Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoutski
I see that this is a pretty strongly held idea on CP, I'm not really sure who's called it that, though I'm not saying you're wrong. If we were to agree that it is full of potential superstars, how many of the first rounders do you think it's realistic to assume will have fruitful NHL careers? I think you could make an optimistic argument that 20/30 of those picks turned into good NHL players if it's realistic to compare it to the 2003 draft:
List of first round picks in 2003
So if we just assume that this draft is definitely as good as 2003 and that we have a 66% chance of getting a great player, we also have to factor in if every single one of those 20/30 players is going to be BETTER than Ryan O'Reilly. We can stay optimistic though and say that 15/20 of those guys will have a better career and that puts us at having a 50% chance of drafting a player better than RoR, still decent for sure.
Even in that case, it's a 50/50 call on getting a better player (and not necessarily exceptionally better) or a worse player/bust. Or if we lose the pick, we get a very good player 100% of the time.
Essentially what I'm saying is do you think a 50% chance of a better player is worth the risk involved? This shouldn't really be a YES/NO situation, but you can definitely make strong arguments for each side.
Also remember that we are using pretty much the most optimistic scenario we can come up with here to get those numbers. |
We're looking to have another top 5-10 pick. You shouldn't be looking at the entire first round then but at the odds of getting a player better than O'Reilly near the top end of the draft. The top end of next years draft actually looks better than 2003. Why 2003 is so touted was the depth but it didn't actually have a McDavid/Eichel type at the top end. So 2015 is supposed to both be deep but also have a nice top end. So you could be missing out on a potential superstar or at worst a likely foundational piece.
Here's the RFA compensation list:
Over $5,046,585 to $6,728,781: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick
Over $6,728,781 To $8,410,976: Two 1st’s, one 2nd, one 3rd round pick
I like O'Reiily a lot. But in order to get them to not match we'd probably have to offer long term in the 7 million range. That means giving up two 1sts, a 2nd and a 3rd. Your analysis isn't taking that into account at all. Heck the Avs got O'Reilly in the 2nd. You wanna give up a 1st, 2nd and 3rd OR MORE in a deep draft? Good lord.
It's pretty much a no brainer that given our potential draft position next year that giving up even a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for O'Reilly is overpayment. It made some sense back when we had Iginla and it was only a 1st and a 3rd but it doesn't make any sense at all now.
The idea doesn't merit any serious consideration IMO. Too many picks in a deep year where we're expected to have high picks in every round.