Adam Fox

I didn’t say they had no value or that teams don’t value them. Just that they aren’t super likely to produce legit NHL players

We're not even having an "and" conversation here.

We're literally having a conversation about not playing one of our best young pieces because of the difference of picking 35 or 66.

We're not even having an "and" conversation here.

 

We're literally having a conversation about not playing one of our best young pieces because of the difference of picking 35 or 66.

I don’t think that’s even a debate

Fox will play and play every night as he should

I’d rather have Fox than the player they’d likely get with that pick, whether that pick is at 35 or 66.

Highly unlikely that player becomes better than what Fox is and will be.

I only commented that 2nds in the NHL aren’t like they are in the NFL (where they are SUPER important and yield great players regularly) and that they carry low odds of yielding NHL players

I don’t think that’s even a debate

Fox will play and play every night as he should

 

I only commented that 2nds in the NHL aren’t like they are in the NFL (where they are SUPER important and yield great players regularly) and that they carry low odds of yielding NHL players

Yeah, of course. Odds of getting an NHLer in the 2nd round are just worse than a coinflip. I'm just stunned that we're having this discussion when there's not even two picks on the table. One is gone, the other will upgrade 31 places based on whether or not Fox plays 30 games.

If you want to look at it another way, we traded two picks, that combined, have around a 70% chance of producing at least one player who plays more than 50 games in the NHL. That says nothing for whether or not this hypothetical NHLer or NHLers are Tanner Glass or Connor McDavid, but it's much more likely they're the former.

Recognizing your edit here - bang on.

What! Hockey is played ALL over the world, football is only played in North America. There is so much more competition in hockey than in football. There?s also no minor league system or professional leagues in other countries for football. The reality is the product isn?t as good in football as that in hockey because of the amount of competition there is for every spot on a particular roster.

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

What! Hockey is played ALL over the world, football is only played in North America. There is so much more competition in hockey than in football. There’s also no minor league system or professional leagues in other countries for football.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

The math doesn't work out in favor of hockey here. It's actually quite against it.

First, there are only 21 spots on an NHL team. An NFL team fields 53 actives every week. Already, you've got 2.5x as many spots as the NHL.

Second, hockey has something to do with it's non-NHL caliber talent. AHL, KHL, Liiga, SEL, DEL, Extraliga, ECHL, and so on. NFL folks? Practice squads, but beyond that? Arena league, Canadian league....not much else. A bust pick has to go find another career, not downgrade his league.

Third, the NFL has a massive feeder pool. 3500 folks declare every year, but only around 250 get taken; maybe another 70 get PTOs. I can't find data on the NHL, but I'd imagine that's closer to 500.

So, the NHL has fewer talented folks competing for fewer spots spread across more professional leagues and fewer folks feeding in.

Just means it's that much harder to get to the NHL. A second round pick - or really any pick - in the NFL is almost assuredly going to play in the NFL at some point. In the NHL, there's a lot more working both in your favor (options) and against you (math)

Yeah, of course. Odds of getting an NHLer in the 2nd round are just worse than a coinflip. I'm just stunned that we're having this discussion when there's not even two picks on the table. One is gone, the other will upgrade 31 places based on whether or not Fox plays 30 games.

 

If you want to look at it another way, we traded two picks, that combined, have around a 70% chance of producing at least one player who plays more than 50 games in the NHL. That says nothing for whether or not this hypothetical NHLer or NHLers are Tanner Glass or Connor McDavid, but it's much more likely they're the former.

 

Recognizing your edit here - bang on.

That’s exactly how I was looking at it and more or less my point

The math doesn't work out in favor of hockey here. It's actually quite against it.

 

First, there are only 21 spots on an NHL team. An NFL team fields 53 actives every week. Already, you've got 2.5x as many spots as the NHL.

 

Second, hockey has something to do with it's non-NHL caliber talent. AHL, KHL, Liiga, SEL, DEL, Extraliga, ECHL, and so on. NFL folks? Practice squads, but beyond that? Arena league, Canadian league....not much else. A bust pick has to go find another career, not downgrade his league.

 

Third, the NFL has a massive feeder pool. 3500 folks declare every year, but only around 250 get taken; maybe another 70 get PTOs. I can't find data on the NHL, but I'd imagine that's closer to 500.

 

So, the NHL has fewer talented folks competing for fewer spots spread across more professional leagues and fewer folks feeding in.

 

Just means it's that much harder to get to the NHL. A second round pick - or really any pick - in the NFL is almost assuredly going to play in the NFL at some point. In the NHL, there's a lot more working both in your favor (options) and against you (math)

Sent from my Z981 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Solid post. But isn't the average football career shorter than a hockey career? I guess there's more money in football too, larger salaries even for non-skilled positions, so it works out in the end.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

3.3 years for NFL, 5 years for NHL.

So, fewer spots, less turnover - harder to break into the NHL.

