Quoting: mvp13
lmfao, It's just not at all how any of this works. You aren't even factoring in games played between the two. Teams don't just look at the stat sheet of one season, and pair up two trades and compare what they got, there are so many other factors in this. You are comparing these things like they are a math equation and not like a hockey trade for some very strange reason. Teams over pay and under pay all the time, nobody cares what player A got vs what player B got. Because if you want to do that, then I'm just going to hold the Tarasenko trade over your head.
Vatrano at full cap hit is worth a 1st, or a 1st and a minor pick/prospect, which I already said I'd throw in with no issues. It's not my fault your GM decided to retain 400k for no reason, because you'd get so much more if you could retain; you can look back at the many teams I've made where I did a 1st and Kakko for Vatrano + retention. We'll just have to come back to this Friday if a trade happens
It’s a simple trade comp. That is completely routine in the NHL, sports as a whole, and business in general. Is it perfect? No. That’s why it’s called a comp, it’s for comparison. Tarasenko would be considered a poor comp because he had a full no trade clause, effectively dictating where he could be traded, which completely changes the leverage dynamics of a trade because the acquiring team knows the seller has nobody else they can go to
I would love to come back to this on Friday. I just got to play this game with someone for Henrique. Unfortunately, in Vatrano’s case I’m rather confident he stays put because ANA will prefer to keep him unless someone offers something they can’t refuse (which will be more than a 1st). So the radio silence is going to imply that ANA isn’t willing to sell for what teams are willing to pay, but we won’t end up knowing what that willing payment was. That’s just my guess though, maybe I’m wrong. Let’s circle back Friday!
Either way, fun discussion. No ill will, wish your Rangers good luck 👍