Confirmed with Link: [TOR/CHI] G Petr Mrazek & 25th Overall Pick to CHI for 38th Overall Pick

[FlareKnight]

My feelings on this is that the solution to the problem was good. But the problem being Dubas' own fault makes giving him much praise for it a bit of a mixed bag. It wasn't the worst possible move and glad we got out of that contract.

Now can move on to seeing what he does with the cap space and goaltending spots to fill. Because he can't make another miss in net like he did with Mrazek.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Pretty evident that the Leafs saw the big board and didn't like what they saw at 25, so they moved back since their guy would probably still be there.

This adds stress to that 38th OA pick for Dubas ... Minten needs to be a hit for this trade to look good. It's ok right now but it could look really bad if the 25th OA player (or next few players) become solid NHLers.

 

[rocketman588]

Pretty evident that the Leafs saw the big board and didn't like what they saw at 25, so they moved back since their guy would probably still be there.

This adds stress to that 38th OA pick for Dubas ... Minten needs to be a hit for this trade to look good. It's ok right now but it could look really bad if the 25th OA player (or next few players) become solid NHLers.

I'd add that we also need to not strike out in the goalie market

 

[BertCorbeau]

I'd add that we also need to not strike out in the goalie market

He needs to do that regardless.

I'm not sure if I would have liked having Mrazek back next year but I would say chances are he rebounds to his career norms. Dubas will need to find someone who plays above that in a starters role.

 

[nuck]

I don't say this often here but that Earl Schwartz guy is either an idiot or a liar. There is no evidence to support that moving from 25th to 38th is worth only a 7th.

No shit. Can you Imagine if a club could bounce 13 spots like that? Who would ever settle for a 2nd round pick when you could get to 1st spending an almost zero value asset? So a 3rd must get you from 38 into the top 10

He must be using some voodoo evaluator that relies on statistical results of picks rather than the actual costs clubs incur to do such a move. Except the stats don't support that either. The below graph is from Dobber and shows about a 35% drop in probability of 99 games without getting into that the lower the pick, the less chance they will be a top line player.

 

[The Podium]

I don't say this often here but that Earl Schwartz guy is either an idiot or a liar. There is no evidence to support that moving from 25th to 38th is worth only a 7th.

It’s not based on trade value, but a pick value comparing the “hit” rate on picks from every round.

Basically he is saying, the likelihood of picking an NHL player at 25 and 38 is almost the same, and the difference in that likelihood is the the same as the probability of a 7th rounder hitting.

 

[Apex Predator]

Not saying it does however doing what needs to be done is important no?
Comparison is fair when evaluating the competencey of the move based on the market it was made in, other wise how would you rate if a move is good or bad?


Trading up and down are completely different though. Also you forgot to add the value of moving the contract

I’m just talking about the fact that writer said the value of moving from 25 to 38 is equivalent to a 7th. I disagree with that becuase that is wrong. There is enough history to prove a trade back or trade up of that costs more than a 7th.

 

[saltming]

I’m just talking about the fact that writer said the value of moving from 25 to 38 is equivalent to a 7th. I disagree with that becuase that is wrong. There is enough history to prove a trade back or trade up of that costs more than a 7th.

I think, and could easily be mistake, that his assessment included the value of Mrazek. Though he was injured and under performed he still has some value

 

[The Podium]

I’m just talking about the fact that writer said the value of moving from 25 to 38 is equivalent to a 7th. I disagree with that becuase that is wrong. There is enough history to prove a trade back or trade up of that costs more than a 7th.

This is the reasoning for Dubas’ trade down philosophy in general. Basically, the value of the picks traded to move up far exceed the actual probability of the pick hitting.

Not true values but for sake of an example.

25 - 25% chance of hitting
38 - 23% chance of hitting
7th round pick - 2% chance of hitting

Historically, moving down 13 spots at the end of the 1st is worth a late 2nd/early 3rd, which is wild when you consider the actual inherent value of those picks.

Tyler Biggs for Gibson and Rakell being a perfect example

 

[keonsbitterness]

It’s not based on trade value, but a pick value comparing the “hit” rate on picks from every round.

Basically he is saying, the likelihood of picking an NHL player at 25 and 38 is almost the same, and the difference in that likelihood is the the same as the probability of a 7th rounder hitting.

That makes more sense.

 

[Apex Predator]

It’s not based on trade value, but a pick value comparing the “hit” rate on picks from every round.

