Keep the Vegas Pick?

[Frk It]

Exercise in theory here.

For the sake of argument, let's assume a ''worst case scenario" of Vegas winning it all, so their pick is 31.

What would be the combined value of 31+34+36 overall? Is that enough to be worth a top 10 pick? A top 5 pick? I've seen draft charts from a few years ago that suggest it's worth as much as 3 or 4 overall, but I'm not convinced that Montreal or Ottawa would go for that deal.

I'm not necessarily advocating for Detroit to make a move like this. Just trying to gauge the currency of the picks. But, if something like that ended up being on the table, would any fans here be willing to exchange all 3 of those picks for having another top 10 (or maybe even a top 5) to go with the 6th overall pick? I'm normally not interested in relinquishing extra picks once acquired, but the thought of coming away with both a Bouchard/Hughes/Dobson AND either another one of those same defensemen, or a Wahlstrom/Kotkaniemi, gives me pause...

I can appreciate that someone took the time to try and quantify the price of trading draft picks.

But at the end of the day, it's going to be highly subjective and come down the opinion of each GM as far as what that costs. I think we are probably better off keeping 31/34/36 then what we would be able to acquire for trading those 3 picks.

Having 4 picks in the top 40 is a damn good spot to be in as is. I am working on a top 40 ranking I will post in the near future, I see a lot of talent available there.

 

[BinCookin]

Exercise in theory here.

For the sake of argument, let's assume a ''worst case scenario" of Vegas winning it all, so their pick is 31.

What would be the combined value of 31+34+36 overall? Is that enough to be worth a top 10 pick? A top 5 pick? I've seen draft charts from a few years ago that suggest it's worth as much as 3 or 4 overall, but I'm not convinced that Montreal or Ottawa would go for that deal.

I'm not necessarily advocating for Detroit to make a move like this. Just trying to gauge the currency of the picks. But, if something like that ended up being on the table, would any fans here be willing to exchange all 3 of those picks for having another top 10 (or maybe even a top 5) to go with the 6th overall pick? I'm normally not interested in relinquishing extra picks once acquired, but the thought of coming away with both a Bouchard/Hughes/Dobson AND either another one of those same defensemen, or a Wahlstrom/Kotkaniemi, gives me pause...

According to my value chart based (basically) on trades GM's have made pick for pick is:

31 (320pts)
34 (270pts)
36 (250pts)

So 840 pts worth OR ... #15 pick (830pts)

 

[njx9]

Yeah, I have a hard time believing any GM would give up a pick high enough to warrant dumping all three picks, whatever the value charts say. Ideally, in my mind, it also puts us in a great spot of being able to really take some flyers on high upside guys (Merkley?) who we might ordinarily pass on.

 

[BinCookin]

P.S. I agree with Frk it, id rather have 3 players in top 4, than one around #15

 

[jkutswings]

P.S. I agree with Frk it, id rather have 3 players in top 4, than one around #15

Completely agree. I didn't know how high the combined value was, but if it's only circa 15, then keep the picks.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Exercise in theory here.

For the sake of argument, let's assume a ''worst case scenario" of Vegas winning it all, so their pick is 31.

What would be the combined value of 31+34+36 overall? Is that enough to be worth a top 10 pick? A top 5 pick? I've seen draft charts from a few years ago that suggest it's worth as much as 3 or 4 overall, but I'm not convinced that Montreal or Ottawa would go for that deal.

I'm not necessarily advocating for Detroit to make a move like this. Just trying to gauge the currency of the picks. But, if something like that ended up being on the table, would any fans here be willing to exchange all 3 of those picks for having another top 10 (or maybe even a top 5) to go with the 6th overall pick? I'm normally not interested in relinquishing extra picks once acquired, but the thought of coming away with both a Bouchard/Hughes/Dobson AND either another one of those same defensemen, or a Wahlstrom/Kotkaniemi, gives me pause...

I think that the chart doesn't account for how substantial the "luxury tax" or the premium that is now placed on top 10 picks. I'd really only be willing to move 31+34/36 to move up, but if you're talking about another crack at the top 9 guys, I'd probably take a leap of faith. Double dipping on Dobson and Hughes would be enormous. The offensive dynamo LD and the all situations potential #1 RD. Could sub in Boqvist or Bouchard for Hughes. Dobson and any of the other 3 to get the best stylistic match. Or take your favorite defenseman and whatever forward is remaining. Or take Tkachuk and whatever defenseman is remaining. So many plays and so much talent to salivate over.

 

[rhef3]

It would be tough to give up those 3 picks to move up to the 15th or so spot. I guess it's a gauge, would someone like veleno, hayton, or kotkaniemi be more valuable than say bokk, bahl and McIssac ?
(Don't know what final rankings will be during draft)

still a good amount of value to be had in the early 30's

 

[DetroitRed]

I wouldn't be happy if my team didn't make the playoffs but then traded away their first-round pick for what Detroit has to offer. I think the Wings would have a better shot of trying to get down to like 20th, and there's a number of defenders and centers ranked in that neighborhood.

Odds are that one of the guys they pick from the Vegas pick until the end of the second round work out pretty well for them anyway. But twentieth, or around it, is a nice area. That's where they got Cholowski, Mantha and Svechnikov, obviously.

 

[Flowah]

According to my value chart based (basically) on trades GM's have made pick for pick is:

31 (320pts)
34 (270pts)
36 (250pts)

So 840 pts worth OR ... #15 pick (830pts)

Sounds about right to me.

There's no way a bunch of 2nd rounders are worth a 3OA or 5OA. Historically those players are just significantly more likely to be impact players than anyone taken after 30. Anyone taken after 30 isn't even likely to be an NHL regular.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

P.S. I agree with Frk it, id rather have 3 players in top 4, than one around #15

I want four picks in the top 40. That is the reason I really like packaging AA with one of these picks to see if we can move up. Maybe we cannot find someone to deal with though. I would tack one of our two thirds with AA and one of the seconds if it is for the right spot with the right guy falling. But I think taking 4 guys in the top 40 is important. That is why I like using AA as the thing to hopefully bring enough to move up a little. I am not sure he helps enough, hopefully the right team likes him, I think it could help us long-term to hopefully do that.

 

[RedWingzz]

I want four picks in the top 40. That is the reason I really like packaging AA with one of these picks to see if we can move up. Maybe we cannot find someone to deal with though. I would tack one of our two thirds with AA and one of the seconds if it is for the right spot with the right guy falling. But I think taking 4 guys in the top 40 is important. That is why I like using AA as the thing to hopefully bring enough to move up a little. I am not sure he helps enough, hopefully the right team likes him, I think it could help us long-term to hopefully do that.

Don't you think we should at least give AA a legitimate chance to be a top 6 forward, with consistent PP time? I'm not talking the Blash treatment, where he gets minutes for 5 games, then doesn't for the next 5. As far as skills go, AA has it all. He can skate, he can dangle, he can shoot. Sure he needs to use his teammates more, and become more engaged and more responsible, but I think it would be a mistake to trade him before he gets a fair shot.

Blashill wants him to "earn" his minutes. Why not give him the minutes and see what happens. I'd play him in a top 6 role for the first 25 gaes next year and see what happens.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Don't you think we should at least give AA a legitimate chance to be a top 6 forward, with consistent PP time? I'm not talking the Blash treatment, where he gets minutes for 5 games, then doesn't for the next 5. As far as skills go, AA has it all. He can skate, he can dangle, he can shoot. Sure he needs to use his teammates more, and become more engaged and more responsible, but I think it would be a mistake to trade him before he gets a fair shot.

Blashill wants him to "earn" his minutes. Why not give him the minutes and see what happens. I'd play him in a top 6 role for the first 25 gaes next year and see what happens.

I am not interested in gifting Athanasiou anything and have been over that several times. That Athanasiou himself in interviews seems to believe this is the problem is a part of why I am not interested in this plan. His minutes went up, he wanted to play in the middle some him and his agent both talked about. That he isn't doing enough is on AA at this point. AA's ice time since his first season is up over 6 minutes. He is a marginal PP guy because almost all of his offense comes on the rush and that is really a hockey IQ issues. But he went from 9 minutes to 13 to 15 minutes. He has been on a PP unit for most of the last two years and has an amazing 2 PP goals and 7 points. People can keep making excuses for him, but the dude doesn't work hard enough yet to be an impact player consistently and he isn't actually being messed with as much as people want to say.

If we wait 40 games his value might completely crater.

Is there a risk sure? But I don't think he is getting there in Detroit, honestly at this point if he gets it I am going to point out it was the trade or change of scenery that was likely responsible for that in advance warning for those that will post that over and over. I don't think AA should be in a long-term plans, I hope they move him this off-season.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

The only way you move the pick is in a pkg with a roster player for a pick in the late teens

Otherwise keep it and just draft

 

[odin1981]

At the moment with them being 1 W away from being a conference final team I would lean toward trading it for 2 late 30's and early 40's picks. We have all seen first hand for the past 20 years or so how unsuccessful late 1st round picks go so I would rather move back 10-15 spots and pick twice if possible.

