Speculation: Who cost more

[Mr Misty]

Spezza Return vs Russell Return.
Chiasson, Paul, Guptill 2nd vs Joki, Pollock, conditional 1st
>?
=?
<?
Who ya got?

Click to read more...

 

[Hockey Dad]

I feel that pollock has more upside than Paul. Plus spezza is a much better player than Russell.

 

[Ghost of Kyiv]

I went with Russell just because I really despised Chiasson near the end of his tenure and would have killed to get him off the PP whereas I am completely indifferent about Jokipakka.

 

[Satan]

Chiasson and Jokipakka are equivalent players more or less.

Pollock > Paul

Guptill is in the ECHL

a 2nd is a 2nd // 1st >2nd


Russell got more

 

[LT]

Chiasson was better than Jokipakka when each were traded. Neither were world-beaters, though.

Guptill and Paul together is most likely more valuable than Pollock. Pollock's the best of the three, but Paul's solid and Guptill still has some potential (which is getting further away every year).

Spezza's 2nd was higher than Russell's. Going to assume it'll be a 2nd for now.

 

[LowSodium]

Went with Spezza. Chiasson & Joki are about equal value, Paul is already producing in the NHL while we have yet to see Pollock, and the 2nd for Spezza was higher than the one for Russel, in what was a much deeper draft class. Picks for 2015 were arguably more valuable than a 2016 pick. Now if the 2nd goes up to a 1st it starts to go the other way.

 

[Benneguin]

Comparing Spezza's bounty with a journeyman and third-paring D man's is frankly insensitive toward Ottawa fans. I mean really.

<--Russell.

 

[OttMorrow]

Spezza cost roughly the same as Russell. Russell also cost us roughly the same as Eric Staal, who was acquired for 2 2nds and a prospect...difference is that Staal will probably take Stepan's job as the #1 C in New York. Russell will probably be our #5 D...maybe #4....maybe.

Brutal.

I would chalk it up to a tight market for D if Mike Weber and Schultz had not been acquired at the deadline for a 3rd Rounder a piece.

He's better than Schultz from what I hear, but is Russell really that much better than Mike Weber (who is a bigger 3rd pairing D, and also a UFA if I'm not mistaken)?

Can anyone please compare the fancy stats between Mike Weber and Russell?

 

[LT]

Staal will definitely not be the #1 C in New York...

 

[valente317]

Wowowowow people are just talking for the sake of talking here.

Nick Paul >>>> Brett Pollock at this point in time. There's no question about it.

Paul was an under-the-radar pick for the top 5 in a strong stars' prospect system, is still projected to be a skilled top six winger, and has already shown in 6 NHL games that he has a bright NHL future.

Pollock is less than a year younger, with no NHL experience, and the ceiling of his potential is turning into what Nick Paul is almost assured to become.

At very best, Pollock = Paul, without the complete physical game. There are TONS of players who score PPG in the CHL each year, only a fraction of whom play even a single NHL game, which Paul has already accomplished. Paul was a legitimate A-prospect. Pollock is a B prospect whose future is very difficult to predict.

Chiasson is garbage. He was always garbage. He went on a hot streak and Nill sold when his value was up. He's a marginal 3rd/4th line grinder. Jokipakka will likewise top out as a 6/7th defender. These are inconsequential losses in the grand scheme of things. They will be forgotten by this time next year.

The second rounder for Russell was difficult to justify, but if the Stars make the conference finals, NO real fan is going to be complaining about a lost 1st rounder between picks 27-30.

 

[joelnmich]

Wowowowow people are just talking for the sake of talking here.

Nick Paul >>>> Brett Pollock at this point in time. There's no question about it.

Paul was an under-the-radar pick for the top 5 in a strong stars' prospect system, is still projected to be a skilled top six winger, and has already shown in 6 NHL games that he has a bright NHL future.

Pollock is less than a year younger, with no NHL experience, and the ceiling of his potential is turning into what Nick Paul is almost assured to become.

At very best, Pollock = Paul, without the complete physical game. There are TONS of players who score PPG in the CHL each year, only a fraction of whom play even a single NHL game, which Paul has already accomplished. Paul was a legitimate A-prospect. Pollock is a B prospect whose future is very difficult to predict.

Chiasson is garbage. He was always garbage. He went on a hot streak and Nill sold when his value was up. He's a marginal 3rd/4th line grinder. Jokipakka will likewise top out as a 6/7th defender. These are inconsequential losses in the grand scheme of things. They will be forgotten by this time next year.

The second rounder for Russell was difficult to justify, but if the Stars make the conference finals, NO real fan is going to be complaining about a lost 1st rounder between picks 27-30.

Never forget Kevin and Toaster

 

[OttMorrow]

The second rounder for Russell was difficult to justify, but if the Stars make the conference finals, NO real fan is going to be complaining about a lost 1st rounder between picks 27-30.

Yes, but the problem here is that I'd say that this team still has only about a 40% chance of making it out of the 1st Round of the playoffs.

I don't think Russell makes the difference between getting out of the 1st Round or being one-and-done...and that would be the only justifiable reason to make this kind of move IMO...if you thought it would make the difference between getting out of the 1st Round and not.