Confirmed with Link: Legwand to Wings for Eaves, Jarnkrok and a cond. 3rd (2nd if we make the playoffs)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,269
14,766
Moulson and Vanek are left wings. Last I checked 2nd line centers were more valuable than 2nd line left wings...

and the last I checked.... 30 and 40 goal scorers are more valuable than 40-50 pt two way forwards.

But really that's just a reach of a statement altogether that you made. Obviously Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson are more valuable hockey players than David Legwand.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,932
15,059
Sweden
Wicked, so we will have a chance in a couple more games. So we can claw our way into a 1st round meeting vs Boston or Pittsburgh and have our lunch handed to us. Lose a 2nd instead of a 3rd and have to draft further away from 1st overall. Nice.

But that playoff streak is sure looking good!
Making the playoffs will be difficult. If we make it we're not dead in the water. Not sure how you could think that if we have a healthy Z and D back.
 

PullHard

Jul 18, 2007
28,421
2,517
Making the playoffs will be difficult. If we make it we're not dead in the water. Not sure how you could think that if we have a healthy Z and D back.

What are the chances that we have Z and D back 100% healthy? Like, in the line up every game and playing big, heavy minutes?
 

PullHard

Jul 18, 2007
28,421
2,517
If our team is 100% healthy I wouldn't hate our chances against many teams. But considering we've basically been rolling an AHL group of forwards with a couple top 6 players sprinkled in all year, ... yeah.
 

Boomhower

Registered User
Aug 23, 2003
5,169
1
Ontario
Visit site
Jiri Fischer seems to agree with our assessment with him.

Talent comes in many different forms.
Jarnkrok is more talented than our prospects the same way Rob Schremp, Kyle Wellwood and Nikolai Zherdev are more talented then 85% of players in the NHL.

Really what did you expect Fischer to say? He wasn't going to talk down one of our prospects... even if they did always intend to trade him, the org would try to pump up his value.
 

DatsyukToZetterberg

Alligator!
Apr 3, 2011
5,550
739
Island of Tortuga
and the last I checked.... 30 and 40 goal scorers are more valuable than 40-50 pt two way forwards.

But really that's just a reach of a statement altogether that you made. Obviously Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson are more valuable hockey players than David Legwand.

Vanek yes, Moulson it's debatable. Moulson hasn't produced that much in Buffalo & really he is a 50-60 point forward like Legwand. In this case the difference that Moulson is better than Legwand at goal scoring doesn't make up the the difference that Legwand is better than Moulson at everything else. Both are 50-60 point players but Legwand has a clear edge in skating & defensive ability. Moulson has the edge in age but both are UFAs. I think it's a clear edge to Legwand.
 

Spitfire11

Registered User
Jan 17, 2003
5,049
242
Ontario
What are the chances that we have Z and D back 100% healthy? Like, in the line up every game and playing big, heavy minutes?

Healthy, I like this team's chances against anyone in the league. D is better than last year, and they would be filthy upfront.

Zetterberg - Datsyuk - Alfredsson
Franzen - Legwand - Nyquist
Abdelkader - Helm - Weiss
Tatar - Sheahan - Jurco

But unfortunately this team will never be healthy ever again it seems...
 

dtones520

Registered User
Jun 10, 2008
3,097
0
Midland, MI
and the last I checked.... 30 and 40 goal scorers are more valuable than 40-50 pt two way forwards.

But really that's just a reach of a statement altogether that you made. Obviously Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson are more valuable hockey players than David Legwand.

Are they more valuable for Detroit's current need? And I think that what NYI and Buffalo got for those two players are indicators of what the entire NHL values those two players at.

But we can also agree to disagree on the value of Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson and the value of a high scoring, no defense left winger. There is a reason that Jonathan Toews has two cups and Alex Ovechkin has none.
 

RedHawkDown

still trying to trust the yzerplan
Aug 26, 2011
4,476
5,116
Canada
Holy crap. We are now comparing Jarnkrok to Rob Schremp.


People are so ridiculously loyal to management.

GUYS. WE GET IT, JARNKROK ISN'T THAT GREAT OF A PROSPECT. HE WAS NEVER GOING TO BE A ZETTERBERG, OR A DATSYUK.

He was probably going to be a Filppula. Just like Dmitrij Jaskin would be for St. Louis. Or Louis LeBlanc for Montreal.

They didn't trade either. Teams don't trade their best prospects for rentals, or for old players.

Holland made a stupid mistake which was a knee-jerk reaction to losing Datsyuk for 3 weeks and Helm for some time. This was a bad trade, no matter what way you spin it.

It's amazing how much people will change their opinion of somebody when they're no longer "one of us". Mob mentality is actually fascinating.
 

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,269
14,766
Vanek yes, Moulson it's debatable. Moulson hasn't produced that much in Buffalo & really he is a 50-60 point forward like Legwand. In this case the difference that Moulson is better than Legwand at goal scoring doesn't make up the the difference that Legwand is better than Moulson at everything else. Both are 50-60 point players but Legwand has a clear edge in skating & defensive ability. Moulson has the edge in age but both are UFAs. I think it's a clear edge to Legwand.

I think you are definitely selling Mouslon short then.

I'd gladly take Moulson over Legwand any day. He has more 30 goal seasons than Franzen. And I'd take Franzen over Legwand any day.
 

RedHawkDown

still trying to trust the yzerplan
Aug 26, 2011
4,476
5,116
Canada
Are they more valuable for Detroit's current need? And I think that what NYI and Buffalo got for those two players are indicators of what the entire NHL values those two players at.

But we can also agree to disagree on the value of Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson and the value of a high scoring, no defense left winger. There is a reason that Jonathan Toews has two cups and Alex Ovechkin has none.

Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson are both more valuable than David Legwand. Younger, better players (Vanek is a very, very good first line winger, and Moulson is a 1st line winger, while Legwand is a 2nd line center), and they actually fill a goal scoring need for Detroit which we don't have. The last thing we actaully need are more playmakers.
 

dtones520

Registered User
Jun 10, 2008
3,097
0
Midland, MI
What are the chances that we have Z and D back 100% healthy? Like, in the line up every game and playing big, heavy minutes?

They are slim, but the playoff streak is important to ownership, management and this team so you gamble on the chance that you get in and get your studs back. If you get in and don't get them back, so be it, we get to watch at least 4 more Wings games. If we miss the playoffs we still have all but one of our top prospects over the past 6 years, a ton of cap space and an entire summer for our studs to get healthy.
 

Kronwalled55

Detroit vs. Everybody
Jan 7, 2011
6,914
897
Atlanta, GA
You guys are forgetting one thing. Vanek and Moulson have a much higher chance of saying "adios" at the end of the season. Legwand wanted to come here to some extent, and you know Holland will give him a good deal (for him anyways).
 

Spitfire11

Registered User
Jan 17, 2003
5,049
242
Ontario
Thomas Vanek and Matt Moulson are both more valuable than David Legwand. Younger, better players (Vanek is a very, very good first line winger, and Moulson is a 1st line winger, while Legwand is a 2nd line center), and they actually fill a goal scoring need for Detroit which we don't have. The last thing we actaully need are more playmakers.

No, they needed a C how much more painfully obvious can it be?

Andersson
Sheahan
Emmerton
Glendening
 

Cyborg Yzerberg

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,152
2,372
Philadelphia
No, they needed a C how much more painfully obvious can it be?

Andersson
Sheahan
Emmerton
Glendening

I prolly would have let the team struggle, give valuable minutes to the kids, taken the good draft pick, and tried again next year. But, yano, we can trade a top 5 prospect and potentially a 2nd rock pick for a 34 year old center on an expiring contract.(and I like Legwand too.)
 

dtones520

Registered User
Jun 10, 2008
3,097
0
Midland, MI
Holy crap. We are now comparing Jarnkrok to Rob Schremp.


People are so ridiculously loyal to management.

GUYS. WE GET IT, JARNKROK ISN'T THAT GREAT OF A PROSPECT. HE WAS NEVER GOING TO BE A ZETTERBERG, OR A DATSYUK.

He was probably going to be a Filppula. Just like Dmitrij Jaskin would be for St. Louis. Or Louis LeBlanc for Montreal.

They didn't trade either. Teams don't trade their best prospects for rentals, or for old players.

Holland made a stupid mistake which was a knee-jerk reaction to losing Datsyuk for 3 weeks and Helm for some time. This was a bad trade, no matter what way you spin it.

It's amazing how much people will change their opinion of somebody when they're no longer "one of us". Mob mentality is actually fascinating.

Read my posts before today (there haven't been a ton) Jarnkrok is a dime a dozen prospect, I've said it before and I'll say it again. The simple fact is that he was behind Tatar, Nyquist, Sheahan, Jurco, Andersson and Glendening in the pecking order for guys that were NHL ready now. Top that off with us having Mantha, Pulkinnen, Frk, Janmark, Athanisou, Ferraro and others who are nearly just as good as Jarnkrok.

Call it a bad trade, I guess that depends on what you think this team can achieve this season. If you are like our management and myself and think Legwand gives you a fighting chance of getting in the playoffs and extending our playoff streak, which is important to the organization, then it was a solid trade. But if you are like the majority of posters on this site who worry so much about what a prospect might do in 3 seasons, then yes it was a bad trade. But by the time Jarnkrok is ready to make an impact in the NHL I'm sure we will have found a prospect or signed a player that can give us the same production and the world will move on.
 

FlashyG

Registered User
Dec 15, 2011
4,624
38
Toronto
I prolly would have let the team struggle, give valuable minutes to the kids, taken the good draft pick, and tried again next year. But, yano, we can trade a top 5 prospect and potentially a 2nd rock pick for a 34 year old center on an expiring contract.(and I like Legwand too.)

Just because we ranked Jarnkrok as the 5th ranked prospect doesn't mean the Wings saw him that way.

Especially if the rumors of his desire to go back to Sweden are true.

They may have seen the trade as getting something for an asset that wanted out and Nashville might also be well aware that he's likely to leave, which would explain the conditional nature of the draft pick.

If the trade was Eaves, and a 2nd for Legwand with an extension on his contract I doubt there would be many complaints.

Right now the trade looks terrible, but there's a lot of variables in play, we may look at the deal entirely differently by the off-season.
 

Shaman464

No u
May 1, 2009
10,271
4,466
Boston, MA
You guys are forgetting one thing. Vanek and Moulson have a much higher chance of saying "adios" at the end of the season. Legwand wanted to come here to some extent, and you know Holland will give him a good deal (for him anyways).

Why would we want him back?

The Wings without him have 6 centers as of next season:

Zetterberg
Datsyuk
Weiss
Helm
Andersson
Sheahan.

Why add to the logjam? I mean Legwand projects to be a 3-4th line center when this team is healthy. Mouslon and Vanek on the other hand next season would project as top 6 wingers pretty easily.
 

Cyborg Yzerberg

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,152
2,372
Philadelphia
Just because we ranked Jarnkrok as the 5th ranked prospect doesn't mean the Wings saw him that way.

Especially if the rumors of his desire to go back to Sweden are true.

They may have seen the trade as getting something for an asset that wanted out and Nashville might also be well aware that he's likely to leave, which would explain the conditional nature of the draft pick.

If the trade was Eaves, and a 2nd for Legwand with an extension on his contract I doubt there would be many complaints.

Right now the trade looks terrible, but there's a lot of variables in play, we may look at the deal entirely differently by the off-season.

I think how we view this trade is contingent on Jarnkrok, whether he stays or goes, and how he develops.(to a somewhat lesser extent, Nashville isn't known for developing forwards very well.)
 

Boomhower

Registered User
Aug 23, 2003
5,169
1
Ontario
Visit site
Holy crap. We are now comparing Jarnkrok to Rob Schremp.


People are so ridiculously loyal to management.

GUYS. WE GET IT, JARNKROK ISN'T THAT GREAT OF A PROSPECT. HE WAS NEVER GOING TO BE A ZETTERBERG, OR A DATSYUK.

He was probably going to be a Filppula. Just like Dmitrij Jaskin would be for St. Louis. Or Louis LeBlanc for Montreal.

They didn't trade either. Teams don't trade their best prospects for rentals, or for old players.


Holland made a stupid mistake which was a knee-jerk reaction to losing Datsyuk for 3 weeks and Helm for some time. This was a bad trade, no matter what way you spin it.

It's amazing how much people will change their opinion of somebody when they're no longer "one of us". Mob mentality is actually fascinating.

I assure you, neither did Detroit. Jurco, Mantha, Sproul, Mrazek, Sheahan and Oullette are all safe and sound. It's always debateable with prospects, but he wasn't ever rated highly by me and I doubt he was in the mind of the Wings brass either. (also Collberg was rated higher in Canadiens prospect rankings than Leblanc, so not sure of your point there exactly)

And it seems like the mob of Holland haters has now realized Jarnkrok is the next coming of Niklas Backstrom
 
Last edited:

Cyborg Yzerberg

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,152
2,372
Philadelphia
I assure you, neither did Detroit. Jurco, Mantha, Sproul, Mrazek, Sheahan and Oullette are all safe and sound. It's always debateable with prospects, but he wasn't even in my top 10 and I doubt he was in the mind of the Wings brass either.

And it seems like the mob of Holland haters has now realized Jarnkrok is the next coming of Niklas Backstrom in this case.

Holy hyperbole. :rolleyes:
 

silkyjohnson50

Registered User
Jan 10, 2007
11,301
1,178
So after initially not being in favor of this move because of Jarnkrok, I'm actually more than fine with it now.

