
The Edmonton Oilers (despite their reputation) do in fact acquire first round picks. In 2007, the club grabbed NY Islanders first round pick in the Ryan Smyth trade and then dealt #30 and #36 to move up to #21 (which I still think was an overpay although the player is a fine prospect).
What is the required currency to move up in a draft year? Increasingly, the answer appears to be other draft picks near your target number. The Nash trade (30+36=21) shows us how the math works (sort of) and a deal from last year's draft is also helpful:
- Anaheim traded #21 to Columbus for #26 and #37. This is extremely similar to the Nash deal.
We also get some great insight on this trade from Guy Flaming and his draft review 2009 article here. Flaming details Edmonton's interest in John Moore, a player they considered at #10 overall. As the first round continued, the Oilers looked to trade into the 1st round:
- As the first round continued and defenceman John Moore continued to be available, Edmonton began kicking tires to see what it would take to move up into an area where they might be able to take him. Moore is a player that Oilers Assistant GM Rick Olczyk knew well from his days spent in the Chicago area where he actually coached the defenceman at a younger age. It's my sense that Moore was very likely 10th on Edmonton's list, just behind Glennie, so if they could have found a way to get back into the first round, they would have. As it turned out, the asking price was a later pick in round 1 and they simply didn't have one so they watched with envy as former Oiler Scott Howson came away with another player Edmonton valued.
So Guy confirms that acquiring the 21st overall pick (which became John Moore) was a pretty difficult task.
--
I'm of the opinion that the Oilers will attempt to trade up in the first round of this year's draft in an effort to select defenseman Dylan McIlrath. He's an attractive option for a team in need of a rugged blueliner. Although it'll take some time for him to develop, adding McIlrath would give Edmonton a few young defenders with grit (Peckham, Plante, Petry can play it tough and Motin has a mean streak) and enough skill to project as NHL defenders.
For the sake of this discussion, lets not worry about the player Edmonton would select (speeds has suggested Kuznetsov and he follows the draft closer than i do), focusing instead on the price for such a move.
With all of the information above, what is your estimate as to the cost of a pick in the 15-20 range at this seasons draft? Would #31 and Andrew Cogliano get it done? Too much? What would #31 and #48 (the Grebs pick from NAS) get you? If the answer is "#25" is it worth it? What if McIlrath/Kuznetsov/your preference is still on the board?
What if MBS tells you McIlrath is the next Jim Dorey? Do you make it happen even if it requires #31 and next year's 2nd round pick?
I would like the Oil to trade into the first round again I tell you that much. Hopefully a little further in 10 to 20 ish.
ReplyDeleteNo. Do not trade the second rounders for another first. 31st overall might as well be a first round pick, but with a better entry level deal.
ReplyDeleteI was looking at the number of picks that rebuilding teams (Chicago, Washington, and Pittsburgh) had for their rebuild and them seem to stock pile picks: in a 5-6 year rebuild the averaged over a pick per round, while the Oilers are averaging under one pick per round. To a point, the draft is like a shotgun approach with some sniping. The Oilers, IMO, need to pick at least four times in the top 100 picks (which is what we have now), and only consider moving down in the later rounds: say a 4th and a 5th or a 6th (maybe two) for another 3rd round pick. We have already gone after specific players (and it has not seemed to work out well with Nash, depending on who you ask), now we have to fill up the stable so the next couple years of the AHL has the potential to produce quality.
Screw McIlrath, if we are looking for defensive Dmen both Patrik Nemeth and Nikita Zaytev should be there during the end part of the 2nd round.
Well, what's the story on that 2007 21st overall as a bargaining chip this year? Is Nash determined to reenter the draft or is he an asset? Does Nash + 31st move you up much?
ReplyDeleteIn my fantasyland (next in line after the major fantasy of taking Hall off the table then staring down Chiarelli for a Seguin for Hemsky/Penner trade) Connolly slips far enough to come in range to trade up.
Spending assets to grab one risky asset over another is dumb.
ReplyDeleteThis is an incredibly bad use of assets when someone decent is going to fall to us @ 31 anyway.
This strategy is like blowing the paycheque on lottery tickets because of a good horoscope.
Both of the example trades you gave were essentially a mid-thirties pick to drop back a few places in the round.
We don't have the later pick in the first round for our counterparty to drop back to. We would be asking someone to drop out of the first round altogether to #31. We also don't have the mid-thirties pick to give either - the best we can do is #48. It will be much more expensive than those 2 picks.
In hindsight, if the Oil used the Nash pick to select David Perron, they would look like the geniuses they think they are. (Remember, Nash was differentiable - he scored off the charts psychologically.)
You have convinced yourself that McIlrath is a differentiable talent at a stage in the draft where that is not likely to happen. Is McIlrath gonna be more like Nash or Perron?
I have my fingers crossed for Bjugstad @ #31.
I used to be a believer in the move-up to get the guy you want strategy but I've reconsidered.
ReplyDeleteThe goal here is to increase the number of bullets in the chamber as opposed to focusing on one particular target.
The Oil have two seconds which would need to be used to move up with (since I think we have established that none of our "ready to flush" crew will secure us so high a pick) and I'd prefer we simply take our best shots with those two picks.
Deano: I haven't convinced myself of anything. The Oilers have a need at defense, but they also have a need in goal and at center.
ReplyDeleteI'm hoping the discussion (and so far it has been) is less about a specific player per se and more about trading up and when it makes sense.
The Hawks did have a lot of 2nd round picks, but did they get good value for them? Bolland aside, would the Hawks have been better off packaging two picks (they had 4 selections in round two in 2004, as an example) to move up?
I understand the value of having more bullets. But where is the fair line in the sand?
Let's turn it around. If the Oilers owned a pick in the 15-20 range, what would you require in terms of lesser picks in order to make the trade?
@highlander that is a good point, and being the 31st pick they have time to get together and take time to assess a game plan for the next day of drafting and make a hopefully more informed decision. Still want to somehow get another pick though lol I took the night off work!
ReplyDeleteLT - the value has already been set. 2 picks:
ReplyDeleteone no more than 9 picks back from my current pick (say 7 places) and a pick in the first 5 picks of the second round. (I have moved the second round pick up a few places to adjust for the fact that you want a pick before the 20's - both examples were for #21)
Its hard to say what is worth it and what isn't worth it, as there is an abundance of variables that could play into it, and only then can it be analyzed properly, in terms of moving up in the draft. i agree Cogliano is the bait, we'll have to see what goes down to see what his worth was.
ReplyDeleteEven then heated debates will ensue, just because the two combatants have different views on how a hockey team is to be shaped. One thing will be for certain, not everyone in Oilerville will be happy, even if they have the draft of a lifetime.
Deano: Okay. So, how much does that change based on a team (like Columbus) having both a "need" to draft a prospect before he falls and available picks?
ReplyDeleteLets say the Oilers deal Riley Nash to Boston for 32nd overall.
Would #31 and #32 get you to #21?
The draft is a crapshoot. Unless you are going top ten it doesn't make sense to trade two top 40 players for #24 or thereabouts. Especially when you have as many holes as the Oilers do.
ReplyDeleteAs stated above - more bullets...
If they want more first rounders, they should be looking at moving roster players.
Hemsky for the #4 pick? Or maybe it makes more sense to move Hemsky later for a D prospect.
http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=532109&navid=DL|EDM|home
ReplyDeleteDoes this put an end to the Oilers communication issue that comes up regularly?
It sounds like they send Sillinger to see every prospect in the organization. Admittedly, they never mention NCAA directly but I would say it's implicit in the article.
LT, you are the baseball guy so you tell me which is the better likelihood of generating a hit (a solid NHLer). One at bat with a .300 hitter (a mid-late 1st round pick) or two at bats with two .200 hitters (two 2nd rounders)?