You actually just made my case just in a different way?-because like I said there are only North American players playing football and because there are so many spots to fill in the NFL, there are scrubbier players being drafted and playing professionally in football?less competition for more spots. Where as because hockey is played around the world and there are less spots in the NHL roster there is way more competition, it is much harder to make an NHL roster so those high picks are golden. The fact that there are many other leagues to play in and this is the highest league in the world proves that you have to be extremely good to make an NHL roster.?doesn?t mean anything that you play in any other league?Sweden, Russia, etc.. if you are not playing here, you are playing in the minor leagues.

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

You actually just made my case just in a different way—-because like I said there are only North American players playing football and because there are so many spots to fill in the NFL, there are scrubbier players being drafted and playing professionally in football—less competition for more spots. Where as because hockey is played around the world and there are less spots in the NHL roster there is way more competition, it is much harder to make an NHL roster so those high picks are golden. The fact that there are many other leagues to play in and this is the highest league in the world proves that you have to be extremely good to make an NHL roster.—doesn’t mean anything that you play in any other league—Sweden, Russia, etc.. if you are not playing here, you are playing in the minor leagues.

 

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Your assertion relies on there being an equal number of football players and hockey players. There aren't. There are literally 7x more players declaring for the NFL draft every single year.

Regardless, this isn't a thread about valuing NFL picks. In the NHL, high picks are golden. High picks also generally means "could win the lottery".

2nd rounders, even high 2nds, are not golden. They're just under 50/50 odds to make the NHL and play 50 games, which brings us back to our greater point: do you want the less-than-coinflip odds mystery box, or Adam Fox and a marginally worse mystery box?

As you can see from my earlier post, I?m one of the dreamers who thought and still thinks that we needed to be patient and wait for Fox to become a free agent. That way we would have Fox and kept our 2-2nd Rd picks. But I?m also one of the few who thought/think that the pick we gave Carlolina last year cost us Rafael Lavoie, Alex Vlasic, Nic Robertson or Firstov?-All guys who were/had 1st Rd potential and were mocked as 1st Rd picks in some drafts. But in 5 yrs we?ll see. This year will be no different. As I think Barron may drop to the top half of the 2nd Rd and he may be the player we lose as a result of ?gifting? that pick to Carolina.

Not that I?m being difficult with you, just that like Queen ?I want it all, and I want it now?.

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Your assertion relies on there being an equal number of football players and hockey players. There aren't. There are literally 7x more players declaring for the NFL draft every single year.

 

Regardless, this isn't a thread about valuing NFL picks. In the NHL, high picks are golden. High picks also generally means "could win the lottery".

 

2nd rounders, even high 2nds, are not golden. They're just under 50/50 odds to make the NHL and play 50 games, which brings us back to our greater point: do you want the less-than-coinflip odds mystery box, or Adam Fox and a marginally worse mystery box?

Yup

In NHL, “high pick” essentially means top 20 picks of first round. Maybe fewer depending on draft class. And never really beyond round 1. Below that, their value is generally considered marginal

In the NFL, any picks in top 3 rounds are treated like plutonium in 1945. Most valuable stuff known to man.

As you can see from my earlier post, I’m one of the dreamers who thought and still thinks that we needed to be patient and wait for Fox to become a free agent. That way we would have Fox and kept our 2-2nd Rd picks. But I’m also one of the few who thought/think that the pick we gave Carlolina last year cost us Rafael Lavoie, Alex Vlasic, Nic Robertson or Firstov—-All guys who were/had 1st Rd potential and were mocked as 1st Rd picks in some drafts. But in 5 yrs we’ll see. This year will be no different. As I think Barron may drop to the top half of the 2nd Rd and he may be the player we lose as a result of “gifting” that pick to Carolina.

 

Not that I’m being difficult with you, just that like Queen “I want it all, and I want it now”.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I hear you, but odds are that two of those four won't play more than 50 games in the NHL. Fox will. He will likely play way more than 50 based on what we've seen. I wouldn't lose sleep over it, even with Robertson's numbers so far this year.

It's why the "trade down for two later picks" move is so popular. It's basically saying "give me twice as many shots at getting this right".

I'd also bet dollars to donuts that Barron doesn't fall out of the first. He's currently projecting as a top 10 pick.

Ultimately what I?m saying is?and a big part of this is perception, but ultimately what I?m saying is I?m ok with giving up a 2nd and a 3rd Rd pick for Fox but the only way I?m giving/upgrading that 3rd Rd pick into a 2nd is if the stipulation is that we made the playoffs because regardless if we were good this year or not, Fox was gonna get to 30 games in. But if the stipulation is we give up a 2nd if we made the playoff then the perception is we are heading in the right direction and the trade was made to improve our team. But here was are as we sit here and we are a rebuilding team who?s giving up assets and not improving?plus that 2nd Rd pick would be in the bottom half of the 2nd Rd if we made the playoffs not as likely to turn into something significance. No one wants us to become the Knicks, who continue to give away picks and continue to be among the worst teams in the,league.

