Help me settle a debate..

[Fighting_Emu]

Kitchen sink roto League everything is a cat except fow.

Which deal is better and if one IS better is it by a close margin? A wide margin? Or a stupid wide margin?

* For the purposes of picks it's a ten team league. The player trading Barkiv away will be a last place team. In either hypothetical trade the team getting barkiv projects top three so the 1st is 7-10 oa, the second in trade two is 17-20 oa- Both next year.

Saros m tkachuk and a 1st (7-10)
For
Barkov teuvo terravainen and a 4th

OR

Nylander, RNH OR Duchene with Cole Caufield, Robert Thomas and a 2nd (17-20)
For barkov and a 4th - no teuvo

Apparently team two is revising in both scenarios.

Thoughts? Please be brutally honest

[Nuckz]

As a rebuild id want #1
Proven over potential! Barkov is best player in deal but Matthew Tk is no slouch and Saros could be deciding factor.
Win now Barkov and Tevo r home runs but think # one is closer imo

Alot of moving pieces in # two but feels more like a gamble. Quality over Quantity. Both trades could work but but Duchene is not going to work in a rebuild and RNH is well RNH. As for a 2nd pick well it drops off after 10-12 so gambling there. Depends on roster for rebuilding. Assuming that it's W.Nylander helps but rather Matthew Tk in a roto that includes the sink.

[mjm44]

deal one by far, Tkachuk is a beast in a multi cat league, although he might not get the same points as Barkov , he will make up for it in the other cats

[Fighting_Emu]

Lmao- the post count- :P

I had a big thing I deleted. all Im going to say is that when you make a god awful team debilitating trade its probably a better idea to take a look why it projects so badly or is so contentious. Saving face is fine and all- but its the interweb- who cares?? Lol- its objectively bad- thats a fact. That being said its done- dont really need to focus on the how it happened at thjis point. It might be interesting to investigate the "why". Juzst sayin...

[chuckcouples]

I don't like the first offer for the Barkov side at all.

Tkachuk = Teuravainen as I don't think Tkachuk comes close to 70 points again in his career and he doesn't hit enough (only 104 hits last season) to be helpful in that category. So the first deal is Barkov and pick 37-40 for a back up goalie (with average numbers) and pick 7-10. Saros is older than Barkov. I also don't think Saros will ever be an above average NHL starting goalie (if he ever gets a starting job). The question to ask is when does this trade make your team better. The answer is probably never.

The second deal may not look as good at first glance because there is no superstar coming back. The deal is one superstar and a mid round pick for 2 very good NHL players (60 point guys with potential for more), 2 high end prospects and a 2nd round pick. With this deal, there is a chance that the sum of the assets received makes the team better in a couple of seasons. It's likely going to make the team worse for the current year but there is a much higher chance that the team is better in the future than with the first offer. This is the type of deal that rebuilding teams should be looking to make as the goal is to plant as many seeds as possible to see what grows into a useful plant.

I am assuming this is a Keep MANY league and that no player involved in the trade will be lost after the upcoming season.

[Fighting_Emu]

Im going to leave an anecdote here- mostly because Ive had too much coffee but also I do think it applies.

In Year 3 of my fantasy hockey career I made a trade that changed the way I approached fantasy hockey for good. In year one I didnt do much of anything , barely set my lineup and basically just donated my entry fee- lol! In year two though a guy from the pool changed to night shift so i could actually talk about the pool, hockey, and player value. Among my catastrophic moves was trading my first for a guy who I cleverly noticed had "even higher fantasy points than the guys on the waiver wire!!!"- lol! I think it was Jeff Hamilton or something (and interesting fact he had supplemented his stas with a basically "out of the blue" five goal performance that he never duplicated. He also turned me onto dobberhockey where I jumped into the forums head first- lol! An interesting thing developed that was enough to rope me in little bu little into fantasy hockey- by the trade deadline in that year- based on the advice, support, and encouragement of members on these boards I had traded no less than six assets (including yet another first :P) for Sidney Crosby. At the time it looked huge and was supposed to win the title for the guy who accepted. Unfortunately lots of the guys didnt age well, it was based around Jason Blake, Zdeno Chara, (who actually did have some monster seasons) and i think Maxim Afinogenov?? I might be confusing assets now but it was a lot of guys coming off big seasons who never really developed into top tier acquiositions. Part of the reason was that at that time a lot of people were asleep at the wheel in terms of hockey prospects. The very big ones- Toews and Backstrom were horded but after that it was aeritable whose who of blue chippers at every position. As a sad aside I was THRILLED to get Peter Mueller after Toews and Backstrom were scooped off- and had the audacity to boast loudly how he was going to end up being just as good or better than the other two- lol! Maybe humility is the takeaway on that one.

So it was either year two or now that Im writing it down it might have been year four. Year two was the teardown. Year 3 I was collecting and maturing assets. By year three I was still one year ahead of my proposed timeline but had surprised myself by making the playoffs (first round exit but still an accomplishment in a 22 team league). At the beginning of that year I traded Jason Arnott for Matt Duchene. This would be 2010-2011. Duchene had put up a very respectable 55 points as a rookie. That being said there were a few conspiring factors. One he was a "free" add like i talked about and on top of that I was being a little cocky because I was the only one really going hard at prospects before they laced up for the NHL so I felt like I had an inexhaustable supply of emerging assets but not a lot of "impact veterans". Arnott had just come off a decent but injury shortened season where he put up 46 in 63 and was just a season removed from 250 sogs and 72 points. The following two seasons he was in a similar range but injuries, trades and linemates had supposedly stifeld his production a little bit. At the time reading the boards- we didnt have nearly the same access to advanced stats so the ones we did have- toi, pptoi, sh%, sogs per minute- they all shone favorably on Arnott. Based on all the conventional wisdom, the statistical backing at the time, and a some suggestions from these boards (opinions were split I believe as Duchene was a bit of a dobber darling early in his career trajectory)- I pulled the triiger.

And luckily for me everything worked out just fine...

For the other owner.

Duchene posted 67 points and broke 200 sogs for the first time. Arnott posted 31 in 73 as he slowly played himself out of the league. To compund the damage I stubbornly held him as I had traded so much to get him and missed out on a "free" prospect in what was largely the last year they were avilable as people were catching on to my strategy and discovering sites like dobber on their own.

So two things- how does this apply? And whats the takeaway?

So first off i dont consider myself a "dumb" owner. Even then I was very invested in fantasy hockey spending a lot of time reading, researching, posting questions, and using every outlet at my disposal to broaden my knowledge of player value and pool systems in general. I also had good support in my corner. All that and I STILL made a very bad trade. I also want to point out I made it for the right reasons. At the time it felt like a sacrifice giving up the young up and coming prospect everyone wanted because my team was ready to contend and I needed to be ready to make the tough decisions to get my team in real contention. I told myself his peripherals cancelled out any discrepancies and I was making the "savvy" move. it was all wrong. Sometimes the obvious move is still the right move.

(Tkachuk is a good player. His peripherals are very good. We still base a large part of our scoring on points and pp production. Teuvo is the clear winner in those cats. Theyre similar assets anyway you spin it which leaves Barkov for Saros and a first. Its my humble opinion that thats a return a GM is not going to be happy with down the line).

The takeaway is that sometimes a trade can be too clever. When you get ahead of yourself in deals that work toward a re-build or jumping into contention there is the potential to do a lot of damage to your roster. Consider them carefully. Whats more watch the results. See what happens and if it is a net loss pay attention to how it happened. Try to avoid mistakes like that in the future. I spent a lot of time trying to save face on that trade (what can I say Ive got a sensitive ego :P 0- and in the end I went to such an extreme saving face that I kept him as a keeper where he posted almost identical numbers (albeit in less games). By the time I got over it and dropped him he was a full blown anchor.

I won 3 titles in 6 years in that league based in large part to the wisdom and advice I recieved on these boards but just as important was learning when to veer away from convention as well. I dont consider myself a dumb owner- or having poor knowledge of player values- but i got caught up in an idea and lost sight of the patient, analytical method I had been applying up until that point. I thought I was being clever, I had enough heads bobbing in agreement that I felt empowered and most of all I got passionate, excited and ultimately carried away to the point the trade took a life of its own and bit hard. I lost in the moment and I lost again when I got stubborn and kept Arnott as a keeper- lol!

Maybe this trade pans out- thats why Im posting all this- Id like to know if I really am way out to lunch. Im just saying it warrants watching how this deal unfolds. There may be parts you win (maybe Rinne gets injured and Saros is a workhorse supoertsar this year), there may be parts that are a push (maybe Tkachuks internal growth and new linemates mitigate the loss from any impending regressions) and there may be parts where you lose (maybe you end up watching Caufield net forty inside of the next two years :P)- but in the end I think its an objectively "losing" trade and the better way to handle it is to see where you could make improvements in the future and pursue those roads.

Now if youll excuse me Ill be retiring to the rocking chair on my stoop where I can yell at the neighborhood kids to get the hell off my lawn. /endrant

[Nuckz]

Seems like there's some real bitterness here...so I'm assuming u were the "other" offer not accepted .

Many things to consider here
How hard is it to obtain goalies in this league?
Is that first rounder a lottery pick?

The break down should be Matthew Chucky very close in overall value/final rank as Barkov in a Roto with all cats... Willing to say he might have even finished higher then Barkov last season in ur league. Could be wrong but worth checking.

So then your looking at Saros + 1st in a loaded draft for Tevo and 4th...soon to be future starter and possible pick 1 Lafreniere-pick 10Drysdale...

To be fair for a rebuilding team id be happy with either or. Guess depends on needs of GMs team.

[Fighting_Emu]

I don't like the first offer for the Barkov side at all.

Tkachuk = Teuravainen as I don't think Tkachuk comes close to 70 points again in his career and he doesn't hit enough (only 104 hits last season) to be helpful in that category. So the first deal is Barkov and pick 37-40 for a back up goalie (with average numbers) and pick 7-10. Saros is older than Barkov. I also don't think Saros will ever be an above average NHL starting goalie (if he ever gets a starting job). The question to ask is when does this trade make your team better. The answer is probably never.

The second deal may not look as good at first glance because there is no superstar coming back. The deal is one superstar and a mid round pick for 2 very good NHL players (60 point guys with potential for more), 2 high end prospects and a 2nd round pick. With this deal, there is a chance that the sum of the assets received makes the team better in a couple of seasons. It's likely going to make the team worse for the current year but there is a much higher chance that the team is better in the future than with the first offer. This is the type of deal that rebuilding teams should be looking to make as the goal is to plant as many seeds as possible to see what grows into a useful plant.

I am assuming this is a Keep MANY league and that no player involved in the trade will be lost after the upcoming season.

Yes- keep many! We have a 48 man farm roster for the prospects with pretty lax games played limits- 3 seasons worth of games (not rthree actual seasons- literally 246 gp). The roster player limits are a lot tighter but the team moving Barkov has more than enough space to take on active players.

[Fighting_Emu]

K- what? First off not bitter- I was at first and went out of my way to make ammends with the other GM. he a good guy- this is still a bad trade.

Tkachuk is close to Barkov (kind of). Itd be nuts to just leave it at that though. By all metrics Tkachuk overachieved last year and nothing indicates better opportunites. he got those numbers off an unsustainable 16.4% shooting percentage and on top of that is very decisively relegated to the second line with Bennett and Backlund. He MIGHT end up with Lindholm if they spread out the offense but he hasnt shown himself to be a playdriver himself and looks to be much more of a passenger. Tkachuk was at 80 in our scoring and I think most reasonable GMs are betting on the safe side and putting him at 75 or so even with the multi-cat contributions- which DO have an impact- not arguing they dont.

Teuvo was at 65 in our scoring. ill get to why Barkov is not a good comparable to Tkachuk in this equation but lets start here. 65 and 75 is a reasonable comparison in this equation. It makes waaaay more sense to shuffle these two out together and THEN your left with Barkov for a very mediocre backup goalie and a 1st. I also want to point out for the sake of argument- RNH scored at a 70 FPG total in our format and Id argue theres upside from there with more exposure to McD. he started out slow in his career but all hes done recently is exceed expectations. His interviews this season are about how hes just looking forward to consistent linemates. A first overall eight seasons into his career and hes just finally looking forward to regular linemates- lol! i personally think its sily to write him off. if you dont thats fine but thats not even the crux of the argument...

Barkov was good for 84. No he doesnt hit or put up pims- in fact hes basically a lady bing candidate. That being said hes 24, has a plethora of star and arguably even superstar linemates. He posted 96 and theres arguably upside from there. His shooting percentage, and pp production are likely near the top end of wher theyre going to be but underneath that he has all the metrics of a play driver- an extremely talented one. he may or may not have another gear but he certainly has the capacity to remain at the elite level hes at for several years. Its pretty simple. Pundits/critics/fans/data-crunchers/armchair GM's almost universally agree that while Tkachuk is a very good, versatile player who brings a lot of stas you like to see on your fantasy team- theres a very good chance that he overachieved last year. Maybe not by a huge margin- but by enough of one that it warrants taking a step back when considering this player. That same demographic did not even blink when Barkov hit his totals. This season albeit a coming out party of sorts was widely predicted. nobody was shocked and most people will be betting the over on his production this year. He was already ahead in our scoring and projects to be as good or better this year. astute GMs are accounting for regression in Tkachuks game.

Im not bitter- I hope the other team bounces back from this and puts together a competetive team. hes an involved GM on the trade market, is generally very knowledgable and well versed in player value- id love to be in a league hes part of going forward. That being said this was a bad trade. Im going to say I personally wouldnt take the trade I offered even- lmao! Id have a death grip on Barkov. as for the question about goalies you could say theyre tough to acquire/not tough to acquire- bhut at the end of the day its a ten team league with a hard cap on goalies games played. There are better routes than one of the best forwards in the game to secure a netminder. i would have moved Hellbyuck ffs- lol! You cant move a top ten skater for Saros and say thats a good play.



Tkachuk- 80
Barkov- 84
TT- 64
RNH- 70

Seems like there's some real bitterness here...so I'm assuming u were the "other" offer not accepted .

Many things to consider here
How hard is it to obtain goalies in this league?
Is that first rounder a lottery pick?

The break down should be Matthew Chucky very close in overall value/final rank as Barkov in a Roto with all cats... Willing to say he might have even finished higher then Barkov last season in ur league. Could be wrong but worth checking.

So then your looking at Saros + 1st in a loaded draft for Tevo and 4th...soon to be future starter and possible pick 1 Lafreniere-pick 10Drysdale...

To be fair for a rebuilding team id be happy with either or. Guess depends on needs of GMs team.

[Nuckz]

Well id feel the same about Barkov as well....guess if other GM is happy with trade that's all that really matters. Be interesting to see what happens at end of season.

[stevegamer]

I've learned over the years that helping settle a debate almost never works if there's no clear right answer. As somebody who gets asked to do this a lot for various things by co-workers, friends, acquaintances, random people at stadiums (yes, seriously), and the like it's odd.

If one side is clearly wrong, you can try to get them to see the error of their ways.

If both sides are wrong, and just arguing for no reason, that's simple: make it work by calling both people wrong, if I can figure out a way to pull that off and have them then turn on me, and then play the humor card, it's splendid.

If they are both half-right, and refusing to budge for whatever reason - ugh.

Nobody thinks alike, but there are some completely dumb thoughts out there - generally when all the facts are known - and then there's a ton of grey area.

[Fighting_Emu]

I've learned over the years that helping settle a debate almost never works if there's no clear right answer. As somebody who gets asked to do this a lot for various things by co-workers, friends, acquaintances, random people at stadiums (yes, seriously), and the like it's odd.

If one side is clearly wrong, you can try to get them to see the error of their ways.

If both sides are wrong, and just arguing for no reason, that's simple: make it work by calling both people wrong, if I can figure out a way to pull that off and have them then turn on me, and then play the humor card, it's splendid.

If they are both half-right, and refusing to budge for whatever reason - ugh.

Nobody thinks alike, but there are some completely dumb thoughts out there - generally when all the facts are known - and then there's a ton of grey area.

So you know I have to ask- which one is this? We're both half right? I feel like there's a clear wrong lol! Like I said I think even my iffer- the second one was t worth barkiv- so taking an objectively worse one has to be considered at least a miscalculation no?

Also that's such a random thing to be known foe- lol!! Actually pretty neat though...