2021 Trade Deadline Thread April 12, 3pm ET

[DevsMan84]

Just now, Guadana said:

 Because we have a specific need and a specific interest in a particular player. for example.

Drafting for need is a worst way you can ever draft.  That is how we end up with Zacha as the number 6 pick in the deepest draft in the past 15 years because there was no way in hell we were choosing a defenseman at the time (imagine us with Provorov instead).

Besides, we need everything but centers (I would like some insurance in case we burn out Blackwood by the time he is 27).

[Guadana]

1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said:

Drafting for need is a worst way you can ever draft.  That is how we end up with Zacha as the number 6 pick in the deepest draft in the past 15 years because there was no way in hell we were choosing a defenseman at the time (imagine us with Provorov instead).

Besides, we need everything but centers (I would like some insurance in case we burn out Blackwood by the time he is 27).

Yes it is, but if you have an equal choice, you take what you need.

[DevsMan84]

Just now, Guadana said:

Yes it is, but if you have an equal choice, you take what you need.

You take who you feel to be the best player, even if the difference is marginal.

[Guadana]

1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said:

You take who you feel to be the best player, even if the difference is marginal.

Nope. Feelings are a poor guide. We don't choose a wife.

If the difference is marginal -  Devils will not choose a good right winger, the Devils will take a defender. Even if they think a particular right-handed winger will be a little better. But how do you compare it? Forward and defender? When they are 18 years old.
You can say as much as you like that needs is a bad criterion. But this is an important criterion. You just can't ignore the obvious like Barzal\Provorov. In  draft2021 case, the difference is not obvious. Not obvious at all. And the prospects we need are really good. With good results. Not like Zacha, who was a prospect with promises.

Moreover. I'll use your own argument here. If the Devils (Fitz, Castron) feel that a particular player will be better than others , it is worth taking the chance and making a trade for him.

[DevsMan84]

28 minutes ago, Guadana said:

Nope. Feelings are a poor guide. We don't choose a wife.

If the difference is marginal -  Devils will not choose a good right winger, the Devils will take a defender. Even if they think a particular right-handed winger will be a little better. But how do you compare it? Forward and defender? When they are 18 years old.
You can say as much as you like that needs is a bad criterion. But this is an important criterion. You just can't ignore the obvious like Barzal\Provorov. In  draft2021 case, the difference is not obvious. Not obvious at all. And the prospects we need are really good. With good results. Not like Zacha, who was a prospect with promises.

Moreover. I'll use your own argument here. If the Devils (Fitz, Castron) feel that a particular player will be better than others , it is worth taking the chance and making a trade for him.

Feelings are what a lot of scouts use.  This is literally them looking into a crystal ball to see how they think the players will turn out.  It is all opinion based (hence why you get the same player as the #1 pick in one list and #8 in another list), so yes, feelings do play a large role in the draft.

Devils need both wingers and defensemen, so I am not sure what kind of point you are making there.  If the Devils scouts feel the best player is even a center, they should take that player.

If we know the future results of prospects then why have scouts to begin with?  Drafting is still a big gamble.  We need everything minus centers, but if the BPA is a center then so be it.

You said it yourself that drafting/scouting experts are a little all over the place with their rankings.  That likely means that there isn't much of a consensus and if we draft up we will be getting a marginally better player.  If Castron/Fitz feels like it is worth it then it is what it is, but I don't think it is and you just take the BPA at whatever top 5-6 pick we end up at.

[Guadana]

38 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Feelings are what a lot of scouts use.  This is literally them looking into a crystal ball to see how they think the players will turn out.  It is all opinion based (hence why you get the same player as the #1 pick in one list and #8 in another list), so yes, feelings do play a large role in the draft.

Devils need both wingers and defensemen, so I am not sure what kind of point you are making there.  If the Devils scouts feel the best player is even a center, they should take that player.

If we know the future results of prospects then why have scouts to begin with?  Drafting is still a big gamble.  We need everything minus centers, but if the BPA is a center then so be it.

You said it yourself that drafting/scouting experts are a little all over the place with their rankings.  That likely means that there isn't much of a consensus and if we draft up we will be getting a marginally better player.  If Castron/Fitz feels like it is worth it then it is what it is, but I don't think it is and you just take the BPA at whatever top 5-6 pick we end up at.

There are certain limits. The presence of skills, statistics, the place where the hockey player studied the game, even interviews.

Otherwise, you're talking about trusting your feelings and choosing the best(in a year when the difference between them is small, instead of choosing by position, although we have a huge need for right-defensmen), but at the same time doing nothing and choosing the best from what remains, without even trying to choose the one who our scouts consider really the best of all, regardless of the position, Especially when there is such an opportunity with trade, because "they are close to each other"?
I don't like your approach of giving in to your feelings and letting things take their course. For me, this is not a tactic or a strategy. Even if we assume that you are right and that's how some clubs work in the draft - I hope that this is just not our case. I just like things to be consistent.

