Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
In a world where unproven NHL prospect defenseman Griffin Reinhart is worth a 1st and a 2nd and whose upside looked to be Travis Hamonic at best, Travis Hamonic himself should easily be worth a 1st and two 2nds. Therefore the Hamonic deal is market value.
In a world where defensive defenseman Braydon Coburn is worth Gudas, a 1st and a 3rd, I would suggest that Hamonic is worth a similar price in a 1st and two 2nds. Therefore the Hamonic deal is market value.
And we could go on and on with the examples. The market for defensive defensemen has been set over the years and it is a lot higher than some fans think or remember. GM's value these players and how they contribute to a winning team even though their offensive stats do not wow the fans that concentrate mostly on those stats.
If you do the research you'll find that the Hamonic deal looks like market value for that type of player. Defensemen cost a lot to trade for in their prime in the NHL, even the ones who are defensive defensemen. Hamonic should be an important piece going forward making the opposition pay a price, battling and blocking lanes and shots, playing with a bit of an edge, helping on the PK while still having the skating and puck handling to move the puck when needed..
|
Appreciate you coming up with examples of value for similar defensemen.
Some trades work out for everyone while other trades have clear winners and losers. The Coburn and Reinhart trades had clear winners and losers IMO and I wouldn’t use them as definitive measures of market value.
Anyway maybe Treliving will trade Brodie for 2 first rounders which would certainly prove out the theory that this defensive depth is so valuable. Or Hamonic’s value will be proved out on the ice and in the standings next year.