It's been 4 years since the 2003 NHL Trade Deadline. Long enough time period so, that we can assess whether these deadline deals have been worthwhile for the team(s) receiving draft pick(s). Only deals in which the draft picks were a major component will be touched. A summary and commentary will be provided at the end.
Here we go:
_______________
1.
| March 11 | Nas. | Alex Riazantsev, D | Col. | 7th-round pick in 2003 |
Alex Riazantsev never played a game in the NHL (AHL and Russia only). Nothing amounted of the 7th round pick.
2.
| March 11 | Was. | Sergei Berezin, RW | Chi. | 4th-round pick in 2004 |
3.
| March 11 | Cal. | Dean McAmmond, LW | Col. | 5th-round pick in 2003 |
4.
| Doug Gilmour, C | Mon. | TOR 6th-round pick in 2003 |
5.
| March 11 | Bos. | Ian Moran, D | Pit. | 4th-round pick in 2003 |
6.
| March 11 | Tor. | Phil Housley, D | Chi. | 4th-round pick in 2003 9th-round pick in 2003 |
7.
| March 11 | Bos. | Dan McGillis, D | S.J. | 2nd-round pick 2003 |
8.
| March 11 | NYI | Janne Niinimaa, D 2nd-round pick in 2003 4th-round pick in 2003 | Edm. | Brad Isbister, LW Raffi Torres, LW |
The Islanders won the deal in the short run, but it was solid Billy Bean-esque management on Kevin Lowe's part.
9.
| March 11 | Ana. | Steve Thomas, RW | Chi. | 5th-round pick in 2003 |
10.
| March 11 | Det. | Mathieu Schneider, D | L.A. | Sean Avery, C Maxim Kuznetsov, D 1st-round pick in 2003 2nd-round pick in 2004 |
11.
| March 10 | Phi. | Tony Amonte, RW | Pho. | Guillaume Lefebvre, LW 2nd-round pick in 2004 3rd-round pick in 2003 |
12.
| March 9 | Tor. | Glen Wesley, D | Car. | 2nd-round pick in 2004 |
13.
| March 9 | NYI | Randy Robitaille, C | Pit. | 5th-round pick in 2003 |
14.
| March 9 | Phi. | Claude Lapointe, C | NYI | 5th-round pick in 2003 |
15.
| March 8 | Col. | Bryan Marchment, D | S.J. | 3rd-round pick in 2003 5th-round pick in 2003 |
16.
| March 3 | Nas. | Oleg Petrov, RW | Mon. | 4th-round pick in 2003 |
17.
| March 1 | Phi. | Dimitry Yushkevich, D | L.A. | 4th-round pick in 2003 7th-round pick in 2004 |
________________
Commentary
The purpose was not to demonstrate that the draft picks after the 1st round (to a lesser extent, 2nd round) are more or less, useless, with a huge element of luck in obtaining a regular NHLer. No sir. One can easily look it up him or herself and see blanks all the way around, or very short NHL careers
2004
2003
2002
2001
Rather, the underlying questions to be asked are:
1 Do NHL GM's overvalue draft picks?
and
2. If so, why?
and
3. How can that be corrected and what would be the end result?
I'll take a stab at it
__________________
1. Do NHL GM's overvalue draft picks?
YES
-Trades on draft day to move down in the first round in exchange for an extra 3rd round pick (Oilers and Flames). Risking the possibility that your targeted player (i.e. Pouliot, Backlund) will not be available at the moved-down spot.
-Lack of RFA offersheets over the years.
-Draft picks playing a noteworthy role in perceived to be as ''big trades'' (Smyth, Pronger, Niinimaa, Satan, Comrie, Lydman, Tanguay, etc.)
NO
-Most trades involving moving down at the draft are a result of the expectation that your targeted player will still be available at the moved-down spot. Why not obtain an extra free pick?
-RFA offersheets have nothing to do with valuation, but everything to do with collusion.
- Most "big trades" involve 1st rounders, everyday NHLers, and/or quality prospects. The aggregate is important.
2. If so, why? If not, why not?
YES
-Subjective belief of superiority on ability to draft greater than peers.
-Recent year draft picks have worked out well. Extrapolate this success to future years.
-Like baseball pre-21st century, lack of mainstream statistical use which can pinpoint how successful drafting is, round-by-round.
NO
-"I'm going to lose player X on July 1 because he either wants more money than he deserves, or we just don't have any interest in bringing him back. The low draft pick value accurately reflects the fact that he's not going to wear our uniform colours next year"
3. How can that be corrected and what would be the end result?
-As mentioned, statistical use must be implemented, with data gathered over years.
-Leads to GMs making *calculated* decisions when moving players for draft picks.
Ask Questions and Analyze Results
-If say, the probability of landing an NHL player who will play more than 164 (2 seasons) games in the third round is 5%, smart GMs can take advantage over the dull GMs whom overvalue 3rd round picks by implementing it in part of a package deal or moving up in the draft.
-Connect free agency to draft picks
"What is the probability that a 3rd round pick will have a more successful career than Mike Johnson/Martin Gelinas, whom are available for peanuts in the free agent market?" If it's low, should I take advantage by using it as trade bait to move up in the NHL entry draft?
- Address pending free agents
I have Petr Sykora and Jussi Markannen, both set to be UFAs in 4 months. They are worth a 3rd and 4th rounder on the market respectively. Is it worth keeping one or both to evaluate their play over the next 20 games to make next year decisions? Is it worth passing up a 3rd or 4th rounder to buy decision-making time on the make-up of next year(s) club? Is it worth burning bridges by trading the player.
_______________
Statistics in hockey may never prove to be as useful as they are in baseball due to two main factors:
1. Team/player chemistry has a much bigger role in hockey
2. Baseball deals with an individual (batter) against an individual (pitcher). Hockey deals with 12 guys on the ice, fighting, muscling, and positioning themselves to put the rubber across the goal line.
That being said, statistics still can be useful in hockey. Until then, the few number of teams that employ full time statisticians such as the Minnesota Wild, will gain a competitive advantage and exploit their peers.
In other words, the market has a long way to go before it is corrected.
Posts
2 comments:
I still diagree with you about the worth of draft picks. Even lower round picks, if you can pick someone there who at least LOOKS good, even if they never play a game for you, they still can provide value in that when a team is having a fire sale, you have ammunition to be able to make a big deal. Maybe this is hard in Edmonton, where its usually the other way around, but the point remains that it is through those kinds of shrewd moves which contenders are built by. The prospects/picks/whatever traded by the Isles for Smyth last year may not all pan out for the Edmonton, and they certainly haven't panned out for NYI, as they didn't even play for them. However, their value came because NYI was able to possess them, and pass them off for a better player. SJ did it twice to Boston. They could make those moves because they had a glut of good youngsters, who could either be traded themselves, or take the spot of a roster player who was traded. That is part of the inherent value of all prospects and draft picks.
The other thing is, drafting kids is definitely not a surefire thing. Its hard, especially outside of the top half of the first round. For that reason, you either need to have a fantastic scouting staff who can make every single one of your picks count, or you need to acquire tons of draft picks, go for the shotgun effect, and hope for the best. Given the Oiler's recent history at doing anything right, it would seem they should go for the shotgun effect when drafting. Drafting keeps you from being stuck with big long contracts that you can't get rid of, and it doesn't cost you anything in terms of current usable assets, unlike trading. Drafting is THE way to build a team, and there is no way around it. Go ask NYR how their adventures in building purely through free agency through the late 90's and and early 00's worked. You have to draft well, or draft enough guys to have ended up drafting well. If you devalue picks like that, you're gonna get burned. Giving away low picks for bit players sticks you with bigger contracts with very little upside. Consolidating low picks into higher ones means that you'd better get that higher pick right, cause if you don't, its going to cost you several picks.
Post a Comment