Tank Nation: Matthews Edition

[Kin]

eric lindros.

Quebec didn't trade the pick, they took Lindros and he sat out a year before they traded his rights.

 

[Bender]

eric lindros.

Quebec didn't trade the pick, they took Lindros and he sat out a year before they traded his rights.

Although, Burke traded up to the #2 selection a couple times before. I still doubt we (or any team) trades down on any of the picks in the top 5 or 6.

 

[bustaheims]

Trading the #1 pick when there's a clear cut #1 selection hasn't happened, I'm sure, in the last 30 years. It may have happened at some point in the 70's but it's just the sort of thing that doesn't happen.

Since the inception of the draft, the 1st overall pick has been traded 4 times leading up to/at the draft (AKA, when the pick being traded was known to be the 1st overall pick). The players taken were Mel Bridgman (1975), Patrick Stefan (1999), Rick Nash (2002), and MA Fleury (2003).

 

[Kin]

Since the inception of the draft, the 1st overall pick has been traded 4 times leading up to/at the draft (AKA, when the pick being traded was known to be the 1st overall pick). The players taken were Mel Bridgman (1975), Patrick Stefan (1999), Rick Nash (2002), and MA Fleury (2003).

Right and I can't speak to th Bridgman draft but I know that Stefan wasn't a consensus #1, I know Bouwmeester was most people's pick for the '02 #1 and I'm sure that 2003 was likewise not a sure thing.

 

[herman]

Since the inception of the draft, the 1st overall pick has been traded 4 times leading up to/at the draft (AKA, when the pick being traded was known to be the 1st overall pick). The players taken were Mel Bridgman (1975), Patrick Stefan (1999), Rick Nash (2002), and MA Fleury (2003).

Right and I can't speak to th Bridgman draft but I know that Stefan wasn't a consensus #1, I know Bouwmeester was most people's pick for the '02 #1 and I'm sure that 2003 was likewise not a sure thing.

2003 was an excellent vintage. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2003e.html

Depressing and hilarious:
The best player we drafted from that year in terms of NHL games played: John Mitchell.

Of course a few of them have since made their way onto (and off) of our team.

 

[Kin]

2003 was an excellent vintage. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2003e.html

I was just referring to the #1 pick. I don't remember there being a consensus as to a #1 or, if there was, it was "MA Fleury is probably going to go #1, now who wants a goalie?".

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I was just referring to the #1 pick. I don't remember there being a consensus as to a #1 or, if there was, it was "MA Fleury is probably going to go #1, now who wants a goalie?".

IIRC in both 02 and 03 most people figured that the prospects each team picked would have been the same regardless of the trades, the picks were just moved to make it 100%.

 

[Kin]

I was just referring to the #1 pick. I don't remember there being a consensus as to a #1 or, if there was, it was "MA Fleury is probably going to go #1, now who wants a goalie?".

IIRC in both 02 and 03 most people figured that the prospects each team picked would have been the same regardless of the trades, the picks were just moved to make it 100%.

That's definitely how I remember '02, sort of a "Florida wanted Bouwmeester anyway so weren't they smart to trade down and still get him".

 

[rdowdall]

So just to have a little fun.  What if the Leafs win the lottery and Tampa comes calling with the following offer:

Rights to negotiate with Stamkos for 48 hours prior to draft
Drouin
Their 1st and either the Bruins 2nd or their 2nd, whichever is lower this year
Another Prospect or their first next year


For Auston Matthews.  The deal is all contigent on Stamkos signing.  Not enough, too little? 

 

[bustaheims]

So just to have a little fun.  What if the Leafs win the lottery and Tampa comes calling with the following offer:

Rights to negotiate with Stamkos for 48 hours prior to draft
Drouin
Their 1st and either the Bruins 2nd or their 2nd, whichever is lower this year
Another Prospect or their first next year


For Auston Matthews.  The deal is all contigent on Stamkos signing.  Not enough, too little?

Pretty easy no for me. Matthews could easily be better than Stamkos, plus the extra cap space for at least 3 seasons, and likely for all 7. Drouin and the picks aren't enough to bridge that gap.

 

[sickbeast]

The Phaneuf trade today is going to do wonders for the tank.  I'm getting really excited about it actually.  Kinda like Mr. Burns:

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Can I ask why this thread is called "Matthews Edition"?

Because it's a tank thread for Auston Matthews.

 

[rdowdall]

So just to have a little fun.  What if the Leafs win the lottery and Tampa comes calling with the following offer:

Rights to negotiate with Stamkos for 48 hours prior to draft
Drouin
Their 1st and either the Bruins 2nd or their 2nd, whichever is lower this year
Another Prospect or their first next year


For Auston Matthews.  The deal is all contigent on Stamkos signing.  Not enough, too little?

Pretty easy no for me. Matthews could easily be better than Stamkos, plus the extra cap space for at least 3 seasons, and likely for all 7. Drouin and the picks aren't enough to bridge that gap.

I was thinking about the Lindros trade and how it really solidified the Nordiques/Avalanche for a bunch of years.  I wonder what the Nordiques/Avalanches would have been like if they had not made the Lindros trade.  I remember reading an article that linked all of the subsequent trades that the Avalanche made for the next two years back to the Lindros trade.  It was an interesting piece.  It inspired the question that I put forth.  I guess it comes down to is there a package that a team would realistically offer that the Leafs could accept and come out ahead on.

 

[Kin]

I was thinking about the Lindros trade and how it really solidified the Nordiques/Avalanche for a bunch of years.  I wonder what the Nordiques/Avalanches would have been like if they had not made the Lindros trade. 

In the sense of if they'd taken the Rangers offer instead or if they'd somehow managed to convince Lindros to play for them?

 

[rdowdall]

I was thinking about the Lindros trade and how it really solidified the Nordiques/Avalanche for a bunch of years.  I wonder what the Nordiques/Avalanches would have been like if they had not made the Lindros trade. 

In the sense of if they'd taken the Rangers offer instead or if they'd somehow managed to convince Lindros to play for them?

In the sense of in they had managed to convince him to stay.  I wonder if they would have had the success that they did after the trade.

 

[Kin]

In the sense of in they had managed to convince him to stay.  I wonder if they would have had the success that they did after the trade.

Tough to imagine a team with Sakic, Sundin and Lindros not having success to one degree or another.

I like Forsberg and everything but to me he's clearly 4th out of 4 there.

 

[bustaheims]

I was thinking about the Lindros trade and how it really solidified the Nordiques/Avalanche for a bunch of years.  I wonder what the Nordiques/Avalanches would have been like if they had not made the Lindros trade.  I remember reading an article that linked all of the subsequent trades that the Avalanche made for the next two years back to the Lindros trade.  It was an interesting piece.  It inspired the question that I put forth.  I guess it comes down to is there a package that a team would realistically offer that the Leafs could accept and come out ahead on.

They weren't working in a capped system, and, well, that trade got the Nordiques a starting goalie, a top pairing defenceman, a highly thought of young player (Ricci, drafted 4th overall in the draft one year before Lindros), an elite prospect (Forsberg), two other young roster players and two 1st round picks (and cash). That's a very different deal than what you're proposing - or one that could get done in the league today. Not that Matthews is necessarily a Lindros level player, but, still...

 

[rdowdall]

I was thinking about the Lindros trade and how it really solidified the Nordiques/Avalanche for a bunch of years.  I wonder what the Nordiques/Avalanches would have been like if they had not made the Lindros trade.  I remember reading an article that linked all of the subsequent trades that the Avalanche made for the next two years back to the Lindros trade.  It was an interesting piece.  It inspired the question that I put forth.  I guess it comes down to is there a package that a team would realistically offer that the Leafs could accept and come out ahead on.

They weren't working in a capped system, and, well, that trade got the Nordiques a starting goalie, a top pairing defenceman, a highly thought of young player (Ricci, drafted 4th overall in the draft one year before Lindros), an elite prospect (Forsberg), two other young roster players and two 1st round picks (and cash). That's a very different deal than what you're proposing - or one that could get done in the league today. Not that Matthews is necessarily a Lindros level player, but, still...

See I think to a certain degree the Flyers overpaid for Lindros because it set them back or at least appeared to set them back.  Would the Flyers have been better off if they had kept all of those assets and just moved forward without making that deal?  I agree that because of the cap that deal wouldn't happen today, but I also think it wouldn't happen because no GM would ever approach offering enough to make the trade palatable for the team trading the pick because it would set them team acquiring the pick back.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

In the sense of in they had managed to convince him to stay.  I wonder if they would have had the success that they did after the trade.

Tough to imagine a team with Sakic, Sundin and Lindros not having success to one degree or another.

I like Forsberg and everything but to me he's clearly 4th out of 4 there.

Wow, really?  I personally wouldn't hesitate taking Forsberg before Sundin and quite possibly Sakic, too.

 

[Kin]

Wow, really?  I personally wouldn't hesitate taking Forsberg before Sundin and quite possibly Sakic, too.

Over Sakic? They've got remarkably similar ppg but Sakic did it in twice as many games and his single season high in goals is almost twice what Forsberg's is.