ReplyDeleteI accept that I may be off on my % here and that may change the outcome but play the math - as is your strength - and convince me that the numbers for trading up works.
Another possibility..... is to give Chicago 2010 draft picks for access to some of their big bodies: Ladd, Eager, Brouwer. Even if we have to take 1 year of Sopel's contract
ReplyDeleteWould those relatively young guys in a 3rd and 4th line be part of a balanced rebuild
And if Chicago wants to go even cheaper: we take Versteeg and they get Cogs
It depends on how much I liked the next 12 players on my list when #20 is picked. (Its much less likely for 2 good players to slide). If I am forced to draft by position (as we suspect the Oilers do), I probably don't take 31 and 32 as that could mean that the 10 interim picks are all D and I then get shut out.
ReplyDeleteThe false anxiety over losing Moore is based on the 'really, really saw him good' fallacy.
The information is imperfect as Ric Olczyk did not have the same level of knowledge about the other possible alternative defencemen available.
Is Moore developing better or faster than the other D selected around him? Not by the boxcars.
This is exactly the same premise that the Hall fans are using to base their confidence on. Saw him good vs. saw him barely.
BTW - Why were we looking to trade up based on our CBA expert's advice? Maybe that explains why the Oil don't seem to have a grasp of the details of the CBA.
First, I read that #30 has more value than #31 since if the player you draft does not sign - the team gets compensation...
ReplyDeleteSecond, I envision the Oilers making a deal to get a second 1st round pick - that adds excitement to the Friday night draft party.
My perfect scenario is the
Oilers trading something like Nash / Cogliano / #48 to move into the top 20...
Then finding some way to switch our #31 into the top 30 - drafting Kabanov.
With Hemsky / Horcoff / Penner
MPS / Gagner / Eberle
Plus Hall or Seguin... Our top two lines are set.
Much as I am a fan of Cogliano & Nash, they are expendable on a rebuilding team...
We need to grab top tier talent to contend for the Stanley Cup...
I generally like to refer to the NFL chart for value of draft picks when thinking about things like this.
ReplyDeletehttp://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670
Obviously it's not directly comparable but I think that generally the value is close. Judging from that table, it'd take our 2nd and Nashville's 2nd to move into the 20 range. Which seems about right based on previous trades we've seen.
I have a spreadsheet with all the draft picks 1993-2009. I used it to create a draft pick value chart; I have a .jpeg of the chart if someone would like to host it.
ReplyDeleteIf someone hosts it I'll explain more about what i did to create it.
Jon K, I'm not an advocate of trading two fairly high picks to get a 20th overall pick.
ReplyDeleteThe huge difference in the NFL is that they're on the whole drafting 23 year olds who much much easier to project. In the NHL they're trying to project on 19 year olds which is a world of difference. When your assessments are so inaccurate you're usually better off just stockpiling picks.
Unless there's an exceptional prospect on the board you do not go out of your way to trade up. I can see Tyler Myer on the board as a trade up situation like Buffalo did, or a Zach Parise as New Jersey did, at the costs they did it for. I do not see Dylan McIlrath or anyone really rated 15-30 by LT that's worth it. If you can nab Connolly sure, but otherwise unless you have some inside scoop on a prospect or really really like him no.
If the Oilers want another Jason Smith then trade or sign one that's had some development time put into them by another organization. Drafting for need is usually silly, and the Oilers would be much better off drafting BPA with as many picks as possible.
Anyway that's just my opinion.
If the Oilers draft Hall, it would be preferable NOT to trade Nash.
ReplyDeleteBy staying in college, Nash is going to have more of a Horcoff-like progression in development at the pro level, but he is still a solid NHL prospect inside the Gagner-Hall cluster and a centre.
Jeff Tambellini chose the college route. So I think Steve is more accommodating of Riley's decisions than KP and the media and blogosphere pundits.
Horcoff is signed to a long contract. There is no need for Nash to get here in a hurry. So he's taken a slower route to the destination.
Off-topic: this story on the Oilers' own website quotes "Oilers' GM Kevin Lowe". That cannot possibly be a good sign.