But. It's a matter of preference. Neither you nor I work at the club. And whoever the Devils choose, I think we both hope that this player will be a great fit for us and will be productive, regardless of the position. I'm sure we agree on that. (I probably did not have enough language skills to conduct the previous part of the discussion in a sufficiently polite manner, as I intended)

Edited April 8, 2021 by Guadana

[DevsMan84]

8 minutes ago, Guadana said:

There are certain limits. The presence of skills, statistics, the place where the hockey player studied the game, even interviews.

Otherwise, you're talking about trusting your feelings and choosing the best(in a year when the difference between them is small, instead of choosing by position, although we have a huge need for right-defensmen), but at the same time doing nothing and choosing the best from what remains, without even trying to choose the one who our scouts consider really the best of all, regardless of the position, Especially when there is such an opportunity with trade, because "they are close to each other"?
I don't like your approach of giving in to your feelings and letting things take their course. For me, this is not a tactic or a strategy. Even if we assume that you are right and that's how some clubs work in the draft - I hope that this is just not our case. I just like things to be consistent.

But. It's a matter of preference. Neither you nor I work at the club. And whoever the Devils choose, I think we both hope that this player will be a great fit for us and will be productive, regardless of the position. I'm sure we agree on that. (I probably did not have enough language skills to conduct the previous part of the discussion in a sufficiently polite manner, as I intended)

Where did I say not to trust the scouts?  I said the complete opposite.  Again, scouts do not have crystal balls; they go by who they predict or feel will be the best player.  That's an opinion, a thought, a feeling based on evidence.

If players and scouts were robots you have a point.  Drafting, as much as the scouts and all the stat nerds try to make it, is not an exact science.  If it was an exact science, then there would be no such things as draft busts.

Edited April 8, 2021 by DevsMan84

[mfitz804]

7 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Again, scouts do not have crystal balls

That sounds like it would be uncomfortable. 

[devlman]

3 hours ago, SterioDesign said:

Well i sure hope so, not as if i don't want him to be but i just don't see it.

If i were to guess Nico is going to be a very solid 2way player that plays the right way and hover around 50-60 pts per season over his career. May have a few peak seasons where he goes to maybe 75.

He’s already been that player though through his rookie and sophomore seasons. He went first overall because of his projected talent and ceiling. I would certainly expect him to improve his point per game rate as he ages, especially with the talent around him exponentially improving. I’d bet on him being close to a point per game player at his peak.

[Guadana]

13 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Where did I say not to trust the scouts?  I said the complete opposite.  Again, scouts do not have crystal balls; they go by who they predict or feel will be the best player.  That's an opinion, a thought, a feeling.

If players and scouts were robots you have a point.  Drafting, as much as the scouts and all the stat nerds try to make it, is not an exact science.  If it was an exact science, then there would be no such things as draft busts.

You literally took it out of context. The most meaning part was "choosing the best from what remains".
Dont forget about that. 
"you just take the BPA at whatever top 5-6 pick we end up at" - I didn`t say that. 

Ok.
We hardly need in RD, players are close to each other, we don`t need in centers, our scouts think center Johnson could be little better than RD Clarke, our pick is 5, both are available, I say we should draft Clarke, you say we should draft Johnson? If i understand you correctly, things should go this way. I think we will agree on this as positions. Other people can argue, in the end it will be decided by Castron and Fitz. (and they will choose the Swedish goalie =-D)

Edited April 8, 2021 by Guadana

[SterioDesign]

2 minutes ago, devlman said:

He’s already been that player though through his rookie and sophomore seasons. He went first overall because of his projected talent and ceiling. I would certainly expect him to improve his point per game rate as he ages, especially with the talent around him exponentially improving. I’d bet on him being close to a point per game player at his peak.

Like i said i sure hope so. But i just don't see it right now. When we're watching as fans we're obviously looking for it and overblowing some stuff but i doubt many fans of other teams look at him play and find him dominant

 

[mfitz804]

1 minute ago, SterioDesign said:

Like i said i sure hope so. But i just don't see it right now. When we're watching as fans we're obviously looking for it and overblowing some stuff but i doubt many fans of other teams look at him play and find him dominant

 

I agree, and there are portions of our fan base who think otherwise. There are some who think that Nico being missing has been the difference in our season. While we will never know, I find that highly unlikely. 

Get the right players on his wings and I think PPG is achievable. 

[DevsMan84]

13 minutes ago, Guadana said:

You literally took it out of context. The most meaning part was "choosing the best from what remains".
Dont forget about that. 
"you just take the BPA at whatever top 5-6 pick we end up at" - I didn`t say that. 

Ok.
We hardly need in RD, players are close to each other, we don`t need in centers, our scouts think center Johnson could be little better than RD Clarke, our pick is 5, both are available, I say we should draft Clarke, you say we should draft Johnson? If i understand you correctly, things should go this way. I think we will agree on this as positions. Other people can argue, in the end it will be decided by Castron and Fitz. (and they will choose the Swedish goalie =-D)

Yes, you take what your scout's opinion or feeling is the BPA at that spot.  I don't know how many other ways I can convey this.

Yes, you take Johnson.  The thinking behind taking Clarke is what got us Zacha.

[Guadana]

7 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Yes, you take what your scout's opinion or feeling is the BPA at that spot.  I don't know how many other ways I can convey this.

Yes, you take Johnson.  The thinking behind taking Clarke is what got us Zacha.

Zacha`s trigger. I understand it. Thanks.
Great logic thinking btw.
Perhaps "Zacha`s choice" won't be the last time the Devils will make a logical choice. Shakir wasn't on the Fitz's list above many forwards I think. Even Holtz.

Edited April 8, 2021 by Guadana

[DevsMan84]

3 minutes ago, Guadana said:

Zacha`s trigger. I understand it. Thanks.
Great logic thinking btw.

I know how this is going to go.  I will be snarky back and you will come back saying it's your poor command of english, which we know is bull.

Whatever, I am not going to argue with you.

Edited April 8, 2021 by DevsMan84

[Guadana]

7 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

I know how this is going to go.  I will be snarky back and you will come back saying it's your poor command of english, which we know is bull.

Whatever, I am not going to argue with you.

You substitute concepts when you talk about Zach in the context of players who are close to each other. You equalize the assessment of forwards and defenders, especially when the scouts do not see a critical difference between them, in general, the scouts do not have a consistent assessment - which of them is better. You mix things up when you talk about the best player according to the scouts and choosing the best one who will remain available. This is bad logical thinking in a particular situation. This is not bullying. Perhaps there is already a cultural difference here - a remark about the lack of logic(or logic errors) is not critical. This is literally the basis of the discourse. We base our argument on the construction of logic.
I would not explain this if it were not for the remark about bullying. If you're offended, I'm sorry. We just disagree in this particular conversation, and this is just an Internet dispute. Nothing more.

[DevsMan84]

2 minutes ago, Guadana said:

You substitute concepts when you talk about Zach in the context of players who are close to each other. You equalize the assessment of forwards and defenders, especially when the scouts do not see a critical difference between them, in general, the scouts do not have a consistent assessment - which of them is better. You mix things up when you talk about the best player according to the scouts and choosing the best one who will remain available. This is bad logical thinking in a particular situation. This is not bullying. Perhaps there is already a cultural difference here - a remark about the lack of logic(or logic errors) is not critical. This is literally the basis of the discourse. We base our argument on the construction of logic.
I would not explain this if it were not for the remark about bullying. If you're offended, I'm sorry. We just disagree in this particular conversation, and this is just an Internet dispute. Nothing more.

You were being snarky in your last post and you 100% know it.

The bolded is where you are just being purposefully obtuse.  I have stated more than once the Devils should take the BPA, which is the best player available (see at least 2 posts I said that effect).  You are just trying to climb yourself out of your own logical fallacies by gaslighting and blaming a language barrier that doesn't seem to be an issue when you don't need it to be.

[Guadana]

22 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

You were being snarky in your last post and you 100% know it.

The bolded is where you are just being purposefully obtuse.  I have stated more than once the Devils should take the BPA, which is the best player available (see at least 2 posts I said that effect).  You are just trying to climb yourself out of your own logical fallacies by gaslighting and blaming a language barrier that doesn't seem to be an issue when you don't need it to be.

This is an overreaction for me. On the construction of logic, I have already explained everything. You can't make me to steriodesign it.

[titans04]

1 hour ago, devlman said:

He’s already been that player though through his rookie and sophomore seasons. He went first overall because of his projected talent and ceiling. I would certainly expect him to improve his point per game rate as he ages, especially with the talent around him exponentially improving. I’d bet on him being close to a point per game player at his peak.

For the sake of conversation what talent is exponentially improving  on the existing roster at this point in time?

I've been looking forward to the day when the top to bottom talent level on the roster improves exponentially.  Haven't seen it. There's been some pleasant surprises but as someone always points out Miles Wood is our leading goal scorer and we're still a bottom feeder even with Mac standing on his head. 

Edited April 8, 2021 by titans04

[devlman]

Just now, titans04 said:

For the sake of conversation what talent is exponentially improving  on the existing roster at this point in time?

The talent level today versus say last year (Sharangovich, Smith, kuok, Bratt Zacha a year better), and then the talented prospects to come (Holtz, Mercer, Foote). Compared to last year, this is a million times better.

[lazer]

Its money ball, i hate it

[titans04]

1 hour ago, devlman said:

The talent level today versus say last year (Sharangovich, Smith, kuok, Bratt Zacha a year better), and then the talented prospects to come (Holtz, Mercer, Foote). Compared to last year, this is a million times better.

I guess we disagree on what a million symbolizes.  In the context of are high quality FA in their prime  likely to come here to play alongside any of the guys you mentioned (Sharangovich, Smith, kuok, Bratt Zacha ) I highly doubt it. So weaponizing our cap space brings nothing until it's done right (and it hasn't been done here right yet) I won't even bother with the guys who haven't played a NHL game yet. But I will say hopefully they work out and sooner rather than later. 

Jack has certainly been better and down the road maybe he draws some interest for others to play here, Ty has been a breath of fresh air on defense. Mac numbers are a hair worse than last year but still generally the same.  When you look at the team as a whole there's a reason why their solidly a bottom 5-6 team yet again this season. WIthin the last ten days they lost last years two top scorers (rightly so but still not good when are offense is anemic).  Getting Nico back should help if he can find a way to stay on the ice.

Even with Sharangovich, Smith, kuok, Bratt Zacha a year better they are who they are, a bad team in the league standings, again. Take away two more solid vets (again for the right reasons) for yet another pick and a later pick in 2 or 3 years and 2 guys who in all likelihood would never play in the NHL for a good team sans a cup of coffee for one of them. It's more of the same. More rebuilding and the moneyball reference seems to fit pretty well as Lazer points out.

For those guys here that are onboard and feel good about the odds of this team crawling out of the basement any time soon great I hope you're right.  I've yet to see a NHL team seriously contend with a roster built this way, and buying or taking in other teams castoffs hasn't worked either.  It's a vicious cycle where winning teams much more easily draw interest when it comes to bringing in top players yet at the same time it's virtually impossible to win these days with only picks and home grown guys.

 

[Guadana]

Colorado spent 7 season for rebuild.
Chicago - 10 seasons.
Oilers - 13 seasons.
Toronto - 11 seasons. 
Blues - 6 years.
Carolina - 9 years.

There are good example of fast rebuild like Wash or Pens. But they had Ovie and Sid. And sometimes even Mcdavid can`t help. Rebuild is a long process. When Nico and Jack get into shape, and until Nico and Jack have permanent partners, the Devils will be in the rebild stage. Maybe with playoffs attempt, maybe not. The appearance of one player can immediately turn the game around. It's a question of who it will be-our prospect like Mercer or someone else. Or someone from the current players will be able to reach a fundamentally new level.

[devlman]

1 hour ago, titans04 said:

I guess we disagree on what a million symbolizes.  In the context of are high quality FA in their prime  likely to come here to play alongside any of the guys you mentioned (Sharangovich, Smith, kuok, Bratt Zacha ) I highly doubt it. So weaponizing our cap space brings nothing until it's done right (and it hasn't been done here right yet) I won't even bother with the guys who haven't played a NHL game yet. But I will say hopefully they work out and sooner rather than later. 

Jack has certainly been better and down the road maybe he draws some interest for others to play here, Ty has been a breath of fresh air on defense. Mac numbers are a hair worse than last year but still generally the same.  When you look at the team as a whole there's a reason why their solidly a bottom 5-6 team yet again this season. WIthin the last ten days they lost last years two top scorers (rightly so but still not good when are offense is anemic).  Getting Nico back should help if he can find a way to stay on the ice.

Even with Sharangovich, Smith, kuok, Bratt Zacha a year better they are who they are, a bad team in the league standings, again. Take away two more solid vets (again for the right reasons) for yet another pick and a later pick in 2 or 3 years and 2 guys who in all likelihood would never play in the NHL for a good team sans a cup of coffee for one of them. It's more of the same. More rebuilding and the moneyball reference seems to fit pretty well as Lazer points out.

For those guys here that are onboard and feel good about the odds of this team crawling out of the basement any time soon great I hope you're right.  I've yet to see a NHL team seriously contend with a roster built this way, and buying or taking in other teams castoffs hasn't worked either.  It's a vicious cycle where winning teams much more easily draw interest when it comes to bringing in top players yet at the same time it's virtually impossible to win these days with only picks and home grown guys.

 

To attract FA’s down the road you’ve got to develop your young players. Plain and simple. We are on that path. But you had asked if the talent level is much better than in year’s passed, so that’s what I was responding to in saying absolutely it is and will be as the crop of young players develop.

[SterioDesign]

11 hours ago, Guadana said:

This is an overreaction for me. On the construction of logic, I have already explained everything. You can't make me to steriodesign it.

I don't even know what you mean by that cause your sentence doesn't make any sense but whatever you attempted to do there, are you sure you want to do this? 

Edited April 9, 2021 by SterioDesign