GFS
Registered User
- Apr 12, 2010
- 3,003
- 265
This trade addressed a need for the Rangers which is their Tom Wilson problem so...
Shouldn't the trade be assessed based on the info available at the time of the trade? So a 3rd round pick would be between 65th and 96th overall and how you think the Rangers will do in the standings next season. What Vegas does with the pick afterwards should be irrelevant to this discussion.We don't know what that pick is or what it will be used for, so until we do NYR is the clear winner since they got a player who provides something they need.
Shouldn't the trade be assessed based on the info available at the time of the trade? So a 3rd round pick would be between 65th and 96th overall and how you think the Rangers will do in the standings next season. What Vegas does with the pick afterwards should be irrelevant to this discussion.
Wouldn't that be evaluating the GM's drafting skills? This is more about determining who won the trade based on what each team got back in value. I simply look at Vegas' return as a third round pick, as vague as that may seem.But how can you determine whether that pick is worth more than Reaves or not? That pick could be everything between a superstar and a player that never does better than ECHL or the juniors in any other country?
We don't know what that pick is or what it will be used for, so until we do NYR is the clear winner since they got a player who provides something they need.
Based on the level of talent you could find there and based on Reaves current level. Otherwise why not trade 4 3rds? Or a 1st?But how can you determine whether that pick is worth more than Reaves or not? That pick could be everything between a superstar and a player that never does better than ECHL or the juniors in any other country?
Rangers spent precious cap on a useless player that’s only there in reaction to a single incident last year.
Wilson will show how useless Reaves is next time the Caps and Rangers meet. As someone else mentioned, Reaves never did anything to slow down Wilson when he played for the Pens or in the SCF against Vegas.
Oh no....What are the Rangers ever going to do with Reaves taking up 1.75 in cap space. Probably going to have to trade Fox now.
You can acquire a much better player than Reaves for the 3rd. Nate Schmidt, Alex Tuch & Brandon Montour for example.
Based on the level of talent you could find there and based on Reaves current level. Otherwise why not trade 4 3rds? Or a 1st?
So you'd trade a 1st for reaves?How can you say that one is better than the other without looking at what you have in front of you? A trade involving a pick for a player will always be a win for the team that gets the player (as long as it's not just a cap move) until you know what that pick is or what it's used for.
How many 3rd round picks have NHL careers? 12%.
So basically a 1 in 10 shot that draft pick will be an NHL player.
Ranger's win this because they needed to add toughness and Reaves will provide that. Even if it's for 9 minutes a game on the 4th line for 41 games vs certain teams.
So you'd trade a 1st for reaves?
So why are you refusing to recognize people see a 3rd the same way when discussing reaves?No. I think a 1st in theory is worth more than Reaves because the chance of you getting an NHL-player is high enough.
So your argument is more "I just think Reaves is worth a 3rd" not "any nhler is worth a 3rd bc any warm body is better than any future"
Yet if someone traded a 1st you'd know it was a losing trade? How bout if it was 2 1sts? 3? I don't get why you're pretending to be confused here when you definitely do get that picks have immediate value based on potential. So to put numbers on it, if you squander a value of 50 on a player who's value is 20, you can lose the trade bc you should've gotten say Reaves and a 4th.My argument is that I find it odd to discuss winners and losers of a trade where we know nothing about the outcome when what's involved is most likely marginal. Do you win because a 12% chance of drafting an NHL-player is worth more than what Reaves can give you, or what?