ReplyDeleteI accept that I may be off on my % here and that may change the outcome but play the math - as is your strength - and convince me that the numbers for trading up works.
ReplyDeleteNot sure if that was an earnest question, but the .300 hitter has (obviously) a 30% chance of getting one hit, while the two .200 hitters have a 32% chance of getting one hit and a 4% chance of getting two hits. Of course, the baseball analogy breaks down a little when you consider outs, and the math depends on the arbitrarily selected batting averages of drafts in each round.
i agree with B.C.B.....the #31 pick in the second round will be a 1st round pick that fell to the 2nd round! many expert's opinions differ after the top 5 or 6, and they seem to think that anyone in the top 40 can potentially go in the 1st round. let's keep #31 and not overpay again for a mid-first round pick.
ReplyDeletethe 31 pick this year is kinida special. There have been numerous quotes by scouots that say there is no consensus at 15-40. Guys will be all over the map.
ReplyDeleteAfter the first round, there will be a bunch of teams that really like a guy still available. One may overpay to get that 31st pick.
Tambo has all night to get a bidding war going.
I'd like to see the Oilers get a mid first for Cogs, or 22 year old defenceman who is ready for the NHL.
ReplyDeleteNot a fan of trading multiples of picks to move up a couple of spots since projecting players in the late 1st round or later is voodoo anyhow.
I think trading up is contingent on your information.
A very simple example is if you have players slotted in 4 categories, I would move up in order to get one of the last players listed in a category.
Lets say the categories are:
A) No brainer excellent players (i.e. 1-2 this year)
B) Tracks well to be good NHLer
C) Has tools but needs work
D) Who the hell really knows
Let say you had 2 A's and 17 B's listed in your information from this year's draft.
If its coming down to pick 27 and there are still two of your B's on the board, I think you should make a move to get one of them.
Do something like offer Montreal the 31st + JFJ for the 27th, but not the 31st and 48th.
Its not that you think you are smarter than anyone else, its working with the information that you have.
The Rick Olcyzk story is a good example of what not to do. The capologist from the team knows and likes the guy so they try to get him. Nothing was mentioned about what the scouts thought of the player.
I trust MBS to have all the players broken down into many more and detailed categories, but the example stands.
If you can get "your guy", you go and get him.
MBS's first 2 5th rounders were late cuts from the Canadian World Junior team.
5th rounders!!
If MBS looks at Tambo and says "I can get two solid B players at 31 and 48, probably just as good as what I can get at 27", then you don't bother trading.
Its all about your information and what is left on the board.
Hall to get the #1 spot on TSN's final rankings as per MacKenzie's twitter.
ReplyDeleteHis 4th rounders on down are all markers sick!
ReplyDelete2009:
Bigios 4th (99) RBC MVP
Rajala 4th (101)U18 Scoring record.
Brandon top scorer Mem Cup
Olivier Roy 5th (133) Final cut U20
2008:
J. Motin 4th (#103) Top u17 year in SEL history
P. Cornet 5th (133) top 18 year old scorer in the Q
T. Hartikainen 6th (163) 18 year old year in SM-Ligga
J. Bendfeld 7th (193) UH ER fighting role.
I expect him to get more wonderful undervalued players with great markers.
This year I hope for the Vesterholm twins in the late rounds. But there dominance of swwedish junior could have them going earlier.
That cannot possibly be a good sign.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I'd go that far, but I will say it was fricking hilarious to read.
2 years on the job, and Tambo still gets cast as the little kid with the toy mock-up dashboard, beeping his cute steering wheel horn in the passenger seat while Big Kev does the actual driving...by the official site no less.
Regarding the actual article, could Sillinger's praise be any more faint for Riley Nash, at least in comparison to the other 1st rounders in that article?
Basically said that by the end of the year, Nash rallied to get himself back to his output from previous years...hell, even Alex Plante got more love with the "he's got lots of upside" rub.
