Dallas Stars TIDBITS & QUICK HITS!

It's not really hard to figure out. People here are dancing around the fact that Silfverberg was a TOP prospect at the time with some NHL time, Noesen was a very solid prospect and a 1st is a 1st.

You can sugarcoat it all day long that the Sens picked out the guys they wanted etc., but the fact remains that the price was much higher for Ryan.

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ryan's younger? Yeah...no kidding lol.

Silfverberg wasn't a TOP prospect in the NHL. Never was.

SpezDispenser wrote:It's not really hard to figure out.  People here are dancing around the fact that Silfverberg was a TOP prospect at the time with some NHL time, Noesen was a very solid prospect and a 1st is a 1st.

You can sugarcoat it all day long that the Sens picked out the guys they wanted etc., but the fact remains that the price was much higher for Ryan.

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ryan's younger?  Yeah...no kidding lol.

So.... the Sens paid more for a younger player, with no history of injuries, on a better deal, signed longer term... than DAL paid for an older player, with a history of injuries, getting overpaid, on an expiring contract... What the Diddle is your point again?

Ev wrote:Silfverberg wasn't a TOP prospect in the NHL. Never was.

He was if the only prospects you paid attention to were from OTT. True story.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:It's not really hard to figure out.  People here are dancing around the fact that Silfverberg was a TOP prospect at the time with some NHL time, Noesen was a very solid prospect and a 1st is a 1st.

You can sugarcoat it all day long that the Sens picked out the guys they wanted etc., but the fact remains that the price was much higher for Ryan.

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ryan's younger?  Yeah...no kidding lol.

So.... the Sens paid more for a younger player, with no history of injuries, on a better deal, signed longer term... than DAL paid for an older player, with a history of injuries, getting overpaid, on an expiring contract... What the Diddle is your point again?

The point is people are sugarcoating the hell out of this and saying that it's a comparable package and we didn't pay that much for Ryan, when it's flat out not true. We paid a huge price.

The thing I remember at the time is everyone saying if we can't get bobby to resign then this is terrible and diddles the trade up

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:It's not really hard to figure out.  People here are dancing around the fact that Silfverberg was a TOP prospect at the time with some NHL time, Noesen was a very solid prospect and a 1st is a 1st.

You can sugarcoat it all day long that the Sens picked out the guys they wanted etc., but the fact remains that the price was much higher for Ryan.

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ryan's younger?  Yeah...no kidding lol.

So.... the Sens paid more for a younger player, with no history of injuries, on a better deal, signed longer term... than DAL paid for an older player, with a history of injuries, getting overpaid, on an expiring contract... What the Diddle is your point again?

The point is people are sugarcoating the hell out of this and saying that it's a comparable package and we didn't pay that much for Ryan, when it's flat out not true.  We paid a huge price.

Map it out:

Chiasson = Silfverberg (Chiasson has played 86 NHL games and put up 42 points, Silfverberg has played 100 NHL games and put up 42 points)
Guptill < Noesen (I think anyway)
Paul + 2nd = 1st (or close to it)

I don't see a huge disparity there. And the disparity that is there, I account for by virtue of Ryan being young, signed longer term, and with a better track record for health. So once again... No. Big. Deal.

Flo The Action wrote:The thing I remember at the time is everyone saying if we can't get bobby to resign then this is terrible and diddles the trade up

Stupid Murray and his lack of clairvoyance and/or Jedi mind powers!!   

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:It's not really hard to figure out.  People here are dancing around the fact that Silfverberg was a TOP prospect at the time with some NHL time, Noesen was a very solid prospect and a 1st is a 1st.

You can sugarcoat it all day long that the Sens picked out the guys they wanted etc., but the fact remains that the price was much higher for Ryan.

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ryan's younger?  Yeah...no kidding lol.

So.... the Sens paid more for a younger player, with no history of injuries, on a better deal, signed longer term... than DAL paid for an older player, with a history of injuries, getting overpaid, on an expiring contract... What the Diddle is your point again?

The point is people are sugarcoating the hell out of this and saying that it's a comparable package and we didn't pay that much for Ryan, when it's flat out not true.  We paid a huge price.

Map it out:

Chiasson = Silfverberg (Chiasson has played 86 NHL games and put up 42 points, Silfverberg has played 100 NHL games and put up 42 points)
Guptill < Noesen (I think anyway)
Paul + 2nd = 1st (or close to it)

I don't see a huge disparity there. And the disparity that is there, I account for by virtue of Ryan being young, signed longer term, and with a better track record for health. So once again... No. Big. Deal.

