Could there be anything more insulting than being traded for a 4th round draft pick? | Page 2 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

Could there be anything more insulting than being traded for a 4th round draft pick?

I would rather be traded for a 4th, or even traded with a 4th, from an NHL team to an NHL than be put on waivers, clear, and go ride the buses in the AHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose
Jim Benning signed some dude out of the OHL becuase of a twitter post

then he traded said guy for future considerations

i think his name was Kane Fox?

Future considerations is pretty brutal

being traded with a 1st round pick is the ultimate "We want you gone by an frigan means possible"
 
Having a strong interest in NHL history I have come across many trades where a player who is a regular on the team that traded him was traded for a 4th round (or later) draft pick.

How deflating must that be? Both GMs have decided you're not even worth a 3rd round never mind a second round or 1st round pick.

And it's not just a fourth line regular, but often times a third line or even borderline second line kind of player.

That has got to kill the ego


Draper for a buck for the win

and I assume this has been mentioned

How about the D mas the wings had to ADD a second to move him for FCS--he got trades for nothing?
 
How has no one mentioned, a bag of pucks. This joke must have some history, did it ever happen maybe in the minors or jrs long ago?
 
Draper for a buck for the win

and I assume this has been mentioned

How about the D mas the wings had to ADD a second to move him for FCS--he got trades for nothing?
That happens quite a bit these days. I would think players, while not necessarily liking it can understand the process behind it.
 
Jim Benning signed some dude out of the OHL becuase of a twitter post

then he traded said guy for future considerations

i think his name was Kane Fox?

Future considerations is pretty brutal

being traded with a 1st round pick is the ultimate "We want you gone by an frigan means possible"
Or you're just an afterthought.

It's amazing how many GMs have mentioned how they added a player just because they needed another body to balance the trade out or something like that
 
Weird that they kept him around for 10 years even though he wasn't a main stay on the NHL roster.

Why yes, it IS weird.

Now over to Ken Holland for an explanation:

1747347397271.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: PistolPete
Or you're just an afterthought.

It's amazing how many GMs have mentioned how they added a player just because they needed another body to balance the trade out or something like that

My favorite offshoot of that recently is when a team has to include a prospect (they don't intend to sign) as a paper transaction when being the middle man to retain salary. Couple of New Jersey trades the past two deadlines:

NJD: Chris Tanev (50% retained by Calgary)
CAL: Cole Brady

DAL: Chris Tanev (50% of the remaining 50% retained by New Jersey)
NJD: 4th round pick

CAL: Artem Grushnikov, 2nd round pick
DAL: Cole Brady

------------

NJD: Trent Frederic (50% retained by Boston)
BOS: Petr Hauser

EDM: Trent Frederic (50% of the remaining 50% retained by New Jersey)
NJD: Shane Lachance

BOS: Maximus Wanner, 2nd round pick, 4th round pick
EDM: Max Jones, Petr Hauser
 
Having a strong interest in NHL history I have come across many trades where a player who is a regular on the team that traded him was traded for a 4th round (or later) draft pick.

How deflating must that be? Both GMs have decided you're not even worth a 3rd round never mind a second round or 1st round pick.

And it's not just a fourth line regular, but often times a third line or even borderline second line kind of player.

That has got to kill the ego
Some players have been traded with assets for future considerations....

For example, Jake Wallman was traded together with a second-round pick for nothing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad