Islanders (Flames') First Round Pick

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by getbak

Another factor to keep in mind is the perceived value of the picks in question. Numerous first rounders were moved at the deadline this year. That's rare, and to me indicates that the perception among the GMs is that it's a weaker draft class. Second round picks are usually the commodity used for deadline deals.

If the 2018 is perceived to be weaker, Treliving may not have been willing to risk the loss of the 2019 pick in order to protect the 2018, even with there being a chance of the 2018 pick being top 5.

From what I've read the 2017 was considered weaker and 2018 had very good top end talent.

Also draft picks have different values at different times of the year. At the trade deadline GMs are looking to bolster their NHL rosters. They want NHL players so draft picks lose value compared to players.

At the draft or after the trade deadline draft picks increase in value since that's the commodity sought.

[bobbylouie]

Originally Posted by New Era

The media loves to toss around generational when it comes to the draft.

http://s232.photobucket.com/user/bob...tml?sort=3&o=0

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

From what I've read the 2017 was considered weaker and 2018 had very good top end talent.

Also draft picks have different values at different times of the year. At the trade deadline GMs are looking to bolster their NHL rosters. They want NHL players so draft picks lose value compared to players.

At the draft or after the trade deadline draft picks increase in value since that's the commodity sought.

From what I'm to,d this is a really good draft to number 7 and then it's mediocre.

[Sylvanfan]

So who's the poor kid who's going to end up as the Gormley or Senyshyn sandwiched between the next Cam Fowler and Jayden Swartz, or Jake DeBrusk and Matthew Barzal. At least the Islanders have the Fowler and Debrusk pick too...

I almost feel better now thinking that the Flames could have been the team making those same picks.

[Beninho]

2017 had more talent throughout the first round, just look at Tolvanen and Vaseilenen, both were highly touted prospects and weren’t picked into the 20’s and 30’s. I don’t think this draft is that deep.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

That being said, I hope Brad learned a valuable lesson about lottery protection

I am sure Brad knows the value of lottery protection.

He also knows that you shouldn't turn down a deal you want simply to protect a pick with a very low chance of moving up.

Considering the Flames chances of making the playoffs, the chance of the pick being a top 3 pick was probably 2-3% at most.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

From what I'm to,d this is a really good draft to number 7 and then it's mediocre.

I have read it's top 8, and then decreases.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I am sure Brad knows the value of lottery protection.

He also knows that you shouldn't turn down a deal you want simply to protect a pick with a very low chance of moving up.

Considering the Flames chances of making the playoffs, the chance of the pick being a top 3 pick was probably 2-3% at most.

It was 3% even after the season. Before the season, I would have placed the chances of finishing the season out of the lottery at above 80% and then the lottery odds being at most 3% like they were. So in total, probably a 1% chance. As it turned out the 80% bet lost, but the lottery odds worked out.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It was 3% even after the season. Before the season, I would have placed the chances of finishing the season out of the lottery at above 80% and then the lottery odds being at most 3% like they were. So in total, probably a 1% chance. As it turned out the 80% bet lost, but the lottery odds worked out.

It was 3.5% to get the first pick. It was 11.4% to get one of the top 3 picks.

But I agree the risk was very acceptable.

[Bingo]

Will never know the truth, but a GM that is known to be as thorough and dogged as Treliving would have asked for protection in my mind ... it fits his profile. When told no, or when told "fine but then you have to kick in a third" (example) he made his call.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

It was 3.5% to get the first pick. It was 11.4% to get one of the top 3 picks.

But I agree the risk was very acceptable.

This site says it was more like 8% to pick top 3.

http://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nhl/n...11ox1pb7tfjeiz

However, I don't think it works that way. I think the Isles had a 2.5% chance to win 1st, a 2.7% chance to win 2nd and a 3% chance to win 3rd. I don't think you add those up. I think the odds are static.

http://www.tankathon.com/nhl/pick_odds

[Flashpoint]

So Boomer and Warrener this AM said that if we hadn’t won vs Vegas in the last game of the year, our pick would have been in place of Carolina.

Lots of variables, but yeesh. Even the optics of losing #2.

[sureLoss]

Fwiw

https://twitter.com/user/status/992520264112947200

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Fwiw

https://twitter.com/user/status/992520264112947200

exactly and I bet the Oilers were offering a similar package too...exactly what both teams need

Islanders probably assumed Calgary's picks would be better so either unprotected or no deal

Besides even if they do protect it...its a one year thing. They likely still give up 12 this season Vs. the unknown of next year. Lottery protection is one year, could be worse the next.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

So Boomer and Warrener this AM said that if we hadn’t won vs Vegas in the last game of the year, our pick would have been in place of Carolina.

Lots of variables, but yeesh. Even the optics of losing #2.

Or any other game they won this season...ifs and buts