Yeah, maybe.

If you want to break it down for the Sens, I'd say that we bought really, really low on Chiasson and Anaheim bought really high on Silfverberg. Chiasson had a horrible bout of the flu last year and lost like 20 pounds apparently. So, if you mix that with the inevitable ebbs and flows of a rookie season, he may have been more like a 45-50 point rookie - which is very solid obviously.

We'll see how it all shakes out, I don't begrudge the Spezza trade when the chips are down. I was convinced we would get more than that, but in the end it doesn't matter.

Really, the only thing that matters to me is putting pen to paper with Ryan. Spezza leaving I couldn't possibly care less about. Alfie leaving stung at the time badly, but it's done now - and so is he I think. Now it's about continuing our trajectory upwards - last season aside - and signing a major core player (yes Ev, a core player).

NEELY wrote:Even then the deal they got for Ryan wasn't much different than what the Sens got for Spezza.  Sens took developed prospects they have a better handle on and a 2nd round pick over a 1st round pick, so what?  People love making judgement calls before anything has played out but it's what insane people do.

How many of the assets that went to Anahiem have played a game for the Ducks?  

A first round pick (especially a top-10) really skews the deal in Anaheim's favor. You just can't argue that. Now, what that pick turns out to be is a completely different story.

The 1st round pick hasn't played a game, sure, but Silfverberg would have had a full season if he didn't get his arm broken (and those aren't the nagging/recurring injuries). He had a pretty good start -- who knows where he would have ended up if not for the bad break. Too early to tell.

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:It's hard to argue it one way or the other, but I think if you were to poll actual GMs, they would concur that the package we sent to Anaheim was much more valuable than what we got back for Spezza.

  It's like you didn't register anything from the above. Carry on.

Value is value.  It's hard to argue against the package we sent to Anaheim being more valuable than the one we got back for Spezza.  

Value at the time the deal was made -- absolutely! Anaheim got a better deal. You've got to compare seeds to seeds and not the fruit those seeds will bear in a few years' time.

LeKing wrote:Bobby Ryan also had more value than Spezza

Yes. Very true.

NEELY wrote:Yah I am not sure how anyone can't see the difference in value between Spezza and Ryan.  With that said I am not convinced Ottawa didn't get the best player back vs everything else in both deal (Silfverberg, Noesen, Guptil, Paul, and Ritchie) on top of everything else.  What Paul and Guptil turn into will be the deciding factor in what kind of deal was made, if one of those guys turns out then it was a good deal, if both turn out if was a steal/great deal, if neither and Chaisson shows he isn't anything more than a 3rd line winger then we can discuss the deal being a flop and not getting value.

Fact:  Ottawa's jr/ncaa/european scouting is second to none.  

That's not the point. You were trying to "prove" that the deal the Sens got for Spezza was just as good as what they gave up for Ryan. Simply not true.

wprager wrote:

NEELY wrote:Yah I am not sure how anyone can't see the difference in value between Spezza and Ryan.  With that said I am not convinced Ottawa didn't get the best player back vs everything else in both deal (Silfverberg, Noesen, Guptil, Paul, and Ritchie) on top of everything else.  What Paul and Guptil turn into will be the deciding factor in what kind of deal was made, if one of those guys turns out then it was a good deal, if both turn out if was a steal/great deal, if neither and Chaisson shows he isn't anything more than a 3rd line winger then we can discuss the deal being a flop and not getting value.

Fact:  Ottawa's jr/ncaa/european scouting is second to none.  

That's not the point.  You were trying to "prove" that the deal the Sens got for Spezza was just as good as what they gave up for Ryan.  Simply not true.

I think it is definitely just as good.

No, it's not. It's close but you just can't discount a top-10 pick. Who knows what the Sens would've done with that.

wprager wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:It's hard to argue it one way or the other, but I think if you were to poll actual GMs, they would concur that the package we sent to Anaheim was much more valuable than what we got back for Spezza.

  It's like you didn't register anything from the above. Carry on.

Value is value.  It's hard to argue against the package we sent to Anaheim being more valuable than the one we got back for Spezza.  

Value at the time the deal was made -- absolutely!  Anaheim got a better deal.  You've got to compare seeds to seeds and not the fruit those seeds will bear in a few years' time.  

And Ottawa got a way better player than Spezza, lol.

NEELY wrote:
And Ottawa got a way better player than Spezza, lol.

I already agreed with that:

wprager wrote:

LeKing wrote:Bobby Ryan also had more value than Spezza

Yes. Very true.

Is this the Ottawa tidbits thread or the Dallas tidbits thread?