Quote:
Originally Posted by jjgallow
45% is about right for sake of arguement.
However, please keep in mind, if you regularly give up your first round picks, it doesn't take long before there's about a 70% chance of losing an impact player and the 12 years that come with him.
The Flames do regularly do this. So whether that's this pick, or the previous one, they do it often enough that odds are they have lost at least one impact player recently and possibly more.
Now consider the cap. Toffoli will be eating cap space in his years of decline. We already seen what he does in high tempo playoffs....basically if the playoffs matter then he really can't do much for you there. Meanwhile a younger guy on the rise, even if he does only pay 150 games, is going to do just fine in high tempo, at just a fraction of the cap space.
So less prospects means less cap space, it also means having guys that can't keep up at high tempo.
You have to really narrow it down and say maybe this pick doesn't work out, and maybe Toffoli is serviceable in the regular season (let's be honest he's not leading us anywhere in the playoffs anymore).
Assuming we actually care about the regular season (I'm more interested int he playoffs, where Toffoli is a wash)... and assuming this first round pick is very average, you still get a huge break on the cap out of it. Or, this guy could be our next MVP. whereas the chances of that happening with Toffoli are negligible.
The pick is your insurance policy, your cap relief, and your lotto ticket. A very, very good lotto ticket, way better odds than any 649.
Dismissing the value of draft picks is a huge mistake that can only be justified with a narrow short term lens.
|
The Flames have made a first round selection in each of the last three drafts, you make it sound like they've dealt their last five first rounders.
They haven't.
In isolation this one went about as well as it could with the Flames doing well enough to keep the pick from moving into a dangerous spot.
If the Habs hit on the pick you'll have a solid argument. There will be hair on it because we can't know that Calgary would have picked the same player, but value for value you can make the argument.
But looking at this trade specifically, there's a better chance that Calgary going all in, but with a non rental, likely means the value to Calgary exceeds the value to Montreal.
And this is from a guy that hates moving first rounders.