When Do Top D Start to Decline?

[Rockies & Hockeys]

Hello All,

As a general point of discussion, I am wondering when you guys think some of the top point-getting D start to decline? I've just recently gotten into dynasty, and I'm noticing that most good D (top 15 or so) don't even start to really hit their stride until their mid to late 20's. How long can they sustain their production?

For example - Subban. I've got him in a dynasty league, and I'm wondering essentially when I should look at flipping him for younger talent. I don't plan on doing that anytime soon, but when should I? When he's 32? 35? I know forward values drop off trade-wise when they hit early 30's - is it the same for top D? Thanks for your input!

[BreadManPanarin]

A little later than forwards I think.

Citing a random study I found: http://www.cbc.ca/news/when-nhl-play...rics-1.2646054

Defencemen, the co-authors report:

• Improve and decline more slowly than forwards and do so very symmetrically.
• Perform within 90 per cent of their peak from 24 to 34 years old (two years longer than forwards).

Probably mid 30s is when you should start to get concerned.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

It varies a ton. Have a look at Nick Lidstrom's career stats... wild. He was one of the best fantasy D every to own, and he AVERAGED (!!!) 59 points from age 36-42 when he hung 'em up. Throw away the best season (80 points at age 36) and worst season (34 points at age 42) and he averaged 60.

Nick Lidstrom is a special case, he was a generational player. But I remember everyone was pronouncing him dead and worthless in fantasy from the age of about 35 onwards. My general observation is that most GMs tend to treat aging D with less value than their likely production warrants, which means the smart strategic play is to run them into the ground. Sure, sometimes you will be left with an aging D that crumbles, but that's a better outcome than taking a poor return on a productive asset for which the risk of decline is overstated.

[Rockies & Hockeys]

Thanks guys! Extremely helpful. Bread Man, that was a great read! REP left for both.

[BreadManPanarin]

GMs tend to treat aging D with less value than their likely production warrants, which means the smart strategic play is to run them into the ground. Sure, sometimes you will be left with an aging D that crumbles, but that's a better outcome than taking a poor return on a productive asset for which the risk of decline is overstated.

Totally agree with this. Burns owner in my league traded him to me last offseason because he was worried Burns's decline was imminent. I got a great deal in that trade, and I'll be running Burns into the ground rather than trading him speculatively in anticipation of decline at any point in the next few years.

[SelkeSmooth]

Great analysis on this from previous posts. My only add is I find in general dynasty/keeper leagues get far too hyped up over youth/prospects. Jake Guentzel being a perfect example here. A recent post had a GM trading Voracek to get him. While I'm not saying it was awful, you're giving up a 27 year old proven 60+pt player to get a 23 year old 60pt hopeful.

Once a player's age passes say 33-34 I agree about moving on and looking at potential swaps for youth, but until then there's a lot of value to be had. Don't be afraid to seek out some of these opportunities on players in and around the 30 mark. (Pavelski, Byfuglien, Wheeler, Bergeron, Steen, Carter, Getzlaf, Kesler, etc)

[BreadManPanarin]

Jake Guentzel being a perfect example here. A recent post had a GM trading Voracek to get him. While I'm not saying it was awful, you're giving up a 27 year old proven 60+pt player to get a 23 year old 60pt hopeful

I could honestly see this trade going either way when we look back in a year. Depends a lot on whether Giroux rebounds. I'll point out that anyone making this trade is not looking at Guentzel as a "60 point hopeful". They are probably someone who is fairly convinced he has a 60 point floor and sees him as a 70-80 point hopeful. Gotta go with your gut sometimes. Like the guy who traded Kopitar for Panarin last year and got some bad feedback initially.

[ericdaoust]

My general observation is that most GMs tend to treat aging D with less value than their likely production warrants, which means the smart strategic play is to run them into the ground. Sure, sometimes you will be left with an aging D that crumbles, but that's a better outcome than taking a poor return on a productive asset for which the risk of decline is overstated.

This applies to most players over 30. Weaker GMs avoid them like the plague while doing their endless rebuild cycles. I'll gladly run them into the ground. When that happens there will surely be another productive vet available on the cheap.

[SelkeSmooth]

No doubt that its a deal that could easily work out. Guys like Panarin who kind of come out of nowhere are the dream and maybe Guentzel is one of those guys. I'm definitely not saying he's not. In general though I prefer the more proven guys over the prospects and there are always a few 30+ players that some GM is ready to throw to the wayside.

[Poutine]

Totally agree with this. Burns owner in my league traded him to me last offseason because he was worried Burns's decline was imminent. I got a great deal in that trade, and I'll be running Burns into the ground rather than trading him speculatively in anticipation of decline at any point in the next few years.

I did exactly that (traded Burns two years ago, to agentzero no less!) when I was just learning the ropes of being a fantasy GM. One very hard pill to swallow but I've learned my lesson not to panic with players in their early 30s!

[Daydream Nation]

On average, 31 is their statistical peak but like others have said they have a slower decline.

[Axeman33]

It depends on what you need them for.

If you are rostering them for hits/blks/PIMs then they hold good value pretty much until they are done. Ride them out.

The issue with scoring D, as I have said many times (as has been mentioned here too), once they age past 30 years old, fantasy GMs tend to undervalue them even though they are still extremely productive. If you want to get max value for them, I recommend moving them before they are 30. Of course, this all depends on your overall team makeup. If your team is still in a bit of a retooling state, then move them. If your team is competitive or on the cusp of being competitive, I'd just keep them and enjoy the ride.