McKenzie on the Wings at the deadline

[TheMule93]

I disagree with moving older players first. Nyquist and Tatar are in their late 20s. Their value is at their highest its ever going to be. They hurt our position in the standings. I would prioritize moving them, and Green above all else.

 

[Ezekial]

Our priority should be building this team for the future, Nyquist or Tatar probably hold the most value of our current "in play" forwards. If we can trade one of them to get a solid return of a prospect or draft pick you take it. I'm not saying deal Tatar for a 3rd just to get him off the team and rid ourselves of his contract, but if we can make a deal that gives us a good chance a good prospect or two we should take it.

 

[chances14]

nobody wants aging veterans on terrible contracts without giving something else up with it

nyquist and tatar's trade value are at their peaks and they will not be a part of the future core. So if you can get a decent return for them, you do it

 

[Redder Winger]

I agree that older non-essential players should be targeted first, but:

1) We don't know that Holland has a single older player that he'd be willing to part with. (Most of the worst contracts are guys widely seen as lifelong Wings, for better or for worse.)

2) I'd be surprised if any of those players yielded trades that brought picks or prospects here, versus having to duct tape an asset to the bad deal in order to make it go away, which would be a net loss at the moment.

So while I would definitely PREFER them to unload some other players first, I'm also enough of a realist that, with the glut of decent forwards on the market, I don't know whether another team would want a Nyquist or a Tatar, let alone a Helm or a Nielsen (should the latter two even be available in the first place).

I agree. the Market is limited.
But where's the story from Khan saying the Wings are shopping Howard, or Helm, Or Abdelkader, or Nielsen, or Kronwall, or Ericsson.

We've seen the following reporter by legit beat writers:
Red Wings open to trading Athanasiou
Red Wings hoping to trade Tatar or Nyquist
Red Wings going to trade Sheahan
Red Wings hoping to trade XO
Tred Wings hoping to trade Mrazek


You notice the trend?
You notice what's missing?

Priorities. Ken Holland's are whack.

 

[Frk It]

We missed the boat on trading Nyquist and Tatar. The time to trade them was probably 2 years ago when they were newer players in the league, had near 30 goal seasons, and we could sell people on their potential.

Probably right up until those Tatar/Fowler rumors, that was the time to trade those guys. You have to strike while guys have peak value. Holland is too scared to make actual hockey trades. It's saved us from some bad trades, but probably some good ones too.

 

[Pavels Dog]

We missed the boat on trading Nyquist and Tatar. The time to trade them was probably 2 years ago when they were newer players in the league, had near 30 goal seasons, and we could sell people on their potential.

Probably right up until those Tatar/Fowler rumors, that was the time to trade those guys. You have to strike while guys have peak value. Holland is too scared to make actual hockey trades. It's saved us from some bad trades, but probably some good ones too.

Except you can't know when peak value occurs. And I doubt GMs value Tatar a lot less now than they did a few years ago. I strongly doubt Fowler straight up for Tatar was ever a possibility.

 

[Frk It]

Except you can't know when peak value occurs. And I doubt GMs value Tatar a lot less now than they did a few years ago. I strongly doubt Fowler straight up for Tatar was ever a possibility.

I'd say it's within a GM's direct job duties to know when his assets are at their highest value, and try to take advantage of that.

Younger Tatar on a 2.75M caphit without a doubt has more value than current Tatar on a 5.3M caphit.

I believe HSJ reported the speculated trade was Tatar or Nyquist + 2nd for Fowler.

 

[Pavels Dog]

I'd say it's within a GM's direct job duties to know when his assets are at their highest value, and try to take advantage of that.

Younger Tatar on a 2.75M caphit without a doubt has more value than current Tatar on a 5.3M caphit.

I believe HSJ reported the speculated trade was Tatar or Nyquist + 2nd for Fowler.

Well, yeah. Larkin has enormous value right now. Doesn't mean we should trade him. It always looks easy in retrospect. Maybe if we had done that trade, Tatar would be putting up 30+ goal seasons next to Getzlaf and Fowler would be a 25-35 point d-man struggling in the #1 position on a weak team, causing people to look back in anger on that trade. Maybe Anaheim would have landed some great player with that 2nd round pick making it look even worse. That is, IF that trade was even a possibility. Maybe that was our offer and Anaheim wanted more. Maybe it was talked about but never actually offered by either side. Who knows.

