Quote:
Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent
They could trade three seconds for a first and if that pick turns out to be a better nhler than the three then it's worthwhile.
|
That's actually a mighty big ‘if’.
Somewhere in all the discussion on this topic, there was an interesting argument between two posters about the value of draft picks. Perri's pick value calculator is based on the history of
trades for picks made by NHL GMs over the years. There's another table, I forget by whom, based on the history of
players drafted over the years. I looked them up at the time. The two curves are somewhat different.
If you compare the two sets of values, you will find that GMs significantly over-value 1st-round picks compared to all later rounds. For instance, the Perri calculator shows that pick #21 is almost exactly equal in value to #34 + #37. But your odds of getting a star NHLer are noticeably better if you take 34 and 37, and the career production you can expect from a 34 and a 37 pick are significantly greater than you can expect from a 21 pick.
I suspect GMs overvalue 1st-round picks partly because they have too much confidence in their scouts' ability to spot probable NHL players, and partly because having a 1st and picking on day 1 of the draft is good for PR. Good PR makes money for the owners, and that is naturally bound to influence the decisions made by their hired managers.
I favour whatever combination of picks gives you the best overall odds of landing a star player. If three 2nds give you better odds than a mid-1st, I'd rather have the three 2nds – even if the probability for each individual pick is rather low.