i agree. picard and the 1st round pick shouldn’t had gone with the deal. it would had been nice if they threw in jason ward. he obviously won’t be on our team next year.

Posted by josh from tampa, fl on 09/01/08 at 06:44 PM ET

I’m unconvinced.  A poor draft record is a reason to trade away picks, not a reason to hold onto them.  If Tampa doesn’t have faith in its scouting staff to pick a good player late in the first round, then they’re better off improving their odds by getting a player someone else drafted.  (Meszaros was picked 23rd, the same year that Picard was picked 8th, interestingly.)

Looking at some past drafts, and assuming the Sharks pick becomes #25-30, I’d very roughly estimate that an average team has about a 1/4 chance of picking a player who’ll wind up better than Meszaros, about a 1/4 chance of picking a player about as good as Meszaros, about a 1/4 chance of picking a player worse than Meszaros, and a 1/4 chance of picking someone who will never be a regular NHL’er.  And depending on how much you like him, that may be understating Meszaros’ potential.  He’s a surer thing than that pick.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 09/01/08 at 07:39 PM ET

Ryan, you’ve confused your Alex Picards. The Alex Picard chosen 8th that year is a CBJ prospect who is still in that organization, although, I don’t think he’s progressed as they’d hoped.

The Alex Picard who was involved in the trade was drafted the year earlier 85th overall by Philly. He, arguably, has progressed nicely, perhaps has been the most pleasant surprise player in the trade, although, as Kevin Allen suggested, no one will suggest that he is more talented or has a higher potential than Meszaros.

I don’t disagree with you though. Ottawa has shown a pretty good record of drafting serviceable players later in the first round (although, imo, our scouting results have dropped in the past few years), whereas Tampa hasn’t seemed to have great luck with even their high picks (when they have them, and the no brainer Lecavalier and Stamkos picks aside)… the pick may be more valuable in the Sens hands, anyway

Posted by Carl Incognito on 09/01/08 at 08:29 PM ET

Oh, and btw, as a Sens fan, after the speculation of an offer sheet compensation, any deal that didn’t involve a first round pick would have been a disappointment… in fact, i’m a little sour we couldn’t squeeze Tampa’s own pick, since I’m of the opinion it’ll be a much much better pick than SJ’s, but I guess TB managment (who exactly is the real GM?) knows that’s still a possibility

Posted by Carl Incognito on 09/01/08 at 08:34 PM ET

Two Alexandre Picards?  That’s just confusing.  There must be a great Star Trek joke in there somewhere.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 09/01/08 at 08:40 PM ET

The joke’s been made, we’re sure one of them, given a few hundred years, might become a great captain someday.

Posted by SENShobo from Waterloo, ON on 09/01/08 at 09:21 PM ET

Correct me if I’m wrong.  I believe that signing Meszaros via RFA would’ve meant they’d give up a 1st, 2nd and a 3rd to OTT.  Since TB didn’t have these left to trade, these two players and the 1st are somewhat comparable.

I think this deal will pan out for TB down the line.  Is he worth the money next year? Maybe not.  They needed more skill on D and they got an upgrade here.

Who’s top four D would you rather have now? TB or OTT?

Posted by RJ on 09/01/08 at 11:12 PM ET

Ah, RJ, but it’s a question of which first round pick… with the offer sheet, they would have had to give up their own first, not the first that they acquired from SJ (which is the one they dealt)

Since I think SJ will challenge for the division and maybe conference lead, and TB will miss the playoffs, TB’s pick, IMO could be up to 20 spots better (though probably more like 12-15)… So, you can see why i’d have preferred that one

I disagree that Tampa needed more skill on D… in Matt Carle, Paul Ranger, and Filip Kuba I think they had an adequate amount of skill… what they lacked, and still lack, is toughness and defensive prowess… if you read the reports on TB’s D, nearly everyone’s would include remarks like “D-coverage needs work”, “Needs to improve toughness”, “Not very physical”, “Prone to D-zone lapses”

Posted by Carl Incognito on 09/02/08 at 01:08 PM ET