Basically he is saying, the likelihood of picking an NHL player at 25 and 38 is almost the same, and the difference in that likelihood is the the same as the probability of a 7th rounder hitting.

Ohh i see what he’s saying now. I still disagree with that. Go look through history of NHL drafts and the probability of hitting an NHL player between 25 and 38 is higher than any 7th

2010
Evegny Kuznetsov (26)
Charlie Coyle (28)
Brock Nelson(30)
Tyler Pitlick (31)
Alexander Peteolvic (36)
Justin Faulk (37)
Jon Merrill(38)
Vs
Frederick Anderson (7th)

2013
Shea Theodore (26)
Jason Dickinson(29)
Ryan Hartman (30)
Adam Ernie(33)
Jacob De La Rose(34)
JT Compher(35)
Vs
Dominic Kubic
Andreas Johnson
Mackenzie Weager

I picked 2 random years and looked at players that have played over 200 games.

 

[colchar]

This is the reasoning for Dubas’ trade down philosophy in general. Basically, the value of the picks traded to move up far exceed the actual probability of the pick hitting.

Not true values but for sake of an example.

25 - 25% chance of hitting
38 - 23% chance of hitting
7th round pick - 2% chance of hitting

Historically, moving down 13 spots at the end of the 1st is worth a late 2nd/early 3rd, which is wild when you consider the actual inherent value of those picks.

Tyler Biggs for Gibson and Rakell being a perfect example

You'd be surprised how high the percentage is of 7th rounders who have played at least one game in the league.

 

[Apex Predator]

This is the reasoning for Dubas’ trade down philosophy in general. Basically, the value of the picks traded to move up far exceed the actual probability of the pick hitting.

Not true values but for sake of an example.

25 - 25% chance of hitting
38 - 23% chance of hitting
7th round pick - 2% chance of hitting

Historically, moving down 13 spots at the end of the 1st is worth a late 2nd/early 3rd, which is wild when you consider the actual inherent value of those picks.

Tyler Biggs for Gibson and Rakell being a perfect example

The probability of hitting on 25 is the same as hitting on one of 38 or the 7th? I just want it make sure that’s what you are trying to say?

 

[saltming]

This is the reasoning for Dubas’ trade down philosophy in general. Basically, the value of the picks traded to move up far exceed the actual probability of the pick hitting.

Not true values but for sake of an example.

25 - 25% chance of hitting
38 - 23% chance of hitting
7th round pick - 2% chance of hitting

Historically, moving down 13 spots at the end of the 1st is worth a late 2nd/early 3rd, which is wild when you consider the actual inherent value of those picks.

Tyler Biggs for Gibson and Rakell being a perfect example

Ahhh
Thanks for explaining that

 

[Lemontree]

Our matchup basically was the conference final, but no. "Throwing away competitive years" has nothing to do with how far you get. It means giving up before you even start - like actively choosing to carry 6.25m in dead weight/on-ice liability, doing absolutely nothing to replace departing players during competitive years, and standing around twiddling your thumbs as your team deteriorates. Keeping Marleau was not an option. Lou is responsible for the consequences of his horrible decision.

This is an unbelievable amount of delusion. NO, we lost in the 1st round.......AGAIN!

 

[Enga Olly]

I'll just say that Dubas bringing Mrazek to Toronto cant really be seen as some failure in judgement on Dubas's part. Mrazek's previous e 3 seasons with Carolina were very respectable and has had a 10 year career with decent numbers. Last year was Mrazek's worst year ever. Just our luck. Kudos to Dubas for getting rid of this problem and not let it hang around any longer - because that then would be an error in judgement going into the next year with that big question mark

 

[nuck]

Pretty evident that the Leafs saw the big board and didn't like what they saw at 25, so they moved back since their guy would probably still be there.

This adds stress to that 38th OA pick for Dubas ... Minten needs to be a hit for this trade to look good. It's ok right now but it could look really bad if the 25th OA player (or next few players) become solid NHLers.

I don't know that Minten was necessarily their guy, except that they saw a big falloff by the time their pick came around. People make a big thing about BPA but as the picks get later the separation gets less. Its only costly if the player they were taking without the trade turns out to be a star.

I am sure lots of people might be pointing to Lambert or Howard in a couple of years if they take off, but neither will impact a clubs chances in the playoffs any time soon and thats what the trade was about. Saying that Dubas was blowing a pick to correct a mistake has nothing to do with whether this was a good move or not. Did anyone think they were going to win on the back of Mrazek? Just please don't add another shitty goalie to replace him.

