Value of: Goaltender to EDM

[Czechboy]

I realize I didn't quote every goalie trade made in the last 10 years. I think my original thread post was long enough. I mean, yes, there have been the occasional trade that was an overpayment. These to me seem to be outliers. For every Anderson trade there are 10 or more trades for future considerations. Maybe I should have posted those too along with the Schneider and Anderson trades to fuller illustrate my point.

Goalies don't land much in trades, but starting goaltenders don't get moved a whole lot.

This is why I hate it when we give away 2nd rounders like candy. 2nd rounders, often times, can land you a good goalie.

 

[McSuper]

nice of you to cherry pick stats
per cf, he is not a ufa until '29-30 season
we are now 23-24, that is 7 seasons away

yeah, he is prime-ish now, but a guy entering prime is like Sanderson, 8 seasons beg. next yr locked in at 9per just as he approaches 30

If you are lucky, you will only have 3-4 years where the wheels fall off, etc
and who is gonna take a 9.25 cap dump then?

You pay now to get flexbiity not only now, but later

And don't shoot the messenger.
In a vacuum you might keep Nurse, but who else can actually be moved?

You're gonna eat soup w'a buy out
that will help slightly
what else Oil can do to bolster team remains to be seen

This is BS. You always try and spin stuff your way.
Let go with what you are saying. We trade Nurse and retain 4.6 million. We are not getting a better D at 4.6 million and we would have to replace Nurse. So please tell how this make Edmonton better today?

 

[TFHockey]

Huge work there. But what for. Whats the offer for Hart to Edm?
A 6th like Blackwood?
a 4th like Hill?
A 3rd like Dubnyk?

Like I said, it is really hard to assess the right value to Hart or Saros because starters don't usually get moved. However it seems that HF has a really skewed view of what a goaltender is worth in a trade.

Like one guy stated

If you wanted Wolf you'd need to send me a high end prospect or top 10 pick.

when historically unproven goaltenders who are close, but aren't quite shoe-in's to be a starter, don't land nearly as much. Realistically a 2nd is as much as they can hope for, and probably less is more likely.

McJedi made a point about Hart and Saros probably not being available. He might be right, but there has been a lot of chatter online about Hart possibly being traded eg:

Cart Hart talks truth

So *maybe* he might be?

As for Saros,

Saros popping up in trade rumors

Insider reveals

So there are rumors enough so no one can categorically state that for sure they aren't available.

 

[Czechboy]

Like I said, it is really hard to assess the right value to Hart or Saros because starters don't usually get moved. However it seems that HF has a really skewed view of what a goaltender is worth in a trade.

Like one guy stated



when historically unproven goaltenders who are close, but aren't quite shoe-in's to be a starter, don't land nearly as much. Realistically a 2nd is as much as they can hope for, and probably less is more likely.

McJedi made a point about Hart and Saros probably not being available. He might be right, but there has been a lot of chatter online about Hart possibly being traded eg:

Cart Hart talks truth

So *maybe* he might be?

As for Saros,

Saros popping up in trade rumors

Insider reveals

So there are rumors enough so no one can categorically state that for sure they aren't available.

I'd also add in what HF posters think Gibson will return.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

Like I said, it is really hard to assess the right value to Hart or Saros because starters don't usually get moved. However it seems that HF has a really skewed view of what a goaltender is worth in a trade.

Like one guy stated



when historically unproven goaltenders who are close, but aren't quite shoe-in's to be a starter, don't land nearly as much. Realistically a 2nd is as much as they can hope for, and probably less is more likely.

McJedi made a point about Hart and Saros probably not being available. He might be right, but there has been a lot of chatter online about Hart possibly being traded eg:

Cart Hart talks truth

So *maybe* he might be?

As for Saros,

Saros popping up in trade rumors

Insider reveals

So there are rumors enough so no one can categorically state that for sure they aren't available.

The rumors regarding Hart, like the one quoted here, were created before Philly's surprising season. So, I wouldn't put much weight on them.

 

[bernmeister]

This is BS. You always try and spin stuff your way.
Let go with what you are saying. We trade Nurse and retain 4.6 million. We are not getting a better D at 4.6 million and we would have to replace Nurse. So please tell how this make Edmonton better today?

bold: let's not be disingenuous here.
Everyone spins their stuff.

Italic: you want your cake and eat it too.
You have a structural cap problem [= too much $$$ for too long term].
Recognizing highest guys are core, not moved, you either
keep Nurse and add to that core, which works for now, but not long term
in which case you live w/current cap reality or make other moves which are hard to see
or
you deal Nurse now and take some pain now to avoid being saddled with him end years of contract.

btw-- whoev takes Nurse now likely has to retain another 1.x to get him to 3m cap hit per to make final acquirer take the long term contract

underline:
yes, there is no magic pushbutton solution which does everything all in one

Oil would need follow up deals, like Lindgren from Rangers, or other, who is a stopgap. You are not married to Lindgren [or whoever] long term, so that = flexibility, and if, for example, it was Lindgren, you would still have coupla mil cap space for this year for a further addition.

So I leave it to you, my friend.
Live w/Nurse = better d now and very constricted cap space AND big risk if the wheels fall off early you ARE effed
OR
downgrade a bit on D now w/flexible stopgap that = a few bucks cap help now, but really = long term cap relief

 

[GreeningOil]

A 1st and a 3rd is what i expect it would take to be Campbell
SJ would be my pick of a trading partner

Edm receives
Kahkonen

SJ receives
1st, 3rd for taking on Campbell
2nd and Youth goalie in system for Kahkonen

I’d do it.

 

[Nikolajs Sillers]

I think Elvis already sitting on his suitcases.

 

[North Cole]

yes, there is supply and demand
but
all laws, including economic ones, are subservient to the conditions that create and maintain them

As that applies here, Shesty, for example, does not go anywhere unless too much to refuse = either Drai or Byfeld as core piece, and even then, that is only if Rs wanna gamble that Garand can step in like next year-ish.

In other words, the supply and demand of which Gs get put up is predicated on certain underlying facts.

On the surface, you are superficially right
But in a more meaningful sense, @Viqsi i is correct.

And I know abot this stuff, any ?s, convo me

No they really aren't correct. Survivorship bias requires the non-prevailing trades to have actually been real/possible at some point. Given that no one is omniscient, you can never prove that a trade was or wasn't talked about by two random NHL people at some point. It's like the God exists because you cannot prove he does not exist argument.

The underlying facts causing G's to be on the block are - can the team internally replace them, does the team need the goalie to compete, and is the team trying to compete? Shesty by definition is on a top 5 team in the league looking to make a cup run with no internal replacement anywhere near his level. Logically, no one on the other 31 teams would even bother picking up the phone to propose a trade, so there is no trade here that is being killed off as proof of lesser trades being survivor bias.

Simply saying - well all assets in the league have a price, thus any lesser traded asset is not proof of the overall value of any other asset (especially my asset) is not survivorship bias. That's a nebulous red herring about all assets being priced differently across a supply curve. However; once you got so far outside of reality, there is no demand curve that will reach that part of the supply curve, so how exactly would that be evidence of a lost trade, or in our case, biased based on real trades?

More meaningful sense? That's the most meaningless train of thought there is. Houses in my area that are selling for 400K, I could sell my house which is slightly different but not that different for 400M. Although no one would ever pay that, you cannot use all these sales for 400K as evidence that my house is not worth 400M. Lmao.

You can have a supply curve and a demand curve. Theoretically, these things extend infinitely, but that's largely irrelevant in reality because a market requires them to intersect. At different price points they have different intersection points and as with all infinite ranges, at some price points they don't intersect at all. The market is the between the upper and lower bounded intersection points. Citing some overpriced value and saying "goalies there never move because no one wants to pay that price" literally admits there is no market for that type of asset. You can't have survivorship bias without there at least having been at market or the possibility of a market there at some point.

 

[Armourboy]

Like I said, it is really hard to assess the right value to Hart or Saros because starters don't usually get moved. However it seems that HF has a really skewed view of what a goaltender is worth in a trade.

Like one guy stated



when historically unproven goaltenders who are close, but aren't quite shoe-in's to be a starter, don't land nearly as much. Realistically a 2nd is as much as they can hope for, and probably less is more likely.

McJedi made a point about Hart and Saros probably not being available. He might be right, but there has been a lot of chatter online about Hart possibly being traded eg:

Cart Hart talks truth

So *maybe* he might be?

As for Saros,

Saros popping up in trade rumors

Insider reveals

So there are rumors enough so no one can categorically state that for sure they aren't available.

Neither of those say anything about Saros other than his name, in fact they both literally say Trotz has no plans to trade him, but then add a " but " cause they need something to try and create traffic to their site.

Trotz has already stated they have already begun talking to Saros agent about a long term extension, which isn't something you do if you have any plans on trading someone.

Trotz has already said what he might be willing to move Saros for, which is why Preds fans keep telling people these offers aren't going to cut it and why he is essentially unavailable. He isn't available unless you offer X, no one is going to offer it so its just a circle of " how about this? No ".

 

[Armourboy]

We can’t know what Nashvilles thinking is, even though they’ve stated they have no intention to trade him.

I see a lot of similarities between the way this situation is tracking and Gibson in Anaheim. He started out with elite numbers behind a good but fading team. They give him a big money long term deal with trade protection thinking the teams performance is sliding a bit but still a decent core in place and we can probably re-tool quickly but they kept sliding and along with it Gibsons performance goes in the toilet playing behind a rebuilding team right after signing a long term deal, which I’m sure he was thrilled about. Rumours of him wanting out but he’s basically untradeable with his contract and performance so him and the team are stuck with eachother.

I’ll call it right now, if Nashville keeps Saros, they’ll re-sign him to a long term 8M a year contract with some trade protection just in time for them to realize their core is aged out and the best they can hope for is coming close to the playoffs and they’re better off stripping it down and getting some fresh high end talent into the system. And Saros performance will struggle behind a bad team that’s backsliding and he’ll be untradeable with a new contract and they’ll be stuck with eachother.

If Nashville is smart they are looking to move him this trade deadline when there’s a hot goalie buyers market and they’re buying an elite goalie with a reasonable cap hit for two playoff runs.

Except Poile came to that conclusion 2 years ago which is why he started retooling then. People just don't pay attention or know what is going on so they didn't see it until Poile started dropping guys at the deadline, but he had already started by restocking Milwaukee prior to that because we had nothing.

Yes Trotz beought some older guys back in with ROR, Schenn, and Nyquist, but all were on shorter type deals and were specifically brought in for culture. You will start seeing more guys roll out as contracts drop, obviously with Josi and Forsberg being exceptions simply due to when they signed, but those two and Saros will be the only ones left from the old core in 3-4 years.

I mean just look at the roster today vs 2017. Saros, Sissons, Josi and Forsberg are the only roster players left from that run already.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

bold: let's not be disingenuous here.
Everyone spins their stuff.

Italic: you want your cake and eat it too.
You have a structural cap problem [= too much $$$ for too long term].
Recognizing highest guys are core, not moved, you either
keep Nurse and add to that core, which works for now, but not long term
in which case you live w/current cap reality or make other moves which are hard to see
or
you deal Nurse now and take some pain now to avoid being saddled with him end years of contract.

btw-- whoev takes Nurse now likely has to retain another 1.x to get him to 3m cap hit per to make final acquirer take the long term contract

underline:
yes, there is no magic pushbutton solution which does everything all in one

Oil would need follow up deals, like Lindgren from Rangers, or other, who is a stopgap. You are not married to Lindgren [or whoever] long term, so that = flexibility, and if, for example, it was Lindgren, you would still have coupla mil cap space for this year for a further addition.

So I leave it to you, my friend.
Live w/Nurse = better d now and very constricted cap space AND big risk if the wheels fall off early you ARE effed
OR
downgrade a bit on D now w/flexible stopgap that = a few bucks cap help now, but really = long term cap relief

It’s impressive that you’re doubling down on this horrible take.

Eating 4.6m for 7 years is long term cap relief?

You’re also aware at 4.6 he’s not a cap dump right?

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

Kuemper could potentially be available from Washington if they continue to free fall. He doesn’t really fit in Washington’s window. That’s all speculation on my part but a goalie who will be 34 next season doesn’t make a lot of sense for a team that’s not going to compete. He’s on a fair deal as well for Edmonton.

With Backstrom and likely Oshie going on LTIRetirment the Caps could potentially take back Campbell as well if the sweetener was worth it.

 

[Bank Shot]

bold: let's not be disingenuous here.
Everyone spins their stuff.

Italic: you want your cake and eat it too.
You have a structural cap problem [= too much $$$ for too long term].
Recognizing highest guys are core, not moved, you either
keep Nurse and add to that core, which works for now, but not long term
in which case you live w/current cap reality or make other moves which are hard to see
or
you deal Nurse now and take some pain now to avoid being saddled with him end years of contract.

btw-- whoev takes Nurse now likely has to retain another 1.x to get him to 3m cap hit per to make final acquirer take the long term contract

underline:
yes, there is no magic pushbutton solution which does everything all in one

Oil would need follow up deals, like Lindgren from Rangers, or other, who is a stopgap. You are not married to Lindgren [or whoever] long term, so that = flexibility, and if, for example, it was Lindgren, you would still have coupla mil cap space for this year for a further addition.

So I leave it to you, my friend.
Live w/Nurse = better d now and very constricted cap space AND big risk if the wheels fall off early you ARE effed
OR
downgrade a bit on D now w/flexible stopgap that = a few bucks cap help now, but really = long term cap relief

This summer you wanted Mcleod, Bouchard, Holloway, Broberg and a 1st for Lafrenierre.

I think its pretty safe to say that Oilers fans should just ignore your trade suggestions.

 

[SherVaughn30]

Kuemper could potentially be available from Washington if they continue to free fall. He doesn’t really fit in Washington’s window. That’s all speculation on my part but a goalie who will be 34 next season doesn’t make a lot of sense for a team that’s not going to compete. He’s on a fair deal as well for Edmonton.

With Backstrom and likely Oshie going on LTIRetirment the Caps could potentially take back Campbell as well if the sweetener was worth it.

Chucky Sideburns has to come back and stay healthy first, while playing like he was, in order for the Caps to think about trading Kuemper.

 

[zar]

bold: let's not be disingenuous here.
Everyone spins their stuff.

Italic: you want your cake and eat it too.
You have a structural cap problem [= too much $$$ for too long term].
Recognizing highest guys are core, not moved, you either
keep Nurse and add to that core, which works for now, but not long term
in which case you live w/current cap reality or make other moves which are hard to see
or
you deal Nurse now and take some pain now to avoid being saddled with him end years of contract.

btw-- whoev takes Nurse now likely has to retain another 1.x to get him to 3m cap hit per to make final acquirer take the long term contract

underline:
yes, there is no magic pushbutton solution which does everything all in one

Oil would need follow up deals, like Lindgren from Rangers, or other, who is a stopgap. You are not married to Lindgren [or whoever] long term, so that = flexibility, and if, for example, it was Lindgren, you would still have coupla mil cap space for this year for a further addition.

So I leave it to you, my friend.
Live w/Nurse = better d now and very constricted cap space AND big risk if the wheels fall off early you ARE effed
OR
downgrade a bit on D now w/flexible stopgap that = a few bucks cap help now, but really = long term cap relief

Every GM in the league would kill to be “saddled” with Nurse for another 7+ years at $4.6m AAV. That is a zero risk situation.

What a terrible take.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

Chucky Sideburns has to come back and stay healthy first, while playing like he was, in order for the Caps to think about trading Kuemper.

Practically and realistically yes you’re right because they need someone to play goalie, but also… why? If they’re not going to compete why do they need to keep Kuemper?

 

[VivaLasVegas]

I think Oilers fans would be thrilled if somehow they could shoehorn Jack Campbell into a deal for another goalie although I am not sure that is at all possible.

Seriously doubt that the Oilers can even unload Campbell, but even if they could find a team with the cap to spare, the cost would probably make a trade too painful.

Otherwise, the Oilers' first problem is that there a number of teams out there who are in realistic Cup contention who are also looking for a TDL goalie, i.e., it is a sellers' market and that is really going to boost prices well above the ordinary TDL norm. The Oilers' second problem is that they really don't have any pieces to trade since they are so top-heavy.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Any Oiler deal for a goaltender will have to exclude Campbell. Campbell is too much of a dump to get rid of.

 

[McFlyingV]

Any Oiler deal for a goaltender will have to exclude Campbell. Campbell is too much of a dump to get rid of.

Not sure that's entirely true. Toronto was able to dump 2 years of Mrazek at 3.8M cap hit to swap their late 1st round pick for Chicago's early 2nd round pick.

So they essentially gave up a 2nd round pick worth to dump 2 years of 3.8M cap hit. Obviously Campbell has 5M cap for 3 more years so the price is going to be a decent amount more. It would have to be to a team that doesn't see themselves competing for the next 3 years, but if Edmonton decided to offer up a couple 1st rounders and one of their top prospects with Campbell for a goalie I'm sure there'd be some deal to be made.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Not sure that's entirely true. Toronto was able to dump 2 years of Mrazek at 3.8M cap hit to swap their late 1st round pick for Chicago's early 2nd round pick.

So they essentially gave up a 2nd round pick worth to dump 2 years of 3.8M cap hit. Obviously Campbell has 5M cap for 3 more years so the price is going to be a decent amount more. It would have to be to a team that doesn't see themselves competing for the next 3 years, but if Edmonton decided to offer up a couple 1st rounders and one of their top prospects with Campbell for a goalie I'm sure there'd be some deal to be made.

Campbell is significantly worse than Mrazek was at the time. Mrazek was overpaid. Campbell is backup in the AHL and a pure capdump for 3.5 years. An absolute useless player.

It would cost ~1st for every year remaining on that contract (3) to dump Campbell because he can't even contribute in any manner in the NHL. Then you have to add to get the goaltender you covet in trade.

Its impossible.

 

[McFlyingV]

Campbell is significantly worse than Mrazek was at the time. Mrazek was overpaid. Campbell is backup in the AHL and a pure capdump for 3.5 years. An absolute useless player.

It would cost ~1st for every year remaining on that contract (3) to dump Campbell because he can't even contribute in any manner in the NHL. Then you have to add to get the goaltender you covet in trade.

Its impossible.

Campbell's Sv% in Edmonton (playoffs included) was actually slightly better than Mrazek's in Toronto and Mrazek was barely an NHL calibre goalie last year in Chicago.

There's no chance it costs 3 1st rounders to dump a 5M contract for 3 years. I'd love to see something even remotely comparable to that which has happened before.

3 years is not a lot for a team that is rebuilding and has no plan to compete for the next few seasons.

The real struggle is finding a team with a goaltender good enough that the Oilers would need that is going into a 3+ year rebuild.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Campbell's Sv% in Edmonton (playoffs included) was actually slightly better than Mrazek's in Toronto and Mrazek was barely an NHL calibre goalie last year in Chicago.

There's no chance it costs 3 1st rounders to dump a 5M contract for 3 years. I'd love to see something even remotely comparable to that which has happened before.

3 years is not a lot for a team that is rebuilding and has no plan to compete for the next few seasons.

The real struggle is finding a team with a goaltender good enough that the Oilers would need that is going into a 3+ year rebuild.

Campbell is an absolutely useless goaltender. Anyone that takes him on are automatically buying him out. Why? Because he's a backup goaltender at the AHL level!

There is no comparable for Campbell. Any other capdump can actually still contribute in the NHL in some manner. Mrazek is able to contribute as a mediocre / low level NHL goaltender.

3 years is a long time for any team taking on 5M caphit. Again, any team that does take the massive sweeteners (3 x 1sts) will promptly buy out Campbell.

You are fooling yourself if you think Campbell is tradeable. Its a complete non-starter. I don't know why you bother trying to find a trade. There is none because the Oilers are not coughing up 3 x 1st (or more since he has another 0.5 year remaining).

 

[McFlyingV]

Campbell is an absolutely useless goaltender. Anyone that takes him on are automatically buying him out. Why? Because he's a backup goaltender at the AHL level!

There is no comparable for Campbell. Any other capdump can actually still contribute in the NHL in some manner. Mrazek is able to contribute as a mediocre / low level NHL goaltender.

3 years is a long time for any team taking on 5M caphit. Again, any team that does take the massive sweeteners (3 x 1sts) will promptly buy out Campbell.

You are fooling yourself if you think Campbell is tradeable. Its a complete non-starter. I don't know why you bother trying to find a trade. There is none because the Oilers are not coughing up 3 x 1st (or more since he has another 0.5 year remaining).

Mrazek has refound his game, but he wasn't an NHL quality goalie last year and he wasn't one at the time he was traded. With that said I think your post is filled with hyperbole, but its probably makes more sense for Edmonton to buy him out this summer than use all their trade assets that they'd rather use on TDL rentals.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Mrazek has refound his game, but he wasn't an NHL quality goalie last year and he wasn't one at the time he was traded. With that said I think your post is filled with hyperbole, but its probably makes more sense for Edmonton to buy him out this summer than use all their trade assets that they'd rather use on TDL rentals.

Oilers will have no choice but to buy him out. My posts are filled with reality. Your belief that Campbell is tradeable is pure fantasy.