- kwolf68

was meant as a joke, appreciate not getting flamed haha

Seems like the Hayes brothers thought very highly of themselves, like spoiled rich kids often do. Yeah, trading Jimmy was likely the catalyst for Kevin not signing. Boo-hoo. At least he got a front row seat when the Blackhawks raised their 2014-15 Stanley Cup Champion banner opening night of the 2015-16 season. Nice timing that the Hawks hosted the Rangers that night. Haha.
- matt_ahrens

At some point I believed that the Hawks viewed Kevin Hayes as such a pain that they didn’t want to sign him. Hawks also saw he had a limited ceiling and were happy with the 2nd. Always thought it was odd that the Hawks traded Jimmy Hayes in the middle of “courting” Kevin Hayes. No more talk about Kevin Hayes please.

Yeah we don’t have to agree that is fine, I will make one more response about this because I think it’s a good topic.

As far as using an outlier to prove my point, i think it is acceptable in this case. I’m not trying to prove that the first pick in the draft isn’t valuable, I’m trying to disprove the hypothesis that you can judge the merits of a trade for draft picks based on what the pick eventually turns in to in the NHL.

I’ll use another example that doesn’t include any outlier situation. Let’s say at the deadline Hartman was traded for the 27 pick and a player of very similar value was traded for pick 35. At the time of the trade, pick 27 clearly has more value than pick 35, so the trade for pick 27 was better. Now, let’s say that the draft roles around and the Blackhawks pick a bust at pick 27 and a player at 35 that has a really good career. This is a very realistic scenario, not an outlier. Now, using your value system we would retroactively declare that the trade for pick 35 was the better trade. What I’m saying is the trade for pick 27 was the better trade because we got a more valuable pick for similar value assets, but because the draft is probabilistic in nature, 35 panned out and 27 didn’t.

This brings me to the term "asset management". I agree, being a good gm is all about good asset management. In trading, this means that they consistently get the more valuable assets in a trade. Draft picks sometimes pan out and sometimes don't, but over the long haul if gms make consistently good moves where they are getting more value, their team should be better off for it even though some trades for draft picks result in a good player whereas others do not. What I think a gm can be judged on is whether they are consistently making moves that provide good value for the team, whether or not a specific draft pick actually pans out is really just a matter of chance.
- LaheysBRandy

Not going to go into anything else much just to point out that pick 35 has little value difference from 27, historically.

#CBJ GM Jarmo Kekalainen on Artemi Panarin report:

"Artemi is an elite National Hockey League player. Our position has been that we want him to be a Blue Jacket for many years and that has not changed. He has a year left on his contract, so there is plenty of time …

“… to work towards that end. Should anything change moving forward, we will address it at that time and any decision we make will be in the best interest of our club.”

JJ

Heard just now Hawks in trade talks with Ottawa. Player unnamed, “might be a Center.”

Is it really fair to say that we have to wait for the #27 to pan out to judge the value of the trade?. I see the idea thrown around a lot that when trading for draft picks, the outcome of the pick somehow retroactively effects the value of the trade. I think that this concept is a logical fallacy.

I think that when judging how well teams did in a trade, particularly when draft picks and prospects are involved, you really have to consider the expected value of the assets that each side received. If there’s a pretty good chance when the trade is made that the combination of Edjsell and #27 pick are more valuable than Hartman a couple years down the line to the Blackhawks, then I think it is a good trade, regardless of how the pick turns out, because of how much uncertainty there is in drafting.

I have an example to illustrate the point that I’m trying to make. Let’s say that the Blackhawks had traded a Hartman-esque player for the number 1 pick in the draft in 2012. Clearly, this is a lopsided trade. Then, the Blackhawks select consensus first pick Yakupov. If we look at this trade based on expected value at the time, there is a high probability that the player selected far exceeds the one traded, so this should definitely be considered a good trade for the Hawks. However, by waiting for the pick to develop to make a call on whether it was a good trade for the Blackhawks, we would conclude it was actually a bad trade because Hartman has more value than Yakupov does today.

Basically, I don’t think it is very fair to judge the value of a trade retroactively based on whether or not the player selected pans out. What should really be considered is the value that both teams are receiving at the time the trade was made.

I see a lot of posters saying they will wait to see whether picks pan out to determine who won a trade so I just wanted to bring it up as a topic of discussion because I don’t think it’s a very fair way to judge these moves.
- LaheysBRandy

Agreed. The Hartman trade is a very good trade period. An extreme example exemplifies this. If the Hawks use #27 to draft a player who early on suffers a career ending injury it was still a very good trade although there was no production.

JJ

Heard just now Hawks in trade talks with Ottawa. Player unnamed, “might be a Center.”
- walleyeb1

DUUUUSHANNEEEEEEEE

If you are Montreal, do you trade the #3 for him?
- z1990z

Have to think on this. Panarin will turn 27 when the season starts. At #3, I think so if I'm Montreal. Not at 1 or 2 but yes at 3 unless MTL thinks Zadina has that 80 point game. .......... As a Jackets fan yes, and that Finn GM takes Tkachuk. He likes big mean players, Jenner, Anderson, Pierre Luc, Dubinsky and hired a coach who plays north-south.

Tough call and who the hell can figure what Bergvin will do anymore.

Stan's asleep at the wheel again....get could have got Hoffman for way less.

TRADE:

To #Sharks:
F Mike Hoffman
D Cody Donaghey
5th RD pick 2020

To #Sens:
F Mikkel Boedker
D Julius Bergman
6th RD pick 2020https://t.co/pOmLyOX15A

— CapFriendly (@CapFriendly) June 19, 2018

- DarthKane

Hoffman is a complete cancer. I’m shocked anyone would take him.

DUUUUSHANNEEEEEEEE
- z1990z

Zack Smith, two years too late. Or Tommy Pyatt

If you are Montreal, do you trade the #3 for him?
- z1990z

If you are St. Louis what do you offer for him. Schwartz and Winnipeg's 1st round pick. It probably depends on signability. If they get to talk to his agent in advance and can sign him they would pay a pretty good price to put him with Tarsenko for the next 5 years.

If the Hawks could sign him for 5 years they would probably give the #8 pick, the #27 pick, Anisimov, a "B" level prospect and Hossa's contract.

Great move by the Sharks, I don't see much of a gamble. Boedker was a complete bust and Hoffman is a major improvement. Looks like the fire sale in Ottawa has begun!


- DarthKane

There is a “Fire Sale” because the Sens trade a player involved in the disgusting bullying of parents who had a stillborn baby?

He is going to want 10 mil per year. He is smart to wait till after this years UFA's hit the market. When Tav gets 12 and Carlson 9mil, Kane gets 7 mil. SAAD at 6 or Pan at 10 will be a interesting question. The mistake he did with both guys is Extend them a bit earlier and get them signed long term. SAAD should have been extended 9 mos before the trade Long Term, Same with pan.
- kmw4631

And probably get it. With him being a UFA after this coming season expect monster numbers from him this yr. Grab him in your fantasy league.

If you are Montreal, do you trade the #3 for him?
- z1990z

The last thing they need is another winger. But Bergeron is such a horrible GM I can see it happening.

DUUUUSHANNEEEEEEEE
- z1990z

Would love Duchene, but JG Pageau makes sense as a 3C. Also wouldn't mind wheaton guy dzingel

Which may be something he/his agent told CHI that he wants to be in the open market versus signing with any team he's with...
- PatShart

No way to know but it would seem reasonable he was happy playing with Kane and in Chicago as long as they forked over the 10 mil.

Zack Smith, two years too late. Or Tommy Pyatt
- stonefire

or Dzingel, Illinois kid

If you are St. Louis what do you offer for him. Schwartz and Winnipeg's 1st round pick. It probably depends on signability. If they get to talk to his agent in advance and can sign him they would pay a pretty good price to put him with Tarsenko for the next 5 years.

If the Hawks could sign him for 5 years they would probably give the #8 pick, the #27 pick, Anisimov, a "B" level prospect and Hossa's contract.
- -Doh-

They wouldn't take Hossa's contract as they want more flexibility than LTIR allows (just like the Hawks) and probably wouldn't want Anisimov.

No way to know but it would seem reasonable he was happy playing with Kane and in Chicago as long as they forked over the 10 mil.
- Mr Ricochet

move Anisimov + Hossa's cap hit, with natural Salary Cap growth and you have room for Artemi at $8-9 mil

Would love Duchene, but JG Pageau makes sense as a 3C. Also wouldn't mind wheaton guy dzingel
- Panarin27

Is Pageau good on draws? (Guess he is 51% per Puck Base)

Since he played on the Memorial Cup winner, Dobson has clearly moved up in the rankings to be the top North American D man available. Remains to be seen if the real hockey guys think he's worth being selected in the top 5 overall. (Although Ottawa might take him so they have a replacement for Karlsson).

Next up is Bouchard, played in London Knights system under the Hunters. I think the Hawks would take him if the forwards available don't turn their crank much.

And you are right, Bovqvist has dropped a bit in the rankings due to the recently discovered concussions.

But do you really want another 5'9" defenceman in Hughes?
- RickJ

Yes I want Hughes. I watched the Memorial Cup. There was lots of scoring so Dobson got some points. However, he was not noticeable - as you’d expect from someone ranked so high. He was just another D-Man on his team. If you didn’t know anything about Dobson you wouldn’t have left saying wow what a prospect. His deep, talented team won. Dobson is not replacing Karlsson - he just isn’t that level of player.

