[CP Story] Cracking the Window (Hamonic Trade)

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Like many "can't go back and see what would have happened" human experiments I sure wonder if some of those Oiler picks showed up in better dressing rooms how they would have turned out.

I think Hall and Eberle traded for less than their production value speaks to that.

A view of "damaged".

not to side track the conversation, but in the end, kelfbomb seemed to be an important player for the oilers, so perhaps that is a consideration also and in the end maybe the trade was not so lopsided - but time will tell.

I too thought the flames paid too much, but is suppose the reality is that if the flames believe their windows is over the enxt three years, the likelihood of having any of those draft picks become impact players in that window are likely low, so you may as well go big game hunting as use the unknown quantity of picks to get a guy who will help you for the enxt season or two.

will be interesting to see who the flames add on crazy day.

tre seems to save his best work for around the draft.

haminoc (sp) seems like a solid individual off the ice, so hopefully the trade works out for him and the team.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

3) I completely agree about how you have defined the cycles of NHL teams. One of the things that I find irritating is the insistence of so many fans that a team must have their cake and eat it too; in other words, teams must build and continue to improve to win a championship while simultaneously perpetually increase their draft stock. It's completely unrealistic. I like Treliving's approach which seems to indicate that he will focus in the draft on smaller windows: two or three drafts with an overabundance of picks; two or three drafts where those picks are currency.

Building on that is the fact that when you load up on 2 or 3 drafts and get a tonne of players they all come into their own around the same time creating that window. It's frustrating to watch players trickle in and as the experienced ones end their productive years you end up with new ones. It is great for perpetual mediocrity but doesn't fit the window strategy the same. Sure I get the theory that you then end up with all contracts coming due at once, but not all players are going to eat cap, focus on a core, draft a cast, go for it, rinse repeat.

I love the way Bingo put it about being patient when the next one comes, because that seems to be the strategy. Using the Burkism, this next year the Flames are running and looking to break into that final sprint. Which means when 2021 comes around it will be time to reset the process.

Bold strategy Cotton, lets see if it pays off.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I think draft picks also have varying value as it gets closer to draft day. The best time to trade them away is on or just before draft day. No one wants to show up with only three picks in their pocket.

This is starting to remind me of Darryl's time of dealing with the difference being we do have the solid foundation instead of chasing our tails with Darryl.

Flames also have drafted much better in the second round on wards compared to when's Daryl was here. Yes it's early to make that claim but I don't remember this team picking prospects like Andersson, Kylington, Fox past the first. These guys already have a fair bit of value

[Sylvanfan]

Interesting read. I think the last part about moving in and out of going for it will be something to watch. In leagues like MLB and the NBA you see teams that seem more willing to move one direction or the other. In MLB, with 10 or 30 making the playoffs, I think more teams are willing to stockpile to open a window. The NBA appears to have a group of Super teams, so a few fringe teams are more willing to back off knowing the odds are light. But the NHL I think still has teams who are reluctant to commit to building. You still have 16 playoff teams, and there is some recent history that seems to indicate that the 16th team can in fact go on a longer playoff run. The difference from 1 to 16 would appear to be trending to decrease over the past few years. So as a result it does seem like NHL teams are still a bit reluctant to move too far one way or the other. Of course if someone goes out and goes for it, and has a bit of a run, which LA sort of did, it may influence some other teams to try it. These are all copy cat leagues...once someone tries something a bit unconventional and proves success...everyone else will try to follow suit.

With the Detroit streak over, off the top of my head, Pittsburgh I believe would now have the longest streak of consecutive playoff appearances? Chicago, and St.Louis I think would be next in line. Than you have teams like San Jose, Washington, New York Ranger, and Anaheim who have been in every year for the past 10 save 1 or two seasons. Other than that, it does seem like there are 4 or more playoff spots that will turn over year after year.

