I think the Lindholm trade was a good indicator of how high Buchnevichs value could be.
In comparison:
Age: Both are going to be 29 this year, with Buch being slightly younger.
Production over the past 3 seasons:
* Lindholm: 73-105-178 --> Games Played: 211 --> PPG: 0.844
* Buchnevich: 73-109-182 --> Games Played: 183 --> PPG: 0.995
So by the numbers Buchnevich is a point per game player as opposed to Lindholm who is around a 70 point player. Both play similar roles for their team as they are important at 5v5, powerplay, and penalty kill.
Now here's where the value gets interesting. Lindholm, at the moment, is a rental. There was no contract in place when he was traded and he could end up walking in free agency. While I doubt that happens it is a possibility. On the other hand Buch has an extra year on his deal, instantly making him more valuable. If the Blues were to retain 50% of that deal, his value goes up more. The only difference in value is Buch is a winger (although he can play a little center) and Lindholm is a center which is a more premium position.
So at the very least Buch is worth the same as what Lindholm got.
That value being a late first round pick, 4th round pick, B prospect, C prospect, and a top 9 cap dump.
Now realistically speaking, the extra year on Buch's deal will cost a 2nd round pick, and 50% retained would cost an additional 2nd round pick. That's a lot but salary is the name of the game in the NHL and costs a lot. The problem is, will any team be willing to give 1 first, 3 seconds, a B prospect, C prospect, and NHL player for Buch, likely not. In that case, the Blues will look for a high end prospect that would cover the cost of all the 2nd round picks. (I value 2 late seconds as 1 late first so you could also view it as 2 firsts, a 2nd, B prospect, C prospect, and an NHL player).
That value is very similar to the Timo Meier trade:
Meier got a 1st, 2nd, B+ prospect (Mukhamadullin), young NHL player with 2nd round value (Zetterlund), a C prospect (Okhotiuk), and a cap dump (Johnsson).
In the deal above you would add another 2nd for the extra year on Buch's deal.
Every contender would likely be interested in Buch but a few of the teams that have specifically been named as being interested are the Oilers, Rangers, Flyers, Red Wings, Capitals, and the Bruins. Let's mock some trades below.
I know every fan will complain that it's overvalued in the trades but you saw what it cost to get Lindholm, it will cost more for Buch. It also depends if Army wants to move him or not. The blues aren't real contenders and moving Buch would greatly accelerate the rebuild. Even though Buch is an amazing player I don't think we reach contender status until he is in his later 30s so extending him might be the wrong move.
Note in the mock trades I went with the are slightly under the value Meier got. Buch likely gets more but it gets complicated making a trade that big.
I think of all the teams trading with Detroit makes the most sense for the Blues. They have the prospects the Blues would want and a deep enough farm system where they wouldn't be hurt trading away guys.
Value:
1st
B+ prospect (Othmann)
Young NHL player (Kakko)
C prospect (Robertson)
Note: I'm not a big fan of this trade for either side really. I think it would be a bad look if the Rangers gave up all this when they gave away Buch for a 2nd and Blais. As for the Blues, they're not getting any defensive prospect to be excited about here and that's what they need.
Value:
1st
B prospect (Bourgault)
Young NHL player (Broberg)
C prospect (Yevseyev)
Cap Dump (Ceci)
Cost of players being lower value than other trades (2nd)
Note: Again, not really a fan of this trade. I don't think the Oilers could afford to sign Buch long term and I would be shocked if they gave up all this for a rental. As for the Blues, nothing truly excites me in this deal.
Value:
A prospect (Leonard)
Young NHL player (Lapierre)
2nd
Leonard is likely untouchable BUT if they are going to move him, it might as well be for an elite first line forward. Buch right now is what Leonard MIGHT be. So if Washington is trying to stay competitive for Ovie, this could make sense.
Value:
1st
Young NHL player (McMichael)
C prospect (Alexeyev)
1st to Dump Kuznetsov
Washington makes a lot of sense to me in a Buch trade so it's interesting to see what they have. Dumping Kuznetsov and getting Buch likely costs more than this though as I didn't even include a B prospect.
Value:
1st
Young NHL player (Frost)
Young NHL player (Brink)
Cap Dump (Atkinson)
The Flyers actually seem like an amazing fit for Buch but still are they really going to be buyers this early into their rebuild? They should still have their sights set on the future so I don't know if dumping future assets into Buch is a good idea. This trade I went light with the return the Blues would likely want Bonk but that would be a hard ask from the Flyers.
Frederic is borderline untouchable for the bruins IMO. On pace for over 20 goals with basically no PP time, along with the added physicality he brings. Not a guy they're gonna want to part with.
I love Buch but no way in hell Caps pay close to any of that for either. They wouldn't even do Leonard straight up let alone adding Lap and a 2nd. For the 2nd trade they have cap room to keep or eat half on Kuzy for a late pick so they don't need to pay to move him. They also aren't trading their 2024 1st.
Caps and Buch aren't really a good trade partners. He's 28 and only has 1 more year on his deal after this, they aren't going to pay an arm and a leg for that. Maybe if he was 24-25 and had 4-5 more years on his deal. You need to find a team who is a great winger away from contending, that isn't the Caps.
I appreciate the fact that all of the proposed offers are as realistic as possible. I do think the Blues are not as far off from being good as people think. That said, it makes total sense to trade Buch, but they may want to have some sort of idea for a replacement, wether internally or outside the organization.
The only ones that would interest me are the first Washington trade (and they'd sooner bang MIckey Mouse than trade Leonard) and maybe Boston.