I dont understand why so many want Pageau

30pts, small center for 3.1mil per??

For wiz

A few more comments on the age of draftees issue. With respect this is not a debatable issue. Of course the relative age of draftees is and always has been an issue.

I did not mention Auston Matthews as a comparable to Brady Tkachuk. Obviously as a player Matthews is a far, far superior player. I mentioned Matthews only as someone who was in the same birthday situation as Tkachuk. Matthews missed an earlier Draft by 2 days, Tkachuk by one day. So any arguments
you made were not against anything I was submitting.

What I was saying is Tkachuk will be as old as a draftee can be when he gets drafted. You describe a distinction for power forwards like Tkachuk which doesn’t apply to other players. I disagree - the age issue applies to all players. There are players across the age continuum. Most players fit somewhere along the middle section where age is less of an issue. However, for those at either extreme it is very much an issue. For players who are very young as a draftee or very old as a draftee it is very much an issue.

For a player who is very young as a draftee the player’s body of work has to be created in a far shorter period. The very old draftee has far more time to create his body of work playing through an entire extra hockey season. Of course the use of the words very young and very old are relative only to their relative positions as draftees.

I disagree with you that big aggressive power forwards should not be held to the same test. I submit that players like Tkachuk who have had their skill level questioned should be looked at even more critically. You see in the extra year whether a previously unseen skill level appears - you are looking for the player’s potential ceiling. The Hawks Scouting Department considers a player’s potential ceiling as an all- important issue. If you want to bring in Matthews there was nothing that happened in his extra year that diminished in any way the view that he was very highly skilled. However, in the case of Tkachuk he did not show dominant skill or burgeoning skill getting only 8 goals in 40 college games. For me Tkachuk’s performance gives no indication that he has a high ceiling as a player - there are far better, more highly skilled and safer choices than him. That his family has a history (Kevin Hayes) of using the college free agent loophole doesn’t help either. Tkachuk is just a dangerous choice all around and the Hawks cannot waste this pick. Also this talk that college hockey is like the AHL or KHL simply must stop.

Someone like Quinton Hughes who is highly skilled and a great skater would be highly skilled and a great skater no matter where he fit on the continuum. If you are comparing him to younger similarly equipped D-Men like Adam Boqvist or just all the other D-Men you do have to judge them all on where you think their relative ceilings are in the future and when you think that ceiling may be reached. Very old draftees, at least in theory, could be more NHL ready with the extra season of development.

I’m hoping that everyone stays away from Ryan Merkley like the plague and the Hawks aggressively pursue him. His Draft rating on some Lists is insanely low. 45, 70 - holy. On other Lists he penetrates the top 10. He has posted quite incredible stats on a bad Guelph Storm team and has played well internationally. Apparently he has been accused of believing his talent is wasted on the bad team - he’s right, he can’t on his own make them a winner. I’d be worried if he didn’t hate losing. Does he have an attitude problem if he is playing for the professionally run London Knights team? He may be confident but so what. I would look for players who are confident, not unrealistically so, but Merkley has a crazy skillset. Also he has put together his impressive statistical body of work as a very young draftee. He won’t even turn 18 until deep into August. I read a great article written June 17, 2018 that compared him to others and said Merkley clearly has the highest playmaking ability in the CHL. Also said his competitiveness fuels his on-ice excellence AND his problems. Bottom line he cares. No doubt there is a high level of frustration for him dealing with the losing. His situation sounds similar to ROR in Buffalo. I still go back to the fact that he is still only 17. On his resume? Drafted into OHL no. 1. OHL Rookie of the Year. 2nd season more than a point a game. Success internationally where he has been no attitudinal problems.

Your discussion is interesting concerning whether the additional season would/could impact on someone’s poor attitude rating. For Merkley he doesn’t get another season to “grow”. Jacques Madeuppe is clearly in an even poorer position being older.

However, for players with perceived attitude problems, regardless of their age, the analysis of their potential ceilings still applies - it is just that the analysis includes whether the attitudinal problem is something that is overblown or in any event will dissipate.

I don’t want Tkachuk. I also don’t want Dobson or Bouchard. I like Hughes. High-end skill, high-end skating. Played at Worlds against professionals. Already knows, respects Kane. I also like Merkley - a lot! Can’t wait for Friday.
- Z3Hawk

Novel-Buzz in here today

or Dzingel, Illinois kid
- ikeane

Depends on the ask. Like him a lot but he'll be UFA at the end of the season and due a decent-ish raise.

Is Pageau good on draws? (Guess he is 51% per Puck Base)
- z1990z

He was around 51% last year and took a lot of draws.