[Trade] Glencross to Washington for a 2015 2nd and 2015 3rd round pick (WSH) (Archive)

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The other consideration that way though is not over valuing your assets relative to market prices.

GMs will obviously always try to buy at the right price, and no one wants to sell at the wrong price, but if at the end of the game you've still got a hand full of cards you didn't play, that's probably a sign your expectations are out of alignment.

Cammalleri may be been priced at a 1st and been valued at a 2nd.

In this scenario, who's valuation is correct? If something is priced a certain way, and doesn't sell, that's generally a sign the price is too high.

Totally agree it's a spectrum. My only point is you just objectively take the best offer. Negotiating is way more nuanced than that. There's an element of bluffing and if you never call the bluff, you are in a position of weakness

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The other consideration that way though is not over valuing your assets relative to market prices.

GMs will obviously always try to buy at the right price, and no one wants to sell at the wrong price, but if at the end of the game you've still got a hand full of cards you didn't play, that's probably a sign your expectations are out of alignment.

Cammalleri may be been priced at a 1st and been valued at a 2nd.

In this scenario, who's valuation is correct? If something is priced a certain way, and doesn't sell, that's generally a sign the price is too high.

Last year we finally saw the league as a whole become reluctant to overpay at the deadline as years past has been the case. I do feel going forward that there are going to be less overpayments as teams are valuing their first round picks and young players higher than before as the rental players rarely pay off. That said there's always going to be a team that feels it's one piece away from winning a cup that is going to go all in so there will still be the odd overpayment but the league is simply going to be more cautious. Glencross is a roster contributor for a team in playoff contention and I think you have to hold the line and let your internal value dictate if he gets moved not the offering teams.

[Weitz]

I don't know how accepting a bad offer one year precludes you to saying "no" the next year.

[nik-]

I don't want a UFA asset to walk for nothing two years in a row, regardless of some moral stance.

Get something.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I don't know how accepting a bad offer one year precludes you to saying "no" the next year.

It doesn't, but if on your negotiations with trans you say "this is the lowest you'll accept", at some point, that has to be the lowest you'll accept

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I don't know how accepting a bad offer one year precludes you to saying "no" the next year.

Because we'd be the Oilers? No, that can't be it. How about: "you can't outsmart me because I'm going to outsmart myself first"? No, wait, now I'm really confused. So many mantras to keep straight.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Rick M.

Because we'd be the Oilers? No, that can't be it. How about: "you can't outsmart me because I'm going to outsmart myself first"? No, wait, now I'm really confused. So many mantras to keep straight.

This post makes no sense.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

It doesn't, but if on your negotiations with trans you say "this is the lowest you'll accept", at some point, that has to be the lowest you'll accept

On the other hand, if all the offers are lower than what you figured you'd accept, maybe the in house valuation of the asset is off and a reassessment is needed.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by nik-

This post makes no sense.

No kidding. I'm just spoofing the narratives constructed around NHL decisions and the supposed lessons they teach. If you lose an asset for nothing how are you showing others that you're a great negotiator? They'll just make deals with others. Besides, we don't have the same GM as last year so how do any lessons supposedly learned by other GMS about the former GM apply this year?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

On the other hand, if all the offers are lower than what you figured you'd accept, maybe the in house valuation of the asset is off and a reassessment is needed.

This is pretty much it. You deal with the market. Last year there was, what, six UFA forwards on the market at trade deadline? It happening one year ... not good, but whatever, fine, take your moral stance. Two years in a row? No, get something for your assets now.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't want a UFA asset to walk for nothing two years in a row, regardless of some moral stance.

Get something.

I don't know about just taking whatever. If all that gets offered is a 5th round pick, do you take it?

[flambers]

Originally Posted by codynw

I don't know about just taking whatever. If all that gets offered is a 5th round pick, do you take it?

Of course not, but on the other hand there is lots of interest in Glencross according to the various media speculations.

Which should help the Flames make a solid trade.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by codynw

I don't know about just taking whatever. If all that gets offered is a 5th round pick, do you take it?

I think with some assets, yes, you do.

As bad as Garth Snow looked last year taking a 2nd and a prospect for Vanek compared to what he gave up to get him, imagine if he hadn't gotten anything at all.

When you know that a player is leaving town, and no one comes up to meet your price, you can't just stamp your feet and wait for the price to rise, you have to make hay when the sun is shining.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by codynw

I don't know about just taking whatever. If all that gets offered is a 5th round pick, do you take it?

If you're intent on moving him and the market comparables are getting 5ths ... then that's the market. If comparable forwards are getting thirds or seconds and someone offers a 5th, then no. Last year was a saturated forward market for players like Cammalleri, so we'll see what happens this year.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I think the theory that a team is better off getting nothing for an asset (such as Cammi), is working off the same assumption that airlines do when they will let a seat fly empty, rather than selling it for $50 last-minute, let's say.
I don't think that is a perfect analogy, as there are so few trades, but I would say that is likely the justification to state that taking nothing, might be better than something, in the long run.

[dammage79]

Why do I get the sense that Glencross is headed to CHI?

[Knut]

I also think this year needs to be isolated from last season. Being in a playoff push means moving Glencross for a 5th can send the wrong message. He does help the teams chances to make the playoffs.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't want a UFA asset to walk for nothing two years in a row, regardless of some moral stance.

Get something.

I agree to a point but this year is different since the playoffs aren't out of the question. If all that's offered is a 5th rounder I think it'd be worth more to keep Glencross

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think with some assets, yes, you do.

As bad as Garth Snow looked last year taking a 2nd and a prospect for Vanek compared to what he gave up to get him, imagine if he hadn't gotten anything at all.

When you know that a player is leaving town, and no one comes up to meet your price, you can't just stamp your feet and wait for the price to rise, you have to make hay when the sun is shining.

Garth Snow's team was enduring a miserable season and he got himself in the Vanek mess in the first place by buying high on him and seeing the player wasn't going to re-sign in NY and the team was long eliminated from the playoffs a 2nd round pick and prospect was better than nothing.

The Flames don't need to trade Glencross for a 5th round pick or even 4th round pick as they could use him in their drive to make the playoffs. His value will ultimately be decided by the Flames not the rest of the league as they will decide if he's worth more on the roster than a 4th or 5th round pick in the spring. While it's great to stockpile picks it's very rare that a 4th round pick turns into a Johnny Gaudreau so it's not like the Flames would be missing out in keeping him.

[Erick Estrada]

Also lets not forget that Cammalleri got hot after the deadline and contributed to the team playing well down the stretch. That strong play translated into this season and maybe if they trade Cammalleri for a bag of pucks and they lose his goals down the stretch they lose more games and some of the momentum they brought into this season? All in all I don't think last year turned out bad at all.