I guess the key will be, to see the end, and make the moves at the right time as opposed to after the tires catch fire, and there's not much left to salvage.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Building on that is the fact that when you load up on 2 or 3 drafts and get a tonne of players they all come into their own around the same time creating that window. It's frustrating to watch players trickle in and as the experienced ones end their productive years you end up with new ones. It is great for perpetual mediocrity but doesn't fit the window strategy the same. Sure I get the theory that you then end up with all contracts coming due at once, but not all players are going to eat cap, focus on a core, draft a cast, go for it, rinse repeat.

I love the way Bingo put it about being patient when the next one comes, because that seems to be the strategy. Using the Burkism, this next year the Flames are running and looking to break into that final sprint. Which means when 2021 comes around it will be time to reset the process.

Bold strategy Cotton, lets see if it pays off.

I don't agree, this team is built to be competitive much longer than 2021 if they deal with their contracts properly.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by belsarius

...I love the way Bingo put it about being patient when the next one comes, because that seems to be the strategy. Using the Burkism, this next year the Flames are running and looking to break into that final sprint. Which means when 2021 comes around it will be time to reset the process...

Maybe.

But I don't know about that.

In terms of age, by 2021 the current core of Flames players will be 38, 32, 31, 28, 28, 27, 25, and 24. Travis Hamonic will be 30-years-old, and newly acquired top draft pick Juuso Valimaki will be 23. Michael Backlund will be in the middle of a high-dollar long-term contract, and Giordano would be in the final year of his deal. Of course, everything will depend on how this group performs, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect the window to remain open for longer.

[Vinny01]

The Dougie trade lined up perfectly for Tree. The team came off an improbable run that nobody saw coming and many said couldn't be duplicated. Treliving to his credit has accumulated enough draft assets and has the Flames in a good cap spot that he was able to pull of the Hamilton trade and it made sense then as Dougie was coming off an ELC and just turned 22.

Fast forward 2 years and the Flames pay the same price for Hamonic. This time however the picks are not all locked in like they were for Dougie. It means the Flames may have traded a very late first or one earlier than they have for Dougie. The team is much further ahead 2 years later after a bounce back season under a new coach. The analytics say the Flames are a good team now as well when they did not say that in 2015.

In 2015 the Hamilton and Frolik moves were a great message to send to the fans. They knew the previous year had a lot of luck but they improved on 2 areas of need with age appropriate players.

In 2017 the Flames are sending an even stronger message to the fans. By acquiring a 35 year old goalie in Mike Smith and sending unknown top draft choices for Hamonic the team is telling the fans they see the window opening and are going for it

[Finger Cookin]

I usually enjoy your write-ups, but this one stands out as being exceptionally well written IMO. A nice eyes-wide-open take that acknowledges that things might not work out exactly as planned, but at the same time highlights the successes management has had in trades and at the draft that set the stage for the Hamonic move and that should allow fans to be optimistic for the coming season and for several years to come. Thanks for sharing it.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Beninho

I don't agree, this team is built to be competitive much longer than 2021 if they deal with their contracts properly.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Maybe.

But I don't know about that.

In terms of age, by 2021 the current core of Flames players will be 38, 32, 31, 28, 28, 27, 25, and 24. Travis Hamonic will be 30-years-old, and newly acquired top draft pick Juuso Valimaki will be 23. Michael Backlund will be in the middle of a high-dollar long-term contract, and Giordano would be in the final year of his deal. Of course, everything will depend on how this group performs, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect the window to remain open for longer.

I think I wasn't clear enough by my use of 2021, "reset" the process was meant more for being in the GM's head. I didn't mean to say the window closed in 2021 and the core was done.

I was thinking more along the lines that come 2021 the focus will no longer be on trading picks for right now type players, I see 2021 as the middle of the Flames competitive window, the peak of the curve. Absolutely I expect this core to be competitive longer than that, but I see the GM planning for 2025 and his focus switching to loading up for those draft years.

