Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Yeah I think you look for the equivalence of two first rounders plus a bit more for a small retention.
1st is there.
2nd is there (I'll ignore the could be a first)
serviceable NHL defenseman likely worth a 2nd?
Prospect that I'd assume they like
Are we saying two 2nds and a prospect isn't worth a 1st?
|
When you factor in that the trade also harms the value of the 1st we already have, I would say that this trade doesn't give the value it should and that is with retention.
The trade condition sucks. It would have been more tolerable if it was just final 4 as that pushes our pick to 28-32 already but the condition means we need to get the worst possible value out of the existing 1st to get another 1st.
It should have been 'anyone but vegas'. Now I hope Andersson never wins a cup.
