01-16-2018, 04:13 PM
|
#1
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Trade Proposal Values from the Calgary perspective
There has been discussion going on in other threads about the likelihood of the flames making a trade and the relative value they can expect to give vs. get in trade scenarios involving players like Brodie, Hamilton, Hamonic and Stone. Rather than derail those conversations, let's put a number on it and go from there. Most Flames fans that post on this board watch Flames games, so everyone should have an understanding of what the player brings, their cap, etc. This value for other teams can be nebulous to determine especially if a poster has watched a lot or a little of a given roster. We should all be on relatively equal footing here in terms of what we've seen from the roster.
What kind of return does everyone expect to get from a player like Stone Vs. a player like Brodie as an example from another thread?
If their value was on a scale between 1 and 10, would Stone be a 7 and Brodie an 8? Is Stone a 5 and Brodie an 8? Is Stone a 5 and Brodie a 6?
So many of these trades proposals and team building suggestions get picked apart for relative trade imbalance on the other side of the equation. Let's start some of these rankings from the Flames perspective and compare that to potential trade partners around the league.
The answer to that question will probably reveal a lot about what kind of return one poster or another thinks is legitimate. It might also be a fun exercise to revisit on an annual or bi-annual basis to see how perceived values can change.
Johnny Gaudreau
Sean Monahan
Matthew Tkachuk
Micheal Ferland
Mikael Backlund
Dougie Hamilton
Mark Giordano
T.J. Brodie
Sam Bennett
Mark Jankowski
Michael Frolik
Troy Brouwer
Kris Versteeg
Garnet Hathaway
Jaromir Jagr
Travis Hamonic
Curtis Lazar
Brett Kulak
Michael Stone
Matt Stajan
Mike Smith
Matt Bartkowski
Rasmus Andersson
Jon Gillies
Tanner Glass
Marek Hrivik
Andrew Mangiapane
David Rittich
Last edited by Flash Walken; 01-16-2018 at 04:40 PM.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:16 PM
|
#2
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Brodie: 7.5 Stone: 6.5
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:18 PM
|
#3
|
Franchise Player
|
Johnny Gaudreau
Sean Monahan
Dougie Hamilton
Matthew Tkachuk
Mark Giordano
My top 5. The top 2 are easy, I could see a case for switching Hamilton and Tkachuk. But those are bonafide top 4 based on skill, age, contract status, haircuts etc.
Giordano rounds out the top 5 but takes a bit of a hit due to his age and contract.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:29 PM
|
#4
|
tromboner
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
|
I would suggest allowing the scale to go negative. 0 = waiver wire, negative means a -1 means you have to throw in a +1 on on the scale to get someone to take him.
It would also be valuable to place draft picks on the scale.
Last edited by SebC; 01-16-2018 at 04:39 PM.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:32 PM
|
#5
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
I would suggest allowing the scale to go negative. 0 = waiver wire, negative means a -1 means you have to throw in a +1 on on the scale to get someone to take him.
|
Sure, let's go with it.
David Clarkson can be represented with a -5.
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TheoFleury For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:43 PM
|
#7
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Brodie has to be at least an 8. He’d command a huge amount of interest if he were to go on the block due to his age + contract and because he’s of the position he plays. He’s a hard one to gauge because players like him hardly ever get traded. Larsson (who he’s better than) garnered Hall but you have to account for the Chiarelli factor. And Hamonic who only wanted to be traded to Western Canada still gathered a bidding war and then was traded for a a package of multiple draft picks. I think he’s better than either of those two guys, and has shown he can play on the top pairing and look good doing so. If BT were to ever think about trading him, he’d bring back a kings ransom.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:46 PM
|
#8
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen
Johnny Gaudreau
Sean Monahan
Dougie Hamilton
Matthew Tkachuk
Mark Giordano
My top 5. The top 2 are easy, I could see a case for switching Hamilton and Tkachuk. But those are bonafide top 4 based on skill, age, contract status, haircuts etc.
Giordano rounds out the top 5 but takes a bit of a hit due to his age and contract.
|
Giordano is very difficult to gauge, due to his age - there is a more limited market for him, but he isn't going to be traded so it's irrelevant. Leaving him off, my top 10, in order, would be as follows:
Gaudreau
Monahan
Tkachuk
Hamilton
Brodie
Bennett
Jankowski
Ferland
Backlund (only due to age and contract status)
Hamonic
After that, I would start putting them in groups.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 04:53 PM
|
#9
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Johnny Gaudreau 10
Sean Monahan 8.5
Matthew Tkachuk 8
Micheal Ferland 5.5
Mikael Backlund 7 (would be higher but he's a rental)
Dougie Hamilton 8.5
Mark Giordano 7.5 (maybe more with salary retained)
T.J. Brodie 7.5
Sam Bennett 6
Mark Jankowski 5
Michael Frolik 4.5
Troy Brouwer 1
Kris Versteeg 2
Garnet Hathaway 2
Jaromir Jagr 3
Travis Hamonic 7
Curtis Lazar 1
Brett Kulak 2
Michael Stone 4
Matt Stajan 1.5
Mike Smith 6 (he ranks much higher on relative importance to the Flames, but seems like it's hard to get a lot for goalies)
Matt Bartkowski 1
Rasmus Andersson 4
Jon Gillies 4
Tanner Glass 1
Marek Hrivik 1.5
Eddie Lack 1
Andrew Mangiapane 3
David Rittich 4
I don't really see this as being a linear scale (eg. I don't think Ferland will return half as much as Gaudreau) 'cause otherwise most of the players would be clustered around 1-3 in my mind.
Last edited by delayedreflex; 01-16-2018 at 04:57 PM.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:00 PM
|
#10
|
Franchise Player
|
Exactly. It isn't a linear scale, and value is very dependent on who the trading partner is.
For example, compare Brodie and Bennett...
Brodie would have very little value to a team that was early in a rebuild, but would have tremendous value for a team that was close to contending but needed another top 4 puck mover, like Toronto for instance.
Whereas Nashville or Anaheim would have much more interest in Bennett than Brodie.
You can go on and on. Because it is buyer-dependent, and isn't linear.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:06 PM
|
#11
|
tromboner
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
|
My first pass
9.5 - Johnny Gaudreau
8.5 - Sean Monahan
7 - Matthew Tkachuk
6 - Micheal Ferland
4 - Mikael Backlund
7 - Dougie Hamilton
6 - Mark Giordano
4 - T.J. Brodie
3 - Sam Bennett
5 - Mark Jankowski
2 - Michael Frolik
-2 - Troy Brouwer
0 - Kris Versteeg
2 - Garnet Hathaway
1 - Jaromir Jagr
3 - Travis Hamonic
0 - Curtis Lazar
1 - Brett Kulak
2 - Michael Stone
-1 - Matt Stajan
4 - Mike Smith
0 - Matt Bartkowski
2 - Rasmus Andersson
1 - Jon Gillies
-1 - Tanner Glass
2 - Marek Hrivik
2 - Andrew Mangiapane
2 - David Rittich
8 - #1 pick
2 - #31 pick
1 - #61 pick
It's tricky because to properly show the gaps between the high end and the mid range you end up with not a lot of numbers to work with at the bottom.
Last edited by SebC; 01-16-2018 at 05:26 PM.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:17 PM
|
#12
|
tromboner
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by delayedreflex
I don't really see this as being a linear scale (eg. I don't think Ferland will return half as much as Gaudreau) 'cause otherwise most of the players would be clustered around 1-3 in my mind.
|
I believe the exercise is far more valuable if one does attempt to make their scale linear. Might be better to make it such that the best asset in the league is 1000 though so you have room for nuance in the compressed bottom.
What it will never be is additive. For my "sanity checks", I tried to make it so that a 6 and a 4 would equal a 10, but ten 1s will never equal a 10. Basically, limit it so that no more than two assets will be traded for one asset and you can make something reasonable.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:18 PM
|
#13
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
I actually think Tkachuk could hold more value then Monahan. If you're a team trading for Monahan you'd probably have some real questions about how much of his $6 million deal is part of Gaudreau's value and what kind of production you could expect from Monahan without Gaudreau.
Whereas with Tkachuk you have a clearer picture of what you're getting in a guy who stirs the drink in all facets of the game and a guy with lots of upside left that won't be capitalized in his next contract. Think trading for Philly Brayden Schenn but getting St. Louis Brayden Schenn. I
To me, that's a more attractive option that teams could overpay for. Conversely for Monahan, he's a 30 goal man being paid as one but is he a 30 goal man on a different team? Probably, but there's risk he's not as productive compared to the value you traded for him.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:27 PM
|
#14
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
I haven't figured out my evaluations yet, but to go off Tinordi's post, i'm inclined to rate them thusly
Gaudreau - 10
Tkachuk - 9
Monahan - 8
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:33 PM
|
#15
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
I believe the exercise is far more valuable if one does attempt to make their scale linear. Might be better to make it such that the best asset in the league is 1000 though so you have room for nuance in the compressed bottom.
