Chip McCleary: Recapping the trade deadline Because everyone does it, for better or for worse.

I'd flip Calgary and Washington. Calgary, on the principle that every year burned contributed to this year's paltry returns. Particularly egregious was their inability to deal w/ Miikka Kiprusoff for, I don't know, years. Washington, on the fact that this Erat deal doesn't feel like some panic-move for the playoffs.

If I've learned one thing over the years, it's that first-round picks generally get moved for one reasony: the team has soured on the player, to at least some degree. I'm pretty sure SportingNews culled the last ten years of data on this, and found a pretty strong, inverse correlation with players dealt, and their professional-level success heading forward.

I personally have no opinion of Forsberg, but it's a rare instance where I tend to appeal to authority on the matter -- something I normally cringe at doing. I don't think it's a smoking gun argument in the slightest, but I do think there's something there.

And, Erat, at the very least, is a good enough player to justify the send-off.

Nashville may get a fantastic player out of this, but it's not as if (a) it's devoid of risk; and (b) came at no cost.

Otherwise -- yeah, I agree across the board.

Nice work.

YOLO

Chip McCleary: Recapping the trade deadline
Because everyone does it, for better or for worse.
- Chip McCleary

It's great to be the moderator for your own blog. Cut off the debate when it's not going your way. Man, you really are in the insurance industry...

YOLO
- xXwagzXx

You shut your goddamned mouth right now!

You shut your goddamned mouth right now!


- BerglundsGrundle

you otta look out

pretty simple for caps: mcphee needs to make the playoffs to save his job so what does he care about 3 years from now?

I'd flip Calgary and Washington. Calgary, on the principle that every year burned contributed to this year's paltry returns. Particularly egregious was their inability to deal w/ Miikka Kiprusoff for, I don't know, years. Washington, on the fact that this Erat deal doesn't feel like some panic-move for the playoffs.

If I've learned one thing over the years, it's that first-round picks generally get moved for one reasony: the team has soured on the player, to at least some degree. I'm pretty sure SportingNews culled the last ten years of data on this, and found a pretty strong, inverse correlation with players dealt, and their professional-level success heading forward.

I personally have no opinion of Forsberg, but it's a rare instance where I tend to appeal to authority on the matter -- something I normally cringe at doing. I don't think it's a smoking gun argument in the slightest, but I do think there's something there.

And, Erat, at the very least, is a good enough player to justify the send-off.

Nashville may get a fantastic player out of this, but it's not as if (a) it's devoid of risk; and (b) came at no cost.

Otherwise -- yeah, I agree across the board.
- Travis Yost

i was kind of thinking the same thing about forsberg.

he fell in the draft, then he fell in the prospect rankings, and now the caps are willing to let one of their "best prospects" walk.

it seems like there's something there that scouts are seeing that the average fan isn't.

It's great to be the moderator for your own blog. Cut off the debate when it's not going your way. Man, you really are in the insurance industry...
- eggsegan

I don't "moderate the blog." You, I and anyone else may go comment on any past blog entry as we see fit; however, I was working on this entry before the discussion on Gaborik. I'm not holding up new blog entries simply so a discussion can be carried out ad infinitum because someone wants to keep arguing.

I gave my $.02, you gave yours - and we disagree. Fine, I'm OK with that. Apparently, you're not. I'll get over it and move on; hopefully you will too - but if not, ... well, I hope you handle disagreements better in the real world.

It's a fair counter on whether Forsberg is as good as originally thought, or if that fall to 11 in last year's draft is a sign of things to come. I still think he has that dreaded tag, "potential" attached, and if he hits it he could be pretty good - but if not, then it's probably "what did Washington do with Erat?" Then again, as good as Erat has been (a solid 16-23 goal, 49-58 point guy) I keep waiting for him to have that breakout 25-30 goal, 65-70 point season. At 31, time's about up for that.

On Calgary: in hindsight, it's easy to look back and say "they should have traded Kiprusoff earlier" - but you could say the same thing about trading Iginla. The NTC/NMC thing is a real sticking point; if they had wanted to trade him and he didn't want to go, it really tied their hands on what they could do. However, then we're talking about things that did or didn't happen way before this year's deadline - and then, we could say (and I think everyone would agree) that the Flames should have blown things up 2 years ago. I give credit to Feaster for realizing this group was done and starting to plan for the future, instead of trying to buy yet again and squeeze another 10th-place finish out and set the rebuild back another year or two.

