Proposal: Proposal Werenski - Murray

[Riptide]

Im talking about the value more than just the teams and everything. In real life no one would do it but in a fantasy league is it a good deal. thats the thing

How do you put value on a player you don't need?

I mean look at Kopitar. LA is going to value him like crazy due to the fact that he's their #1C. But clearly PIT isn't going to value him anywhere close to what LA will, because at best he's their #2C - and that's only if Malkin moves to the wing. Every team/GM values players differently based on their individual strengths and needs.

Werenski who's value to CBJ might be somewhere around what Murray's is.. but because it doesn't actually make any sense for Pittsburgh to acquire him, they're going to value Murray a lot higher, and thus CBJ would be adding a lot to make that happen.

You cannot look at "value" in a bubble, because every team and GM places a different value on different players based on their own needs, wants and perceptions. Thus your proposal is flawed.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

This is terrible for Columbus. Goalies don't have that high of value like previously stated.

 

[Jyrki Lumme]

Terrible for Columbus. Goalies really shouldn't have significant value until they're established. Even then, you're not going see one traded for one of the better d prospects in the world.

 

[OCPenguin]

Terrible for Columbus. Goalies really shouldn't have significant value until they're established. Even then, you're not going see one traded for one of the better d prospects in the world.

Those who suggest its a terrible deal for Columbus really have zero clue and didn't watch Murray play one single game in the regular season or the play-offs ... yes, the time where he helped lead the Pens to the Cup. I will say this, if Dallas had Werenski, they would bend over backwards to make that deal happen. Why? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Dallas represents the West in the SC last year, not SJ.

I laugh at those who say bad deal for Columbus. Then again, Pittsburgh ain't trading Murray for Werenski either. He will probably win a second Cup before Columbus is a threat for the Cup with Werenski.

 

[Jyrki Lumme]

Those who suggest its a terrible deal for Columbus really have zero clue and didn't watch Murray play one single game in the regular season or the play-offs ... yes, the time where he helped lead the Pens to the Cup. I will say this, if Dallas had Werenski, they would bend over backwards to make that deal happen. Why? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Dallas represents the West in the SC last year, not SJ.

I laugh at those who say bad deal for Columbus. Then again, Pittsburgh ain't trading Murray for Werenski either. He will probably win a second Cup before Columbus is a threat for the Cup with Werenski.

Ok, then keep him. Congratulations. It doesn't change the fact that the objective value of goalies is far lower than d-men.

 

[Hello Johnny]

Those who suggest its a terrible deal for Columbus really have zero clue and didn't watch Murray play one single game in the regular season or the play-offs ... yes, the time where he helped lead the Pens to the Cup. I will say this, if Dallas had Werenski, they would bend over backwards to make that deal happen. Why? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Dallas represents the West in the SC last year, not SJ.

I laugh at those who say bad deal for Columbus. Then again, Pittsburgh ain't trading Murray for Werenski either. He will probably win a second Cup before Columbus is a threat for the Cup with Werenski.

The goaltending position isn't that big of a need for Columbus, ergo trading a high-quality prospect at a position of need for one is a bad deal for them.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

 

[Freeptop]

Ok, then keep him. Congratulations. It doesn't change the fact that the objective value of goalies is far lower than d-men.

If there were such a thing as "objective value", goalies would never go for as little as they usually do, since it is an absolutely critical position on the team. Goalies tend to have less value, because "value" is completely subjective.

Here are factors as to why goalies have less value:
1. Difficult to project. Murray's career could range anywhere from Cam Ward to Ken Dryden (the latter being extremely unlikely). Nobody has really gotten good at evaluating goaltenders to determine how that will go.
2. There are a grand total of 60 (soon to be 62) NHL jobs for goaltenders out there. For which there are several hundred aspirants to those jobs. When the supply of goaltenders outpaces the demand for them, the price tends to go down.
3. Take a look at the names of the goaltenders that have changed hands over the last several years. The elite ones aren't moved in their primes. They're either moved before anyone knows what they'll really be, or they're moved after they've past their prime. Luongo could be argued as an exception here, but his toxic contract really messed up his value in trade.

Just saying, "well, goaltenders never get a big return" ignores that the goaltenders who would get a big return are never moved in the first place, so we don't know what their value would be. Do you really think the Canadiens would ever give up Carey Price for anything remotely similar to the goaltender trade deals we've seen, for example? How about the fact that Tampa Bay decided to hold on to Bishop this summer, even though they risk losing him as a UFA next summer? Seems like they value him at a price higher than goaltenders have generally been traded for so far, doesn't it?

All players have a value to the team that currently has them, and a value to the team that wants to acquire them. Trades only happen when the team that wants to acquire that player values them the same or higher than the team that currently has them. When they don't, the trade doesn't happen. There's no such thing as "objective value" or "value in a vacuum."

 

[CBJx614]

Those who suggest its a terrible deal for Columbus really have zero clue and didn't watch Murray play one single game in the regular season or the play-offs ... yes, the time where he helped lead the Pens to the Cup. I will say this, if Dallas had Werenski, they would bend over backwards to make that deal happen. Why? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Dallas represents the West in the SC last year, not SJ.

I laugh at those who say bad deal for Columbus. Then again, Pittsburgh ain't trading Murray for Werenski either. He will probably win a second Cup before Columbus is a threat for the Cup with Werenski.

I don't think you've seen Werenski play.

And I think you mean Crosby, Malkin and Letang win another cup. Yes you have to have a hot goalie to get to the finals /win a cup but without those pieces Pitt doesn't even sniff the finals or the playoffs.

 

[Crede777]

Those who suggest its a terrible deal for Columbus really have zero clue and didn't watch Murray play one single game in the regular season or the play-offs ... yes, the time where he helped lead the Pens to the Cup. I will say this, if Dallas had Werenski, they would bend over backwards to make that deal happen. Why? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Dallas represents the West in the SC last year, not SJ.

I laugh at those who say bad deal for Columbus. Then again, Pittsburgh ain't trading Murray for Werenski either. He will probably win a second Cup before Columbus is a threat for the Cup with Werenski.

This post just shows a general lack of understanding of the history of goalie trades.

Goalies don't hold value. Period.

Nobody cares that you think Murray is the first young goalie ever to get hot or that he has had success at every level (hint, every NHL goalie has) or that there is no way he could bust.

It's an inherently unpredictable position. That's why goalies don't get picked high in the draft anymore. And it's why they fetch bargain basement returns.

 

[Riptide]

The goaltending position isn't that big of a need for Columbus, ergo trading a high-quality prospect at a position of need for one is a bad deal for them.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

You mean just like how the left side of the blueline isn't a need at all for Pittsburgh? Ergo trading their 21 yr old cup winning goalie is a brutal deal for them...

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

 

[Viqsi]

Those who suggest its a terrible deal for Columbus really have zero clue and didn't watch Murray play one single game in the regular season or the play-offs

...or they recognize that not all trades have exactly one winner and one loser. Columbus does not need a young goaltender, but we are banking pretty hard on a "killer blueline" strategy, and trading away Werenski nixes that strategy.

Just because it's worse for the Pens (and it certainly is, no question about that) doesn't mean we somehow "win" or that it's somehow "good" for us. Likewise, "terrible deal for Columbus" does not imply "good deal for Pittsburgh".

 

[Halla]

why would columbus trade their best prospect when they already have bobrovsky and a couple very good goqalie prospects.

oh, and you want their early second as well?

 

[tony d]

Doubt either team would do this. They're division rivals. Pittsburgh's not trading their goalie of the future and Columbus is not trading 1 of their top defensemen.

 

[Hello Johnny]

You mean just like how the left side of the blueline isn't a need at all for Pittsburgh? Ergo trading their 21 yr old cup winning goalie is a brutal deal for them...

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out.

Hey man, I never said anything about what Pittsburgh thinks of this deal. The guy I quoted said he didn't understand how anyone could think this is a bad deal for Columbus, and I gave my $.02 as to why it is. Pittsburgh just won a cup so I don't blame them for wanting to keep things the way they are.

But hey, I'm in a thread defending my team's viewpoint, so clearly I was attacking yours.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Absolutely awful value for Columbus.


PIT would be the ones adding, and it would be a significant add.

Why? Murray is very young and just won a Stanley Cup. I know this is HFboards, but in real life neither team is likely adding anything.

 

[DrDangles]

Murray was already a top goalie prospect and has only continued to prove he's the real deal. Werenski could end up being a good top 4 guy, but I'd rather keep the safer cost controlled starting goalie.

 

[Empoleon8771]

why would columbus trade their best prospect when they already have bobrovsky and a couple very good goqalie prospects.

oh, and you want their early second as well?

-implying that there are any Penguins fans saying yes to this

Something people on here don't understand is that value isn't rigid, value is dependent on what teams are willing to give up and what teams are willing to accept. It's not like goalies have a set value of a 2nd and B prospect or defensemen have a set value of a top-6 winger. Value is set by GMs, it's a bartering and haggling transaction. In Murray's case, what goalies like Lehner and Jones brought back is totally irrelevant because Murray isn't Lehner or Jones, mainly as in JR isn't looking to move Murray. You can't apply past trades for guys who were being shopped to a guy that is untouchable.