I agree Holland's aversion to trades may cause us to miss out on some good ones. But generally I belive 90% of "hockey trades" are, at best, lateral moves. But I know you're higher on Fowler than I am.

 

[kliq]

I'd say it's within a GM's direct job duties to know when his assets are at their highest value, and try to take advantage of that.

Younger Tatar on a 2.75M caphit without a doubt has more value than current Tatar on a 5.3M caphit.

I believe HSJ reported the speculated trade was Tatar or Nyquist + 2nd for Fowler.

To a degree, but different players begin to regress at different stages in their careers. Its impossible to know for sure. Trading players in their early 20's because you foresee potential regression would likely lead to the opposite issue, players being traded prior to their peeks.

 

[Frk It]

To a degree, but different players begin to regress at different stages in their careers. Its impossible to know for sure. Trading players in their early 20's because you foresee potential regression would likely lead to the opposite issue, players being traded prior to their peeks.

Based on the rumblings of retention, I’d say the thing that descreased their value wasn’t regression, but their increased caphit.

We did know when their RFA status or bridge deals would end.

 

[jkutswings]

Well, yeah. Larkin has enormous value right now. Doesn't mean we should trade him. It always looks easy in retrospect. Maybe if we had done that trade, Tatar would be putting up 30+ goal seasons next to Getzlaf and Fowler would be a 25-35 point d-man struggling in the #1 position on a weak team, causing people to look back in anger on that trade. Maybe Anaheim would have landed some great player with that 2nd round pick making it look even worse. That is, IF that trade was even a possibility. Maybe that was our offer and Anaheim wanted more. Maybe it was talked about but never actually offered by either side. Who knows.

I agree Holland's aversion to trades may cause us to miss out on some good ones. But generally I belive 90% of "hockey trades" are, at best, lateral moves. But I know you're higher on Fowler than I am.

Except that Larkin and Tatar have always been apples and oranges throughout their respective careers.

Wingers are a dime a dozen compared to centers. And decent defensemen are an asset this franchise has struggled to cultivate or otherwise acquire over the last decade. So unless I'm fairly sure that a Nyquist or Tatar is becoming the next Ovechkin or Patrick Kane, I'm perfectly willing to deal them for even a second pair defensemen, without a moment of regret.

So, to use an example that isn't questioned as largely hindsight: if there was a young-ish defenseman that I believed was headed for top 4 or better on a good blue line, I would have zero issue shipping off a guy like AA. And if I believed he has top pairing in his future, I'd be willing to deal Mantha for him. Because that position - unless they're elite - is by far the easiest to replace, especially with Detroit's track record in the draft.

So yes, I was hollering to deal Tatar for Fowler. And would be ecstatic to package AA for Faulk. And would pack the bags of the next decent scoring winger, if a decent defenseman was on the table. Because wing is my lowest priority in team building, and tends to have the shortest learning curve once acquired, anyway.

 

[Run the Jewels]

One of Tatar or nyquist needs to go. I hope it’s not LA and we have to retain cause the whole point of moving them is the contract.

I'm fine with moving Tatar if we can get JAD and a second which seems to be the consensus. Salary right now isn't a concern as we shouldn't be going after big ticket free agents.

JAD gives use another really good young prospect and the 2018 2nd round pick could be a good one depending on the scouting department that makes the pick. Those are the things we need if we're going to be good again in 5-6 years.

 

[Eye of Ra]

We need to remove alot of players.

Zetterberg and Kronwall retires.

Trade Abby, Helm, Glendening, Nielsen, Jensen, Tatar, Nyquist and Ouellet.

Let go of Daley, Booth, Witkowski.

Buy out Ericsson.

Franzen? What is going on with him? Is he really that selfish that he is gonna wait out his contract until 2020 to get the money?

Try to get Panarin, Zuccarello, Hagelin, Edler, Hjalmarsson, Schmidt, Gunnarsson and Donskoi via trade/fa.

Pär Lindholm is the best center in SHL, late bloomer.

Pick up Kruger.

Hopefully we get to draft Brady Tkachuk.

