Brandon Hagel traded

DaHawkz24

Active member
Joined:
Oct 14, 2019
Posts:
291
Liked Posts:
281
We'll see all right! Radish potted his 6th NHL goal last night after being set up point blank. The Hagel doubters remain regardless how well he plays I guess and look for him to move up there just like he did here.

Let's revisit this at the end of the year..........the end of the next few years.
I like Hagel and when Tampa needs to make salary cap moves he will get more minutes for sure.
I also dont think Raddysh will be even as good as Hagel at any point, but if he can play a Brouwer type of role and one of the draft picks turn out to be a solid NHL contributor its a good trade.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,418
Liked Posts:
2,893
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
If Raddysh keeps playing like these 2 game we might win this trade. He is taking advantage of getting more ice time.
We'll see if Hagel continues to produce with a smaller role, and hopefully at least one of the 1st rounders contributes in the NHL
The real way the 'hawks win that trade is whatever those picks turn out to be turn into a tangible asset for the 'hawks within their rebuild. We won't know that for quite some time but being realistic here: With the dearth of *any* blue chip defensive prospect or player anywhere within the 'hawks system, by the time the 'hawks will be be ready to compete again at the earliest Hagel would be in his 30's--as well as being expensive enough not to be able to pull in the same kind of assets that he did while he was young, good, and cheap. There's no way the 'hawks would be able to pick up the D, G, and C prospects they need via free agency without blowing past the cap ceiling so hard keeping Hagel in that situation wouldn't be an option. Just look at what Seth Jones commanded. Granted, that deal was made by a reject from H&RBlock, but still--deveoping from within is a lot less expensive.

Raddysh and Katchouk are decent enough payers to have within the lineup during a rebuild--kinda like your Vrbatas and Rene Borques, but the onus now is on McI and Davidson to turn those picks into gold. Ditto with whatever pick we get out of Fleury.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
8,528
Liked Posts:
5,805
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
The real way the 'hawks win that trade is whatever those picks turn out to be turn into a tangible asset for the 'hawks within their rebuild. We won't know that for quite some time but being realistic here: With the dearth of *any* blue chip defensive prospect or player anywhere within the 'hawks system, by the time the 'hawks will be be ready to compete again at the earliest Hagel would be in his 30's--as well as being expensive enough not to be able to pull in the same kind of assets that he did while he was young, good, and cheap. There's no way the 'hawks would be able to pick up the D, G, and C prospects they need via free agency without blowing past the cap ceiling so hard keeping Hagel in that situation wouldn't be an option. Just look at what Seth Jones commanded. Granted, that deal was made by a reject from H&RBlock, but still--deveoping from within is a lot less expensive.

Raddysh and Katchouk are decent enough payers to have within the lineup during a rebuild--kinda like your Vrbatas and Rene Borques, but the onus now is on McI and Davidson to turn those picks into gold. Ditto with whatever pick we get out of Fleury.
That's the name of the game....the trade wasn't Hagel for Raddysh and Katchouk. What the Hawks wanted was the the two first round picks. I mean if one of these two guys work out, hey great. But what Davidson does with those picks will ultimately decide if it was a good trade for the Hawks.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,418
Liked Posts:
2,893
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
That's the name of the game....the trade wasn't Hagel for Raddysh and Katchouk. What the Hawks wanted was the the two first round picks. I mean if one of these two guys work out, hey great. But what Davidson does with those picks will ultimately decide if it was a good trade for the Hawks.
Exactly. So for now it's a waiting game. Right now my only hope is that the 'hawks hold position for the rest of the season and get the best odds to NOT pick 1st or 2nd. Next year should be VERY bad, but potentially 2 1st rounders in a very deep draft, if played right, can help a lot in the long game.

I won't say McI and Davidson will succeed, but I have a bit more faith in them than I do the previous generation.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,525
Liked Posts:
9,302
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
Nah, the Hagel trade gets evaluated independently of what the future picks bring. We received fair value in the trade IMO, period. What the FO does in the future with those picks also gets evaluated independently. Though obv connected, those are separate transactions.
 

Bust

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 5, 2020
Posts:
6,555
Liked Posts:
3,465
That Raddysh assist . . .WOW! btw, Dach last scored 30 days ago, #ugh. Given his draft prestige, big disappointment in the points department this year.
 

KBIB

CCS Hockey Icon while hated at HF
Joined:
Apr 26, 2013
Posts:
2,056
Liked Posts:
1,055
That Raddysh assist . . .WOW! btw, Dach last scored 30 days ago, #ugh. Given his draft prestige, big disappointment in the points department this year.
Here’s hoping he cracks 10 goals.

Kirby Bust is more like it
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 15, 2019
Posts:
3,249
Liked Posts:
3,029
Location:
Campton Hills
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Nah, the Hagel trade gets evaluated independently of what the future picks bring. We received fair value in the trade IMO, period. What the FO does in the future with those picks also gets evaluated independently. Though obv connected, those are separate transactions.
Just to clarify,are you saying Radish 57gms 7gls 16pts and Katchouk 42gms 2gls 6pts are equal to Hagel's 111gms 31gls and 62pts at a younger age than either is equal value w/o the picks?

Guess we'll see in a year or two.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,525
Liked Posts:
9,302
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
Just to clarify,are you saying Radish 57gms 7gls 16pts and Katchouk 42gms 2gls 6pts are equal to Hagel's 111gms 31gls and 62pts at a younger age than either is equal value w/o the picks?

Guess we'll see in a year or two.
No, Bob, that's not my meaning whatsoever. Perhaps an illustration will help:

Transaction #1: let's say you decide to sell an asset, in this case your house or car or whatever, and you wind up selling it for cash at fair market value.

Transaction #2: a year later, you reinvest the cash you received from Transaction #1. You may or may not invest that cash wisely, but whether you do or not does not invalidate the fact that you received fair value in Transaction #1. Example: whether you invest that cash in crypto and make a fortune - or - whether you invest in scratch-off tickets and lose it all, that does not change the fact that Transaction #1 was a fair deal.

In the current case, contrary to the assertions of several posters in this thread, whether our FO drafts wisely with the picks we received in the Hagel trade does not affect the analysis of whether the Hagel trade was fair or not.
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 15, 2019
Posts:
3,249
Liked Posts:
3,029
Location:
Campton Hills
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
No, Bob, that's not my meaning whatsoever. Perhaps an illustration will help:

Transaction #1: let's say you decide to sell an asset, in this case your house or car or whatever, and you wind up selling it for cash at fair market value.

Transaction #2: a year later, you reinvest the cash you received from Transaction #1. You may or may not invest that cash wisely, but whether you do or not does not invalidate the fact that you received fair value in Transaction #1. Example: whether you invest that cash in crypto and make a fortune - or - whether you invest in scratch-off tickets and lose it all, that does not change the fact that Transaction #1 was a fair deal.

In the current case, contrary to the assertions of several posters in this thread, whether our FO drafts wisely with the picks we received in the Hagel trade does not affect the analysis of whether the Hagel trade was fair or not.
You just made me re-examine my portfolio and it's allowcations....LOL!

As far as the trade,it'll take a few years to see if we got fair value for certain.....the return looks decent.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,525
Liked Posts:
9,302
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
You just made me re-examine my portfolio and it's allowcations....LOL!

As far as the trade,it'll take a few years to see if we got fair value for certain.....the return looks decent.
Nope, you are missing my point entirely.

The results of the Hagel trade are 100% complete NOW: we received fair value (IMO). The end.

What the FO does with the future picks will be analyzed independently.
 

dbldrew

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 24, 2012
Posts:
3,383
Liked Posts:
1,161
Nope, you are missing my point entirely.

The results of the Hagel trade are 100% complete NOW: we received fair value (IMO). The end.

What the FO does with the future picks will be analyzed independently.
disagree you need to look at the whole thing in a few years. It would be like me saying I cashed out my 401K and took it to Vegas and traded it in for chips for a poker tournament and if a lose it all, nobody is going to be saying I got fair value on those poker chips on that first transaction.

Trading in a secure retirement to play poker is a gamble.. trading a NHL caliber player for draft picks is also a gamble. Time will tell if it was a good gamble or not
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,525
Liked Posts:
9,302
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
disagree you need to look at the whole thing in a few years. It would be like me saying I cashed out my 401K and took it to Vegas and traded it in for chips for a poker tournament and if a lose it all, nobody is going to be saying I got fair value on those poker chips on that first transaction.

Trading in a secure retirement to play poker is a gamble.. trading a NHL caliber player for draft picks is also a gamble. Time will tell if it was a good gamble or not
Disagree, you did indeed get fair value for trading your 401k proceeds to an equivalent cash value of poker chips. It's unquestionably a fair transaction. End of transaction, end of story. All you did was increase your risk profile because there is far greater volatility and beta risk in holding poker chips as compared with 401k investments. It does not change the fact that you received fair value for your 401k.

What you then do with those poker chips is an entirely different analysis and measurement.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
Joined:
Dec 8, 2014
Posts:
8,418
Liked Posts:
2,893
Location:
PacNW
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Disagree, you did indeed get fair value for trading your 401k proceeds to an equivalent cash value of poker chips. It's unquestionably a fair transaction. End of transaction, end of story. All you did was increase your risk profile because there is far greater volatility and beta risk in holding poker chips as compared with 401k investments. It does not change the fact that you received fair value for your 401k.

What you then do with those poker chips is an entirely different analysis and measurement.
Perhaps, but ultimately the analysis of every trade always has to take into account what the actual results become, not just what was offered at value initially. The 'hawks could receive fair market value for a trade an ultimately win or lose it, and that win/loss will be what the perception of the trade is--irrespective of fair market value because in a lot of cases the GM that makes the trade also oversees the disposition of of the draft picks that come back.

To wit: Eric Meloche & Patrick Sharp for Matt Ellison and a 3rd round pick might have been fair market value at the time give who the players were at the time that transaction happened, but in the end the 'hawks won the shit out of that trade. At the time of the trade a lot of people thought that Saad for Panarin was near market value. In the end the 'hawks lost the shit out of that trade.

We could say that what the 'hawks got for Hagel was fair market value or even a little bit in the 'hawks favor. But, if Davidson whiffs on those picks the 'hawks might lose that trade because the onus is on him to make those picks count.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,525
Liked Posts:
9,302
Location:
Silicon Valley, CA
Perhaps, but ultimately the analysis of every trade always has to take into account what the actual results become, not just what was offered at value initially. The 'hawks could receive fair market value for a trade an ultimately win or lose it, and that win/loss will be what the perception of the trade is--irrespective of fair market value because in a lot of cases the GM that makes the trade also oversees the disposition of of the draft picks that come back.

To wit: Eric Meloche & Patrick Sharp for Matt Ellison and a 3rd round pick might have been fair market value at the time give who the players were at the time that transaction happened, but in the end the 'hawks won the shit out of that trade. At the time of the trade a lot of people thought that Saad for Panarin was near market value. In the end the 'hawks lost the shit out of that trade.

We could say that what the 'hawks got for Hagel was fair market value or even a little bit in the 'hawks favor. But, if Davidson whiffs on those picks the 'hawks might lose that trade because the onus is on him to make those picks count.
Respectfully disagree. Davidson made a fair trade , period. If Davidson subsequently drafts poorly with the picks acquired in the trade, then he did a shitty job at drafting. It does not change the fact that he made a fair trade.

I've never understood the logic people mistakenly apply when they say "we won't know the outcome of ____ trade for _____ years".
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 15, 2019
Posts:
3,249
Liked Posts:
3,029
Location:
Campton Hills
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Nope, you are missing my point entirely.

The results of the Hagel trade are 100% complete NOW: we received fair value (IMO). The end.

What the FO does with the future picks will be analyzed independently.
I get the point that two 1st's are a good return on their face for the player at this point in time even if they're not used properly but don't we have to see how Hagel progresses as a player over time to make a final analysis?
 

dbldrew

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 24, 2012
Posts:
3,383
Liked Posts:
1,161
Disagree, you did indeed get fair value for trading your 401k proceeds to an equivalent cash value of poker chips. It's unquestionably a fair transaction. End of transaction, end of story. All you did was increase your risk profile because there is far greater volatility and beta risk in holding poker chips as compared with 401k investments. It does not change the fact that you received fair value for your 401k.

What you then do with those poker chips is an entirely different analysis and measurement.
Yes I did get fair value on those poker chips, but nobody is going to judge my decision on it being a success or complete failure based on the poker chips fair value. It all depends on what happens at the poker table and if I now have no retirement or I won millions.

Poker chips and draft picks both represent an unknown and can't be judged until that unknown is.. known
 

Top