Rumor: McKenzie says Wings shopping Ouellet

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,205
12,195
Tampere, Finland
It's not anger.
It's pointing out the obvious.

A bad team with the highest payroll and oldest roster in the NHL shouldn't be moving out young, cheap players.

They should be moving out old, expensive players.

It's common sense.

Nah, Holland should be moving out left-handed defencemen who will have value.

Old experienced players with negative value players are PRETTY BAD TRADE IDEAS. Better just wait their contracts until the end. Time will open cap room for future contracts.

Trade mediocre lefties who will have some value out for future asset. Replace them with a right-handed PROSPECT like Hronek and/or Saarijärvi (later Sambrook/Lindström) to build BETTER OVERALL DEFENCE with perfect handness pairs. We have too many lefties, trade them out.

That's what smart GM should do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nbwingsfan

waltdetroit

Registered User
Jul 20, 2010
2,649
526
Just a thought, some teams in the AHL could use some help going for the Calder which also gets their prospects some PO experience. Oullette has value there similar to our trade for McIrath
 

kliq

Registered User
Dec 17, 2017
2,727
1,319
Its in his contract (as with most long term deals Holland signed past few years) and is his right.

Sometimes players don't wanna go to a particular city, team, or coach.Or they just don't want to leave. Recall Filppula rejected a trade to Toronto last deadline.

Agreed, I'm not disputing that he has a no-trade clause.

Also, I completely understand that players may not want to go to a certain city, but I think its fair to say that Green will have multiple suitors and I cant see him saying no to every option when its only going to be for a few months and he will be given a chance to win a cup.

Filppula did reject a trade to Toronto, but he had years left, not months and he did agree to go to Philly. It's completely different.
 

kliq

Registered User
Dec 17, 2017
2,727
1,319
So? Let's hear the rumor they're available.
I'd love to hear McKenzie report that Holland has made Ericsson available.

But he didn't. He reported that Ouelett is available.

Because it's easy to move young, cheap players that have upside.

And Holland only picks the low hanging fruit, because it's easy and he;s complacent and lazy.

So is it fair to say that your issue isn't so much that XO is being traded, and that your anger stems from the fact that guys like Helm, Nielsen, E, Howard etc. are not being actively shopped?

If so, I see your point but I dont see it as one or the other. What I would like to see is the Wings keep any player who has top 4 upside, and anyone who doesnt fit into that mould being shipped out minus a couple vets to help the kids out. With that being said, I would trade any of the vets on D if we got an offer.
 

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,205
12,195
Tampere, Finland
There's 8 defencemen now if we look at the big picture.

1. Green
2. Kronwall
3. DeKeyser
4. Daley
5. Ericsson
6. Ouellet
7. Jensen
8. Hronek (knocking the door)

What Holland is going to do?

A) trade Green for future draft picks.
B) trade Ouellet, who has value, for future draft picks.

C) bring in a prospect, like Hronek.
D) sign UFA defenceman, like Jack Johnson, a free asset, to be sold later, again, for futures.

And next year we will have:

1. Johnson
2. DeKeyser
3. Kronwall
4. Daley
5. Ericsson
6. Hronek
7. Jensen

Next year he is gonna sell bodies from Kronwall/Daley/Ericsson/Jensen group.

And will bring kids in. And will sign UFAs again.

Reapeat, repeat. UFAs are not any kind of problem. Always a free asset. Sell another asset for futures. Repeat. Bring a kid in drafted with a pick from earlier trade for futures. Repeat. Repeat.

At some point you will start winning in values, when you never buy players. The talent group grows bigger, towards a contender talent group.

We did sell futures for 2 decades. Now do it in an opposite way and as long as we get lucky in lottery, or some of multiple draft picks will surprise us.

Only thing you have to avoid, is losing assets for nothing. If some player is gonna retire as a Wing because of injuries, then so be it. It's life, bad things happen. But turn valuable players for picks. Doesn't matter old or young. If you turn old player for futures, great. But it you turn mediocre player for futures, also great. Doesn't matter. Transfer the player value forward. But don't lose anybody to UFA you did pay for. Do it exact opposite way, turn free assets for picks. Repeat.
 
Last edited:

StargateSG1

Registered User
Nov 26, 2016
1,787
654
Of course it's Oullette, when the genius should be finding any way to move that DDK pylon.
Oh well, Maybe the new GM will.
 

dragonballgtz

Registered User
Jul 30, 2014
1,898
861
It's not anger.
It's pointing out the obvious.

A bad team with the highest payroll and oldest roster in the NHL shouldn't be moving out young, cheap players.

They should be moving out old, expensive players.

It's common sense.

This board *****es and cries about the direction of the franchise....
Yet when the media reports they want to trade XO or Sheahan or Mrazek .... they're all about it. When someone points out that they should be trading Ericsson, Helm or Howard instead, they vigorously defend Holland.

Apparently unaware of how Holland locked himself into an expensive, old and mediocre roster.

Trade them all... honestly I would love for all the old farts gone as well. Personally I would be up for trading Z as well, but all these old timers have horrible contracts
 

Run the Jewels

Make Detroit Great Again
Jun 22, 2006
13,827
1,754
In the Garage
Big concern with Jack Johnson is he's going to want a contact long on term and dollars and Kenny is just the got to give it to him. This is why it's essential for Holland to retire as soon as the season is over. Once Jack Johnson's agent gets Holland into negotiations Johnson is officially unmovable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Winger98

TheMule93

On a mule rides the swindler
May 26, 2015
12,474
6,522
Ontario
Big concern with Jack Johnson is he's going to want a contact long on term and dollars and Kenny is just the got to give it to him. This is why it's essential for Holland to retire as soon as the season is over. Once Jack Johnson's agent gets Holland into negotiations Johnson is officially unmovable.