That?s what I?m getting at. At least with the picks there?s hope for something to hope for.

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Ultimately what I’m saying is—and a big part of this is perception, but ultimately what I’m saying is I’m ok with giving up a 2nd and a 3rd Rd pick for Fox but the only way I’m giving/upgrading that 3rd Rd pick into a 2nd is if the stipulation is that we made the playoffs because regardless if we were good this year or not, Fox was gonna get to 30 games in. But if the stipulation is we give up a 2nd if we made the playoff then the perception is we are heading in the right direction and the trade was made to improve our team. But here was are as we sit here and we are a rebuilding team who’s giving up assets and not improving—plus that 2nd Rd pick would be in the bottom half of the 2nd Rd if we made the playoffs not as likely to turn into something significance. No one wants us to become the Knicks, who continue to give away picks and continue to be among the worst teams in the,league.

 

That’s what I’m getting at. At least with the picks there’s hope for something to hope for.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I get what you're worried about, but it's a little hyperbolic to be worried about things like "we gave up #37 in 2019 and a pick that's somewhere in the 33-75 range for a 21 year old NHLer who will be a player for a long time and was widely touted as a top 20 prospect in the world". Or, "We traded Winnipeg's own 1st back to them for their best defenseman". Those aren't risky, silly things - those are moves that help you end your rebuild. Keep in mind that in spite of those moves, we still picked three times in the top 60.

If we start doing Eric Staal or Carmelo Anthony things, or we randomly throw Dallas Karl Henriksson for Corey Perry - yeah, start to worry.

Post 1 in this thread

Also is it true the fox trade has a condition on his games played this year? Making the third a second? If so why in fuck is he here? He’s certainly not good enough to warrant giving up a very early second round pick in a loaded draft. I mean that’s the return we likely get for kreider. Why not limit his games played to not meet that condition?

 

Mod Note: I've moved the discussion of Adam Fox over into a thread of its own. Please continue any discussion of Fox here and not in the Kravtsov thread. Thank you, Drew.

My point was based on the condition. 30 games is unworkable. If it was more games it could have been possible to have fox and keep the pick a 3rd.

Your point was that Fox shouldn't be in NYC in order to protect us from triggering that condition. Not that the condition was bad or unworkable.

It was obviously intended to be insurance against him completely shitting the bed and not making the team in '19-20.

For comparison, Brendan Smith cost a 2nd and a 3rd.. I'm not losing any sleep with a 3rd becoming a 2nd for a kid 7 years younger at the time of the trade and with exponentially more upside..

For a franchise that took Hugh Jessiman @12, Al Montoya @6, Dylan McIlrath @10, and went 4 years without a 1st round pick, we sure are getting worked up over what looks to be a legitimate NHL defenseman additionally costing you pick #41 rather than pick #72.. If this was the most pressing unknown this team had to address, I'd be all for the wringing of hands..

Trust the process.

Post 1 in this thread

 

 

 

 

Your point was that Fox shouldn't be in NYC in order to protect us from triggering that condition. Not that the condition was bad or unworkable.

 

It was obviously intended to be insurance against him completely shitting the bed and not making the team in '19-20.

I know what my point was and is. I’ve tried to explain it with multiple posts after the one you just referenced. Instead of playing gotcha why not read the posts that followed. I was unaware of the condition and how many games. My entire post was mostly about kakko. The fox rant was a sidebar and honestly not expected to start a thread. I have already clarified my stance and here you are again trying to be divisive just to be so.

I get what you're worried about, but it's a little hyperbolic to be worried about things like "we gave up #37 in 2019 and a pick that's somewhere in the 33-75 range for a 21 year old NHLer who will be a player for a long time and was widely touted as a top 20 prospect in the world". Or, "We traded Winnipeg's own 1st back to them for their best defenseman". Those aren't risky, silly things - those are moves that help you end your rebuild. Keep in mind that in spite of those moves, we still picked three times in the top 60.

 

If we start doing Eric Staal or Carmelo Anthony things, or we randomly throw Dallas Karl Henriksson for Corey Perry - yeah, start to worry.

Essentially, the Rangers top 3 picks in last years draft (their pick at 2, the Winnipeg pick at 20 and their pick at 33) plus Pionk and that conditional pick, yielded Kakko, Trouba, and Fox.

I’d say that’s a very good haul and likely brought in better pieces than either of those other picks would have

I don?t think anyone thought that Smith trade was good move, it was just an act of desperation in our part.

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

One thing to note in regards to NFL vs NHL draft picks. The value of the NFL pick is greater for many reasons.

1- many more players available in a NFL draft

2- A 22 year old NCAA football player is a much better read for scouts than a 17 year old hockey player.

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk