btw, I think that's a bit of an overpay for Kuzy at this point

Thats not even close to getting 4 OA. Not. Even. Close.

Actually it is a significant over pay.
Using four different draft pick ranking systems:
https://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/4/25/4262594/nhl-draft-pick-value-trading-up
13 31.20
29 15.25
46.45 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 53.40

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819
13 5.05
29 3.57
8.62
4 6.79

https://mapleleafsnation.com/2016/05/01/is-it-worth-it-to-trade-up-in-the-nhl-draft/
13 481
29 275
756 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 783

https://theathletic.com/1798463/2020/06/12/by-the-numbers-revisiting-the-true-value-of-a-draft-pick/
13 5.3
29 3
8.30 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 9

http://donttellmeaboutheart.blogspot.com/p/draft-pick-value.html
13 570
29 410
980
4 820

In the second and fifth rating the two picks from 2023 have a higher value with out the 2024 pick.
In the remaining 3 rating systems, the 2024 pick more than makes up the difference.

EDIT: Let me add, my favorite is the the first one which make the trade nearly equal.
The three picks being only slightly more valuable than the 4th over all, but one would need to over pay to move up in this years draft.
The three picks with a value of 61.5 v the 4th OA of 53.4

amullican
Actually it is a significant over pay.
Using five different draft pick ranking systems:
https://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/4/25/4262594/nhl-draft-pick-value-trading-up
13 31.20
29 15.25
46.45 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 53.40

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819
13 5.05
29 3.57
8.62
4 6.79

https://mapleleafsnation.com/2016/05/01/is-it-worth-it-to-trade-up-in-the-nhl-draft/
13 481
29 275
756 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 783

https://theathletic.com/1798463/2020/06/12/by-the-numbers-revisiting-the-true-value-of-a-draft-pick/
13 5.3
29 3
8.30 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 9

http://donttellmeaboutheart.blogspot.com/p/draft-pick-value.html
13 570
29 410
980
4 820

In the second and fifth rating the two picks from 2023 have a higher value with out the 2024 pick.
In the remaining 3 rating systems, the 2024 pick more than makes up the difference.

EDIT: Let me add, my favorite is the the first one which make the trade nearly equal.
The three picks being only slightly more valuable than the 4th over all, but one would need to over pay to move up in this years draft.
The three picks with a value of 61.5 v the 4th OA of 53.4

Nice work, and you're right that ranking systems will say this is a good trade, and trading down is almost always a value gain in those terms, but there are a few realities this year that change the landscape.

First is how top heavy this draft it. At least from what I've read from various sources the top is deep but the second half of the 1st round is closer to a standard draft. 4OA likely has closer value to 1OA or 2OA in a normal year, but 29 is still 29. Likewise the 2024 1st is going to be a standard value pick.

Second, the Sharks are desperate for elite talent. Yes we need quantity, but we need quality more. Our rebuild has to kick off right with top end players this year and next. 13OA will be solid, but its not going to be Smith/Michkov/Carlsson and we badly need multiple players of that caliber.

If Shark's fan's say its not close it isn't because the value isn't there, its because its going to take an insane overpayment to get 4OA from us. The kind of overpayment GM's are probably just not going to pay unless they are desperate.

Grier himself said it would take a “significant offer”. This might be a fair offer but it is a longshot from significant

amullican
Actually it is a significant over pay.
Using five different draft pick ranking systems:
https://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/4/25/4262594/nhl-draft-pick-value-trading-up
13 31.20
29 15.25
46.45 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 53.40

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819
13 5.05
29 3.57
8.62
4 6.79

https://mapleleafsnation.com/2016/05/01/is-it-worth-it-to-trade-up-in-the-nhl-draft/
13 481
29 275
756 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 783

https://theathletic.com/1798463/2020/06/12/by-the-numbers-revisiting-the-true-value-of-a-draft-pick/
13 5.3
29 3
8.30 then add in the 2024 first which should be equal to the 29th OA of 2023
4 9

http://donttellmeaboutheart.blogspot.com/p/draft-pick-value.html
13 570
29 410
980
4 820

In the second and fifth rating the two picks from 2023 have a higher value with out the 2024 pick.
In the remaining 3 rating systems, the 2024 pick more than makes up the difference.

EDIT: Let me add, my favorite is the the first one which make the trade nearly equal.
The three picks being only slightly more valuable than the 4th over all, but one would need to over pay to move up in this years draft.
The three picks with a value of 61.5 v the 4th OA of 53.4

Nice work, and you're right that ranking systems will say this is a good trade, and trading down is almost always a value gain in those terms, but there are a few realities this year that change the landscape.

First is how top heavy this draft it. At least from what I've read from various sources the top is deep but the second half of the 1st round is closer to a standard draft. 4OA likely has closer value to 1OA or 2OA in a normal year, but 29 is still 29. Likewise the 2024 1st is going to be a standard value pick.

Second, the Sharks are desperate for elite talent. Yes we need quantity, but we need quality more. Our rebuild has to kick off right with top end players this year and next. 13OA will be solid, but its not going to be Smith/Michkov/Carlsson and we badly need multiple players of that caliber.

If Shark's fan's say its not close it isn't because the value isn't there, its because its going to take an insane overpayment to get 4OA from us. The kind of overpayment GM's are probably just not going to pay unless they are desperate.

You are correct about the "insane overpayment", is not a first over the value close to insane.
As you have noted my responce was to "Thats not even close to getting 4 OA. Not. Even. Close." and I provided the evidence that it was more than a fair offer, as all but the first draft value charts clearly indicate that this offer is a huge over payment with the 2024 first being the icing.

It is interesting how values are perceived.
Before the 2021 draft, I proposed trading the first OA for all three Blue Jacket first round picks, 5-12-25.
Using the first draft value:
5 49.20
11 34.90
25 17.83
101.93
While the 1st OA has a value of 100.
All Blue Jacket fans railed against it even though it was close to value.
In this instance, we have push back from getting 3 first round picks for the 4th OA.
I guess, it is all a matter of perspective, but in reality, the Sharks have a very poor prospect pool (ranked 21st https://theathletic.com/3510017/2022/08/22/nhl-pipeline-rankings-2022-prospects/) and Greir may want to have more darts to throw at the prospect pool to restock the team.
Let's not forget back in 2015 McDavid was destined to be the game changer yet Edmonton has not progressed to the finals since that draft.

Using the first model, 31.2(13OA) + 15.25(29OA) + 15.25(2024 pick) = 61.7 which is indeed higher than 53.4 (4OA). About the value of a 40-45 pick on the same scale. But this isn't a normal 4th round pick. Smith or Michkov would go even higher in other years so the value of 4OA this year is probably closer to 69.9 or 59.4 for 2OA or 3OA. Split the difference and call it 64.7. Now the three proposed 1st round picks are an underpay or depending on how you adjust the value of 13oa they are close to being an event payment for 4OA.

These models aren't perfect, but using this one it looks like in a normal draft year its an overpayment by CAR of one 2nd round pick worth of value. That doesn't qualify as insane for me. You're right, you can't draft one player and hope they carry you're team to a championship, but you do still need star players, even if they're just a start to building a contender. This is SJ's chance to take a shot at getting a star center and we really can't afford to pass it up

Yeah seems like I still overestimated it a bit. Which means Wyshynski's trade is a crazy over pay. I'm not the best at gauging trades where somebody retains salary lol