HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2013 Off-Season Armchair GM Thread Part V

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-11-2013, 04:31 PM
  #326
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,014
vCash: 1379
I have no problem saying a Russian player is riskier. I have a huge problem with the idea that it's because of some huge character flaw and that they're self-serving and don't care about their teammates.

Any NA player that has gone to the KHL comments about how strange it is, and honestly, how much they didn't really like it. Russian players coming here experience the same thing. You can't blame someone for feeling out of place across an ocean.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 04:32 PM
  #327
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
You have to admit, your odds of being screwed by a Russian player are higher than any other nationality. Whether it be because of a stupid transfer agreement, poor safety, or poor health care, it's a risk.
It is always dangerous when you see individuals as part of a group, and not as individuals.

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 04:32 PM
  #328
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
honestly...a 15 year contract? kovalchuk is a great player, but i think this will look like a blessing in disguise for them.

NJ will have to make some moves though.

do0glas is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 04:36 PM
  #329
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by murdock1116 View Post
Every player is unique onto their own. I don't agree with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeIFBB View Post
And you've only named the ones that are outside the player's control.
The transfer agreement is the biggest one, and it is absolutely within their control. They are choosing not to honor the contract and it happens more often with Russian players. Russian players are also, stupidily (and totally not their fault) more likely to die in safety related accidents, travel related accidents, or poor health care related accidents.

The point is, argue specifics all you like, but in the end of the day statistically your chances of any given russian draft pick/played not playing out their contract for one reason or another are higher. I'm not saying Russians are bad people, it is not a totally irrational fear though. The Sharks are known for never drafting Russians, they draft Sobchenko, he dies int a plane crash. I totally understand their hesitation. Whether its warranted statistically (I suspect the odds of a Russian player not fulfilling their contract are not particularly 'bad', just worse) I don't know, but there is still a realistic concern.

It's fair to 'lump' together this group because they are a group the essentially plays by a different set of rules than any other player. Sure a Swedish player could choose to abandon his contract and play in the KHL, but that's highly unlikely for various reasons. Russian players have an option that most other players are either not privy to or at least not comfortable wish.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 04:39 PM
  #330
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
It is the obvious excuse. Lidstrom was a Swede and Chara was abnormally large. Those kinds of instances do not happen again. Like Vancouver drafting Bure...it is a quirk.
But it did happen again although only a #15 pick. Karlsson was nominated and none of Bogo, Doughty, Piet and Schenn were. It is a repeating theme.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 04:46 PM
  #331
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
I don't think you realize how valueless a 2nd round pick really is.

The Sharks want to win. Now. That means trading fuuuutures for current help. For experience. EVERY team does it. Juxtaposer had a great retort to you last time you brought this up.

In other news, HFboards must be going crazy over the Kovvy retirement.
It's this mentality that has to change. If the Sharks want to win now, they have to stop wasting their 2nd round picks for today and draft people with them. The 2nd round picks are good bets to take because they can yield high-quality players at cheap prices and fill spots. Yeah, it takes time but it is worth it. Look at Chicago's 2nd round drafting. Yeah, they've missed a few but they hit with guys like Keith, Bolland, Saad, Bickell, and Crawford out of the 20 picks they've had since 2002 in that round. I'd rather take the chance of hitting for a guy like Vlasic in that round than trade them for depth players simply because you should be developing your own depth players or signing them for free...especially here. Those are the only free agents we manage to get. lol

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 04:49 PM
  #332
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
It's this mentality that has to change. If the Sharks want to win now, they have to stop wasting their 2nd round picks for today and draft people with them. The 2nd round picks are good bets to take because they can yield high-quality players at cheap prices and fill spots. Yeah, it takes time but it is worth it. Look at Chicago's 2nd round drafting. Yeah, they've missed a few but they hit with guys like Keith, Bolland, Saad, Bickell, and Crawford out of the 20 picks they've had since 2002 in that round. I'd rather take the chance of hitting for a guy like Vlasic in that round than trade them for depth players simply because you should be developing your own depth players or signing them for free...especially here. Those are the only free agents we manage to get. lol
So forgetting just the 2nd round, the Blackhawks's drafting record isn't really that much more impressive than the Sharks's post lockout. Especially if you figure where Kane and Toews were drafted.

Hell, even out of the guys you mentioned, only Keith is an impact player. The rest...that's very replaceable.

Plus, NHL GMs do not have the luxury of being able to wait things out. The future is now...

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:00 PM
  #333
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
So forgetting just the 2nd round, the Blackhawks's drafting record isn't really that much more impressive than the Sharks's post lockout. Especially if you figure where Kane and Toews were drafted.

Hell, even out of the guys you mentioned, only Keith is an impact player. The rest...that's very replaceable.

Plus, NHL GMs do not have the luxury of being able to wait things out. The future is now...
Your drafting records that you're comparing is essentially a four or five year window where you take away the two best picks by either team in that time frame. That's convenient.

Saying the other guys aren't impact players is selling them short. Yes, they are replaceable but they're making much better use out of them than trading them for the average depth player. All those guys are or will grow into something beyond that.

That last line is a perfect example of short-sightededness. The GM's do have the luxury of waiting rather than trading draft picks for depth players. That's what free agency is for...especially for the Sharks. Sign them for free or develop them. Don't trade for them. It's a waste and it doesn't last.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:00 PM
  #334
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
It's this mentality that has to change. If the Sharks want to win now, they have to stop wasting their 2nd round picks for today and draft people with them. The 2nd round picks are good bets to take because they can yield high-quality players at cheap prices and fill spots. Yeah, it takes time but it is worth it. Look at Chicago's 2nd round drafting. Yeah, they've missed a few but they hit with guys like Keith, Bolland, Saad, Bickell, and Crawford out of the 20 picks they've had since 2002 in that round. I'd rather take the chance of hitting for a guy like Vlasic in that round than trade them for depth players simply because you should be developing your own depth players or signing them for free...especially here. Those are the only free agents we manage to get. lol
I agree, however i think giving up a second rounder for someone who was a second rounder that pretty much hit his projections is something i would do when i have multiple picks.

if we wouldve ended up with shirakuk, paquin-gadreau, Tyler Bertuzzi? and heatherington instead of mueller, kennedy (2 years 4 mill), and paquin-gadreau does it really look worse?

i think in that scenario we did the right thing. but we missed out on a lot of good second rounds over the years.


Last edited by do0glas: 07-11-2013 at 05:06 PM.
do0glas is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:07 PM
  #335
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by do0glas View Post
I agree, however i think giving up a second rounder for someone who was a second rounder that pretty much hit his projections is something i would do when i have multiple picks.

if we wouldve ended up with shirakuk, paquin-gadreau, and heatherington instead of mueller, kennedy (2 years 4 mill), and paquin-gadreau does it really look worse?

i think in that scenario we did the right thing. but we missed out on a lot of good second rounds over the years.
You're forgetting the fourth pick in the 2nd round. The Mueller pick is something I'm not excited about for this team. I'm not for giving up a 2nd rounder for someone who hit his projections as a 3rd line player because you're paying the premium cost for his services and not getting the good part of it when he was cheap or on entry-level. And the issue is that in all likelihood, in two years, Kennedy is gone and the process starts over again. A 2nd round pick that hits, you will probably get twice that amount of service and probably at a cheaper cost.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:11 PM
  #336
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
You're forgetting the fourth pick in the 2nd round. The Mueller pick is something I'm not excited about for this team. I'm not for giving up a 2nd rounder for someone who hit his projections as a 3rd line player because you're paying the premium cost for his services and not getting the good part of it when he was cheap or on entry-level. And the issue is that in all likelihood, in two years, Kennedy is gone and the process starts over again. A 2nd round pick that hits, you will probably get twice that amount of service and probably at a cheaper cost.
If the 2nd round pick hits.

FYI, I ommitted Kane and Toews from my above comment since both were top-5 picks. The Sharks simply aren't going to pick there.

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:15 PM
  #337
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
You're forgetting the fourth pick in the 2nd round. The Mueller pick is something I'm not excited about for this team. I'm not for giving up a 2nd rounder for someone who hit his projections as a 3rd line player because you're paying the premium cost for his services and not getting the good part of it when he was cheap or on entry-level. And the issue is that in all likelihood, in two years, Kennedy is gone and the process starts over again. A 2nd round pick that hits, you will probably get twice that amount of service and probably at a cheaper cost.
yea i editted my post.

how could you not be excited about mueller but be excited about our pick at 20? we wouldnt have picked mantha, and shinkaruk couldve been considered a reach.

and if you consider 2 years 2.3 mill cap hit a premium? the guy has outdone the average 2nd rounder, imo. so it seems like a win to me. you wouldve likely complained at a longer term anyway. 2 years seems like a good plan to me. he might suck and we wont be handcuffed, or he ends up being good enough to justify a bigger cap hit.

not to mention wingels a 6th rounder that looks like he could be a full time 3rd liner. and sheppard who has that same promise if not more given his inherent skill. both are at points that mcginn was at, except they are both better defensively and can stay above water in posession. mcginn had better offensive instincts though.

at this point, it wouldve been a good idea to keep jamie mcginn. hopefully thats the last rental trade DW does, because it back fired horribly.

in this case the price was worth it.

but weve given up second rounders in the past that didnt make sense, imo.

do0glas is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:16 PM
  #338
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by do0glas View Post
I agree, however i think giving up a second rounder for someone who was a second rounder that pretty much hit his projections is something i would do when i have multiple picks.

if we wouldve ended up with shirakuk, paquin-gadreau, Tyler Bertuzzi? and heatherington instead of mueller, kennedy (2 years 4 mill), and paquin-gadreau does it really look worse?

i think in that scenario we did the right thing. but we missed out on a lot of good second rounds over the years.
By trading, you are getting generally older forwards than by drafting. Most of the lower line impact forwards are homegrown although not an overwhelming majority. Slight edge to drafting. I am defining the term impact as a player scoring above his own reg season rate in the playoffs.

And for all the deadline deals that have hit, the vast majority of deadline deals do not. The most active team at this last deadline, Pitt, went out with a whimper in the conf. finals. Chicago had only one deal, Handzus. NYR didn't so well with all of its deals either.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:32 PM
  #339
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
If the 2nd round pick hits.

FYI, I ommitted Kane and Toews from my above comment since both were top-5 picks. The Sharks simply aren't going to pick there.
And you're probably going to get hits with more opportunities. The Sharks have picked there before and eventually will again. Excluding them only makes the sample size smaller and more convenient for your argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by do0glas View Post
yea i editted my post.

how could you not be excited about mueller but be excited about our pick at 20? we wouldnt have picked mantha, and shinkaruk couldve been considered a reach.

and if you consider 2 years 2.3 mill cap hit a premium? the guy has outdone the average 2nd rounder, imo. so it seems like a win to me. you wouldve likely complained at a longer term anyway. 2 years seems like a good plan to me. he might suck and we wont be handcuffed, or he ends up being good enough to justify a bigger cap hit.

not to mention wingels a 6th rounder that looks like he could be a full time 3rd liner. and sheppard who has that same promise if not more given his inherent skill. both are at points that mcginn was at, except they are both better defensively and can stay above water in posession. mcginn had better offensive instincts though.

at this point, it wouldve been a good idea to keep jamie mcginn. hopefully thats the last rental trade DW does, because it back fired horribly.

in this case the price was worth it.

but weve given up second rounders in the past that didnt make sense, imo.
If they had snagged a forward, I would be a little less reserved about it. They just haven't had very much luck on the blue line in that range. But at least if they had kept it and picked a reach, which Hertl was last year at that same spot, they would've kept the pick and gotten another shot at someone.

I would complain about a longer term for a player like Kennedy. I'm not complaining about his contract. I'm complaining that getting him for a 2nd means two seasons of play then starting it over again. Those picks shouldn't be used in a high turnover position.

They need to emulate what Chicago does have. Even with what people may call the same level of success, they have more chances than we have to get those players. From the 2005 draft on, the Hawks have had 25 picks in the first two rounds compared to the Sharks having 12 or 13. It is significant and when those players grow, they unseat the guys on the roster to which they can be dealt for more draft picks to continue the process. That's how a team like the Sharks can sustain success w/o having really high draft picks.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:36 PM
  #340
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,014
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
By trading, you are getting generally older forwards than by drafting. Most of the lower line impact forwards are homegrown although not an overwhelming majority. Slight edge to drafting. I am defining the term impact as a player scoring above his own reg season rate in the playoffs.

And for all the deadline deals that have hit, the vast majority of deadline deals do not. The most active team at this last deadline, Pitt, went out with a whimper in the conf. finals. Chicago had only one deal, Handzus. NYR didn't so well with all of its deals either.
I thought you said that almost never happens?

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:41 PM
  #341
Splitbtw
Rebuild? Refresh?
 
Splitbtw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And you're probably going to get hits with more opportunities. The Sharks have picked there before and eventually will again. Excluding them only makes the sample size smaller and more convenient for your argument.



If they had snagged a forward, I would be a little less reserved about it. They just haven't had very much luck on the blue line in that range. But at least if they had kept it and picked a reach, which Hertl was last year at that same spot, they would've kept the pick and gotten another shot at someone.

I would complain about a longer term for a player like Kennedy. I'm not complaining about his contract. I'm complaining that getting him for a 2nd means two seasons of play then starting it over again. Those picks shouldn't be used in a high turnover position.

They need to emulate what Chicago does have. Even with what people may call the same level of success, they have more chances than we have to get those players. From the 2005 draft on, the Hawks have had 25 picks in the first two rounds compared to the Sharks having 12 or 13. It is significant and when those players grow, they unseat the guys on the roster to which they can be dealt for more draft picks to continue the process. That's how a team like the Sharks can sustain success w/o having really high draft picks.
100% agree with this. Takes a lot of discipline to get there, and scouting to keep it there, but is much more efficient/effective.

Splitbtw is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:41 PM
  #342
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And you're probably going to get hits with more opportunities. The Sharks have picked there before and eventually will again. Excluding them only makes the sample size smaller and more convenient for your argument.
What's the average of second round picks between 50 and 60 that make it to the NHL? Come back and argue that when you get some stats to back you up.

You're putting way too much value on them. We got 2 for Douglas Murray for christs sake.

__________________

Youth Movement! Tally Ho...
Led Zappa is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:42 PM
  #343
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
I thought you said that almost never happens?
Yup. But the winners almost always have one or two who do.

Guys like Marchand, Talbot, Fedotenko, Bolland, etc.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:44 PM
  #344
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Yup. But the winners almost always have one or two who do.

Guys like Marchand, Talbot, Fedotenko, Bolland, etc.
And are you attributing that to luck or skill, cause each pick is just as wrong or right as that pick and says little about others.

Led Zappa is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:45 PM
  #345
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
What's the average of second round picks between 50 and 60 that make it to the NHL? Come back and argue that when you get some stats to back you up.
Not relevant to the context you're responding to. Second round is 31-60 with the occasional compensatory selection in there. The team also has Chris Tierney at 57 that is being looked at as a future player for the team.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:45 PM
  #346
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
By trading, you are getting generally older forwards than by drafting. Most of the lower line impact forwards are homegrown although not an overwhelming majority. Slight edge to drafting. I am defining the term impact as a player scoring above his own reg season rate in the playoffs.

And for all the deadline deals that have hit, the vast majority of deadline deals do not. The most active team at this last deadline, Pitt, went out with a whimper in the conf. finals. Chicago had only one deal, Handzus. NYR didn't so well with all of its deals either.
of course youre getting older via trade than draft. those guys are 18-21 usually.

desi,wingels,pavs,hertl. thats our homegrown lot. via trade weve gotten kennedy/torres/sheppard. the ratio looks fine to me. if nieto steps up this year or next year (1.5 years in ahl), even better.

our deadline activity this past season was more about shedding dead weight and adding some speed. which we locked up to good contracts

26 is not old. and its more than likely (pure hyperbole here...not gonna look up every second rounders age when they made an impact) that 24-27 is when a second rounder would start being a roster player if at all. otherwise its likely they go in the first round.

pens getting douglas murray is a garbage trade. a defensive d man? i see them acquired for late picks more often than not, and douglas murray did nothing to separate himself from other vet d men.

but a 2nd for kennedy (can play in the top six, has shown multiple years of consistent bottom six scoring) is a good trade, when you have multiple picks like that, deep draft or not.

do0glas is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:48 PM
  #347
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Not relevant to the context you're responding to. Second round is 31-60 with the occasional compensatory selection in there. The team also has Chris Tierney at 57 that is being looked at as a future player for the team.

