Speculation: Rumour, Trade, and Free Agent Speculation 2018-19 - Part X

[Whileee]

Very interesting Whileee.

In general, I agree that these kinds of statistical models are a much better way of evaluating picks than cherry picking. I think we are all prone to cherry picking from time to time. We need to discipline ourselves to keep that in perspective. When we see a better player taken later we need to ask ourselves if the picks looked reasonable at the time? Did someone miss a pick they reasonably should have made? Usually I find I can't justify criticizing the miss or, commonly a good player was passed over by everyone until finally someone decides to jump in because the player is small. If you are simply trying to determine the value of 25 OA vs 20 OA, this is the way to go.

In the case of our '18 1st, I have identified Veleno as the most likely trade off. It is not a generic 29th pick. It is a specific one. Of course the Jets might have taken someone else but considering his attributes and team need and the fact that C is the most highly rated position, I think it is a safe bet. It is not hindsight. He is the one I wanted at the time. I would have been happy to trade up to get him.

In evaluating generic 25-31 picks vs a rental you need to apply the same kind of evaluation to the rentals as you do to the picks. This is a major piece of the puzzle that I see being completely ignored. I'm not talking about the depth rental that you get for a late rd pick or a C prospect. I'm talking about the expensive ones that cost 1st + prospect or a really good prospect. I don't have the numbers but out of all the teams that rent players a max of 1 per year wins the Cup. Many of the rented players disappoint with their new teams. Sometimes they have been overrated. Sometimes they take time to fit in with their new teams. Either way, the rental odds are a lot less than 100%. So it is not a case of 45% likely success late pick vs sure thing rental even if we lower the bar for what constitutes a successful rental.

Just for discussion lets say that rental success = late pick success, both 45%. It is still 45% for 1 PO vs 45% for 7 years minimum.

Regarding Veleno, when the Jets traded the pick what was the probability that he was going to be available at that pick? That's the question.

 

[Whileee]

Delete

 

[tbcwpg]

I do not follow your Panarin point at all. We need and needed a 2C. One was available. We had the resources to match or beat the price he went for. Where is there a similarity? We don't need a Panarin. We don't have the resources. But mostly, he just isn't something we need.

You said that the situations of the Blues and the Jets don't matter, and an ROR deal was available. Given the Jets pending cap situation, an ROR deal was less realistic for the Jets than the Blues. They do matter. The Panarin point is another example - he's "available", sure, but not to the Jets given where we are.

It isn't 2-3 years of deep runs. Each TD deal is for 1 year of a deep run - you hope, if the rental fits and works out well. They often do not. And it isn't vs 7-10 years of maybe getting bounced in the first or second round. It is 7-10 years of doing better than you would otherwise without those assets. That better may mean winning the Cup instead of losing the SCF in 7 games. Or it may mean getting the opportunity to get bounced in the 1st round instead of missing the PO altogether. Exactly what it is is unknown. Just like there is no guarantee the rented player actually brings you a deep run.

I think the impact of Stastny or Hayes on their playoff success this year is greater than the potential impact of those late 1sts in 4-6 years from now. We're just talking about how we value the pick - I value it along the lines of Whilee's research, in that it's a 50/50 shot (give or take) that the player even makes the NHL at all.

The problem I see - IMO, is that pro-rental people expect a really substantial improvement in the odds of winning with the rental. I don't believe that is the case. If they work out well, they give a small boost to the chances of winning. Various betting site odds have been posted several times illustrating that. The thought experiment supports that.

I think the problem with the anti-rental people (if we're using that terminology) is that they start with the idea that the asset given up is almost certainly going to make a big impact down the road, when that is just as unlikely.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Hopefully spending 1st convince players to want to be here so don't charge extra as fa and our players will sign reasonable deals.

 

[Keystone]

The 'what if' counters the position that rentals are good because Stastny was a success. It is just 1 part of looking at the overall success rate of rentals - since it gets compared to the overall success rate of late 1st rd picks.

Yes, Brassard might have done better with the Jets than with the Penguins. I don't think that is likely though. I think Brassard's flaws have been revealed. It turns out that he just isn't that good.

