Has Sweeney gained your trust?

[Reardon's Beard]

This 5th round criticism isn't a big deal. If nothing else, perhaps the scouts feel next year is much deeper in terms of talent and a 5th rounder could be as good as a 4th rounder this year. It's just one of those hockey operation decisions I am going to wager (rightly) they know their business more than most of us if not all of us. If we were saying Marchand or 46 traded for a 5th round pick then we can rightly critique and go bananas, and the Hamilton move is certainly a place for debate, but less so here.

 

[The Napkin]

As long as Zac Rinaldo is on the team my answer will remain no

 

[Eddie Jurak]

All the 5th round discussion really shows is that hockey should probably strip back to a 3 or 4 round draft and have more unrestricted amateur signing.
 
Trading anything of real value in year one for the same value in year two is an obviously bad play.  The fact that you can justify this not being a bad play shows how little value there is to the 5th round pick.

Well, here is the number of drafted players from rounds 5-7 who played at least 1 NHL game.  If I used a threshold of 50 games this would probably be cut at least in half.  
 
2000: 5th - 12/37; 6th - 7/30; 7th - 9/31
2001: 5th - 9/34; 6th - 11/31; 7th - 10/31
2002: 5th - 7/35; 6th - 10/31; 7th - 11/32
2003: 5th - 10/31; 6th - 10/30; 7th - 11/32
2004: 5th - 11/34; 6th - 9/30; 7th - 12/34
2005: 5th - 13/37; 6th - 8/32; 7th - 9/36
2006: 5th - 8/30; 6th - 7/30; 7th - 6/30
2007: 5th - 7/30; 6th - 13/30; 7th - 5/30
2008: 5th - 12/30; 6th - 11/30; 7th - 8/30
2009: 5th - 9/30; 6th - 11/30; 7th - 4/30
 
I stopped after 2009 because some players from the late rounds of 2010 are just barely making it now (example, Zach Trotman who has 29 NHL games).
 
Clearly these rounds are a crapshoot, although there are a few good players who slide this far.  (Good examples include Jamie Benn, a 5th round pick, and Torey Krug, unddrafted.)
 
The median contribution of a late round pick to his franchise, at least in terms of NHL wins, is zero.  Some of them might contribute in other ways - such as being the NHL equivalent of an "org guy" - but many don't even sign so their only contribution is in training camp.
 
So why did Sweeney deal the pick for a similar future asset?  I would say for one or both of 2 reasons:
 
1. He didn't particularly like the players available there.  The guys he wanted and thought might slide down to him were drafted ahead of that pick.  And drafting a "zero" there is worth zero (ie less than a 2016 5th, even if it is the last pick in the round).
 
2. Less need of an "org guy" than usual this year, given that even after dealing the pick he still drafted 11 players.
 
Edit:  Bottom line - Zac Rinaldo is a much better reason for not trusting Sweeney than a trade of a 5th round pick.

 

[veritas]

A better analogy is criticizing someone for being financially irresponsible because they lent someone $50 and didn't make them pay interest. It's a completely inconsequential trade. Stop being so pedantic about this, there's plenty else to roast Sweeney for

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Time to change that picture, Veritas.