Proposal: Hagens Schaefer Misa NYI SJS CHI

[Pinkfloyd]

Well just to let you know every team that has won the Cup in the past 6 years all chose a D-man within the top 4 draft slots.

Pieterangelo 2019 drafted 4th
Hedman 2020 drafted 2nd
Hedman 2021 drafted 2nd
Makar 2022 drafted 4th
Pieterangelo 2023 drafted 4th
Ekblad 2024 drafted 1st and right now he’s aiming for his 2nd Cup

I’m sure they regret the huge risk they took.

They aren’t the only ones to do so in the timeframe those picks were made until now. It’s funny you don’t mention that.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

OP edited the trade proposal, it was originally just dumping bad contracts to move down.

And it's probably going to be Schaefer.

Got it.

 

[Rehabguy]

They aren’t the only ones to do so in the timeframe those picks were made until now. It’s funny you don’t mention that.

But clearly choosing a defenseman in the top 5 does NOT present a “huge risk”. In fact it’s the exact opposite.

 

[General Fanager]

We already heard Darche say it would need to be something really special to move the 1st and this isn't it imo.

 

[miscs75]

We already heard Darche say it would need to be something really special to move the 1st and this isn't it imo.

This is more of a way to get rid of the Lou contracts than just a package to move down. I doubt he entertains anything to move down unless a team is offering a franchise-changing piece (for example from Montreal we’re talking a player of Lane Hutson’s caliber but more proven) in return. Teams aren’t giving those types of players up at all.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

But clearly choosing a defenseman in the top 5 does NOT present a “huge risk”. In fact it’s the exact opposite.

No, the facts say that isn't clear at all given the amount of top five defensive picks that didn't work out compared to the ones that do.

 

[BHFAN92]

EDITED to add more value for NYI

FIRST TRADE

to San Jose Sharks
1st overall pick
PIERRE ENGVALL
edited in - ANTHONY DUCLAIR

to New York Islanders
2nd overall pick
TY DELLANDREA
edited in - 2025 DAL 1ST


SECOND TRADE

to Chicago Blackhawks
2nd overall pick
SCOTT MAYFIELD
edited in - 42nd overall pick

to New York Islanders
3rd overall pick
T.J. BRODIE
Nolan Allan
edited in - 34th overall pick


FINAL RESULT

SJS out =
2nd overall
2025 DAL 1st (29/30/31/32)
DELLANDREA

SJS in =
(#1) Schaefer
DUCLAIR
ENGVALL

San Jose agrees to take on Engvall in order to get Schaefer. Engvall is $3.0m cap hit for 5 years, and if you buy him out at any point, the buyout cap hit is $1.0m.

CHI out =
3rd overall
34th overall
BRODIE
Nolan Allan

CHI in =
(#2) Misa
42nd overall
MAYFIELD

Chicago agrees to take on Mayfield's 5 year contract, and also give Allan, in order to get Misa. Luckily, Mayfield is an upgrade on Brodie in terms of on-ice play. The player is fine honestly... it's the 5 year term and age combo Islanders want to move on from.

NYI out =
1st overall
42nd overall
MAYFIELD
DUCLAIR
ENGVALL

NYI in =
(#3) Hagens
2025 DAL 1st (29/30/31/32)
34th overall
Nolan Allan
DELLANDREA
BRODIE

Islanders get the guy they want, but they also manage to dump Engvall and move on from the 5 year long commitment to Mayfield. Brodie is terrible but it's only a 1 year contract. Allan is a decent add-on. Dellandrea is a low commitment reclaimation project worth trying out.

I could see the parameters of this working out. Each team gets the guy they want and Isles get couple extra assets

 

[Grinner]

We already heard Darche say it would need to be something really special to move the 1st and this isn't it imo.

Seems the standard fare when it comes to GM talk. Grier pretty much stated the same thing prior to the draft lottery

 

[Rehabguy]

No, the facts say that isn't clear at all given the amount of top five defensive picks that didn't work out compared to the ones that do.

What do you mean by did not work out? I'm pretty sure the number of forwards a the top 5 that "didn't work out" whatever that means was far worse than the D-man at that position that did not work out.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

What do you mean by did not work out? I'm pretty sure the number of forwards a the top 5 that "didn't work out" whatever that means was far worse than the D-man at that position that did not work out.

The same way you mean by not working out in terms of getting a Norris and a Cup. That's the standard you're running with. Of course there will be more forwards because teams pick defensemen far less in this area. You're acting like there's no reason for that.

 

[Rehabguy]

The same way you mean by not working out in terms of getting a Norris and a Cup. That's the standard you're running with. Of course there will be more forwards because teams pick defensemen far less in this area. You're acting like there's no reason for that.

Which brings us back to my original point that teams pick defensemen far less at the top of the draft simply because the level of talent displayed by defenseman such as Schaefer are so rare. And as you agree all things being equal the there are far more forwards chosen at the top of the draft who do not “work out” than there are defensemen. In fact those relatively few defensemen who are chosen higher in the draft as the last 6 Cup winners have shown often are associated with winning Cups whereas we have a number of so called franchise centers who never have their names engraved on it further exemplifying why defenders are considered cornerstones of a Cup winning team. To top it all off you have not given a single plausible reason why choosing a defenseman over a forward at the top of the draft represents a “huge risk”.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Which brings us back to my original point that teams pick defensemen far less at the top of the draft simply because the level of talent displayed by players such as Schaefer are so rare. And as you agree all things being equal the there are far more forwards chosen at the top of the draft who do not “work out” than there are defensemen. In fact those relatively few defensemen who are chosen higher in the draft as the last 6 Cup winners have shown often are associated with winning Cups whereas we have a number of so called franchise centers who never have their names engraved on it further exemplifying why defenders are considered cornerstones of a Cup winning team. To top it all off you have not given a single reason why choosing a defenseman over a forward at the top of the draft represents a “huge risk”.

They do it because there is more of a risk with those at that position than a forward. You're choosing to ignore that because you see some Cup winners work out picking a defenseman high and ignore that other teams have done the same to nowhere near the same results.

 

[Rehabguy]

They do it because there is more of a risk with those at that position than a forward. You're choosing to ignore that because you see some Cup winners work out picking a defenseman high and ignore that other teams have done the same to nowhere near the same results.

Again, you shown absolutely no evidence of that and I've shown solid evidence how elite and top drafted defensemen (as rare as they are and as few as we agree there are) become cornerstones of nearly all cup winning teams. The bolded is simply your misplaced assumption and I've never heard ANY GM arguing that position of yours. For the umpteenth reason there are fewer defenseman chosen at the top of the draft because elite defensemen are so far and few between but when they are there they are taken at the top of the draft- AND you agreed with me that elite D men are nearly always taken at the top of the draft so you are contradicting yourself here.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Again, you shown absolutely no evidence of that and I've shown solid evidence how elite and top drafted defensemen (as rare as they are and as few as we agree there are) become cornerstones of nearly all cup winning teams. The bolded is simply your misplaced assumption and I've never heard ANY GM arguing that position of yours. For the umpteenth reason there are fewer defenseman chosen at the top of the draft because elite defensemen are so far and few between but when they are there they are taken at the top of the draft- AND you agreed with me that elite D men are nearly always taken at the top of the draft so you are contradicting yourself here.

The evidence is in the actual results of the picks. Your 'solid evidence' is a huge amount of cherry picking. Lots of teams were trying to pick a cornerstone defenseman and it failed miserably. A GM doesn't need to argue any position. The proof is in the actions made. I didn't actually agree that elite D men are nearly always taken at the top of the draft. You're misinterpreting me.

 

[seabass45]

Well this has become a different thread.

 

[Rehabguy]

The evidence is in the actual results of the picks. Your 'solid evidence' is a huge amount of cherry picking. Lots of teams were trying to pick a cornerstone defenseman and it failed miserably. A GM doesn't need to argue any position. The proof is in the actions made. I didn't actually agree that elite D men are nearly always taken at the top of the draft. You're misinterpreting me.

Here, since you are not listening to me just read this: How defensemen became the NHL's most valuable asset

"I don't know if it's just the way that the league is going or the style of play that teams are having success with, but defensemen are at a premium," Hall said. "You have to draft them. If not, then you have to give up good players to get them."

 

[MackAttack71]

 

[Rehabguy]

View attachment 1044260

I know exactly how Bart feels

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Here since you are not listening to me just read this: How defensemen became the NHL's most valuable asset

"I don't know if it's just the way that the league is going or the style of play that teams are having success with, but defensemen are at a premium," Hall said. "You have to draft them. If not, then you have to give up good players to get them."

Read it. Not very convincing. You have to draft top centers because they're rarely made available as well. The issue with the drafting portion of it is that when a top center comes to the draft, you have a better read on it than you will on the defensemen because they show their potential a lot sooner. It's why forwards have a prime that tends to begin earlier than defensemen.

 

[Rehabguy]

Read it. Not very convincing. You have to draft top centers because they're rarely made available as well. The issue with the drafting portion of it is that when a top center comes to the draft, you have a better read on it than you will on the defensemen because they show their potential a lot sooner. It's why forwards have a prime that tends to begin earlier than defensemen.

This is true and I mentioned that many posts ago that D-men take longer to develop and because of that they tend to be picked later in the draft. But there are few instances when players do show their potential a lot sooner. This is one of those drafts. It is an atypical draft in that regards that a 17 yo defenseman would show so much promise and high end skill set so early. As I've been saying all along it is a rarity. Because of this he is the consensus #1 pick going into this draft and since elite defensemen are so coveted for their ability to cornerstone a franchise they almost always go at the top of the draft if you can find them .

 

[Rehabguy]

I understand the point you guys are trying to make but the decision to choose a 1C over a 1D in this situation defies logic.

Most defenders are chosen in later rounds simply because they typically take longer to develop so their skill does not become as apparent until they have experience in the NHL. Teams were not choosing true #1 defenseman because they are sure they would be available in later rounds. They just simply had a harder time identifying them. Many of them perhaps are not true #1 defensemen but simply very good defensemen. As most in the business would agree there are very few true #1 defensemen in the league as it is

Nicklas Lidstrom was chosen in the 3rd round 53rd overall. Part of that was due to unfamiliarity with European players at the time but it supports my point. Do you seriously think GMs are going to wait past the first round if they knew what Nicklas Lidstrom- one of the greatest D-men in the history of the game was to become? They are not choosing him in the 3rd round, most likely he would have gone head to head with the 1OA with Mats Sundin that year.

What you guys are doing is making one of the most common lay person mistakes in interpreting statistics assuming "correlation equals causation". You are assuming since many top defensemen are chosen in the later round that it would be safe to assume they will be available in later rounds. This is not the case and would not be the case if teams were able to identify top defensemen better. You are observing the effect of longer development times and lesser identifiable skill sets.

The key thing to understand that if a potential skilled #1 defenseman is identifiable in an NHL entry draft they almost always are picked at the very top of the draft if not at times #1 because they are extremely rare. Makar, Orr, Dahlin, Coffey, Potvin, Hedman. and Bourque were chosen early on because their skill was readily identifiable. Teams don’t wait for these players to be available later in the draft. They take them right away simply because they are extremely rare and play a critical role in any cup contender’s success. Schaefer's skill set at 17 is readily identifiable so it would be absolutely crazy for the Isles not to choose him at #1.

This is what I said many posts above.

 

[Patty Ice]

Well this has become a different thread.

Unstoppable force meets an unmovable object.

 

[Patty Ice]

I know exactly how Bart feels

Then why keep engaging?

Agree to disagree and let the thread go a different direction.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

This is true and I mentioned that many posts ago that D-men take longer to develop and because of that they tend to be picked later in the draft. But there are few instances when players do show their potential a lot sooner. This is one of those drafts. It is an atypical draft in that regards that a 17 yo defenseman would show so much promise and high end skill set so early. As I've been saying all along it is a rarity. Because of this he is the consensus #1 pick going into this draft and since elite defensemen are so coveted for their ability to cornerstone a franchise they almost always go at the top of the draft if you can find them .

I'm sure many thought the same thing when they were drafting a defenseman 1st overall. I mean, how do you rise to the head of a draft class without doing so? But after Potvin, you got Greg Joly that the Caps GM called the next Bobby Orr. There are arguably 12 other instances since that where a defenseman was taken 1st overall and it isn't yielding the results that you think Schaefer is going to do because of Potvin doing it. It's being quite selective about what you actually decide to take into account and call risk.

 

[boredmale]

I'm sure many thought the same thing when they were drafting a defenseman 1st overall. I mean, how do you rise to the head of a draft class without doing so? But after Potvin, you got Greg Joly that the Caps GM called the next Bobby Orr. There are arguably 12 other instances since that where a defenseman was taken 1st overall and it isn't yielding the results that you think Schaefer is going to do because of Potvin doing it. It's being quite selective about what you actually decide to take into account and call risk.

Not saying how good Schaefer will be but this draft sort of reminds me of 2014 where you had Ekblad as the consensus #1 and a but of good but not great guys(at least at the time) rated in the top 10. While Ekblad probably would rate 3 or 4th out of that group in the top 10 do you want to be the team that passes on Draisaitl.