What draft pick did we use to get Mueller? What pick did we use to get Kennedy? You are putting way to much weight on 2nd's and say we are using stats convenient to our argument?

How many late 2nd rounders make it to the NHL? Not many? and usually they are bottom 6. They ain't worth spit when you want your guy.

Led Zappa is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 05:54 PM
  #348
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
What draft pick did we use to get Mueller? What pick did we use to get Kennedy? You are putting way to much weight on 2nd's and say we are using stats convenient to our argument?

How many late 2nd rounders make it to the NHL? Not many? and usually they are bottom 6. They ain't worth spit when you want your guy.
So now that you've jumped in it's 'our argument', eh? I'm not putting too much weight on it. I'm saying it can be utilized better than what they have been. Just because I didn't like them spending a 2nd to move up two spots or get Kennedy means that they couldn't trade those two picks for an earlier pick in the round or as a throw-in for a legitimate top six forward or top four d-man.

And it's great that you want to spend a 2nd round pick to get your guy but that guy isn't going to be there all that long either way so you'll just end up doing it over and over again instead of just getting your usual bottom 6 player that you could have developed and gotten cheaper years out of. I don't know why you're taking such a hostile tone on this.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 06:02 PM
  #349
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
So now that you've jumped in it's 'our argument', eh? I'm not putting too much weight on it. I'm saying it can be utilized better than what they have been. Just because I didn't like them spending a 2nd to move up two spots or get Kennedy means that they couldn't trade those two picks for an earlier pick in the round or as a throw-in for a legitimate top six forward or top four d-man.

And it's great that you want to spend a 2nd round pick to get your guy but that guy isn't going to be there all that long either way so you'll just end up doing it over and over again instead of just getting your usual bottom 6 player that you could have developed and gotten cheaper years out of. I don't know why you're taking such a hostile tone on this.
i dont think hes being hostile but yea haha.

i try hard to take a trade in a vacuum, because it seems like youre applying it to all trades involving a 2nd rounder. just like you cant take all of our draft picks together, because each is an individual player with his own potential and skills, you cant lump all trades together because kennedy isnt a rental for one, and hes only 26.

if we ran kennedy-pavs-wingels our third line average age would be 26.6. thats a third line in their prime age wise. two proven scorers and one prospect who could breakout.

secondly, if you believe tierney has a future here, great. so does nieto...both second rounders that could supplant and gain roster spots. in this particular scenario, its possible they looked at that and thought it was worth spending a 2nd on a guy for 2 years at a decent cap hit to make an impact.

our other trades involving seconds dont look very good, i agree. but i wouldnt color this trade with that brush at all.

do0glas is offline  
Old
07-11-2013, 06:17 PM
  #350
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
They need to emulate what Chicago does have. Even with what people may call the same level of success, they have more chances than we have to get those players. From the 2005 draft on, the Hawks have had 25 picks in the first two rounds compared to the Sharks having 12 or 13. It is significant and when those players grow, they unseat the guys on the roster to which they can be dealt for more draft picks to continue the process. That's how a team like the Sharks can sustain success w/o having really high draft picks.
Not too sure I get the point you are making. They need to emulate Chicago...even though they already have the same level of success (or >).

While Chicago has done that impressively, trading guys like Bolland, Byfuglien, and Versteeg and letting the younger player get that spot, Chicago, drafting wise, has most benefited from being able to select Kane and Toews so early in the draft.

Also, the majority of trades Chicago has made were not real trades. They were shedding of salaries, to pay Kane, Toews, and Keith once the cheap contracts ran out. The younger player didn't really surpass the established player.

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.