True that it might not have been Veleno - but it certainly should have been. IMO almost certainly would have been - because because he was an obvious fit for need and the BPA. But yes, it is possible that Chevy could have ****ed up at the draft. It isn't like GM's don't. But it would not have been a horrible failure if Chevy had taken Sundin, the player that actually went to that pick.

I fall back on the argument about what kind of long term solution could have been found for some approximation of the same package we have given up by renting a 2C twice - so far. It turns out that ROR was available. My position is not that those assets need to be hoarded. It is just that assets in general need to be used to get real solutions to problems, not band aids. You only get to use them once.

I am 100% with you on ROR and felt that way last season. I know there was some discussion on here about him and if I remember correctly there was lots of opinions he wasn’t affordable in Wpg cap moving forward. Maybe that was before Armia was moved.

It’s also quite likely in my opinion that we couldn’t just give an equivalent on a ROR deal that St Louis paid. We had to go beyond. We went to conference final and most were expecting at least that again. A Wpg 1st was projected to be in the 28-31 range.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Regarding Veleno, when the Jets traded the pick what was the probability that he was going to be available at that pick? That's the question.

Very low IMO. I haven't ever stated that they would have had that in mind at the time. They couldn't have known months earlier. He .... and Sundin too, only illustrate that high quality prospects are still available at that point in the draft.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

You said that the situations of the Blues and the Jets don't matter, and an ROR deal was available. Given the Jets pending cap situation, an ROR deal was less realistic for the Jets than the Blues. They do matter. The Panarin point is another example - he's "available", sure, but not to the Jets given where we are.



I think the impact of Stastny or Hayes on their playoff success this year is greater than the potential impact of those late 1sts in 4-6 years from now. We're just talking about how we value the pick - I value it along the lines of Whilee's research, in that it's a 50/50 shot (give or take) that the player even makes the NHL at all.



I think the problem with the anti-rental people (if we're using that terminology) is that they start with the idea that the asset given up is almost certainly going to make a big impact down the road, when that is just as unlikely.

OK, yes in that sense situation matters. The Jets situation at the time made it an option for them. Panarin might be too. Room could be made for him. But whats the point? He isn't a need.

Yes the pick is in that 50/50 range. So are rental players. Brassard, Duchene, Dzingel, etc, etc. The list of disappointing rentals is long. 50/50 might be optimistic. Stastny worked out well. Hayes is OK so far, but most of his points have come in just 3 of his 14 games, so I'm reserving Judgement. But I'm optimistic that he will be a success.

Edit: Missed your last para. I don't think that is true at all. I know it certainly isn't in my own case. I've stated several times that the low probability of a hit makes it all the more important to hang onto them because you need more chances.

We too often forget about the additional pieces too. Lemmy was a high(ish) pick and has already proven out. He might be worth more than that late first.

 

[Whileee]

Very low IMO. I haven't ever stated that they would have had that in mind at the time. They couldn't have known months earlier. He .... and Sundin too, only illustrate that high quality prospects are still available at that point in the draft.

They are, but they are very uncommon, as illustrated by the draft pick value analyses above.

 

[KingBogo]

You're right KB. We are never going to agree. You don't know what the assets given up might turn out to be or how long it would take (4-6 is a bit extreme, 2-5 is more realistic). We do know that the rentals will be gone after this season, even if they turn out very well. And that is the weakness in the value equation.

There is never a time to make bad bets. This is actually a similar argument to the Logan Stanley one. It isn't that Stanley is horrible and has zero chance of making the NHL. He isn't horrible and he does have a chance. But there were better bets available at the time. There are better bets to be made with our assets than anything short term now.

After catching up on this thread I see how you have spent your day Mort . As mentioned earlier we can agree to disagree on this one and we pretty much have run through our arguments a dozen times over by now. So I'm ready call it a day on this one. We can pick it up again next TD when I'm arguing that Chevy needs to all he can and be even more aggressive to help us repeat as cup champs , and you will argue that now it is vital to conserve assets to ensure we contend for as many cups as possible down the line. Anyways no matter how contested the debate is, I always appreciate how respectful you remain to everyone you engage with.

 

[ps241]

Sorry about the way that embedded reply worked. Seemed like a good idea at the time. I expected better.

