No GM would trade 1st overall, too much risk for not enough reward.
So how come the 1st overall pick has not been traded since the 2003 draft which was 17 years ago.You’re not the first to mention the clubs “appearance” when trading #1 overall. Why a good GM would give one rats ass about your opinion of him is beyond me.
It’s a results based business. If you make a blockbuster, you don’t pine over the player you traded away. You do what you think makes your team better.
Being afraid to “look bad” is a good way to always be in the middle of the pack at best.
So how come the 1st overall pick has not been traded since the 2003 draft which was 17 years ago.
The cost was too high?So how come the 1st overall pick has not been traded since the 2003 draft which was 17 years ago.
This is with the benefit of hindsight being 20/20 but if the 1st overall pick was going to be traded in a previous draft it would have been in 2012, considering among the top 5 selections Morgan Rielly turned out to be the best player selected.The cost was too high?
okThis is with the benefit of hindsight being 20/20 but if the 1st overall pick was going to be traded in a previous draft it would have been in 2012, considering among the top 5 selections Morgan Rielly turned out to be the best player selected.
You’re not the first to mention the clubs “appearance” when trading #1 overall. Why a good GM would give one rats ass about your opinion of him is beyond me.
It’s a results based business. If you make a blockbuster, you don’t pine over the player you traded away. You do what you think makes your team better.
Being afraid to “look bad” is a good way to always be in the middle of the pack at best.
Maybe if you’re from Buffalo, but I want my front office pushing the envelope.That is the world we now live in, being in the middle is a good safe space.
To be fair, how often has the #1 pick not gone to a team that isn't absolutely shite.Wendel Clark.
Auston Matthews.
How often in the life of a franchise does it pick 1OA?
I would take my chances by keeping the pick rather than taking it away.
To be fair, how often has the #1 pick not gone to a team that isn't absolutely shite.
Unless #1 is the Crosby/McDavid type, you take 3 & 5.
Posted this list in the trade rumours thread. More often than not 1>3+5 and especially when there is a consensus #1. Given our limited cap space, a star on an ELC is just what we need.
Last 25 1st, 3rd & 5th overall picks.
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Jack Hughes Kirby Dach Alex Turcotte Rasmus Dahlin Jesperi Kotkaniemi Barrett Hayton Nico Hischier Miro Heiskanen Elias Pettersson Auston Matthews Pierre-Luc Dubois Olli Juolevi Connor McDavid Dylan Strome Noah Hanifin Aaron Ekblad Leon Draisaitl Michael Dal Colle Nathan MacKinnon Jonathan Drouin Elias Lindholm Nail Yakupov Alex Galchenyuk Morgan Rielly Ryan Nugent-Hopkins Jonathan Huberdeau Ryan Strome Taylor Hall Erik Gudbranson Nino Niederreiter John Tavares Matt Duchene Brayden Schenn Steven Stamkos Zach Bogosian Luke Schenn Patrick Kane Kyle Turris Karl Alzner Erik Johnson Jonathan Toews Phil Kessel Sidney Crosby Jack Johnson Carey Price Alex Ovechkin Cam Barker Blake Wheeler Marc-Andre Fleury Nathan Horton Thomas Vanek Rick Nash Jay Bouwmeester Ryan Whitney Ilya Kovalchuk Alexander Svitov Stanislav Chistov Rick DiPietro Marian Gaborik Raffi Torres Patrik Stefan Henrik Sedin Tim Connolly Vincent Lecavalier Brad Stuart Vitaly Vishnevski Joe Thornton Olli Jokinen Eric Brewer Chris Phillips J.P. Dumont Ric Jackman Bryan Berard Aki Berg Daymond Langkow
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Given how deep this draft is, I think I'd take #3 & #5 still. One of those picks could be converted to a good defender, and we need as many good quality ELCs as we can get given our cap situation.
A previous draft I can think of right now where those picked 3-5 turned out to be better than the #1 was when Toronto selected Morgan Rielly 5th overall and Edmonton selected Nail Yakupov 1st overall in 2012. In fact it's fair to say among just the top 5 picks Rielly turned out to be the best player.It's also a bit flaw narrowing down the 3rd and 5th picks specifically .. A fairer analysis should be seeing what picks 3-6 have been in comparison to #1 which can show you the kinds of players available at those picks.
Needless to say the 1st OA has been the preference overall but in the last 10-15 years we see a lot of 3/5 pick be superior.
I guess it depends on where you rank Laf in this group of #1 OA's.
A previous draft I can think of right now where those picked 3-5 turned out to be better than the #1 was when Toronto selected Morgan Rielly 5th overall and Edmonton selected Nail Yakupov 1st overall in 2012. In fact it's fair to say among just the top 5 picks Rielly turned out to be the best player.
The other draft I can think of is 2014 since Leon Draisaitl who Edmonton selected 3rd overall turned out a lot better compared to Aaron Ekblad who was selected 1st overall by Florida and Sam Reinhart who Buffalo selected 2nd overall.
I was just responding to @BertCorbeau where in the 2012 and 2014 drafts that the best player wasn't the one who was selected 1st overall.Were I to trade #1 for #3 and #5, I know I am passing on the best player available. That’s not the question. At 3 and 5, I’m trying to fill two roster spots with “next level down” talent, say like a RHD and a LW?
Matthews has been called the next best sniper since Ovi. I hesitate to say Laf will be hitting Matthews scoring levelTake Laf and run. He's absolutely a Matthews level talent. I'd imagine he'll outscore Auston over their careers. Auston plays center though which is huge.
Can't see that either. He's good, but he's not in that realm. First off he's more of a playmaker.Matthews has been called the next best sniper since Ovi. I hesitate to say Laf will be hitting Matthews scoring level