It's a fair counter on whether Forsberg is as good as originally thought, or if that fall to 11 in last year's draft is a sign of things to come. I still think he has that dreaded tag, "potential" attached, and if he hits it he could be pretty good - but if not, then it's probably "what did Washington do with Erat?" Then again, as good as Erat has been (a solid 16-23 goal, 49-58 point guy) I keep waiting for him to have that breakout 25-30 goal, 65-70 point season. At 31, time's about up for that.

On Calgary: in hindsight, it's easy to look back and say "they should have traded Kiprusoff earlier" - but you could say the same thing about trading Iginla. The NTC/NMC thing is a real sticking point; if they had wanted to trade him and he didn't want to go, it really tied their hands on what they could do. However, then we're talking about things that did or didn't happen way before this year's deadline - and then, we could say (and I think everyone would agree) that the Flames should have blown things up 2 years ago. I give credit to Feaster for realizing this group was done and starting to plan for the future, instead of trying to buy yet again and squeeze another 10th-place finish out and set the rebuild back another year or two.
- Chip McCleary

to be fair, the talent of the forwards he's been surrounded with in nashville can only be described as "non-existent". i think maybe the most talented player he's palyed with is....i don't know...mike fisher. that entire forward group is pretty much comprised of 3rd and 4th liners, and erat.

Regarding your trade deadline recap for the LA Kings, how is it that you are able to predict that new King's D man, Robyn Regher, will be injured before season's end, and miss playoff time ?

I sense some bitterness towards the LA Kings, with the Blues recent losses to that club. Good luck with your deadline acquisitions.

"Columbus - I know, some of you think picking up Gaborik was terrible for the Jackets because (A) he's been inconsistent this year, (B) he's allegedly not great in the playoffs, (C) he's overpaid, (D) he's not a guy you build around, ... keep the reasons coming. In football and basketball, the axiom is "whoever gets the best player wins the trade" - and Jarmo Kekalainen clearly got the best player here even after accounting for how inconsistent players involved have been. He also did it without having to give up the 1st-round pick he was publicly dangling just 24 hours ago"

No the reasons are he is a winger, he is injury prone and his EFFORT is inconsistent. That is why.

Have you ever heard a team say they are building from the wing?

The Blue Jackets did give up two first round picks in the trade with Moore just having got to the NHL. BTW I know it's just one game and it's not the complete answer but Brassard racked up some points, Clowe nets his first two of the season and Moore scores his first goal with Brassard assisting.

Here's what I don't like about trading a bunch of good to almost damn good not quite almost great players for one great-ish player meaning they are not great yet. Example Crosby is great Nash is almost great. The problem is these players cannot consistently dominate games. When they go to 30 or over it's an even worse move to give young talented players that have not capped their potential for a guy who in all likelihood has defined his career.

As for basketball well I don't care one iota about basketball. That might work on a basketball court more than on an ice surface where players all play at varying moments of the game unlike basketball where there are some subs but not every 30-45 seconds. It doesn't play the same in hockey.

One other thing is the fact the Jackets would improve a team who's first round pick they still hold. Why not move that pick instead of one of the players? So Columbus shoots themselves in the foot here making this trade during the season especially. It would have made more sense in the off season. Because unless San Jose goes on another losing streak, Detroit continues to falter and the Blues remain inconsistent and Edmonton stops winning they are not going to make the play offs. They have an evolving team and there's no way they could have made such definitive decisions about personnel so soon before a big draft.

For Columbus the best deals at the deadline are bargain deals. Trade from a position of strength like Armstrong who out waited Feaster. Wait till the off season when the Rangers would have failed or had a hard time making the play offs. When that $7.5 million cap hit mattered even more to the Rangers.


The rest of it I can pretty much concur. The Tampa/Ottawa trade was great for both teams.

Obviously you don't like Steve Mason - you are far from alone there. However, tell me how giving up Michael Leighton and a 2015 3rd rounder, for a 24 year-old former rookie of the year is getting robbed. If it doesn't work out, so what? It's a third round pick 2 years from now and a guy who is not even a competant backup anymore. At best it's 50/50 that Mason turns his career around but, at his age, maybe he just needs a change of scenery. If he fails, I doubt the Flyers will look back and regret what they gave up for him.

I still want my money for bringing in the colors.

How much do I get?

Anything extra for fancy fonts?

Carcus

Obviously you don't like Steve Mason - you are far from alone there. However, tell me how giving up Michael Leighton and a 2015 3rd rounder, for a 24 year-old former rookie of the year is getting robbed. If it doesn't work out, so what? It's a third round pick 2 years from now and a guy who is not even a competant backup anymore. At best it's 50/50 that Mason turns his career around but, at his age, maybe he just needs a change of scenery. If he fails, I doubt the Flyers will look back and regret what they gave up for him.
- BOSS_TWEED

I agree, and I don't like Steve Mason.

