Kevyn Adams GM thread

[toddkaz]

Based on comments from folks like Friedman, prospect value does actually go down after selection.

Like driving a new car off the lot

 

[stealth1]

This fanbase amazes me anymore. Last season everyone loved our young guys. Now cause they took a step back they all suck. Fire everyone and trade everyone and start over for the millionth time.

I think many forget that like Winnipeg, it's hard to get guys to come here with our overpaying for them. They tried that before and it never works out.

 

[Chainshot]

This fanbase amazes me anymore. Last season everyone loved our young guys. Now cause they took a step back they all suck. Fire everyone and trade everyone and start over for the millionth time.

I think many forget that like Winnipeg, it's hard to get guys to come here with our overpaying for them. They tried that before and it never works out.

Eh, the last time they went hard to get vets, they also had a GM who was most often at the titty bar, a variety of people having mental health problems and self-medicating. THAT part of the Murray culture is gone, seemingly, as are those folks who were either depressed, drunk, drunk and depressed or some other form of messed up. There is no need to necessarily overpay, it's finding fit and function. They have needed mid-line support and that isn't being solved by plugging in more prospects or waiver wire material.

 

[Tatanka]

This fanbase amazes me anymore. Last season everyone loved our young guys. Now cause they took a step back they all suck. Fire everyone and trade everyone and start over for the millionth time.

I think many forget that like Winnipeg, it's hard to get guys to come here with our overpaying for them. They tried that before and it never works out.

And you paint with a broad brush. Not all suck, matter of fact most don’t suck, but rather are not a good fit together. What I find frustrating is the low IQ. What many hoped was that some with questionable habits, blind passes, cheating the zone, not driving the house, would grow out of them. They haven’t. Continuing to hope that they will without something to force it, seems equally amazing to me.

 

[stealth1]

And you paint with a broad brush. Not all suck, matter of fact most don’t suck, but rather are not a good fit together. What I find frustrating is the low IQ. What many hoped was that some with questionable habits, blind passes, cheating the zone, not driving the house, would grow out of them. They haven’t. Continuing to hope that they will without something to force it, seems equally amazing to me.

The problem with that means starting over again. That means trading some of Thompson, Cozens, Dahlin and or Power. Then that was also a waste of money signing them to long term deals.

 

[Tatanka]

The problem with that means starting over again. That means trading some of Thompson, Cozens, Dahlin and or Power. Then that was also a waste of money signing them to long term deals.

It isn’t starting over. Replacing A with B isn’t that drastic of a step. Provided A and B are roughly equivalent. trading A for picks and scratch offs is starting over bc you have no idea what’s under the scratch off. I am not advocating trying to clean house for picks. Rather trade player for player for a better fit. The alternative is keeping everyone and hoping. Hope is not a strategy.

 

[BFLO]

Based on comments from folks like Friedman, prospect value does actually go down after selection.

If you want to say the average NHL prospect is worth less after being drafted I can agree to that. But it's absurd to say that all prospects are worth less after being drafted. That's like saying Bedard was only worth the 2nd overall pick in 2024 the moment after he was drafted.

There's now 224 players drafted every year, most of them don't become regular NHLers and their value decreases the more data we have on them. Unless the additional data says they are more of a sure thing to make it, in which case their value only goes up.

It's like options trading. Options get cheaper as they get closer to expiry if they are out of the money. But they get more expensive as they get closer to expiry if they are in the money, and they get more expensive the closer to in the money they get.

Prospects get cheaper the older they get and the worse they look. Prospects get more expensive the older they get and the better they look.

You are making the mistake of trying to equate the position with the player. If today you offered the Kullich or the 2024 first, that could be the 5th to first overall. A GM would love the potential of picking in the top 5 over Kullich 9/10.

No. I'm comparing the position the player was picked at to their current perceived value. Not all prospects go down in value upon being drafted. Some actually make progress in their development post draft and go up in value. Levi was worth a lot more by the time we traded for him than he was worth at the draft when he went 212th overall.

If what Jim Bob and Chain say is true, that all prospects are worth less after being drafted than before, then Kulich has to be worth less than 28th overall, since that's what he was worth when he was drafted. Meaning the only 1st round picks that Kulich would be worth right now belong to NYR, BOS, LAK, or VGK. The teams currently in position to draft 32-29th. Kulich's exact value is hard to pin down, but I think we can all agree it's more than the value of any of those 4 team's 1st this year right?

 

[Tatanka]

If you want to say the average NHL prospect is worth less after being drafted I can agree to that. But it's absurd to say that all prospects are worth less after being drafted. That's like saying Bedard was only worth the 2nd overall pick in 2024 the moment after he was drafted.

There's now 224 players drafted every year, most of them don't become regular NHLers and their value decreases the more data we have on them. Unless the additional data says they are more of a sure thing to make it, in which case their value only goes up.

It's like options trading. Options get cheaper as they get closer to expiry if they are out of the money. But they get more expensive as they get closer to expiry if they are in the money, and they get more expensive the closer to in the money they get.

Prospects get cheaper the older they get and the worse they look. Prospects get more expensive the older they get and the better they look.

No. I'm comparing the position the player was picked at to their current perceived value. Not all prospects go down in value upon being drafted. Some actually make progress in their development post draft and go up in value. Levi was worth a lot more by the time we traded for him than he was worth at the draft when he went 212th overall.

If what Jim Bob and Chain say is true, that all prospects are worth less after being drafted than before, then Kulich has to be worth less than 28th overall, since that's what he was worth when he was drafted. Meaning the only 1st round picks that Kulich would be worth right now belong to NYR, BOS, LAK, or VGK. The teams currently in position to draft 32-29th. Kulich's exact value is hard to pin down, but I think we can all agree it's more than the value of any of those 4 team's 1st this year right?

But when you present to another gm, they value your draft pick more especially if they think it will be high. Kullich can’t crack the big club on the last place team in the east. So yes his value has gone down.

 

[Chainshot]

If you want to say the average NHL prospect is worth less after being drafted I can agree to that. But it's absurd to say that all prospects are worth less after being drafted. That's like saying Bedard was only worth the 2nd overall pick in 2024 the moment after he was drafted.

There's now 224 players drafted every year, most of them don't become regular NHLers and their value decreases the more data we have on them. Unless the additional data says they are more of a sure thing to make it, in which case their value only goes up.

It's like options trading. Options get cheaper as they get closer to expiry if they are out of the money. But they get more expensive as they get closer to expiry if they are in the money, and they get more expensive the closer to in the money they get.

Prospects get cheaper the older they get and the worse they look. Prospects get more expensive the older they get and the better they look.

No. I'm comparing the position the player was picked at to their current perceived value. Not all prospects go down in value upon being drafted. Some actually make progress in their development post draft and go up in value. Levi was worth a lot more by the time we traded for him than he was worth at the draft when he went 212th overall.

If what Jim Bob and Chain say is true, that all prospects are worth less after being drafted than before, then Kulich has to be worth less than 28th overall, since that's what he was worth when he was drafted. Meaning the only 1st round picks that Kulich would be worth right now belong to NYR, BOS, LAK, or VGK. The teams currently in position to draft 32-29th. Kulich's exact value is hard to pin down, but I think we can all agree it's more than the value of any of those 4 team's 1st this year right?

Most prospects, yes. Feel free to point to where Bedard is still considered a prospect to try to parse out your point on a technicality. I'll wait.

Also, when there is a bluechipper at that level, find me a GM who is going to deal them.

 

[Irie]

If you want to say the average NHL prospect is worth less after being drafted I can agree to that. But it's absurd to say that all prospects are worth less after being drafted. That's like saying Bedard was only worth the 2nd overall pick in 2024 the moment after he was drafted.

There's now 224 players drafted every year, most of them don't become regular NHLers and their value decreases the more data we have on them. Unless the additional data says they are more of a sure thing to make it, in which case their value only goes up.

It's like options trading. Options get cheaper as they get closer to expiry if they are out of the money. But they get more expensive as they get closer to expiry if they are in the money, and they get more expensive the closer to in the money they get.

Prospects get cheaper the older they get and the worse they look. Prospects get more expensive the older they get and the better they look.

No. I'm comparing the position the player was picked at to their current perceived value. Not all prospects go down in value upon being drafted. Some actually make progress in their development post draft and go up in value. Levi was worth a lot more by the time we traded for him than he was worth at the draft when he went 212th overall.

If what Jim Bob and Chain say is true, that all prospects are worth less after being drafted than before, then Kulich has to be worth less than 28th overall, since that's what he was worth when he was drafted. Meaning the only 1st round picks that Kulich would be worth right now belong to NYR, BOS, LAK, or VGK. The teams currently in position to draft 32-29th. Kulich's exact value is hard to pin down, but I think we can all agree it's more than the value of any of those 4 team's 1st this year right?

The problem is that value is relative. Most GMs like the picks for two reasons.

1.) They can select prospects from a huge pool and better select players that fit their preferences/needs.

2.) The win the lotto effect. Even a 7th round pick has a chance of becoming a player the quality of Pavel Datsuk. At 18, you truly never know what you have in a prospect. At 20, the ceiling is clearer. Picks are like lottery scratch-its.

You are correct though, some prospects do improve value, but that value is still relative to other GMs. The one you are likely trading with probably doesn't have your prospect at the top of their wish list, but a GM with nothing you want might.

Is Savoie worth the 8th overall at this upcoming draft? Probably to a few GMs, but probably not to most GMs, which means that the GM you are trading with will more than likely not give you that full value.

 

[Ace]

But when you present to another gm, they value your draft pick more especially if they think it will be high. Kullich can’t crack the big club on the last place team in the east. So yes his value has gone down.

No it hasn’t. Adams and Granato being dumb about his usage doesn’t change the fact that his value was literally the 28th pick in the draft and that wouldn’t get it done at all. It wouldn’t even be close.

 

[BFLO]

Most prospects, yes. Feel free to point to where Bedard is still considered a prospect to try to parse out your point on a technicality. I'll wait.

Also, when there is a bluechipper at that level, find me a GM who is going to deal them.

You said "There is some depression of value of the prospect almost the moment they are selected"

I responded with "That's like saying Bedard was only worth the 2nd overall pick in 2024 the moment after he was drafted."

What does whether Bedard is still considered a prospect or not in December of 2023 have to do with what his value was pre and post selection on June 28th 2023?

As to your 2nd point. That's pretty similar to what I've been saying. GMs are unwilling to trade away their blue chips or even well developing prospects. They'd rather give up draft picks.

The problem is that value is relative. Most GMs like the picks for two reasons.

1.) They can select prospects from a huge pool and better select players that fit their preferences/needs.

2.) The win the lotto effect. Even a 7th round pick has a chance of becoming a player the quality of Pavel Datsuk. At 18, you truly never know what you have in a prospect. At 20, the ceiling is clearer. Picks are like lottery scratch-its.

You are correct though, some prospects do improve value, but that value is still relative to other GMs. The one you are likely trading with probably doesn't have your prospect at the top of their wish list, but a GM with nothing you want might.

Is Savoie worth the 8th overall at this upcoming draft? Probably to a few GMs, but probably not to most GMs, which means that the GM you are trading with will more than likely not give you that full value.

GMs settle for picks because blue chips and prospects that have developed well are too expensive.
They'd rather gamble on making the pick themselves than on a prospect that hasn't increased his value post draft.

Seems like we're actually all pretty much in agreement, but were not specific enough with our language earlier on.

 

[Irie]

GMs settle for picks because blue chips and prospects that have developed well are too expensive.
They'd rather gamble on making the pick themselves than on a prospect that hasn't increased his value post draft.

Seems like we're actually all pretty much in agreement, but were not specific enough with our language earlier on.

Often that is also true, but it wouldn't be universal. I think there is a little bit of truth to everyone's take here. Discussing values and saying a prospect is worth exactly the pick spot they were taken the moment they are drafted is silly, since each GM only gets one pick (to start) in each round.

There is no guarantee that a player drafted at 28 wouldn't go 12th if the team that picked at 10 had a second pick (at 12) and that prospect was 2nd on their board.

Or maybe a prospect that was drafted at 32 would have been taken at 14 if the actual prospect taken at 14 was already off the board.

Values are totally arbitrary unless every GM has the exact same draft board (which they don't)

 

[toddkaz]

His opinions are logic based and grounded in reality though.

Posters that think it should be easy for Adams to pull off one sided trade coups are not living in reality.

. You seem to think you know eeven more than people who have information and its their jobs. How come these people don't know Adams couldn't do anything because one sided trade coups isn't living in reality? Someone should have told them they aren't living in reality because its impossible to pull off one sided trade coups. Even though Detroit and Arizona improved without using the "one sided trade coup"

I wonder how many GMs kept their jobs because they told management,"Ya we missed the playoffs by 1 point but the price was too high and Mr. President its just not reality to think I can pull of a one sided trade coup" Because for some bizarre reason you think its not possible to make a normal hockey trade to improve the sabres even the Yzerman did it to improve Detroit.

Do you think thats what GMs tell management when they are getting fired? President of Hockey ops please don't fire me! No one can pull off a one sided trade coup its not living in reality!

Even though no one was asking for a one sided trade coup which is bizarre that you would even post it. Maybe you should take a look at Steve Yzerman assembling a team to understand its possible to improve your team without one sided trade coups.

Even Arizona is better than us now, did they do that using one sided trade coups?

I guess Steve Yzerman isn't living in reality

OR

how about a GM who can make trades that improve the team without mortgaging the future?

Is that really too much to ask?

 

[Irie]

Here is the thing. You seem to think you know everything. Even more than people who have information. How come these people don't know Adams couldn't do anything cause the price is too high? Someone should have told them they aren't living in reality because its impossible to pull off one sided trade coups. These guys here are just not living in reality.

I wonder how many GMs kept their jobs because they told management,"Ya we missed the playoffs by 1 point but the price was too high and Mr. President its just not reality to think I can pull of a one sided trade coup"

Do you think thats what GMs tell management when they are getting fired? President of Hockey ops please don't fire me! No one can pull off a one sided trade coup!

Even though no one was asking for a one sided trade coup which is bizarre that you would even post such nonsense. Maybe you should take a look at Steve Yzerman assembling a team or do you think all his trades are one sided trade coups?

Even Arizona is better than us now but ya one sided trade coups is the only way!

I guess Steve Yzerman isn't living in reality either.

OR

how about a GM who can make trades that improve the team without mortgaging the future?

Is that really too much to ask?

Being cheeky does not give your position any validity.

Pray tell what deals Adams could have made for an upgrade that would be around for at least a few seasons and wouldn't cost Benson ++?

Armstrong's ask for Chychrun was Benson and Kulich or Savoie according to Adams himself.

For Ekholm, who turned 33 and is looking extremely slow, the ask was Benson+.

For Meier it was Benson++ and Meier would likely not have extended long term, and that deal is already looking abysmal for Jersey.

The upgrades that the sabres were looking for were the exact upgrades that 80% of the league is looking for. The price to acquire those pieces is going to hurt.

Last season, nearly every day someone in here would post "let's trade Joker and Olofsson and a second for so-and-so-upgrade". Completely unrealistic packages. maybe you play video-game hockey and you think acquiring team upgrades is cheap and easy, but that is not the reality. Unless you are willing to severely overpay, deals just are not readily available to most GMs. GMs state that exact statement all the time.

Detroit has overpaid for a lot of their vets, and they are not that good. I have serious doubts they make the playoffs, and they are playing like crap now as well. Buffalo's farm is in way better shape than Detroit's, thanks to Adams.

 

[Jim Bob]

Are you sure about that? I think it's the opposite. Seems to me that GMs don't want to give up their prospects and are more willing to trade picks.

Talking heads have talked about it for years. GMs oftentimes overvalue their guys and undervalue guys on other teams. But, picks are all potential value assets without any preconceived notions. So, that is why picks are used so often to add as opposed to prospects.

It's why Rangers fans had so many prospects and young players as untouchable in the Eichel trade chatter.

 

[Beerz]

Being cheeky does not give your position any validity.

Pray tell what deals Adams could have made for an upgrade that would be around for at least a few seasons and wouldn't cost Benson ++?

Armstrong's ask for Chychrun was Benson and Kulich or Savoie according to Adams himself.

For Ekholm, who turned 33 and is looking extremely slow, the ask was Benson+.

For Meier it was Benson++ and Meier would likely not have extended long term, and that deal is already looking abysmal for Jersey.

The upgrades that the sabres were looking for were the exact upgrades that 80% of the league is looking for. The price to acquire those pieces is going to hurt.

Last season, nearly every day someone in here would post "let's trade Joker and Olofsson and a second for so-and-so-upgrade". Completely unrealistic packages. maybe you play video-game hockey and you think acquiring team upgrades is cheap and easy, but that is not the reality. Unless you are willing to severely overpay, deals just are not readily available to most GMs. GMs state that exact statement all the time.

Detroit has overpaid for a lot of their vets, and they are not that good. I have serious doubts they make the playoffs, and they are playing like crap now as well. Buffalo's farm is in way better shape than Detroit's, thanks to Adams.

That is a real dumb way to look at things considering how everyone was shocked Benson fell to 13. We got absolutely lucky by keeping that pick.

All those asks were pick 13 +

I don't know where you get your crystal ball but it is very possible we make the playoffs last year with a Meier or a Chychrun... we will never know. What we do know is we did nothing and missed..and we are even in a worse position now.

 

[toddkaz]

Being cheeky does not give your position any validity.

Pray tell what deals Adams could have made for an upgrade that would be around for at least a few seasons and wouldn't cost Benson ++?

Armstrong's ask for Chychrun was Benson and Kulich or Savoie according to Adams himself.

For Ekholm, who turned 33 and is looking extremely slow, the ask was Benson+.

For Meier it was Benson++ and Meier would likely not have extended long term, and that deal is already looking abysmal for Jersey.

The upgrades that the sabres were looking for were the exact upgrades that 80% of the league is looking for. The price to acquire those pieces is going to hurt.

Last season, nearly every day someone in here would post "let's trade Joker and Olofsson and a second for so-and-so-upgrade". Completely unrealistic packages. maybe you play video-game hockey and you think acquiring team upgrades is cheap and easy, but that is not the reality. Unless you are willing to severely overpay, deals just are not readily available to most GMs. GMs state that exact statement all the time.

Detroit has overpaid for a lot of their vets, and they are not that good. I have serious doubts they make the playoffs, and they are playing like crap now as well. Buffalo's farm is in way better shape than Detroit's, thanks to Adams.

Even when reality hits you in the face you still ignore it.

Yzerman literally did zero what did you call it? "Big one sided trade coups"?

Another question. Do you think "one sided trade coups" are the only thing that exist?

Why not be cheeky when you are using ridiculous hyperbole like "one sided trade coups" are the only thing that exist in the NHL.

Its not even reality. Whats the point of even discussing it with you when you think the only way Adams can improve the team is with "one sided trade coups" LOL

Who the heck even said "one sided trade coups" other than you?

 

[toddkaz]

delete

 

[stealth1]

That is a real dumb way to look at things considering how everyone was shocked Benson fell to 13. We got absolutely lucky by keeping that pick.

All those asks were pick 13 +

I don't know where you get your crystal ball but it is very possible we make the playoffs last year with a Meier or a Chychrun... we will never know. What we do know is we did nothing and missed..and we are even in a worse position now.

We may made it with making those deals but if it were me I'm not giving up what it costs for either one of those guys. This team isn't at the stage where giving up firsts is worth it to just make the playoffs. Especially for Meier as odds are he wasn't going to sign here.

 

[stealth1]

. You seem to think you know eeven more than people who have information and its their jobs. How come these people don't know Adams couldn't do anything because one sided trade coups isn't living in reality? Someone should have told them they aren't living in reality because its impossible to pull off one sided trade coups. Even though Detroit and Arizona improved without using the "one sided trade coup"

I wonder how many GMs kept their jobs because they told management,"Ya we missed the playoffs by 1 point but the price was too high and Mr. President its just not reality to think I can pull of a one sided trade coup" Because for some bizarre reason you think its not possible to make a normal hockey trade to improve the sabres even the Yzerman did it to improve Detroit.

Do you think thats what GMs tell management when they are getting fired? President of Hockey ops please don't fire me! No one can pull off a one sided trade coup its not living in reality!

Even though no one was asking for a one sided trade coup which is bizarre that you would even post it. Maybe you should take a look at Steve Yzerman assembling a team to understand its possible to improve your team without one sided trade coups.

Even Arizona is better than us now, did they do that using one sided trade coups?

I guess Steve Yzerman isn't living in reality

OR

how about a GM who can make trades that improve the team without mortgaging the future?

Is that really too much to ask?

Did Yzerman really improve that team much? That run at the beginning for the season for the Wings was smoke and mirrors. IMO he has made some good trades to improve the team. The Greenway addition is an improvement.

As far as guys available in the off season. None would have made this team much better. The free agency class was mediocre this off season.

 

[toddkaz]

Did Yzerman really improve that team much? That run at the beginning for the season for the Wings was smoke and mirrors. IMO he has made some good trades to improve the team. The Greenway addition is an improvement.

As far as guys available in the off season. None would have made this team much better. The free agency class was mediocre this off season.

Arizona 16-13-2 Goal differential 22-23 -71 23-24 +8
Detroit 15-13-4 Goal differential 22-23 -39 23-24 +8
Buffalo 13-17-3 Goal differential 22-23 -4 23-24 -20

What record would you rather have? 2 teams improved their roster and 1 didn't.

Buffalo had a better record than both teams last year.

So did they improve over Buffalo? Its a statistical fact its a yes and by a lot.

How did the sabres go that far backwards.

 

[stealth1]

Arizona 16-13-2
Detroit 15-13-4
Buffalo 13-17-3

What record would you rather have? 2 teams improved their roster and 1 didn't.

Buffalo had a better record than both teams last year.

So did they improve over Buffalo? Its a statistical fact its a yes.

Record wise they are better right now. The way the Wings are going I'm sure by the end of the season the Sabres will be close record wise.

Either way I'm trying to understand how adding better depth gets Thompson, Cozens, Dahlin and Tuch to play like they were last season?

 

[TageGod]

Arizona 16-13-2 Goal differential 22-23 -71 23-24 +8
Detroit 15-13-4 Goal differential 22-23 -39 23-24 +8
Buffalo 13-17-3 Goal differential 22-23 -4 23-24 -20

What record would you rather have? 2 teams improved their roster and 1 didn't.

Buffalo had a better record than both teams last year.

So did they improve over Buffalo? Its a statistical fact its a yes and by a lot.

How did the sabres go that far backwards.

Tage Tuch and Cozens expected goal pace coming into the season pretty much makes up that goal differential

 

[toddkaz]

Tage Tuch and Cozens expected goal pace coming into the season pretty much makes up that goal differential

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

You want to give them goals they haven't scored to make up the difference?

We went backwards other teams improved while the GM sat on his hands.

What tough decisions did he make that he is claiming he is capable of?