Value of: Hardest position to trade for?

[Flyerfan52]

Right now I would say it is a true #1D man. You would almost have to draft one since it would be very rare for a team to give one up in a trade. Or one can wait if one makes it to UFA status.

I agree. A true #1 is more than just the best of those on a particular team so are very rare.
Guys like Nicklas Lidstrom.

 

[CanadienShark]

#1D imo. To acquire even a potential one, you need to give up a #1C or insane value.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I agree. A true #1 is more than just the best of those on a particular team so are very rare.
Guys like Nicklas Lidstrom.

Absolutely. Teams were scrambling to sign a #4 in Shattenkirk this summer and overpaying at the trade deadline. Quality D men are so in demand right now, they are more value in the NHL. How many teams would want a D man that is a true #1 playing close to half the game? 100% I would say.

 

[mpp9]

Young top 4 RHD
Top Center is next hardest

You think it's harder to acquire Sami Vatanen than a #1C?

Seth Jones is a potential #1. So don't bring that up.

 

[The Moose is Loose]

A cup caliber #1C is the hardest for sure

 

[Warden of the North]

I think a 1D.

1C get moved with more regularity.

 

[Man Bear Pig]

A #1 RHD. There's simply less of them than any other specific position. #1 Centers are very hard to find as well obviously, but IMO you can "get away with" not having that franchise, 90 point center.

 

[Riptide]

A #1 RHD. There's simply less of them than any other specific position. #1 Centers are very hard to find as well obviously, but IMO you can "get away with" not having that franchise, 90 point center.

I'll wait while you name a team that won the cup without a legitimate #1C. 2 in the last 11 years have won it without a #1D (PIT 2017, CAR 2006).

 

[1989]

I'll wait while you name a team that won the cup without a legitimate #1C. 2 in the last 11 years have won it without a #1D (PIT 2017, CAR 2006).

I'd argue that Brind'amour was a lower-tier #1C by the time he won with Carolina.

Also, while your argument isn't necessarily incorrect, it could be interpreted as "even some Cup-winning teams can't get ahold of a #1D." That is, showcasing the difficulty and rarity of acquiring or developing a player properly suited for that position. Not saying it's definitively the case but certainly arguments can be made both ways.

Another interesting question would be, "how many Cup-winning teams since the lockout have had a defenceman who would be arguably considered the best player on their team?" Lidstrom, certainly. Pronger/Niedermayer, possibly. Doughty may fit this category, Keith also has an argument. Chara and Thomas played huge roles in their Cup year, but this one's a bit shakier for my premise. Pittsburgh doesn't count but they also have two top-3 centres of their era on their roster in lieu of a #1 defenseman. I just think there's more to be considered here than meets the eye with regards to the original topic.

 

[Riptide]

I'd argue that Brind'amour was a lower-tier #1C by the time he won with Carolina.

Also, while your argument isn't necessarily incorrect, it could be interpreted as "even some Cup-winning teams can't get ahold of a #1D." That is, showcasing the difficulty and rarity of acquiring or developing a player properly suited for that position.

And Eric Staal and his 45g/100pts who was 7th in NHL scoring that year? Or the guy who lead the team in scoring with 9g/28pts? Brind'amour wasn't a #1C at the time, but Staal certainly was.

 

[1989]

And Eric Staal and his 45g/100pts who was 7th in NHL scoring that year? Or the guy who lead the team in scoring with 9g/28pts? Brind'amour wasn't a #1C at the time, but Staal certainly was.

Brind'amour might be considered a borderline #1, and you're absolutely correct about Staal who I forgot. In which case, that team may have fallen into the "stronger centre depth/2-way team game" category, such as the Penguins.

 

[Halla]

#1 D and #1C are tied, because those guys rarely get traded.
when they do, its in a deal for the other (EX. Jones for Johansen)
Both have to be drafted high and developed

 

[Riptide]

Brind'amour might be considered a borderline #1, and you're absolutely correct about Staal who I forgot. In which case, that team may have fallen into the "stronger centre depth/2-way team game" category, such as the Penguins.

Yeah that Carolina team (2006) that many overlook... but that team was a team with probably one of the deepest forward groups to win the cup in the cap era. Their blueline on paper sucked (although was better than Pittsburgh's 2017 team), but they managed to make it all work - at least a LOT better then Pittsburgh did this spring.

 

[Halla]

A #1 RHD. There's simply less of them than any other specific position. #1 Centers are very hard to find as well obviously, but IMO you can "get away with" not having that franchise, 90 point center.

I think there are less #1 LHD. Look at Canadians on the right side.
Doughty,Weber,Subban,Letang,Pietrangelo, Burns

compare to the left
Keith, Vlasic, Giordano,....

7 of the top 10 D scorers were right handed, which includes the best dman in the league (Karlsson) and doesnt include the 2nd best (Doughty)

 

[Man Bear Pig]

I'll wait while you name a team that won the cup without a legitimate #1C. 2 in the last 11 years have won it without a #1D (PIT 2017, CAR 2006).

I'll wait while you take a moment to understand the question posed in this thread. I never said that you don't need a #1 center. I implied that you dont necessarily need a Crosby to win a cup. Bergeron and Kopitar are/were excellent centers but they aren't 90 point centers are they? Not exactly the mold people think of with #1 centers.

 

[Riptide]

I think there are less #1 LHD. Look at Canadians on the right side.
Doughty,Weber,Subban,Letang,Pietrangelo, Burns

compare to the left
Keith, Vlasic, Giordano,....

7 of the top 10 D scorers were right handed, which includes the best dman in the league (Karlsson) and doesnt include the 2nd best (Doughty)

Weird observation. Going back to 2006, 8 of the top 20 point producing blueliners were LD, 12 were RD. However if you look at the top 20 unique D, it's 12 LD, 8 RD.

 

[Zirakzigil]

#1 center.

IMO, there are more defenders ably filling a #1 role than there are centers.

This. And you can win with a defense full of solid players with none being exceptional. Centers drive the offense.

 

[FrolikFan67]

i remember reading a quote about this last year on here, from some anonymous gm or executive, but they listed it as D, C, G, then W.

 

[Seanaconda]

Top 5 center or top 5 dman . About the same. If you go to just number 1 center or number 1 dman it gets muffled because the talent towards the bottom of what people consider #1 vary.


Also depends on contracts/age. Mcdavid is probably the hardest to get right now. But karlsson wouldn't be far off.

 

[1989]

As centres and defencemen are generally accepted to have the greatest value in a vacuum (though I personally lean towards the defenceman on most occasions) I think the debate that remains is pretty interesting.

Taking a quick look through the thread, I see wingers as having "far more value" than a goalie. While that might be true for your bottom-9 wingers vs journeyman #1B netminder, I'm baffled to see how a consistent, bonafide #1 goaltender (think Lundqvist, Price, Kiprusoff, Hasek) somehow aren't considered as better at covering up the deficiencies of a team better than the likes of a star #1 winger (Ovechkin, Iginla, Kessel in Toronto, etc.) If we are to judge the position's value by considering player scarcity, the goaltenders with solid #1 ability should hold far more value than your comparable first-line winger.

 

[scorvat53]

Mobile top 4 defenders.

 

[nucksauce]

#1 50+ game playing Goalie.

Not a Future #1 but an established top goalie.

There's not enough resource material for trading a #1 and many teams have no desire in trading their #1. There are almost 30 top Defensemen and 30 #1 centers, there is not even 20 #1 Goalies. The buyer will most likely always have to overpay substantially. Goalies are unpredictable performance wise and arguably the most difficult to scout/draft/improve

 

[Wo Yorfat]

Probably top.

 

[Laineux]

Another interesting question would be, "how many Cup-winning teams since the lockout have had a defenceman who would be arguably considered the best player on their team?" Lidstrom, certainly. Pronger/Niedermayer, possibly. Doughty may fit this category, Keith also has an argument. Chara and Thomas played huge roles in their Cup year, but this one's a bit shakier for my premise. Pittsburgh doesn't count but they also have two top-3 centres of their era on their roster in lieu of a #1 defenseman. I just think there's more to be considered here than meets the eye with regards to the original topic.

But has there even been a Cup-winning team where the centerman isn't arguably considered the best player on his team? I can't think of any recent examples, unless you count the best player as the best playoff performance in the Cup winning year.

 

[jetsforever]

Young top 4 RHD
Top Center is next hardest

Hey, we have one of those Might even need to be traded