The main issue I have is accepting 4-5-6 pieces for one player. That's just not good or realistic. Condense whatever value you think is required to 2-3 pieces max. We ain't gonna take on four contracts or let someone beef up the offer with mid picks. Condense. Distill.
I'd love Buch for the canes. What would a fair comp look like? 1st+Flyers 2nd+Morrow+Drury?
That would be about right. I was very surprised that the canes haven't been linked to Buch. Maybe they will be soon we'll see he would be a great fit there.
That would be about right. I was very surprised that the canes haven't been linked to Buch. Maybe they will be soon we'll see he would be a great fit there.
Don likes to stay off the radar and all the big names we've been linked to haven't panned out (Tkachuk, Meier, Karlsson specific examples). If something were to happen it would come out of the blue like the Skjei and Trocheck trades we made a few deadlines ago.
I appreciate the thought in your description but at the end of the day all of these arguments are meaningless. NHL teams decide whether they're going to trade a player or not, then worry about price -- there's no magical 'godfather' offer or breaking point at which they make decisions like that. IF (and that's a big if) the Blues decide to trade Buch, the return will be extremely predictable.
At the end of the day, he is a good (even very good!) player but not a superstar approaching 30. Those players ALWAYS go for exactly 1 first, 1 a B- to B+ prospect, and salary filler to make the deal work. Sometimes you get that extra second, sometimes you don't. Lindholm is just the latest in a long line of the exact same returns for this level of player. Horvat, Meier, DeBrincat, Bertuzzi, ROR, Tarasenko, Fiala, Giroux, Tofolli, Reinhart, Mantha are all just forward examples from the last 3 years. Add H. Lindholm, Orlov, Kuemper in there as well for even more comps or if you want to stretch back the time period a bit add in Zucker, Stone, Pacioretty, Hall, K Hayes as well.
The ONLY players who have been moved for significantly more than this are Eichel and Tkachuk -- two players who could make legitimate claims to being top 10 forwards in the league both now and at the time they were traded -- and Brandon Hagel, who had a uniquely low cap hit / buyer in Tampa. I think Buchnevich is certainly towards the higher end of players in that first group, but definitely not in the Eichel/Tkachuk tier.
The final thing I'd say is about "cap dumps." A cap dump is taking on a bad contract (especially one with many years left) in exchange for picks. Most trades for big players don't involve dumps but rather salary filler. Guys who probably are overpaid/paid for too long but are necessarily taken back to facilitate a deal. Think Craig Smith to WSH last year in the Orlov deal, Rutta/Granlund/Petry/Hoffman in the Karlsson deal, Beauvillier in the Horvat deal, and most recently Kuzmenko in the Lindholm deal. These players do not increase the value that a team gets back for taking them - it's just the cost of doing business. Ceci/Forbort/Atkinson all fall into this category and would not increase the amount of futures needed for a deal. Even Kuznetsov is bordering right on that level for that proposal, and certainly wouldn't add a whole other first rounder.
I appreciate the thought in your description but at the end of the day all of these arguments are meaningless. NHL teams decide whether they're going to trade a player or not, then worry about price -- there's no magical 'godfather' offer or breaking point at which they make decisions like that. IF (and that's a big if) the Blues decide to trade Buch, the return will be extremely predictable.
At the end of the day, he is a good (even very good!) player but not a superstar approaching 30. Those players ALWAYS go for exactly 1 first, 1 a B- to B+ prospect, and salary filler to make the deal work. Sometimes you get that extra second, sometimes you don't. Lindholm is just the latest in a long line of the exact same returns for this level of player. Horvat, Meier, DeBrincat, Bertuzzi, ROR, Tarasenko, Fiala, Giroux, Tofolli, Reinhart, Mantha are all just forward examples from the last 3 years. Add H. Lindholm, Orlov, Kuemper in there as well for even more comps or if you want to stretch back the time period a bit add in Zucker, Stone, Pacioretty, Hall, K Hayes as well.
The ONLY players who have been moved for significantly more than this are Eichel and Tkachuk -- two players who could make legitimate claims to being top 10 forwards in the league both now and at the time they were traded -- and Brandon Hagel, who had a uniquely low cap hit / buyer in Tampa. I think Buchnevich is certainly towards the higher end of players in that first group, but definitely not in the Eichel/Tkachuk tier.
The final thing I'd say is about "cap dumps." A cap dump is taking on a bad contract (especially one with many years left) in exchange for picks. Most trades for big players don't involve dumps but rather salary filler. Guys who probably are overpaid/paid for too long but are necessarily taken back to facilitate a deal. Think Craig Smith to WSH last year in the Orlov deal, Rutta/Granlund/Petry/Hoffman in the Karlsson deal, Beauvillier in the Horvat deal, and most recently Kuzmenko in the Lindholm deal. These players do not increase the value that a team gets back for taking them - it's just the cost of doing business. Ceci/Forbort/Atkinson all fall into this category and would not increase the amount of futures needed for a deal. Even Kuznetsov is bordering right on that level for that proposal, and certainly wouldn't add a whole other first rounder.
Can't argue about the salary + B prospect + late 1st package for a 1yr rental, but Buch would be a 2-yr rental, at either 5.8m or 2.9m. If no one wants to offer better than the stock rental package, no reason to do it until next season.
Can't argue about the salary + B prospect + late 1st package for a 1yr rental, but Buch would be a 2-yr rental, at either 5.8m or 2.9m. If no one wants to offer better than the stock rental package, no reason to do it until next season.
Quite a few of those guys had much more than 1 year of team control. As always not saying that it doesn't objectively make sense but NHL GMs have a very strange perception of player value and have consistently demonstrated so
aedoran et BluesReport18 a aimé ceci.
Répondre
Neighbours,
CapFriendly
CapFriendly