So, how does that fit with your above assertion that this is close to fair value? As good as Pietrangelo is, it is clearly too much, by a very considerable margin. Even with just the pick, the value would be debatable (depending on where the Oilers end up of course).
I think it's close to fair value based on what it would take to get most teams in the league to part with Pietrangelo. Also, saying that Edmonton shouldn't trade their first rounder has a lot more to do with where they are in development, not value.
Originally Posted by Qvist
That's really a quite pointless argument. Neither Steen or McDonald are natural left wingers, and could well be moved elsewhere. It's not as if a young winger with MPS' potential does not fit the Blues' needs.
Both have been playing left wing for multiple seasons. And, what do you know, Steen is clearly playing his best hockey there. "Natural" is irrelevant. And if you shuffle them around, you still end up with the same number of positions. The highest Paajarvi gets without breaking out is 3rd line, while Pietrangelo is currently in the Blues' top-4 and is their most productive d-man offensively by a significant margin.
That is not to denigrate Paajarvi, but to show that it would take a lot to entice the Blues into taking a downgrade in impact like that.
I read this comment and immediately thought back to the Kessel trade thread because it was full of HF'ers talking about how that young NHL player they just got was totally going to be worth way more than those few first round picks they just gave up for him.
Certainly you can understand the difference between that situation and the one that's being presented here.
Originally Posted by tempest2i
That nameless, faceless draft pick represents the opportunity to draft pretty much any player available in the 2011 draft. If your organization has great scouts that draft pick has as good a chance of becoming a superstar as that young NHL'er having a great season.
Possibly... the difference is that we have witnessed three more seasons(critical seasons) of Pietrangelo's development than any player in this years draft. As I'm sure you know there are a lot fewer question marks when judging a player at age 21 than at 18. Why would St. Louis want to expose themselves to that risk again when they did it right the first time?