Follow @james_tanner123 After losing six in a row, the St. Louis Blues made the decision to trade pending unrestricted free-agent Paul Stastny to the Winnipeg Jets for a 1st round pick.
The logic behind the trade seems sound on the surface: it is reasonable to trade a player your aren't likely to re-sign when you can get something for him, especially if you don't think you are a contending team.
However, I think this is bad logic.
The Blues, for the second year in a row, have traded a core piece of their team at the trade deadline in exchange for futures.
They already traded the Shattenkirk pick to get a prime season out of Schen, which makes this mid-season reversal of strategy all the more confusing. So in order for this to pay off, they need to somehow get a star player with a pick that will be 26th at best.
On the surface, getting something for a guy you won't re-sign makes sense. But the cost of the draft pick doesn't just include a star player. It includes the psychological damage you're doing to your players and fans, the money you would have made if you made the playoffs or won a round, and whatever satisfaction you take from doing so.
It's easy for us pretend GMs to imagine every move in a perfect vacuum where the future is perfect and everything goes according to plan, but in reality it's a lot harder to play for the future than our discourse on the NHL makes it seem.
To get an idea how rare it is, in a salary cap world, to align enough star players to be a contender for multiple years, with cap certainty, and a revolving door of entry-level NHL players that allows you to do it, just look at recent history.
In the last ten years, two teams (arguably four or five, but that's it) have really pulled it off. I ain't no math genius, but you probably have better odds to make a Cup Final as a lower-seed that no one would call a 'Cup Competitor' than pulling off a reasonable approximation of what the Hawks or Penguins have done over the last decade.
This doesn't mean teams shouldn't make moves for the future, it just means that in a situation where you're in or near the playoffs, the cost to get a late draft pick for a roster player is probably too high. Why would you ever make a marginal move with a potentially high cost?
I don't think people realize how good Stastny is. He's the Blues second best possession player, he generates a lot of shots when he's on the ice, and when he's played this year, his team has had over 100 more scoring chances than they've allowed.
Stastny (or Shattenkirk before him) could easily be the difference in whether or not the Blues make the Playoffs. All he'd have to be is the difference in one game down the stretch, which is highly likely. The majority of NHL games are one-goal games, and a player like Stastny could easily be the difference between one round or two, making the Playoffs or not.
Furthermore, just because you aren't likely to win the Stanley Cup doesn't mean you should punt the season. As a lifelong hockey fan, some of my best memories are playoff series where my team loses. I've never seen the Maple Leafs win a Cup, but it doesn't mean I haven't enjoyed it every time they've made the Playoffs or won a round or two.
Additionally, one extra round of Playoffs probably makes the team millions of dollars, in addition to however many extra tickets or ticket packages they sell because of it.
The Cup or Bust mentality that people have is honestly insane. One out of 31 teams wins the Cup. It's enough just to get a couple of rounds of Playoffs. The first round is the best anyways, and if your team is out of it, it's a drag.
So the Blues get Winnipeg's 26th overall pick. Big deal. There is a 75% chance, according to Scott Cullen at TSN, of a such a late pick being a 4th liner or worse. For that you punt your season.
So for a 25% chance of getting a third line or better player, they signaled to their fans and players that they are giving up. To do it twice in a row is unconscionable. Once you are in the playoffs you have a shot. Two years of Tarasenko's prime, punted at the last minute for draft picks when you have even a remote chance to win is a bad move.
Even if they hit on both picks, odds are that by the time they're helpful, Tarasenko is longer as good as he is today, and that neither of them is close to an impact player. But at least that would be a consistent progression. Since they actually traded the first draft pick to make themselves better right now, punting the season becomes even worse of a play.
In my opinion, and granted I am a total idiot, people, including teams, vastly overrate the value of a draft pick. St. Louis risked their entire season, plus the chance of being a Cinderella Playoff team, to potentially get a player who, if they are lucky, will play on the third line when Tarasenko is 30.
Furthermore, I think it's self evident that the value of any playoffs to your fans, players, and employees, even if its just psychological, is greater than whatever you're getting in return for your UFA player. One round of the playoffs is worth losing Stastny in the offseason for nothing. To put it in slightly more favorable language: You wouldn't trade a first round playoff series for a third line rookie to be in your lineup in 2022. No one would.
The Blues are a good team that had a deep roster. They are 11th in the NHL in possession, but 26th in save percentage. Instead of punting the season, make a trade for a goddamn goalie. It's just nuts. You don't need 15 years of GM experience to know that.
When I started writing about hockey, I just assumed GMs were respectable and smart. With only 30 teams, how could you not have the best of the best? What I've come to realize is that virtually anyone who owns a suit could easily match the performance of an average GM. The more you pay attention, the deeper you parse the moves, the more apparent it becomes that most of these guys are going on emotion and whims.
How can Doug Armstrong be an NHL GM for ten years and not be able to complete the simple risk vs reward equation of this trade? The only reason there isn't a total revolt in St. Louis is because fans overrate first round picks and are conditioned to assume that anything for a UFA player is a worthwhile endeavor.
This trade isn't just bad. It's shameful.
https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131