Obviously you don't like Steve Mason - you are far from alone there. However, tell me how giving up Michael Leighton and a 2015 3rd rounder, for a 24 year-old former rookie of the year is getting robbed. If it doesn't work out, so what? It's a third round pick 2 years from now and a guy who is not even a competant backup anymore. At best it's 50/50 that Mason turns his career around but, at his age, maybe he just needs a change of scenery. If he fails, I doubt the Flyers will look back and regret what they gave up for him.
- BOSS_TWEED

Probably because he is a net (no pun intended) negative. Having nothing is better than having Mason. So when you give up tangible assets to acquire something that makes your team worse, you are getting fleeced.

Regarding your trade deadline recap for the LA Kings, how is it that you are able to predict that new King's D man, Robyn Regher, will be injured before season's end, and miss playoff time ?

I sense some bitterness towards the LA Kings, with the Blues recent losses to that club. Good luck with your deadline acquisitions.
- KeithM

Clearly, I should have invested in more red ink.

Probably because he is a net (no pun intended) negative. Having nothing is better than having Mason. So when you give up tangible assets to acquire something that makes your team worse, you are getting fleeced.
- BerglundsGrundle

I would rather have Mason, and he is young so he still has time to turn it around. I don't see how this makes them worse.

Clearly, I should have invested in more red ink.
- Chip McCleary

Do you want to borrow some of mine?

Can't pick through all your points, but I'll hit these:

have you ever heard a team say they are building from the wing?

The Blue Jackets did give up two first round picks in the trade with Moore just having got to the NHL. BTW I know it's just one game and it's not the complete answer but Brassard racked up some points, Clowe nets his first two of the season and Moore scores his first goal with Brassard assisting.
- BluemanGuruu

The Blues had a pretty damn good winger for years. They also had a pretty damn good center to go with him - but we all know how that ended.

You're correct in that it's only one (1) game so far with the Rangers. If anyone needs another reminder about why not to put stock in one (1) game, see Peter "I scored my first NHL goal against Patrick Roy" Sejna, among numerous other examples. The fact that the Blue Jackets dealt a pair of guys who are former 1st-round picks is noteworthy - but really irrelevant. The Jackets had pieces to replace Brassard and Moore; they didn't have anything like a Gaborik in the lineup. Spin this another way (and ignore the Blues current roster situation when looking at this): if the Blues dealt Berglund and Cole for a 31-year old winger who's got a history of 30-40 goal seasons, can be a dangerous player when interested, is prone to going through the motions at times, and has been docked for playoff performance in the past - but has the ability to make the team more dangerous offensively, which is something you need - do you really say "gosh, they gave up a pair of 1st-round picks for a guy who can score but floats at times, what a terrible move?"

Here's what I don't like about trading a bunch of good to almost damn good not quite almost great players for one great-ish player meaning they are not great yet. Example Crosby is great Nash is almost great. The problem is these players cannot consistently dominate games. When they go to 30 or over it's an even worse move to give young talented players that have not capped their potential for a guy who in all likelihood has defined his career.
- BluemanGuruu

As I noted, this backfires on Columbus if Brassard suddenly "gets it" - but he wasn't going to do that in Columbus. He was going to get them to "OK, we're kind of good but not great." Gaborik can give them an extra dimension they haven't had since ... well, Nash (who could be - and has been - equally as inconsistent as Gaborik).

One other thing is the fact the Jackets would improve a team who's first round pick they still hold. Why not move that pick instead of one of the players? So Columbus shoots themselves in the foot here making this trade during the season especially. It would have made more sense in the off season.
- BluemanGuruu

The "why help a team whose 1st you hold" argument is irrelevant, and puts way too much stock in that pick over actual on-ice performance (which at this point is more important). Way too early to speculate on who gets helped/hurt after one (1) Rangers game; for all we know, both teams are better and go to the playoffs and now all 3 1st's are in the high teens to mid 20s - and then you can argue "why make the trade? Should have done nothing, both teams would have missed and the picks would have been 5-15 spots higher." The true winner on this trade won't be known for a while - but immediately, the Jackets are better positioned short-term and long-term to cause some noise if they get to the postseason. Prior to the trade, they were set up as a "lucky to squeak in, probably going out quietly in 4 again" team.

I still want my money for bringing in the colors.

How much do I get?

Anything extra for fancy fonts?

Carcus
- carcus

Working on a case of Ski. Maybe even bottles.

Working on a case of Ski. Maybe even bottles.
- Chip McCleary

Better than nothing!