Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
The Anderson trade is another example of a goalie around 20-25th overall not going for very high value at all. You are right - not every trade is even, since different teams value players differently. Toronto obviously thought they were getting a much better goalie in Toskala. But Bryzgalov? Nobody was willing to give up anything significant for him.
They? Oh yes, how brilliant "they" were to outwait Burke until Phoenix got him. Who are these other "they" that considered Bryzgalov a top goalie at the time? If "they" did, then they would have upgraded to him. But no team did, indicating that very few teams considered him an upgrade over their own goalie. And that is what a "fringe goalie" is - a goalie who very few teams would take over their own starter.
I am not saying all trades are perfect indications of value, but when a guy gets waived it's pretty fair to say that there was nobody out there willing to give up a significant asset for him. And when there is nobody willing to give up a significant asset for you, then you are a fringe player.
I'm not sure why you are conflating value with "quality". Value is, by definition, the worth of an asset on the market. To bring this back to prospects, when we are attempting to rank these guys, it is very reasonable to do it is in terms of market value. Filatov has much lower market value than Zibanejad, and hence should not be considered as valuable a prospect. Since all 30 GMs are trying to win the Stanley Cup, market value should be a reasonable indicator of "quality", and when there is clear evidence of different market value (e.g. Zibanejad for 6th, Filatov for 66th), this should be considered a fairly good metric for "quality".
While I am not saying that NHL GMs form an efficient market, neither are they total idiots who give away assets for far less than their worth. It is perfectly reasonable to argue about whether this year's 30th overall pick is actually better than the 20th, but when people start to argue that a guy attained for 66th overall pick is a better prospect than a guy attained for a 6th? Sorry, I think i'll trust the market on that one.
|
Well, as one poster already pointed out, there is at least one GM that thinks he got a steal of a deal by trading Filatov for the 66th. I'm not advocating he be ranked ahead of Zibanejad, but I'm also not going to say it is unreasonable to say he should be. Filatov's value on the market dropped due to a perceived risk, but some people won't perceive that risk as great as others do.
You say that because nobody traded for him that no one saw him as an upgrade but you haven't proven that. Goaltender trades are rare for a reason, there is only 2 spots per team. There may have been many teams that saw him as a minor upgrade, but a minor upgrade isn't worth giving up quality assets for, and Anaheim didn't want a Goalie back. Teams don't want to have their 3-5 million dollar ex starter sitting on the bench and their previous 1-2 million dollar backup in the press-box. That doesn't mean its not an upgrade, it just means now is not the time to make that trade.
I'm not going to buy a new car because this years model has slightly better mileage than mine. It's a better car, an upgrade over what I have, but I'll hold out until a more appropriate time.
Anyway, I'm done with this, I'll agree to disagree...