 

[Kurtz]

The probability of hitting on 25 is the same as hitting on one of 38 or the 7th? I just want it make sure that’s what you are trying to say?

Yes.

Caveat here though is the definition of "hit". I'm guessing that he's simply defining it at player x hitting a certain number of games, and not measuring the actual productivity.

I would guess that while the probability of the guy taken around 25 to make the NHL is the same as the guy at 38+ same relative position at 7th is the same, the expected production of the guy taken 25th is going to be higher.


But in any case, I'm not sure this is the best way to look at value given up. We know it would cost more than a 7th to move from 38 to 25 even in this draft. It's probably closer to a late 2nd.


I'd gladly have given up a late 2nd to move off of that Mrazek deal.

 

[ACC1224]

This is an unbelievable amount of delusion. NO, we lost in the 1st round.......AGAIN!

I don’t know that I’d describe it as ‘unbelievable’. It seems to be the usual amount.

 

[Stephen]

Pretty evident that the Leafs saw the big board and didn't like what they saw at 25, so they moved back since their guy would probably still be there.

This adds stress to that 38th OA pick for Dubas ... Minten needs to be a hit for this trade to look good. It's ok right now but it could look really bad if the 25th OA player (or next few players) become solid NHLers.

I don’t think the pressure is on Minten too much as opposed to what they do with the cap space.

At 25 we were within striking distance of a trade up for an Ohgren or Yurov and the fall back to Minten is a big step down. I don’t think expectations are too, too high but it depends on how constructively that cap savings is spent.

 

[Apex Predator]

Yes.

Caveat here though is the definition of "hit". I'm guessing that he's simply defining it at player x hitting a certain number of games, and not measuring the actual productivity.

I would guess that while the probability of the guy taken around 25 to make the NHL is the same as the guy at 38+ same relative position at 7th is the same, the expected production of the guy taken 25th is going to be higher.


But in any case, I'm not sure this is the best way to look at value given up. We know it would cost more than a 7th to move from 38 to 25 even in this draft. It's probably closer to a late 2nd.


I'd gladly have given up a late 2nd to move off of that Mrazek deal.

At the end of the day the Mrazek contract is gone and it only cost them 13 drafting spots!!

 

[The Podium]

The probability of hitting on 25 is the same as hitting on one of 38 or the 7th? I just want it make sure that’s what you are trying to say?

Pretty much, now obviously hitting is subjective. But getting a star at 25 isn’t any more guaranteed than getting a star at 38 and the probability difference of the quality of player isn’t statistically significant.

 

[wc17]

It’s not based on trade value, but a pick value comparing the “hit” rate on picks from every round.

Basically he is saying, the likelihood of picking an NHL player at 25 and 38 is almost the same, and the difference in that likelihood is the the same as the probability of a 7th rounder hitting.

jeez im glad I saw this, couldn’t figure out what Earl was trying to say and I know that dude knows what he’s talking about.

Good job figuring it out instead of straight up calling him an idiot

 

[justashadowof]

Ohh i see what he’s saying now. I still disagree with that. Go look through history of NHL drafts and the probability of hitting an NHL player between 25 and 38 is higher than any 7th

2010
Evegny Kuznetsov (26)
Charlie Coyle (28)
Brock Nelson(30)
Tyler Pitlick (31)
Alexander Peteolvic (36)
Justin Faulk (37)
Jon Merrill(38)
Vs
Frederick Anderson (7th)

2013
Shea Theodore (26)
Jason Dickinson(29)
Ryan Hartman (30)
Adam Ernie(33)
Jacob De La Rose(34)
JT Compher(35)
Vs
Dominic Kubic
Andreas Johnson
Mackenzie Weager

I picked 2 random years and looked at players that have played over 200 games.

You know what you did there? You're comparing a short range of multiple draft picks with an entire round of 30+ draft picks represented by a few best-of's.

 

[justashadowof]

It’s not based on trade value, but a pick value comparing the “hit” rate on picks from every round.

Basically he is saying, the likelihood of picking an NHL player at 25 and 38 is almost the same, and the difference in that likelihood is the the same as the probability of a 7th rounder hitting.

Yes, it's weasel word play meant to plant the suggestion in the reader's head that the value of the position difference on the trade market is literally a 7th rounder when it clearly isn't. It's spin.