Panarin - Tkachuk - Zuccarello
Mantha - Larkin - Athanasiou
Hagelin - Pär Lindholm - Donskoi
Bertuzzi - Kruger - Frk

Edler - Hjalmarsson
DeKeyser - Green
Gunnarsson - Schmidt

Howard
Mrazek

Should fit under Salary Cup. I smell Stanley Cup.

 

[kliq]

Based on the rumblings of retention, I’d say the thing that descreased their value wasn’t regression, but their increased caphit.

We did know when their RFA status or bridge deals would end.

Sure, but ideally when a player is on the assent financially, the hope is that their production will follow suit. Otherwise every time a player is about to become an RFA the logic would be to trade them.

Now if you want to argue that the Wings should have traded Nyquist after he had that 3 month span back in 2014 where he was producing like a hart candidate, that I could see the argument for as his value was never going to get any higher then that. Guy was shooting over 18%.

 

[Frk It]

Sure, but ideally when a player is on the assent financially, the hope is that their production will follow suit. Otherwise every time a player is about to become an RFA the logic would be to trade them.

Now if you want to argue that the Wings should have traded Nyquist after he had that 3 month span back in 2014 where he was producing like a hart candidate, that I could see the argument for as his value was never going to get any higher then that. Guy was shooting over 18%.

Yeah, that’s a good point too.

GM’s can’t predict the future, but at the same time I’d put foresight pretty high on the list of important qualities for a GM.

You gotta hold and be patient with certain guys, and then sometimes you gotta say “this might be as good as it’s gonna get”. It’s damn hard, but I think good GM’s do both. Look at Yzerman... kept Kucherov, but dealt Drouin.

Most of the times Holland has sold guys its when they’re late 20’s or it’s clear their development has stalled out. Which hey, props for getting a 2nd out of Smith and Jurco when they’re healthy scratches (honestly), but we haven’t gotten anything significant back in a trade in awhile here.

 

[19 for president]

The old guys are untradeable unless we are giving up young assets/picks or taking equally bad contracts back. Ericsson maybe can be traded in his last season if his play holds up. Helm maybe if we retain a mil. Abby and Nielson I think are completely untradeable. Kronner and Z are LTIR or retire candidates.

Tats, Green, Nyquist, Daley, and Danny D are our legit trade candidates in terms of returning useful assets.

Hollands inability to address the D in the years following Lids retirement was his downfall as a GM. We failed at development and aquirement.

And unlike many posters im not pro dealing all our dman as I think it would stunt the development of our forwards. I dont want to go full Edm disaster.

 

[Winger98]

And unlike many posters im not pro dealing all our dman as I think it would stunt the development of our forwards. I dont want to go full Edm disaster.

You think the Wings will lose their ability to find middle of the lineup talent just because they draft in the top5 for a few years? Because that was what really killed Edmonton for so long. They got a lot of nice pieces with their first picks, and then totally botched the rest of pretty much every draft since like 02 (or whenever Jarret Stoll was picked in the third round).

If we had a run of drafting as high as Edmonton did, I don't doubt that Holland&Co. could grab a ton of NHL talent up and down the draft, including those high end guys you can almost only get high in the first.

Credit to Chiarelli for getting creative, though, and finding different ways of botching having McDavid and still putting together weak teams that can't at least limp into the playoffs.

 

[dragonballgtz]

To a degree, but different players begin to regress at different stages in their careers. Its impossible to know for sure. Trading players in their early 20's because you foresee potential regression would likely lead to the opposite issue, players being traded prior to their peeks.

The reason to trade Nyquist or Tatar back then was never about having a sense they would regress, it was more about addressing the horrible state our defense was/is in. Around that time our defense consisted of Kronwall, Ericsson, rookie Dekeyser, Lashoff, Smith, Quincey and Kindl.

 

[kliq]

Yeah, that’s a good point too.

GM’s can’t predict the future, but at the same time I’d put foresight pretty high on the list of important qualities for a GM.

You gotta hold and be patient with certain guys, and then sometimes you gotta say “this might be as good as it’s gonna get”. It’s damn hard, but I think good GM’s do both. Look at Yzerman... kept Kucherov, but dealt Drouin.

Most of the times Holland has sold guys its when they’re late 20’s or it’s clear their development has stalled out. Which hey, props for getting a 2nd out of Smith and Jurco when they’re healthy scratches (honestly), but we haven’t gotten anything significant back in a trade in awhile here.

