Jack Eichel for Patrik Laine

[Crazy Joe Davola]

Is it just me, or is this thread gone crazy? You're trading for Eichel, correct?

You are correct sir. Some confusion over which side is mine, but I've got Laine/Connor and have put the offer to the Eichel owner.

He came to me offering Klingberg+ for the Laine pick and this was my counter. He's very excited at the prospect of getting both Connor and Laine and we've both decided to mull it over and meet back today/tomorrow and see if we can hash it out. For the record, I've been after Eichel for exactly one year after I lost the lotto and ended up with the 3 pick last offseason.

I'm loving the heat that this thread has caused, and while I usually like to see 100% agreement on the side I'm receiving, the fact that there are a handful of people who either see the Laine side as the winner or at least reconize that it isn't as far fetched as Canadiens2099 has callously stated a few times, reaffirms my thoughts to bring this topic to the wealth of knowledge known as the Dobberites.

When it's all said and done, I may even pop a little extra on my side to get it done, but I won't go wild, I think both sides are getting supreme talent and then a nice top prospect.

Reps are coming boys, and they're well earned.

[Canadiens2099]

You are correct sir. Some confusion over which side is mine, but I've got Laine/Connor and have put the offer to the Eichel owner.

He came to me offering Klingberg+ for the Laine pick and this was my counter. He's very excited at the prospect of getting both Connor and Laine and we've both decided to mull it over and meet back today/tomorrow and see if we can hash it out. For the record, I've been after Eichel for exactly one year after I lost the lotto and ended up with the 3 pick last offseason.

I'm loving the heat that this thread has caused, and while I usually like to see 100% agreement on the side I'm receiving, the fact that there are a handful of people who either see the Laine side as the winner or at least reconize that it isn't as far fetched as Canadiens2099 has callously stated a few times, reaffirms my thoughts to bring this topic to the wealth of knowledge known as the Dobberites.

When it's all said and done, I may even pop a little extra on my side to get it done, but I won't go wild, I think both sides are getting supreme talent and then a nice top prospect.

Reps are coming boys, and they're well earned.

anarchy, the Eichel side is the overwhelming winner in this thread.

[Crazy Joe Davola]

anarchy, the Eichel side is the overwhelming winner in this thread.

Notice my use of the phrase, "handful of people". As the side hopefully receiving Eichel, I want an overwhelming consensus that sees that side as the winner.. but merely proposing the topic was not the madness you claimed it to be.

Laine is a rare breed and will be worth the price of admission for a lot of years.

[Canadiens2099]

Notice my use of the phrase, "handful of people". As the side hopefully receiving Eichel, I want an overwhelming consensus that sees that side as the winner.. but merely proposing the topic was not the madness you claimed it to be.

Laine is a rare breed and will be worth the price of admission for a lot of years.

You even admitted it was crazy at first. Obviously I was just having some fun and being sarcastic. Is the trade idea 'way out there'.......no. Would most people want the proven Eichel said......that seems obvious, even to you. So get out there and make this deal happen. No regrets. Shoot for the stars. And whoever in this thread said Eichel> Matthews is right too.

good luck with the deal, hope you can pull it off.

[Crazy Joe Davola]

There is a decent chance that Eichel rips it up next year. If that happens, come December, you will be able to trade Eichel for Laine and Connor and + and +. Laine and Connor are prospects. Good ones, but still prospects. Eichel is in the NHL and is scoring points and has a reasonable chance to be a 70 point player next year. I doubt that either Laine or Connor will be in the NHL next year full time.

I think if you did this trade it would be selling low on Eichel and buying high on Laine. Dont do it.

I think there's a very likely chance that both are in the NHL full time next year, while Laine is a virtual lock. Connor will get a very long look and if he needs some more strength than the AHL is there for him. Laine is going to step right in though and I'd predict a 45-50 point campaign.

- - - Updated - - -

You even admitted it was crazy at first. Obviously I was just having some fun and being sarcastic. Is the trade idea 'way out there'.......no. Would most people want the proven Eichel said......that seems obvious, even to you. So get out there and make this deal happen. No regrets. Shoot for the stars. And whoever in this thread said Eichel> Matthews is right too.

good luck with the deal, hope you can pull it off.

There's the loving backhands I was looking for! Your sarcasm must've just run a little too deep for me. I'll do my best to get Eichel and not give up the bank. Muchas gracias.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

You could flip this around to look at it a different way, and I think it'd make it a hell of a lot clearer: is the gap between Eichel and Connor bigger than the gap between 2nd OA and 6th OA? To me, my intuition says the answer is a resounding yes.

This happens every year leading into the draft: the shiny new toy gets loads of hype and it drives normally rational people to overvalue the hype and undervalue what they've already got. I would trade Laine and Connor for Eichel without the 6th overall pick for the simple reason that he's the only current NHL player in the discussion.

With prospects, we tend to systemically underestimate the risk that they don't pan out or have injury trouble or or or. That risk should represent a discount on their value when compared to a player who carries a lesser risk because they've proven they can play etc. The other factor to consider is the ramp-up to "peak" production. Eichel has already proven that he can do 55, and it's clear that there's bigtime headroom there. So for Laine/Connor/anyProspect, they won't close the production gap for a few years... and that should create a huge discount.

As a rule of thumb, I discount each year from the coming one in the range of 25%, kind of like a Net Present Value (NPV) calculation. 25% is high, but we see such wild volatility in NHL scoring that I think it's actually somewhat conservative. This rate should go up for a more boom/bust -type prospect, and come down for more proven NHL players. I'd propose for a simple evaluation, we use:

• 15% for a previously proven production level
• 20% for a step forward for an established player
• 25% for an elite prospect
• 30% for an very good prospect
• 35% for a good prospect with some question marks

So let's do the math. Let's assume their productions look something like this, and instead of calling it a Net Present Value, let's call it a Present Value of Production (PVoP):

• Eichel takes a small step forward to 65 this season, followed by 75, then 80, then 85.
• Laine has an Eichel-type impact: 55 in his first season, then we'll project the rest the same way. (glass half full I think)
• Connor sticks in the NHL in his first season and puts up 40, followed by 50, then 60, then a 4th year breakout for 75 (glass half full I think)
• 6th overall gets you a good prospect who doesn't play in the NHL this coming season, but then follows the Connor path.

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	65	75	80	85	20%	194
Laine	55	65	75	80	25%	157
Connor	40	50	60	75	30%	114
6th	0	40	50	60	35%	60

So the math tells us that Eichel + 6th has a PVoP of 254 vs 271 for Laine + Connor. Interesting!

Let's think about sensitivities. What happens if Connor needs a year in the AHL and everything else moves to the right a year? That drops his value to 67, and the side of the trade to 224. What if 6th OA makes an early impact in the NHL right away? That bumps the value from 60 to 104. What about Laine? How much better or worse could it be? What about Eichel exploding next year? Considering that we gave the benefit of the doubt to Laine and Connor but only projected Eichel to step forward 7 points next season, I think his side of the trade is the better one.

This jives with what my gut said at the start: Eichel is less risky, and that tilts my preference to his side of the trade.

Interesting, and fun, analysis. Thanks for the nudge! Hope it got you thinking.

[Crazy Joe Davola]

You could flip this around to look at it a different way, and I think it'd make it a hell of a lot clearer: is the gap between Eichel and Connor bigger than the gap between 2nd OA and 6th OA? To me, my intuition says the answer is a resounding yes.

This happens every year leading into the draft: the shiny new toy gets loads of hype and it drives normally rational people to overvalue the hype and undervalue what they've already got. I would trade Laine and Connor for Eichel without the 6th overall pick for the simple reason that he's the only current NHL player in the discussion.

With prospects, we tend to systemically underestimate the risk that they don't pan out or have injury trouble or or or. That risk should represent a discount on their value when compared to a player who carries a lesser risk because they've proven they can play etc. The other factor to consider is the ramp-up to "peak" production. Eichel has already proven that he can do 55, and it's clear that there's bigtime headroom there. So for Laine/Connor/anyProspect, they won't close the production gap for a few years... and that should create a huge discount.

As a rule of thumb, I discount each year from the coming one in the range of 25%, kind of like a Net Present Value (NPV) calculation. 25% is high, but we see such wild volatility in NHL scoring that I think it's actually somewhat conservative. This rate should go up for a more boom/bust -type prospect, and come down for more proven NHL players. I'd propose for a simple evaluation, we use:

• 15% for a previously proven production level
• 20% for a step forward for an established player
• 25% for an elite prospect
• 30% for an very good prospect
• 35% for a good prospect with some question marks

So let's do the math. Let's assume their productions look something like this, and instead of calling it a Net Present Value, let's call it a Present Value of Production (PVoP):

• Eichel takes a small step forward to 65 this season, followed by 75, then 80, then 85.
• Laine has an Eichel-type impact: 55 in his first season, then we'll project the rest the same way. (glass half full I think)
• Connor sticks in the NHL in his first season and puts up 40, followed by 50, then 60, then a 4th year breakout for 75 (glass half full I think)
• 6th overall gets you a good prospect who doesn't play in the NHL this coming season, but then follows the Connor path.

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	65	75	80	85	20%	194
Laine	55	65	75	80	25%	157
Connor	40	50	60	75	30%	114
6th	0	40	50	60	35%	60

So the math tells us that Eichel + 6th has a PVoP of 254 vs 271 for Laine + Connor. Interesting!

Let's think about sensitivities. What happens if Connor needs a year in the AHL and everything else moves to the right a year? That drops his value to 67, and the side of the trade to 224. What if 6th OA makes an early impact in the NHL right away? That bumps the value from 60 to 104. What about Laine? How much better or worse could it be? What about Eichel exploding next year?

This jives with what my gut said at the start: Eichel is less risky, and that tilts my preference to his side of the trade.

Interesting, and fun, analysis. Thanks for the nudge! Hope it got you thinking.

What a fantastic breakdown of the next four seasons! This is really how I've been trying looking at it.. attempting to evaluate the perceived value of Laine/Connor for the more assured value of Eichel with a toss in of the unknown coming from the 6th overall pick.

Worst case scenario, I think we see Eichel become a very solid 75 point player - pretty unlikely for a player of his calibre but injury or any number of factors could limit him to that ceiling. I stress, unlikely. Conversely, the likely best case scenario for Eichel is a perennial Art Ross candidate .. which probably isn't too far fetched.

Laine's top end is to become a 50 goal, 90 point superstar that ravages goaltender's dreams with a floor of a 30/30 guy. Pretty tough to know until we see him compete in the NHL night after night. From his play this year, I'd say somewhere in the middle is the most likely peak output - 40 goals, 75-80 points

Connor to me has a ceiling that carries a ton of 'boom' in the sense that with proper seasoning, his skill set could garner 75+. At the same time, he'll have many hurdles to overcome before that happens and he could round into more of a 60-65 point winger.

6th overall is a wildcard.. drafting guys with 1-3 seasons before they enter full-time NHL status is difficult to predict and carry. The pick could be used on a veteran drop or a guy like Radulov for a more short term gain, but clearly this is the least valued piece of the trade.

I really appreciate the thought that has gone into this discussion.. It's probably shaken me from my 'new shiny toy' syndrome when attempting to evaluate Laine and reinvigorated my desire to acquire Eichel by (almost) any means necessary.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

Great discussion... this is how you have to look at these things. If you could get Radulov with that 6th pick, I don't think the comparison is close:

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	65	75	80	85	20%	194
Radulov	55	55	55	55	30%	119
Laine	55	65	75	80	25%	157
Connor	40	50	60	75	30%	114

Eichel + Rad = 313
Laine + Connor = 271

You'll note that I was very pessimistic on Radulov both in terms of production and discount rate. My personal belief is that he should step in as a top-30 scorer, which with last year's numbers gets him 63, and I think he could beat that. If we go rose-coloured with Eichel and project him to pop 70 next year, 80 the year after, then hover around 85 after that, his value would get a bump too.

Just for fun, let's do a "stars align" look.

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	70	80	85	85	20%	204
Radulov	63	65	65	65	25%	152
Laine	60	75	85	85	25%	174
Connor	50	60	75	75	30%	134

Stars align and it's 356 to 309. What if Eichel flatlines, Rads disappoints with 40 points, Laine struggles to adjust to the small rink and goes between the AHL and NHL for the year, and Connor needs a year in the AHL?

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	58	58	58	58	20%	150
Radulov	40	40	40	40	25%	94
Laine	30	50	75	80	25%	127
Connor	0	40	55	75	30%	75

That's truly pessimistic for all those players, and it still is 245 to 202.

Note the really key thing here: a consistent 40 point vet is actually worth more from a production perspective than a shiny prospect who will do nothing for a year then follow typical development curve and explode to 75 (which would have been good for 11th in scoring this past year!) in year 4.

[rataylor22]

I would probably take the Eichel side. At the same time, people blowing up hyperbole for the Eichel trade like this is some massive steal need to calm their shit. This isn't 2 unproven prospects, this is 2 elite, high end prospects. The bust rate isn't the same as your average prospect.

It's really not hard to find scouts who will say Matthews right now is better than Eichel was when he was drafted. And it's really not hard to find scouts who Say Laine right now is better than Matthews right now. As such it's not that far-fetched to say Laine right now is better than Eichel when he was drafted, and Laine is young comparatively to Matthews/Eichal @ time of draft.

This isn't some crazy, outlandish, easy choice trade. It's pretty even, and it wouldn't surprise me if Laine ended up the best player in the deal. I could see that quite easily.

[JagrBomb]

Oooh I wouldn't agree there. Laine will be a monster on the PP which is pretty major in our structure. I see JP as a 30/40 ceiling player with great two-way responsibility. Conversely, I wouldn't bat an eye if Laine scored 50 one day.

I do want Eichel in a bad way.. and am willing to make this swap.

PP = G + A

Looking at extremes, lets say if Laine becomes a shooter like Ovy and Puljujarvi becomes a playmaker like Backstrom.

PPP since last lockout:

Ovy: 24/34/39
Backstrom: 30/33/44

Backstrom was either better or on par with him every time, despite Ovy being such a puck hog. In most cases the playmaker will get more points over the goal scorer, and that includes PPP.

I'd still take Laine over Puljujarvi in your format, but mostly because his hype is sky high and he'd have better trade value. Linemates sort of factor into that decision too but I try not to focus too much on that when evaluating players.

If I'm looking to draft the guy who will be better in your league longterm, I'd take Puljujarvi over Laine.

[Crazy Joe Davola]

PP = G + A

Looking at extremes, lets say if Laine becomes a shooter like Ovy and Puljujarvi becomes a playmaker like Backstrom.

PPP since last lockout:

Ovy: 24/34/39
Backstrom: 30/33/44

Backstrom was either better or on par with him every time, despite Ovy being such a puck hog. In most cases the playmaker will get more points over the goal scorer, and that includes PPP.

I'd still take Laine over Puljujarvi in your format, but mostly because his hype is sky high and he'd have better trade value. Linemates sort of factor into that decision too but I try not to focus too much on that when evaluating players.

If I'm looking to draft the guy who will be better in your league longterm, I'd take Puljujarvi over Laine.

Here's the thing though, Puljujarvi isn't projected to be a Backstrom-type player. Backstrom is a pure set up man, plain and simple. Both him and Ovi have been very fortunate to have each other and together create serious PPP numbers.

Puljujarvi projects into more of a two-way, power winger. I keep seeing Jere Lehtinen when I watch him, but maybe with a dash more speed and skill. He's going to score 30 or more a goals a bunch of times and provide his team with a lot of quality hockey, but I don't see 80 point seasons from him.

[Crazy Joe Davola]

Great discussion... this is how you have to look at these things. If you could get Radulov with that 6th pick, I don't think the comparison is close:

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	65	75	80	85	20%	194
Radulov	55	55	55	55	30%	119
Laine	55	65	75	80	25%	157
Connor	40	50	60	75	30%	114

Eichel + Rad = 313
Laine + Connor = 271

You'll note that I was very pessimistic on Radulov both in terms of production and discount rate. My personal belief is that he should step in as a top-30 scorer, which with last year's numbers gets him 63, and I think he could beat that. If we go rose-coloured with Eichel and project him to pop 70 next year, 80 the year after, then hover around 85 after that, his value would get a bump too.

Just for fun, let's do a "stars align" look.

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	70	80	85	85	20%	204
Radulov	63	65	65	65	25%	152
Laine	60	75	85	85	25%	174
Connor	50	60	75	75	30%	134

Stars align and it's 356 to 309. What if Eichel flatlines, Rads disappoints with 40 points, Laine struggles to adjust to the small rink and goes between the AHL and NHL for the year, and Connor needs a year in the AHL?

Player	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Discount	PVoP
Eichel	58	58	58	58	20%	150
Radulov	40	40	40	40	25%	94
Laine	30	50	75	80	25%	127
Connor	0	40	55	75	30%	75

That's truly pessimistic for all those players, and it still is 245 to 202.

Note the really key thing here: a consistent 40 point vet is actually worth more from a production perspective than a shiny prospect who will do nothing for a year then follow typical development curve and explode to 75 (which would have been good for 11th in scoring this past year!) in year 4.

I need to get you in on all of my big decisions.. with breakdowns like that, I won't have to suffer through too many nights tossing and turning on a player their projections.

So far the Eihel deal hasn't moved forward .. My buddy living in Australia really cramps the negotiations, but he has come back with my choice of Tarasenko, Gaudreau or Panarin plus the 6th pick and likely another 1st in 2017 for Connor and the #2 pick.

I'm going to keep working for Eichel, but knowing that a Tank++ deal is sitting there if it falls through is reassuring. I'll probably end up polling the masses on who they prefer between the three studs (for me its really close with Tarasenko/Johnny and Panarin a slight edge or two behind)

[JagrBomb]

Here's the thing though, Puljujarvi isn't projected to be a Backstrom-type player. Backstrom is a pure set up man, plain and simple. Both him and Ovi have been very fortunate to have each other and together create serious PPP numbers.

Puljujarvi projects into more of a two-way, power winger. I keep seeing Jere Lehtinen when I watch him, but maybe with a dash more speed and skill. He's going to score 30 or more a goals a bunch of times and provide his team with a lot of quality hockey, but I don't see 80 point seasons from him.

like i said i was just using an extreme example.

i was just trying to convey that being a shooter doesn't always mean you'll get more PPP than a playmaker.

[Crazy Joe Davola]

like i said i was just using an extreme example.

i was just trying to convey that being a shooter doesn't always mean you'll get more PPP than a playmaker.

Fair enough... and I can agree with that. Often its the QB (not just a dman, but the guy who everything runs through.. more often than not from the half-wall) who gets the most PPP's and you're absolutely right that an elite playmaker is usually worth more than the triggerman.

Any preference between Tarasenko and Gaudreau?

[JagrBomb]

Fair enough... and I can agree with that. Often its the QB (not just a dman, but the guy who everything runs through.. more often than not from the half-wall) who gets the most PPP's and you're absolutely right that an elite playmaker is usually worth more than the triggerman.

Any preference between Tarasenko and Gaudreau?

they are pretty similar, however I think Gaudreau is the better player. Tarasenko has a star studded supporting cast. Gaudreau is the focal point of offense in Calgary, he does it all himself.

In fantasy hockey it all comes down to personal preference I suppose. Goals are always harder to come by so can't blame anyone from picking Tank, just like I cant with picking Laine.

I just want people to remember Puljujarvi was ranked higher pretty much all year until the playoffs. Even at the WJC i think Puljujarvi was the better all around player.

My main reasons for selecting Laine higher are:

-goal scoring
- media hype increasing trade value
- winnipeg > columbus (better linemates)

in a vaccuum with no external factors and based on skill alone i'd take puljujarvi. i could definitely be wrong, i'm not going to make a thread and tell everyone to expect 70 points at the minimum...