What it will never be is additive. For my "sanity checks", I tried to make it so that a 6 and a 4 would equal a 10, but ten 1s will never equal a 10. Basically, limit it so that no more than two assets will be traded for one asset and you can make something reasonable.
|
It's not about other players in the league though, that's the point.
It's assigning an arbitrary number on a relative scale to a single roster.
It's not a linear value, two lazars don't equal a bennett, but it *is* a referential value relative to other players in the lineup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Exactly. It isn't a linear scale, and value is very dependent on who the trading partner is.
For example, compare Brodie and Bennett...
Brodie would have very little value to a team that was early in a rebuild, but would have tremendous value for a team that was close to contending but needed another top 4 puck mover, like Toronto for instance.
Whereas Nashville or Anaheim would have much more interest in Bennett than Brodie.
You can go on and on. Because it is buyer-dependent, and isn't linear.
|
This is about what Flames Fans on this board view as their trade value, not about what players you'd get in return.
It's a measure of assigning value without presenting a trade value, similar to the prospect ranking bingo does yearly. People might differ on whether the criteria is likelihood to make an NHL roster or perceived likelihood of reaching maximum of their potential or even likelihood of being a superstar.
I think Tkachuk has more trade value than Monahan, but not as much as Gaudreau, who has the most. So he gets a 9.
Last edited by Flash Walken; 01-16-2018 at 05:39 PM.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:39 PM
|
#16
|
tromboner
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
It's not about other players in the league though, that's the point.
It's assigning an arbitrary number on a relative scale to a single roster.
It's not a linear value, two lazars don't equal a bennett, but it *is* a referential value relative to other players in the lineup.
|
If the numbers aren't going to have meaning, cut them out entirely and just make a ranking. But that's far less useful than making a linear scale would be.
And yes, my linear scale would primarily be a tool for comparing Flames players. But it to expand its use to assessing trade proposals, the top of the scale has to be league-wide, or maybe even all-time. So to place Gaudreau, you have to compare him to other players. Or you could make him 10 (or 1000) and let other players go over, but I find that less elegant.
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:48 PM
|
#17
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
It's not about other players in the league though, that's the point.
It's assigning an arbitrary number on a relative scale to a single roster.
It's not a linear value, two lazars don't equal a bennett, but it *is* a referential value relative to other players in the lineup.
This is about what Flames Fans on this board view as their trade value, not about what players you'd get in return.
It's a measure of assigning value without presenting a trade value, similar to the prospect ranking bingo does yearly. People might differ on whether the criteria is likelihood to make an NHL roster or perceived likelihood of reaching maximum of their potential or even likelihood of being a superstar.
I think Tkachuk has more trade value than Monahan, but not as much as Gaudreau, who has the most. So he gets a 9.
|
Isn't their 'trade value' defined precisely by 'what you'd get in return'?
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 05:49 PM
|
#18
|
Franchise Player
|
Also, isn't Gaudreau's '9' meaningless unless we know what 9 gets us in return?
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 06:06 PM
|
#19
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Also, isn't Gaudreau's '9' meaningless unless we know what 9 gets us in return?
|
I don't think it has to be. If I rank him a 10, the top of the scale, you can infer that I believe his value is very high, you don't need to know the list of players I think he could be traded for fairly
$5 CDN is $5 CDN no matter what the USD exchange rate. Sure, on a grander scale relative values input to purchasing power, but for the purposes of this thought experiment it's just a way to rank players by perceived trade value.
It's about where they rank on their own team, not where they rank out of every player in the league.
Does Hamonic have higher value than Brodie? Does Janko have more value than Bennett? You don't need to be up on the rest of the league to answer those questions; if you were trading *for* them, how would you rank them?
|
|
|
01-16-2018, 07:15 PM
|
#20
|
Franchise Player
|
Just my opinion, but it is amazing to me how some fans underrate Ferland. He provides so much to the Flames and he is a “5.5” or “6”?
On a 2 million dollar contract, he would only get a “couple of seconds”??? He’s the 5th leading goal scorer amongst rwers, can make plays and is big and tough.
I’d take him over Evander Kane every day of the week.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to timbit For This Useful Post:
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:29 AM.
|
|