Fair points.

 

[kliq]

The reason to trade Nyquist or Tatar back then was never about having a sense they would regress, it was more about addressing the horrible state our defense was/is in. Around that time our defense consisted of Kronwall, Ericsson, rookie Dekeyser, Lashoff, Smith, Quincey and Kindl.

I would never argue this, we definitely should have attempted to trade one of them for a top 4 D-man.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The reason to trade Nyquist or Tatar back then was never about having a sense they would regress, it was more about addressing the horrible state our defense was/is in. Around that time our defense consisted of Kronwall, Ericsson, rookie Dekeyser, Lashoff, Smith, Quincey and Kindl.

Until we hear a solid source say Holland had an offer on the table of Nyquist/Tatar for a good top 4D (say Fowler) and declined it I don’t see the value in even being upset about the lack of such a trade. Maybe Anaheim was the party reluctant to pull the trigger?
They did end up selling low on Vatanen instead.

I would never argue this, we definitely should have attempted to trade one of them for a top 4 D-man.

Holland attempted it for years and years. We’ll never know exactly what offers he made or declined. But the rumors were constant.

 

[19 for president]

No not at all. But Ive seen a lot of posts saying lets just dump all the middling or above average talent on D ie Green, DDK, Daley, and Big E and just let Jenson, XO, Hickets etc run with it. If you ice a D much worse than ours you lose all structure, and the forwards have to focus so much on D that I think you stunt their growth offensively.

So Im very pro dealing Green, Im not pro gutting the whole D just to gut the D. I do feel Edm'd terrible D (say in the past 5 years prior to last season) was one of the main reasons all of their forwards really stunted in growth. Now that team has other filling out issues. You want to deal any of the other guys but replace them with a better or similar level D then Im fine.

You think the Wings will lose their ability to find middle of the lineup talent just because they draft in the top5 for a few years? Because that was what really killed Edmonton for so long. They got a lot of nice pieces with their first picks, and then totally botched the rest of pretty much every draft since like 02 (or whenever Jarret Stoll was picked in the third round).

If we had a run of drafting as high as Edmonton did, I don't doubt that Holland&Co. could grab a ton of NHL talent up and down the draft, including those high end guys you can almost only get high in the first.

Credit to Chiarelli for getting creative, though, and finding different ways of botching having McDavid and still putting together weak teams that can't at least limp into the playoffs.

 

[kliq]

Until we hear a solid source say Holland had an offer on the table of Nyquist/Tatar for a good top 4D (say Fowler) and declined it I don’t see the value in even being upset about the lack of such a trade. Maybe Anaheim was the party reluctant to pull the trigger?
They did end up selling low on Vatanen instead.


Holland attempted it for years and years. We’ll never know exactly what offers he made or declined. But the rumors were constant.

Incorrect verbiage on my part. I should have said, I wish Holland were successful is trading one of them for high end D-man. Was it possible? I don't know, none of us really do.

 

[Gyldenlove]

This is not a turn around, this team is not some trades, buyouts and FA signings away from being anything.

We need to get value from as many players as possible. Green obviously, XO if possible, Nyquist. If anybody will take Howard or Mrazek and AA and give something relevant in return that is peachy.

We need to ride out some of the bad contracts while collecting high draft picks and prospects. Whatever happens now has to be about the 2021-2022 season. That is the first year this team has any shot at being actually competitive in a relevant way.

There is no reason to bring on contracts running beyond the 20-21 season, that will only postpone any shot at returning to a deep playoff run.

 

[Pavels Dog]

This is not a turn around, this team is not some trades, buyouts and FA signings away from being anything.

We need to get value from as many players as possible. Green obviously, XO if possible, Nyquist. If anybody will take Howard or Mrazek and AA and give something relevant in return that is peachy.

We need to ride out some of the bad contracts while collecting high draft picks and prospects. Whatever happens now has to be about the 2021-2022 season. That is the first year this team has any shot at being actually competitive in a relevant way.

There is no reason to bring on contracts running beyond the 20-21 season, that will only postpone any shot at returning to a deep playoff run.

Ridiculous. Great chance to be competitive during ELCs of Rasmussen/Cholo/Hronek/18 1st and RFA deals of Larkin/Mantha/AA. Some overpaid veterans don’t matter if they can still be solid depth.