Confirmed with Link: Pens trade 1st (No. 31) + Oskar Sundqvist for Ryan Reaves and Blues 2nd (No. 51)

[froods]

I did a few pages back. It's essentially a 6th round pick and Sundqvist.

Yea, you get it.

 

[HandshakeLine]

dropping 20 spots and giving up a prospect for a 4th line player is still bad asset management. spin it however you like.

Picking 31st is not the same as picking in the top 10, however you'd like to spin it either.

 

[froods]

Picking 31st is not the same as picking in the top 10, however you'd like to spin it either.

Without mentioning we picked up a second as well. I am spinning it right?

 

[Terrapin]

The idea of this being a deterrent has to stop. If you want to argue that he is physical and can play some, whatever. But this deterrent stuff just doesn't exist. The Pens had Asham, Godard, and Engelland the night of the Isles' gong show.

I'm sure you already know how that game went down, since it's been posted here several times. Yet you guys keep ignoring it to push your agenda. But just in case you forgot:

Asham didn't play in that game.

Rupp and Engelland got tossed early in the game (along with Matt Martin). Engelland jumped on Martin, and possibly saved Talbot from getting mauled.

Godard was left for the Pens. Haley, Konopka, and Gillies were left for the Isles.

And oh btw, Godard leaving the bench may have saved Johnston from getting pummeled by that plug Haley.

I'm sure you guys will 'forget' these facts again, so I'll be happy to remind you.

 

[HandshakeLine]

I'm spinning so much, I think I need to sit down for a bit.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

dropping 20 spots and giving up a prospect for a 4th line player is still bad asset management. spin it however you like.

A prospect who still isn't NHL ready, will not amount to anything more than a 4th liner and is waiver eligible.

 

[froods]

I'm spinning so much, I think I need to sit down for a bit.

Yea, man, take a break. We won't have to respond to anymore hyperbole for another minute or two. Lol.

 

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Please help me understand what "that cost" is!
.

They primarily cost themselves the opportunity to use that first-round pick to trade for a real player in a position of need to actually make the team better. This is a serious opportunity cost, because they need both a 3C and another good D, and they probably don't have enough cap space to address both at UFA prices.

 

[HandshakeLine]

A prospect who still isn't NHL ready, will not amount to anything more than a 4th liner and is waiver eligible.

Which is a huge thing. If the team doesn't think that Sundqvist is going to be able to land on the opening roster, and doesn't think they can sneak him through waivers... that's a problem. Disingenuous takes on drafting last in the first round vs. early in the second, the very real fact of the matter is that we could have also conceivably lost Sundqvist for nothing in a few months.

I think a lot of these posts are overrating someone they're familiar with but haven't watched play much (Sundqvist) and ignoring the play of someone they haven't watched (Reaves) and cherry picking stats to make some really bad faith claims.

 

[gdsmack267]

All we have left must be yes men. How does no one in that management group cut the cord during that trade call. Like beyond stupid. Could have just re-signed Sestito for free

 

[Asuna]

Picking 31st is not the same as picking in the top 10, however you'd like to spin it either.

it's not, but it's better to pick 31 than 51

A prospect who still isn't NHL ready, will not amount to anything more than a 4th liner and is waiver eligible.

it's still an overpayment lol.

 

[HandshakeLine]

They primarily cost themselves the opportunity to use that first-round pick to trade for a real player in a position of need to actually make the team better. This is a serious opportunity cost, because they need both a 3C and another good D, and they probably don't have enough cap space to address both at UFA prices.

But in a weak draft, is there REALLY that much difference between picking 31st and 52nd? I don't remember who did the big round-up on draft order a few years back, but if I remember right, there really wasn't much difference between picking outside of the top 10 in the first round and the second round.

 

[froods]

They primarily cost themselves the opportunity to use that first-round pick to trade for a real player in a position of need to actually make the team better. This is a serious opportunity cost, because they need both a 3C and another good D, and they probably don't have enough cap space to address both at UFA prices.

A few things here.

#1 Other GMs are looking at the same draft. That second round pick is slightly less valuable than the first we traded. We could easily flip that for a D-man.

#2 We are looking at just under 19 million in cap space right now. After we resign the RFAs, we probably still have 6-7 million to address the second needs.

