Thread: Trading Up
View Single Post
Old
05-07-2007, 06:50 PM
  #8
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robb_K View Post
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.
Reading over the helpful list IB put together it looks like moving up in the last part of the first round 3-4 spots costs a 3d rounder, but I suspect that if we want to go from 9 up to 5 it might cost a 2d rounder. as you asymptotically approach the top of the board, the price goes up.

Incidentally, there is an interesting read over on the prospects board from Hiishawk today predicting the top 60. No matter what, three picks in the first round is going to be nice.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote