Proposal: Minnesota/Chicago Pick Trade
- Thread starter Dr Jan Itor
- Start date
Neutrinos
Registered User
- Sep 23, 2016
- 8,931
- 3,825
All depends on who is there. My guess is pick 50 would be the comfortable spot for the hawks to move.
Last edited:
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
If a big prospect drops to that spot such as say Hawks select Demidov at #2 and Lev somehow slides to #13
But that is very steep price to pay for 5 spot jump and very few prospects in this draft would justify it
Levshunov and maybe Dickinson IMO you could justify that cost, but I doubt either are there at #13
But that is very steep price to pay for 5 spot jump and very few prospects in this draft would justify it
Levshunov and maybe Dickinson IMO you could justify that cost, but I doubt either are there at #13
13 for 18 + 50 is almost exact value while 18 +34 is an overpay by roughly a mid 2nd according to the Sound of Hockey chart. It would take a hell of a faller for the Hawks to be willing to overpay that much, would also make the Wild unwilling to make the deal and simply pick the player themselves.
Djp
Registered User
Price is probably a little high.
In 2012 draft 21+42 for 14.
It depends on the draft CV lass and where the picks are
Sarava
Registered User
If the Hawks go with Demidov at #2, and Yakemchuk falls to #13 (probably not, but you never know), then I could see the Hawks biting. Otherwise, without a faller to #13, it's probably an overpay and not worth it.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,304
- 18,696
I think it would probably need to be something like 13+45 for 18+34. Not sure if either team does that or not. 18 and 34 seems too much for 13, 18 and 50 is not enough.
And it's kinda weird because if the premise is that Chicago only does it if one of the big names drops, well Minnesota would probably just want the dropper.
And it's kinda weird because if the premise is that Chicago only does it if one of the big names drops, well Minnesota would probably just want the dropper.
bert
Registered User
To get into the top 13 you have a legitimate shot at the 2nd best prospect in this draft. Context needs to be applied not every draft is the same from a value and moving perspective. No way Minnesota does this in my opinion.
lanceuppercut75
Registered User
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
My scenario in this was more of: Celebrini, Demidov, Levshunov, Catton, Buium, Dickinson, Iginla, Lindstrom, Silayev, Yakemchuk, Helenius and Sennecke are all off the board at #13 (not impropable). Chicago wants Parekh to round out their future top 4 and run their power play.
I don't necessarily think that Minnesota would want this dropper (though we might).
Just seems like jumping 5 spots in the mid first round should be much more valuable than jumping 11 spots in the early second.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 15,662
- 10,397
The price is only high if you don't really love the selection at 13 and you're moving up just to move up and grab a somewhat better player. If the 13th spot has that player you really want, adding the 34th pick isn't a high price to pay. The charts are just charts and every scenario will obviously be different. To lose out on a guy at 13 you really want in your organization just because you're only willing to part with the 50th instead of the 34th is absolutely madness. So I guess it comes down to how much Chicago loves that selection and how many players Minnesota still has on the board that they really want.
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
I would really only be interested if Catton was in that area, in which Minnesota likely takes Catton.
That would be the normal exchange, according to most draft pick trade charts. As you said, though, it's all about who is available. If CHI has picked Levshunov, and a skilled forward like Sennecke or Catton is available at 13, then I would make the trade even if it costs them the #34. Bedard needs to be surrounded with talent, and once you get to #18 the top skilled forwards will be gone.
If they go forward with their first pick then I don't see them making the trade with the 34 to pick a Yakemchuk or Parekh. Korchinski, and maybe Rinzel, can cover a lot of what they do. Not worth overpaying for either, considering their prospect/young player pool.
I agree. As a MN fan, i would only trade the pick if my choices were Parekh and Eiserman. There is some thought that guerin will be reluctant to pick another small forward(Catton), on a team that is lacking size and grit on the forward lines, and in their forward prospect pool. Having Rossi and Catton as your middle six C's is not ideal.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,304
- 18,696
There can be a pretty big difference in the mid 2nd round compared to the second pick of the 2nd round. Not always, not necessarily, but there can be. And in this scenario you're describing, it seems like the guy we'd take at 13 and the guy we'd take at 18 aren't all that far apart.
Like I said, I don't know if either team does it. I don't really use any of those pick value charts because they don't seem to take the actual prospects available into account, but maybe CHI can also add pick 67 or 72?
13+45 for 18+34+72
BuckifyouKnuck
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 8
- 4
What about 13+45 for 18+34+50 ? Give up 50 to move up 5 in the first, but down 9 in the second.
I wouldnt trade down to 18 for a late 2nd. Prospect available at 13 is pretty much the same tier available at 9/10.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Speculation: Another year of this Bluc **** (The 2024-25 season thread)- Latest: All The Kings Men
-
-