 

[Wingsfan 4 life]

If that pick is traded, its very likely to move up or down a couple spots depending whose on the board.

We have two 2nds that could be used to move up. I can also see Holland collecting future pick(s) to move down.

I'd be really surprised if the pick is traded outright

 

[Go Wings]

P.S. I agree with Frk it, id rather have 3 players in top 4, than one around #15

I depends one player may fall to 15 that shouldnt be there. Every year some player starts falls a lot farther than be should. Suppose Hughes fall to 15 (unlikely but u never know). If that happens I am fall for trading picks to get him. Detroit the has say Bouchard and Hughes instead of Bouchard and a bunch of guys that wont reach Hughes level.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The idea that this late 1st round pick could be the centerpiece of a trade that would net a player who would make a notable difference regarding the fortunes of this team over the next 5 years is laughable. Teams don't trade young top pairing D-men or potential top pairing D-men away unless there's a pressing reason and if they do they want more in return than this team has.

 

[ShelbyZ]

For reference, the 2011 draft was the last time a pick in that general area of the 1st round was traded straight up for one player and not part of a package. The Caps sent #26 overall to Chicago for Troy Brouwer.

As far as value, Brouwer at the time was:

-25YO coming off two years where he had 22 and 17 Goals and 40 and 36 Points (78 and 79 games)
-An impending RFA that was on a bridge deal and due a decent raise
-Two years away from UFA eligibility (and he signed a 2-year extension a few days after the trade)

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The value of a guy like Brouwer would be close to zero for the Wings at this time. That's a piece you add when you ready to go, not when you haven't even got the players you want to build around yet.

 

[Winger98]

The value of a guy like Brouwer would be close to zero for the Wings at this time. That's a piece you add when you ready to go, not when you haven't even got the players you want to build around yet.

He'd probably be more than we'd get out of that pick if we used it ourselves, though. I doubt we can package it to move up, and I don't see a lot of teams with enough picks to make it worth our while to move back. Maybe there is a swap to be made for a future #1, but I consider a deal for a "Brouwer" type guy just to flip him later to recoup a more favorable pick/asset at the next TDL.

 

[ShelbyZ]

The value of a guy like Brouwer would be close to zero for the Wings at this time. That's a piece you add when you ready to go, not when you haven't even got the players you want to build around yet.

That's what I meant, without really explaining it lol. Trading the pick straight up for a player at the value level of 25YO Brouwer probably doesn't help the team much.

He'd probably be more than we'd get out of that pick if we used it ourselves, though. I doubt we can package it to move up, and I don't see a lot of teams with enough picks to make it worth our while to move back. Maybe there is a swap to be made for a future #1, but I consider a deal for a "Brouwer" type guy just to flip him later to recoup a more favorable pick/asset at the next TDL.

INB4 we all get reminded that the RW didn't get anything for Mike Green since they waited till the deadline

 

[PullHard]

What about something like

Nyquist @ 50% retention
Athanasiou's RFA rights
Vegas 1st

for Blackhawks 1st (8th overall)

 

[njx9]

What about something like

Nyquist @ 50% retention
Athanasiou's RFA rights
Vegas 1st

for Blackhawks 1st (8th overall)

I just don't think Nyquist and AA are going to be all that appealing to very many teams for the kind of return we'd want. In the above, I imagine we'd be taking back a Seabrook, rather than a year's worth of minor retention on Nyquist.

 

[Flowah]

Chia's apparently shopping #10!

Maybe we can get him to bite!

 

[PullHard]

I just don't think Nyquist and AA are going to be all that appealing to very many teams for the kind of return we'd want. In the above, I imagine we'd be taking back a Seabrook, rather than a year's worth of minor retention on Nyquist.

I think you're onto something, I'd be peddling that to the Hawks with the hopes of them being desperate not to waste another year of Toews + Kane + Keith before they are no longer as useful. Nyquist and AA immediately help their top 6/9 wings out. No more Jurco/ Sharp/ whoever. They'd have Saad, Kane, Nyquist, Sikura, DeBrincat, etc. Makes them a lot more formidable upfront.

Chia's apparently shopping #10!

Maybe we can get him to bite!

Same logic applies here. Give McDavid and Draisaitl some wing options. Between RNH, Rattie, Lucic, Nyquist, AA, Puljujarvi, Yamamoto, etc. they will have a good group of top 6/9 wingers to roll with their top Cs.


The logic here is that Detroit capitalizes on some lesser assets/ guys who don't fit in moving forward to grab another shot at Wahlstrom/ Hughes/ Bouchard/ Dobson etc. to fill in our cupboards a bit more.