#3 Reaves does make the team better

 

[froods]

All we have left must be yes men. How does no one in that management group cut the cord during that trade call. Like beyond stupid. Could have just re-signed Sestito for free

Reaves is a good hockey player. Sestito is not.

 

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

But in a weak draft, is there REALLY that much difference between picking 31st and 52nd? I don't remember who did the big round-up on draft order a few years back, but if I remember right, there really wasn't much difference between picking outside of the top 10 in the first round and the second round.

I don't care about the picks for picking. Nobody they pick at any slot is going to be ready to help the Crosby/Malkin Pens win another cup.

I care about the picks for trading. First-round picks return good players. Second-round picks return Ron Hainsey. I'd say that's an important difference.

 

[Erz8771]

Another thing. This organization owes Crosby, Malkin and Letang a piece of mind. Whether you want to admit it or not. They will get that now with Reaves playing on there team.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

it's still an overpayment lol.

Oh I agree that moving down 20 spots for Reaves is alot. But I couldn't care less about Sundqvist. Plenty of guys like him get waived.

 

[froods]

I don't care about the picks for picking. Nobody they pick at any slot is going to be ready to help the Crosby/Malkin Pens win another cup.

I care about the picks for trading. First-round picks return good players. Second-round picks return Ron Hainsey. I'd say that's an important difference.

The 31st pick has much different value than the 15th pick for example. Your statement is too black and white in a situation that is not black and white. Trading future picks, yes. Trading already ordered picks, much different.

 

[HandshakeLine]

it's not, but it's better to pick 31 than 51

Okay then, why is it better? What's the drafting strategy here? What changes?

Also, let's take into account that not everybody thinks there's a difference there, statistically speaking.

http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819

So, really, the question comes down to-- do you think your BPA is going to be on the board at 31 vs 51? Or do you consider the draft weak enough that you're going to be going more off-the-board and thus drafting position doesn't matter as much?

 

[Terrapin]

I don't care about the picks for picking. Nobody they pick at any slot is going to be ready to help the Crosby/Malkin Pens win another cup.

I care about the picks for trading. First-round picks return good players. Second-round picks return Ron Hainsey. I'd say that's an important difference.

31st pick in a weak draft isn't going to net us much in return, and Sundqvist will bring back even less.

 

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

A few things here.

#1 Other GMs are looking at the same draft. That second round pick is slightly less valuable than the first we traded. We could easily flip that for a D-man.

#2 We are looking at just under 19 million in cap space right now. After we resign the RFAs, we probably still have 6-7 million to address the second needs.

#3 Reaves does make the team better

#1) Flipping a #2 for a defenseman gets you Ron Hainsey. The goal is to improve; that's not an improvement.

#2) Good D-men and good 3Cs each cost about $4 million at UFA prices. You're at least a million short there. It's necessary to do one of them through trade.

#3) No, he doesn't. He's not as good as the 4th liners already on the team, and he doesn't fit the system.

 

[MrBrightside]

Wait, why is it better to pick 31st than 51st is an actual question?

 

[Asuna]

Okay then, why is it better? What's the drafting strategy here? What changes?

Also, let's take into account that not everybody thinks there's a difference there, statistically speaking.

http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819

So, really, the question comes down to-- do you think your BPA is going to be on the board at 31 vs 51? Or do you consider the draft weak enough that you're going to be going more off-the-board and thus drafting position doesn't matter as much?

me personally? i would've just picked timmins at 31.

obviously the pens feel they needed reaves more than whoever was available at the time. and/or they feel the player they like will still be there at 51.

 

[HandshakeLine]

I don't care about the picks for picking. Nobody they pick at any slot is going to be ready to help the Crosby/Malkin Pens win another cup.

I care about the picks for trading. First-round picks return good players. Second-round picks return Ron Hainsey. I'd say that's an important difference.

I'd say it's petitio principii, but you're not in my class so I don't have to grade your work.

Draft picks have different values at different times for different years. And when you're not in the top 10, it really doesn't have any more value as a trade piece than an early 2nd.

 

[Deutschland Dangler]

Wait, why is it better to pick 31st than 51st is an actual question?

I was just thinking the same thing.