Following the prospects this year tells me there will be plenty of names in the second round. (Just look at the amount of names that have cycled through the first round projections)
ReplyDeleteI'd rather see the Oilers try and get more second round picks if first rounders cost too much.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather see the Oilers try and get more second round picks if first rounders cost too much.
That's why I'd rather see them trade something like Cogs for a mid first than burn 31 and 48.
I know that's a bit like trading an almost NHL player for magic beans, but given the window on this team (3+ years before being consistently good) and Cog's lack of traction on the team, it would probably be better in the long run for the team.
If Riley Nash is interested in playing with his brother, I wonder if Nash + JFJ + something less than 48th gets you Montreal's 27OV.
Both players are big, one is French...
Seems that in a normal year, the cost for trading up is "in the range" as you state it LT.
ReplyDeleteBut Woodguy and Aynonmous do a good job noting what everyone's been saying about this draft.
Given that, trading to get in the top 15 makes sense IF you can. If all it costs is a pick (#31) and one of the smurfs, fine.
But while historically paying 2 2nds to go up in the low 20's may have applied, this year it seems to be an over-pay given how tightly bunched everyone is. I'd rather get 2 more prospects. Seems at this point we can't have enough - especially when you think the chances are great that a couple will be in the NHL this fall.
On that last comment - meant to point out that a couple of guys out of the group from the Oilers system (Hall/Seguin, Eberle, MPS) could be expected to be playing with the big club in the fall.
ReplyDeleteYou have to keep replenishng the system.
I checking the move up for Riley Nash I note that PHX wound up with Nick Ross at #31 and Joel Gistedt at #36.
ReplyDeleteGistedt was the 2007 Team Sweden Goalie in the U-20's but has been a disappointment (last year had a .874 SP in the ECHL)- but with goalies you never know.
Ross hasn't been anything special spending time in the ECHL and AHL. He still has time but looks to be a 5-6 D man to me.
So, if the Oilers would have taken those same guys, you have to say Nash was a better pick.
Of course there were other guys available including PHX own pick at #32, Brett MacLean, who looks like a keeper.
"Much as I am a fan of Cogliano & Nash, they are expendable on a rebuilding team..."
ReplyDeleteOur Top 3 prospect has no place on a rebuilding team? If he doesn't sign I can see it but wow.
Another nugget in a week full of pre-draft stories and television specials:
ReplyDeleteThis sounds pretty cool...
http://www.edmontonsun.com/sports/myoilers/2010/06/17/14432146.html
WG - The more the current group put into StuM's hands (and luck) the less they are actually doing to muck it up. (like chasing Ric Olczyk's 'secret' about Moore - effin' goofs).
ReplyDeleteI am now just as interested in seeing who Mackenzie has in the 25 to 30 range and watching where the Russians end up on Friday. That will have a lot to do with who may slide down to us.
digger - It sounds like they intend to present Nash with an ultimatum. (I think Nash has been working towards this day and is expecting it.)
Bob MacKenzie's Top-75 has just been posted on TSN...
ReplyDelete... with Hall #1 and McIlrath mving up 8 spots from #23 to #15
http://tsn.ca/draftcentre/story/?id=325285
http://tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=24944
If it's to pay 2 2nd rounders for Mcilrath, i'd just take a similar guy like Petrovic, or wait for surprises, then gamble on Kabanov or a Galiev. Buy low sell high. Draft Russians when no one wants them, they're at theyr highest quality/price ever.
ReplyDeleteyup, we should keep our 2nd rounders and just draft Alex Petrovic at #31. i suspect he'll still be there by then, and is probably better defensively that McIlrath.
ReplyDeletei hope they pull off a coup.... get both 1st and 2nd overall for whomever (hemsky, penner, cogliano, souray) plus some later pics... wouldnt that just be great??
ReplyDeleteimagine :
hall seguin (insert the leftover above here)
mps gagner eberle
what a first couple lines to grow around... friday is gonna be exciting
(i know im dreaming, salaries, players, boston never going for it blah blah blah)