I think we might still see some moves involving picks to get right now players, but after 2021 I expect picks to be incoming instead of outgoing.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I think I wasn't clear enough by my use of 2021, "reset" the process was meant more for being in the GM's head. I didn't mean to say the window closed in 2021 and the core was done.

I was thinking more along the lines that come 2021 the focus will no longer be on trading picks for right now type players, I see 2021 as the middle of the Flames competitive window, the peak of the curve. Absolutely I expect this core to be competitive longer than that, but I see the GM planning for 2025 and his focus switching to loading up for those draft years.

I think we might still see some moves involving picks to get right now players, but after 2021 I expect picks to be incoming instead of outgoing.

Ahhh that reasoning does make sense. 2021 would probably be the correct time to re-evaluate the core and the future of the team. Think that's a pretty good plan

[Itse]

I feel that "draft picks have such and such odds of becoming impact players" creates a false equivalency. I don't have a problem with using draft picks to get established players as such, but guys on ELC's create just unbeatable bang for the buck.

Nashville got 13 points in the playoffs out of Viktor Arvidsson and 12 points out of Colton Sissons for a combined price $1.4M. Pittsburg got 21 points out of Guentzel for about $700k.

Hamonic might be fine for his pricetag, but it's not even in the ballpark of best possible value you can get by drafting players. Penguins won't mind one bit if Guentzel is a flash in the pan, he still helped them to that cup. If Nashville had won, Arvidsson and Sissons could have retired for all they care.


Despite what I said above, I don't think we're totally screwed.

We should have good young players on ELC's pushing for spots for about the next three seasons, after which a lot of contracts are going to come up for renewal anyway. At around that time there's likely to be about 1-2 seasons of gap with incoming prospects, which is not too bad.

This is about the point where I think we should stop selling draft picks, but we haven't crossed it.

I also don't know how Treliving plans to handle our draft picks long term, but I'm sure he has a plan. Probably several.

So, I'm a little concerned about our draft situation because I think drafting helps in keeping a window open. However, it's too early to start seriously worry about it.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Itse

I feel that "draft picks have such and such odds of becoming impact players" creates a false equivalency. I don't have a problem with using draft picks to get established players as such, but guys on ELC's create just unbeatable bang for the buck.

Nashville got 13 points in the playoffs out of Viktor Arvidsson and 12 points out of Colton Sissons for a combined price $1.4M. Pittsburg got 21 points out of Guentzel for about $700k.

Hamonic might be fine for his pricetag, but it's not even in the ballpark of best possible value you can get by drafting players. Penguins won't mind one bit if Guentzel is a flash in the pan, he still helped them to that cup. If Nashville had won, Arvidsson and Sissons could have retired for all they care.


Despite what I said above, I don't think we're totally screwed.

We should have good young players on ELC's pushing for spots for about the next three seasons, after which a lot of contracts are going to come up for renewal anyway. At around that time there's likely to be about 1-2 seasons of gap with incoming prospects, which is not too bad.

This is about the point where I think we should stop selling draft picks, but we haven't crossed it.

I also don't know how Treliving plans to handle our draft picks long term, but I'm sure he has a plan. Probably several.

So, I'm a little concerned about our draft situation because I think drafting helps in keeping a window open. However, it's too early to start seriously worry about it.

I would agree with that, it's not something they can continue to do.

Plus I don't think it's something the would have done if they hadn't found 6 or so players in rounds 2-6 in the past three drafts; that level of development (luck) has really changed the growth plan, and they know it.

One source of future picks would be to sell of existing vets on expiring contracts despite being a contender; if that happens Treliving has gone to the next level of management and would be amazing.

Imagine dealing TJ Brodie at a trade deadline after winning your division?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Imagine dealing TJ Brodie at a trade deadline after winning your division?

I'd rather just dream about cups and be glad I'm not the GM

[GGG]

Your comment on Vegas and McPhees strategy is interesting. I think McPhees strategy is right because part of trading NHL assets for picks even late firsts and seconds is that it makes your team worse and thus increases the value of your own picks.