Let me start by saying that Jarnkrok has been my favorite prospect since watching him at the World Juniors a few years back. I thought he had a real smart hockey mind that can't be taught and his skating was a big positive at that time. To me, he looked like the player that we had always hoped Filppula would become (this was before Filppula's big 11-12 season and his current season.)
With that being said, Jarnkrok was never a Datsyuk/Zetterberg level player and the chances that he becomes one are beyond slim IMO. He had the ceiling of a very good 2-way 2nd line center in my mind, which is still very valuable. But let's face it, even reaching that potential is far from guaranteed at this point. I'm still hopeful that he becomes a solid NHLer but I'm not quite as high on him as I was when I first seen him as his skating has leveled off as he's played against better competition. We all still valued him so highly because he had the highest potential amongst are centers, which is obviously the weakness in our pool.

In comes Legwand, basically the player we hoped we were getting in Weiss. You know what you're getting from Legwand. I'm thinking it's very likely that he's here for longer than just this remaining season, which brings me to the main factor in not minding this move now:

(And let me also mention we didn't lose a 1st where we will almost certainly take a center this draft)

As much as we our encouraged by our youth, our biggest window of opportunity is likely within the next 2-3 years where Datsyuk and Zetterberg can still perform at a fairly high level. As much as I liked Jarnkrok, he wasn't ready to contribute at a level as high as Legwand will for the next 2-3 seasons. I think Holland seen Legwand as an obvious need for the rest of this season, while also really going for it in the next couple seasons.

Can anyone possibly deny that Legwand isn't an upgrade over Jarnkrok for this team right now and for the next couple years? Jarnkrok wasn't going to be a #1 center in my mind. We don't have to worry about center prospects for the next few years because we now have Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Helm, Legwand, Weiss, Sheahan, and Andersson. This allows us to draft a center high this year and develop him for when these players are on their way out. Additionally, the influx of centers potentially allows us to move players (Helm, Sheahan, Tatar) for a legit top 3 defencemen, which you and I know is probably the biggest need in the next couple years.

It's funny, usually this board is so short sighted, but IMO too many of you are looking too far ahead and only thinking distant future instead of thinking now and tomorrow.

Lastly, I also thought why not tank and get a higher draft position this year. Well, that's not how Detroit runs things and shame on us for ever wanting them to do that. They can build the right way. Even if they only played the youth, we aren't likely to get a high pick. So let's tank for 3-4 spots? Grow up. For all of the complaining about Holland doing nothing since 09, look at all of the young players that have since been drafted. These turnarounds don't happen overnight and while some of you have done nothing but complain about him in that time span, Detroit has developed their deepest prospect pool I can ever remember.

And as far fetched as it is to make a run this year, if we make the playoffs you just never know. There's a reason they actually play the series out on the ice rather than paper. There are no powerhouses in the East right now. Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Helm, and Weiss could all be back. And if that happens, look out. Additionally, this is a business so making the playoffs does matter financially in ways many of us are ignorant to. And like I said, there is no tanking for #1 at this point. Even if we attempted to tank we aren't gaining much ground. But regardless, I like our team's near future and you can bet that I'll be watching and rooting for them every game from here on out.

Go Wings.
 

PelagicJoe

Registered User
Mar 20, 2012
2,153
577
St. Louis, MO
I still say Jarnkrok, (like the majority of prospects in general) was/is expendable. I like the trade for the most part. We probably could have negotiated the pick down to a 4th/conditional 3rd, but oh well. I still approve.
 

Marky9er

Registered User
Jan 30, 2008
7,476
729
I think Jaskin is a worse comparison than Schremp. We wouldn't have traded a Jaskin, just like we didn't trade a Jurco. I'm happy about the guys we didn't move, myself.
 

FlashyG

Registered User
Dec 15, 2011
4,624
38
Toronto
Why would we want him back?

The Wings without him have 6 centers as of next season:

Zetterberg
Datsyuk
Weiss
Helm
Andersson
Sheahan.

Why add to the logjam? I mean Legwand projects to be a 3-4th line center when this team is healthy. Mouslon and Vanek on the other hand next season would project as top 6 wingers pretty easily.

One of Datsyuk and Zetterberg is going to be playing the Wing.

Helm can't stay healthy, Weiss is a question mark and Andersson is completely expendable.

I don't think an extra center is really a problem at this point, unless you're Landon Ferraro.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

  • USA vs Sweden
    USA vs Sweden
    Wagers: 3
    Staked: $1,050.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Finland vs Czechia
    Finland vs Czechia
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $200.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Augsburg vs VfB Stuttgart
    Augsburg vs VfB Stuttgart
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $1,000.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Frosinone vs Inter Milan
    Frosinone vs Inter Milan
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $150.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Alavés vs Girona
    Alavés vs Girona
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $22.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad