re-assigning them is easy enough and there is nothing added to payroll

Here's a Chayka quote.

“Teams are giving their kids a chance,” said one executive.

And teams tend to overvalue their own players. They’ve invested a ton in them – everything from a draft pick to years of development. They’re invested.

“There’s a bit of an endowment type of bias,” Chayka said. “They’re yours. You typically view them higher than the rest of the world. Some guys have a good preseason and you want to see the best in them. You want to give them a chance. A lot of teams want to give their own guy the benefit. It should still be an evaluation but it’s tough.”

Pretty similar to how we all act here when we get a "steal" in the late 2nd round, when that player never winds up being on an NHL roster or takes five years to get there.

Another point from the Athletic:

It’s often preferable to make a trade: One of the interesting side stories of last week’s waiver moves (or lack thereof) is that Ho-Sang cleared waivers and then requested a trade from the Islanders through agent Ian Pulver. On the surface, it looks like a complete misread of the situation from the player’s perspective. You just passed through waivers. Not a single team made the claim. Who is going to make a trade? But the reality is that teams would probably rather trade for a fringe NHL player than acquire them via waivers because it provides more flexibility. Had a team claimed Ho-Sang, they’d have to keep him on their roster for 30 days or 10 games before they can send him to the AHL. Otherwise, you’re basically just offering him back up to the Islanders when you put him on waivers to send him down.

“It’s only 24 hours. You have to put that player on your NHL roster. You can’t put him in the minors,” said an agent. “The team that just put him on waivers can claim him and send him to the minors. They have first dibs.”

If you trade for a fringe player, you keep your total contracts at the same number (assuming it’s one-for-one) and you can send him to your AHL team. We’ve already seen one player from that list last week go unclaimed and then get traded in Vancouver defenseman Alex Biega who was sent to Detroit in the middle of the night for minor league forward David Pope.

Do I think right now will Ho-Sang will be traded for a 7th? Of course not. Do I think he'll be traded for a 2nd? No. Do I think someone else may toss their "once-heralded, now nothing" prospect for Ho-Sang? Possibly.

 

[TS Quint]

You are thick lol. 440 as in 440 pm. Here's reasons why players pass through waivers easily at the beginning of the season, as cited by the Athletic:

Contract limits, Salary cap and liking current players: At the beginning of the season teams have love-affair with their prospects, a majority of which will be tossed back to minors or juniors with ease after the shine has worn off. Contracts are already on the books, re-assigning them is easy enough and there is nothing added to payroll

Here's a Chayka quote.

“Teams are giving their kids a chance,” said one executive.

And teams tend to overvalue their own players. They’ve invested a ton in them – everything from a draft pick to years of development. They’re invested.

“There’s a bit of an endowment type of bias,” Chayka said. “They’re yours. You typically view them higher than the rest of the world. Some guys have a good preseason and you want to see the best in them. You want to give them a chance. A lot of teams want to give their own guy the benefit. It should still be an evaluation but it’s tough.”

Pretty similar to how we all act here when we get a "steal" in the late 2nd round, when that player never winds up being on an NHL roster or takes five years to get there.

Another point from the Athletic:

It’s often preferable to make a trade: One of the interesting side stories of last week’s waiver moves (or lack thereof) is that Ho-Sang cleared waivers and then requested a trade from the Islanders through agent Ian Pulver. On the surface, it looks like a complete misread of the situation from the player’s perspective. You just passed through waivers. Not a single team made the claim. Who is going to make a trade? But the reality is that teams would probably rather trade for a fringe NHL player than acquire them via waivers because it provides more flexibility. Had a team claimed Ho-Sang, they’d have to keep him on their roster for 30 days or 10 games before they can send him to the AHL. Otherwise, you’re basically just offering him back up to the Islanders when you put him on waivers to send him down.

“It’s only 24 hours. You have to put that player on your NHL roster. You can’t put him in the minors,” said an agent. “The team that just put him on waivers can claim him and send him to the minors. They have first dibs.”

If you trade for a fringe player, you keep your total contracts at the same number (assuming it’s one-for-one) and you can send him to your AHL team. We’ve already seen one player from that list last week go unclaimed and then get traded in Vancouver defenseman Alex Biega who was sent to Detroit in the middle of the night for minor league forward David Pope.

Do I think right now will Ho-Sang will be traded for a 7th? Of course not. Do I think he'll be traded for a 2nd? No. Do I think someone else may toss their "once-heralded, now nothing" prospect for Ho-Sang? Possibly.

And you think something has changed this week?

 

[PhilThrillPill]

We have a fourth line of WBS youngsters outplaying second line regular NHLers...
When Malkin\Chucky\Bjug\Rust get back we will have a lot of RICH MANS problems on our hands with 14-15 legitimate NHL forwards and difficult decision as to who we sit out!

Therefore, literally, the LAST thing we need is somebody like HO-SANG. The only thing we are lacking is a #6D to run with Marino (who is playing like a 2nd pair PMD at the moment.

We need to rid ourselves of JJ and Gudbranson. Addition, by subtraction.

 

[Treb]

You think NYI would have taken him back? They finally got rid of him and they would have taken him back and given him a NHL roster spot? That's what you are telling me?

If the other team claim him and waive him, Islanders could claim him and send him down without waiver if no one else put a claim.

 

[Crazy Cizikas]

No! The Isles (Lou Lamoriello) changed his number, not him!

Silly me for not using the passive voice. I should have said that his number was changed from 66.

 

[GOilers88]

Would rather just keep Ho-Sang than give him away.

Don't waivers insinuate a give away?

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Where is Jesse Puljujarvi right now?

Yeah...and there goes your value.

We didn’t want to give up a roster by claiming JHS for free on waivers. No team wanted to lose the contract spot.

What you are failing to notice is Puljujarvi isn’t counted against our 50 contract spots so no, we wouldn’t for a second consider this move as we’d still be using one of our 2 available contract spots since Puljujarvi currently isn’t counted as he’s without a contract and willfully signed over seas with an NHL out clause.

 

[Ciao]

AHL roster player for the contract swap. Conditional 3rd round pick if he can make it 30 games and get 15 points with the Pens. If not it’s a 5th. He has some offensive upside which intrigues me, but there are a lot of question marks with him.

Any recent examples of a player clearing waivers and then being traded for a conditional third?

 

[BudBundy]

Isles fan are absolutely delusional if they think a guy all 30 teams passed on during waivers is worth anything. Like worth literally any asset. “But bbbut bbut roster spot!” Whatever. If any team thought he was better than what they already have, theyd make the move and would have got him for NOTHING. Now he’s a trade asset? Delusional.

 

[Bank Shot]

Maybe the Islanders can trade Ho-Sang to Europe where he might actually be good.

 

[varano]

Would rather just keep Ho-Sang than give him away.

He also doesnt want to play on the islanders so yeah....

 

[Riptide]

I respectfully disagree. Give Ho Sang a genuine opportunity and he can be a top 6 forward. I would hate to see us give up Josh for peanuts only for him to succeed with a division rival

I don't think he'd get that in PIT. I'm all for acquiring him if the cost is dirt cheap but I doubt he'd have much of a chance - even with all the injuries we have. I mean our 4c (Lafferty) now has 3g/5pts in the 4 games since getting called up. Johnson who's on 4w has 2pts in 3 games. Sure those were in blowouts and it won't continue... but when you're getting that type of production from L4 odds are the GM/coach isn't going to make a change. Especially when those guys can PK and are not bad defensively.

 

[Riptide]

We can agree to disagree.

You can disagree all you want... but NYI just waived him and every GM in the league had a chance to get him for free - they all passed. That should tell you a lot about where his value around the league actually is... and it's not at "a 3rd or a 4th".

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

You can disagree all you want... but NYI just waived him and every GM in the league had a chance to get him for free - they all passed. That should tell you a lot about where his value around the league actually is... and it's not at "a 3rd or a 4th".

Agree to disagree.

 

[Riptide]

Agree to disagree.

Disagree all you want - the proof is right there in black and white.

 

[doublechili]

I’m not trading for anyone named after a cough drop.

IDK, I'd take Taylor Hall....

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

Disagree all you want - the proof is right there in black and white.

Agree to disagree

 

[stl76]

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. If a waived player is picked up, he has to run through waivers again by the team that claims him if they want him to go to the minors. If a player is traded for he can be immediately placed in the minors without having to go through waivers again.

Not saying it would warrant a return like a first but I think that the value would be a little closer to a 3rd or 4th than it would be a 7th.

If you claim Ho Sang you a) have to play him in the NHL and b) are taking on a contract.

It is likely easier to get rid of Josh via a trade because some team might be able to swap one undesirable player for another

You are thick lol. 440 as in 440 pm. Here's reasons why players pass through waivers easily at the beginning of the season, as cited by the Athletic:

Contract limits, Salary cap and liking current players: At the beginning of the season teams have love-affair with their prospects, a majority of which will be tossed back to minors or juniors with ease after the shine has worn off. Contracts are already on the books, re-assigning them is easy enough and there is nothing added to payroll

Here's a Chayka quote.

“Teams are giving their kids a chance,” said one executive.

And teams tend to overvalue their own players. They’ve invested a ton in them – everything from a draft pick to years of development. They’re invested.

“There’s a bit of an endowment type of bias,” Chayka said. “They’re yours. You typically view them higher than the rest of the world. Some guys have a good preseason and you want to see the best in them. You want to give them a chance. A lot of teams want to give their own guy the benefit. It should still be an evaluation but it’s tough.”

Pretty similar to how we all act here when we get a "steal" in the late 2nd round, when that player never winds up being on an NHL roster or takes five years to get there.

Another point from the Athletic:

It’s often preferable to make a trade: One of the interesting side stories of last week’s waiver moves (or lack thereof) is that Ho-Sang cleared waivers and then requested a trade from the Islanders through agent Ian Pulver. On the surface, it looks like a complete misread of the situation from the player’s perspective. You just passed through waivers. Not a single team made the claim. Who is going to make a trade? But the reality is that teams would probably rather trade for a fringe NHL player than acquire them via waivers because it provides more flexibility. Had a team claimed Ho-Sang, they’d have to keep him on their roster for 30 days or 10 games before they can send him to the AHL. Otherwise, you’re basically just offering him back up to the Islanders when you put him on waivers to send him down.

“It’s only 24 hours. You have to put that player on your NHL roster. You can’t put him in the minors,” said an agent. “The team that just put him on waivers can claim him and send him to the minors. They have first dibs.”

If you trade for a fringe player, you keep your total contracts at the same number (assuming it’s one-for-one) and you can send him to your AHL team. We’ve already seen one player from that list last week go unclaimed and then get traded in Vancouver defenseman Alex Biega who was sent to Detroit in the middle of the night for minor league forward David Pope.

Do I think right now will Ho-Sang will be traded for a 7th? Of course not. Do I think he'll be traded for a 2nd? No. Do I think someone else may toss their "once-heralded, now nothing" prospect for Ho-Sang? Possibly.

It’s truly amazing to me how many people can’t understand the simple fact that passing thru waivers may make a player move valuable in a trade scenario.

This isn’t rocket surgery...yet every time this happens there is always a loud chorus of “HURRR DURRR COULDVE GOT EM FOR FREE, NO VALUE HURRR DURRR.”

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

It’s truly amazing to me how many people can’t understand the simple fact that passing thru waivers may make a player move valuable in a trade scenario.

This isn’t rocket surgery...yet every time this happens there is always a loud chorus of “HURRR DURRR COULDVE GOT EM FOR FREE, NO VALUE HURRR DURRR.”

Agree to agree

 

[Riptide]

It’s truly amazing to me how many people can’t understand the simple fact that passing thru waivers may make a player move valuable in a trade scenario.

This isn’t rocket surgery...yet every time this happens there is always a loud chorus of “HURRR DURRR COULDVE GOT EM FOR FREE, NO VALUE HURRR DURRR.”

And yet he still will not be worth a 3rd or 4th.

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

And yet he still will not be worth a 3rd or 4th.

Agree to disagree

 

[Riptide]

Agree to disagree

You actually going to present an argument? Or are you just going to continue to pretend you know better while presenting no facts to back up your opinion?

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

You actually going to present an argument? Or are you just going to continue to pretend you know better while presenting no facts to back up your opinion?

I did. You continue to say he's not worth a 3rd or 4th as he passed through waivers. You make it seem like a 3rd or 4th rounder has any value whatsoever. For every Jake Guentzel there's 30 players that play a total of 100 nhl games total amongst all of them.

3rd and 4th rounders have absolutely no value. Josh Ho-Sang has little to no value. To say that he's not worth a 3rd or 4th is like saying Sprong, Baertschi or several other players that cleared waivers don't have that value.

Personally don't think Ho-Sang is going to be traded but I'm pretty sure his value is more than a 3rd-7th round pick. We'll see at some point, until then I'll agree to disagree with you regarding my opinions based on several factors, some of which I 've quoted or explained here and your simple statements not backed up by anything at all.

Disagree with that.

Maybe try to explain your view too, if you're competent enough to do so