OK, fair point.
The window can be extended by the supporting cast as well as by top players. If we didn't already have any, or enough top players then supporting players wouldn't open the window, much less extend it.

That is if we only think of them as players of the ilk of those you listed. That's why I talk about assets. A package of assets of that level bought ROR for StL, with 5 years of term. They can be used in different ways. They can be bundled together or with some other assets. How about bundling a couple of those now gone assets with Trouba in order to get a replacement 1RHD in return, for example. The problem is not trading them. The problem is trading them for players with no term.

Ok Mort thanks for slowing the pitch down for the old guy because I can quote this one.

I have generally been more skeptical of the rental game as far as asset usage for all the reasons listed by the posters who don’t like it. That being said there are very smart posters who are rental Hawks so I am very bipolar on the topic.

My hopes are that Chevy pulls a Sakic level Hail Mary miracle out for flashy show pony cancer boy like Dutch who is at best level with Trouba value wise long term IMO.

 

[Board Bard]

Hopefully spending 1st convince players to want to be here so don't charge extra as fa and our players will sign reasonable deals.

They can't even remember to backcheck. You want them to remember something that's going to cost them money?

 

[surixon]

Very low IMO. I haven't ever stated that they would have had that in mind at the time. They couldn't have known months earlier. He .... and Sundin too, only illustrate that high quality prospects are still available at that point in the draft.

While it would have been nice to have both, did we really end up with a worse C prospect in Gustafson? Very different players but David has performed well at a men's level and has performed similiarly to Veleno in equiviliant age international play (not the be all end all).

I personally have been less than impressed with what i have seen from Veleno in international play. He spends too much time on the perimiter. He is having a big season but this is his fourth QMJHL year.

I don't particularly like rentals but I think we had a solid draft last year even taking into account we didn't have a first.

I wasn't as big of a fan of making the Hayes move this year but if we can convince him to resign it won't be too bad.

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

I liked the Stastny move last year at the deadline and we got robbed out of a trip to the final by being to spent after our Nashville series. 3 rounds deep was an amazing ride last year and I would love to get to final against either Montreal or Toronto this year.

I missed having a 1st round pick at the draft in 2018. Veleno would have been a good prospect for the cupboard..... A potential 2nd line centre behind Schief.

This year I was hoping that Chevy would stand pat...... and not trade out 1st. I liked the D men pick ups @ the deadline and even Heinrichs for a 7th. I hope Heinrichs does not play more than 1 game in the 4 rounds that we play in the playoffs this year.

I did not want to trade our first this year 2019 as I was planning on going to the draft again ( this year in Vancouver)..... I am not going now as we do not have a 1st pick anymore.

I have enjoyed Hayes play for the Jets so far and I think he can be a difference maker for us in the playoffs this year.

I do not want to trade our 2020 1st ...... next year.

It is suppose to be a strong draft and I do not want to go 3 years without a first round pick.

 

[nobody imp0rtant]

It is suppose to be a strong draft and I do not want to go 3 years without a first round pick.

Still hoping a Trouba trade means we won't even go 2 years without one.

 

[KingBogo]

I liked the Stastny move last year at the deadline and we got robbed out of a trip to the final by being to spent after our Nashville series. 3 rounds deep was an amazing ride last year and I would love to get to final against either Montreal or Toronto this year.

I missed having a 1st round pick at the draft in 2018. Veleno would have been a good prospect for the cupboard..... A potential 2nd line centre behind Schief.

This year I was hoping that Chevy would stand pat...... and not trade out 1st. I liked the D men pick ups @ the deadline and even Heinrichs for a 7th. I hope Heinrichs does not play more than 1 game in the 4 rounds that we play in the playoffs this year.

I did not want to trade our first this year 2019 as I was planning on going to the draft again ( this year in Vancouver)..... I am not going now as we do not have a 1st pick anymore.

I have enjoyed Hayes play for the Jets so far and I think he can be a difference maker for us in the playoffs this year.

I do not want to trade our 2020 1st ...... next year.

It is suppose to be a strong draft and I do not want to go 3 years without a first round pick.

And now you are going to miss out on the blockbuster Trouba trade on the draft floor.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Continue here: Speculation: - Rumour, Trade, and Free Agent Speculation 2018-19 - Part XI