Can you show me some numbers or examples to prove that a 2nd round pick or lower has a higher chance to become an impact player than a reclamation player? Since you are talking about probability. We should see some numbers. If you can't provide that, that means you are just generalizing.
I did some research and I just randomly picked a draft year. I looked at 2010 draft. Anywhere from 2nd round to 7th round. These are the players that became top 6 F/Top 4 D Faulk Zucker Toffoli Klingberg Gallagher and Stone. You can probably make an argument a few more players in that draft. 6 top F/Top 4 D out 180 picks from round 2 to round 7. A 3% chance. Of course every draft is going to be different but if we look at a larger sample size. The numbers is not going to change too much. Maybe it's higher like up to 10%.
Now your job is to show something to prove that reclamation trade have less than 10% chance working out?
It really depends on what is a reclamation trade is. Players that were not nhl regulars Like sharp Versteeg Moulson Beachemin and team gave up on them and They became top 6 F/Top 4 D with another team.
If your definition of reclamation trade is larger sample size like the first 3 seasons. Then you can say Naslund and Bertuzzi were reclamation trade as well
I am not saying reclamation players are better. I am saying I don't see thst big of a difference.
If you value picks more than a struggling player. I am pretty sure most will not trade Virtanen for a 3rd round pick
I appreciate the work and effort you put into your response...but, I think you're ignoring a key point that I made, to justify a different point of view...nothing to do with what I mentioned.
Let's discuss your claim that I'm just 'generalizing' and use the random year you chose to come up with 10% as your marker. Lets go with 2010 since you already did the legwork for us both.
You pointed out that 6 players drafted in the second or lower rounds became top 6 f/top 4 d, without a doubt there could be arguments for more, as you stated. No argument from me, I don't have the time or inclination to refute this.
However, this is where I believe your research proves my theory correct. What you should have researched is how many 1st round draft picks there were that failed their teams expectations and were traded early. From those players, how many of them ended up being top line players...
Now, the players you mentioned that were traded prior to becoming NHL players are listed below:
Sharp - 95th overall
Versteeg- 134th overall
Moulson- 263rd overall
Beachemin- 75th overall
These are all the type of players we could draft if this mgt didn't try and take short cuts. Keeping our 2nd and lower draft picks gives us that opportunity. If we acquire more picks in later rounds, our probability increases and the opposite is true if we give our draft picks away, our probability of obtaining these type of players decreases.
If you are one of those posters who believe benning is some sort of drafting guru, this probability increases infinitely.
Per your research, we can add Faulk, Zuffer, Toffoli, Klingberg, Stone and Gallagher + x (borderline players that could be argued as top 6f/top 4d).
For arguments sake, lets just say that 10 players in 2010 were picked in the second round or later and have proven to be steals in the second round or later.
Do you truly believe that there were an equal or greater amount of
first round draft picks that failed expectations and eventually went on to become top line players from 2010, on their new team(after being traded)?
***note, Bert and Nazzy were first round picks, but they were already considered NHL players. Also, we all understand that power forwards take a little longer to develop, so lets choose to ignore them in our discussion. Unless you consider Vey, Baertschi, Granlund, etc..PFs that benning sought out.
This is why I value picks over reclamation projects and if you add the waiver risk these players carry... the difference between reclamation projects and draft picks is vast and shouldn't be debateable.
Although I don't agree with where Virt was picked, I'm still hoping he surprises me as a PF. Having said this, if we were offered a 2nd for him this coming draft I'd make that trade.
Considering what we gave up for Vey, Granlund, Gud...theres gotta be another idiot GM who would accept it.