So if Vegas believes their window is 5 years out being horrible for the next two years and building as much currency as they can now will allow them to hit there window in a similar way to what the flames have done.

[Brewmaster]

I agree with the premise that the window is now open and that it will be exciting times now that the Flames are going for it. The one thing I am skeptical about is the strength of our current prospect group and how many of them will become impact NHL players. On one hand we are giving statistics of how unlikely young players drafted outside of the top 10 are to be impact NHL players, making the argument for trading away picks. It seems hypocritical to take this stance and also point to Flames prospects (all of which were drafted outside of that range) as a reason to get excited about the future.

Saying that Andersson, Kylington, Parsons and Dube all look to be NHL bound, and all four could turn out to be impact players is far fetched IMO. The reason for the low % of draft picks becoming impact players is because very few can take the steps forward from being good Junior/NCAA/AHL players to become NHL regulars. Most draft picks experience some degree of success in lower leagues which is why every fan base tends to over-rate their own prospects. The Flames have a solid young core of players that have proven themselves in the NHL which is something to get excited about, but I think there may be some lean years ahead for prospects that will make an impact.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Brewmaster

I agree with the premise that the window is now open and that it will be exciting times now that the Flames are going for it. The one thing I am skeptical about is the strength of our current prospect group and how many of them will become impact NHL players. On one hand we are giving statistics of how unlikely young players drafted outside of the top 10 are to be impact NHL players, making the argument for trading away picks. It seems hypocritical to take this stance and also point to Flames prospects (all of which were drafted outside of that range) as a reason to get excited about the future...

The reason this is not such an issue is that most of the Flames's high impact "prospects" have already graduated and are playing in the NHL. In five year's time when the current group has either graduated or moved on Gaudreau, Bennett, Monohan, Hamilton, Brodie, Tkachuk will still be in their prime. It would be an issue if the core players were older, but most of them are still just kids who happen to already be making a big impact in the NHL.

[Yrebmi]

I've got nothing to add beyond saying that was a really good read. I am excited for the upcoming season.

[McG]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanFromBC

Would it be correct to say with the three draft picks they have a 34% (basically 1 in 3) chance to pick an impact player over next 3 years (20+7+7)?

made me think! but I think that I have it...

you have added the numerator but not accounted for the denominators. think of it this way; if the best is 20%, together they cannot be combined to be higher in percentage. for our purposes, it is 34/300 or 11 1/3% for an average.

this makes sense; the highest percentage should be better than the average, but the average should be better than the worst pick.

we know that with the draft though, averages are tough and there are lots of examples of lower picks making it. those odds are pretty dire, so each franchise has to believe that they can beat those odds.

a really super question.

[Vox]

Originally Posted by McG

made me think! but I think that I have it...

you have added the numerator but not accounted for the denominators. think of it this way; if the best is 20%, together they cannot be combined to be higher in percentage. for our purposes, it is 34/300 or 11 1/3% for an average.

this makes sense; the highest percentage should be better than the average, but the average should be better than the worst pick.

we know that with the draft though, averages are tough and there are lots of examples of lower picks making it. those odds are pretty dire, so each franchise has to believe that they can beat those odds.

a really super question.

It would be 31% chance of picking an impact player if there were three picks with 20%, 7% and 7% individual chance of picking an impact player.

[FlamesFanFromBC]

Originally Posted by McG

made me think! but I think that I have it...

you have added the numerator but not accounted for the denominators. think of it this way; if the best is 20%, together they cannot be combined to be higher in percentage. for our purposes, it is 34/300 or 11 1/3% for an average.

this makes sense; the highest percentage should be better than the average, but the average should be better than the worst pick.

we know that with the draft though, averages are tough and there are lots of examples of lower picks making it. those odds are pretty dire, so each franchise has to believe that they can beat those odds.

a really super question.

So your saying if I drink 10 beers at 5% alcohol each I wouldnt be consuming 50% alcohol?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk