View Single Post
05-07-2007, 06:06 PM
Join Date: Apr 2007
Originally Posted by
First, let's all agree that a trade for a pick is only going to happen when the pick comes up and the player the Blues have in mind is still there.
I would be willing to give up Backman (or anybody else lower than him in the depth charts and I don't think EJ is lower) and depending on the player available, either of our two later 1st round picks. Given the current sentiment you could assume that the likely top 5 picks will be, in no particular order
..Would you make this deal?
..Which of the 5 remaining would not do the deal if they were the one still on the board at pick 5?
If you look above, you'll see that NO team gave up as much as regular-shift NHL roster player AND a #1 draft choice, just to move up a measly 4 draft positions. Bäckman is a 2nd-shift (top 4 NHL defenceman). He, alone, could bring a proven NHL forward. The Blues choosing at #9 will get a good player. But will getting players at #5 and #9 be so much better than trading Bäckman and picking up a talented, young NHL roster forward, and picking at #9 and #24?
Past history (above) has shown that an extra 3rd rounder can move a team up 3-4 positions in the first round. Maybe it would be better to keep #24 and #26, and pay a 3rd and 5th or so to move up from 9th to 5th?
If the Blues are so determined to rise from #9, then, they feel that the difference between #5 and #9 is great, and, thus, #9 may be closer in talent to #24. If so, there won't be that much gain by trying to keep #9. On the other hand, perhaps at #9, Washington will feel they can still pick up a player they want,- and picking up an extra #3 will help them build up volume of prospects. So they may want to do that. On the other hand, Washington has a lot of young players, and may insist upon getting an NHL defenceman in such a deal.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Robb_K