This is terrifying me too
 

kliq

Registered User
Dec 17, 2017
2,727
1,319
Big concern with Jack Johnson is he's going to want a contact long on term and dollars and Kenny is just the got to give it to him. This is why it's essential for Holland to retire as soon as the season is over. Once Jack Johnson's agent gets Holland into negotiations Johnson is officially unmovable.

With the big 3 d-men possibly becoming available next off season, I don't see Holland going after a guy like JJ. At least I hope not.
 

Redder Winger

Registered User
May 4, 2017
3,700
730
So is it fair to say that your issue isn't so much that XO is being traded, and that your anger stems from the fact that guys like Helm, Nielsen, E, Howard etc. are not being actively shopped?

If so, I see your point but I dont see it as one or the other. What I would like to see is the Wings keep any player who has top 4 upside, and anyone who doesnt fit into that mould being shipped out minus a couple vets to help the kids out. With that being said, I would trade any of the vets on D if we got an offer.

Priorities.
Priorities.
Priorities.
 

Oddbob

Registered User
Jan 21, 2016
15,907
10,451
I don't see the big concern with him getting traded, as none of us will miss anything he brings to the table. He is not part of our future core or anything close, isn't improving or anything, and even if a draft pick turns to nothing, we would basically have what we have now. Ouellet is a dime a dozen. If the team trades a Larkin or Mantha or AA, then I see getting up in arms about it, but not spare parts that aren't improving and no loss when they don't play. Our team played no or worse in the recent games he sat out, and the same with the game Jensen sat out. Trading Ouellet allows another (Hicketts or someone else) a look and chance to be part of our future.

Also Redder, crying about Jurco, Sheahan? Jurco, is he even in Chicago's lineup, doing anything of prominence, not likely and Sheahan was just another warm body providing nothing for us. Honest question, do we win even one more game with Sheahan in our lineup? Youth for youth's sake is not a good game to play when you are talking about the Sheahan's, Joakim Andersson's, Teemu Pulkkinen's of the world. In reference, Larkin, Mantha, AA, and Bertuzzi came into out lineup and made impact very soon after debuting, so they should and have played their way onto our team, but if you are young, come up and don't bring much to the table, (Pulkkinen, Mursak, Andersson, etc.) then you should either be in the press box, minors or traded.
 

Mlotek

Registered User
Feb 28, 2017
921
346
South of US Border
Your "facts" are the consequence of a player not performing, you're ignoring the actual reasons a player gets reduced icetime or a different role. Is it a fact that I don't score more NHL goals because I don't get the opportunity to play top 9 minutes on an NHL team? Yeah, but it's also a fact I'm nowhere near good enough to play in the NHL to begin with. Jurco is not in the NHL either. You can believe that's because he was "ruined" by getting some icetime with Glendening, but again; he was vastly outperformed offensively by guys like Glenny, Helm, Cole etc. so why would any coach in their right mind give Jurco a bigger role? Oh right, I forgot, because he's young..


Has he? He's been okay, but we're talking limited icetime. Do you think he outperforms anyone in the top 9? I would doubt it.

What you need to realize is that Blashill isn't coaching to get maximum returns on players at the TDL. He has no reason to try and showcase Booth for a trade.

Outperforms Helm by a wide mile.

Wouldn't mind him taking minutes from Abdulqadeer either. Although I must admit, I have a big bias against Abby.
 

chances14

Registered User
Jan 7, 2010
10,399
511
Michigan
common sense would dictate you move out players that you believe have no future with the team whether they be old veterans on bad contracts or young guys on cheap contracts. On a rebuilding team in the beginning stages, acquiring as many draft picks as possible should be the number one priority.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,872
14,973
Sweden
Big concern with Jack Johnson is he's going to want a contact long on term and dollars and Kenny is just the got to give it to him. This is why it's essential for Holland to retire as soon as the season is over. Once Jack Johnson's agent gets Holland into negotiations Johnson is officially unmovable.
I don’t see it. Think he’d rather try to re-sign Green if anything.

Outperforms Helm by a wide mile.

Wouldn't mind him taking minutes from Abdulqadeer either. Although I must admit, I have a big bias against Abby.
Booth has been solid but let’s not push it. Chances are he’d quickly fall apart if given tougher assignments and bigger minutes.
 
Last edited:

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,205
12,195
Tampere, Finland
Booth has been solid but let’s not push it. Chances are he’d quickly fall apart if given tougher assignments and bigger minutes.


I think Booth will fetch us a draft pick. He is perfect dpeth scorer for contender 4th line. 4th liners play with limited (~10) minutes, and he donn't have to worry getting more. Score with that 1.69/60min pace from 4th line (same pace as Matthews), and he is a great asset.

6th-7th round pick.
 

Zetterberg4Captain

Registered User
Aug 11, 2009
13,802
2,174
Detroit
If we're moving out players who have no future with this team, ie they won't be integral when the team is good again, shouldn' we start by moving out the players who would bring back the most return( so as to increase our draft odds at finding elite players) and who's contracts are larger so as to free up both short and long term cap space?

Short term so we can add guys on one year deals to then flip at TDL for more picks while still not tanking, ie vanek

Long term so we can pay young true elite players their money when the time comes should ww fund them or sign them AND surround them with a better supporting cast?
 

Zetterberg4Captain

Registered User
Aug 11, 2009
13,802
2,174
Detroit
If we're moving out players who have no future with this team, ie they won't be integral when the team is good again, shouldn' we start by moving out the players who would bring back the most return( so as to increase our draft odds at finding elite players) and who's contracts are larger so as to free up both short and long term cap space?

Short term so we can add guys on one year deals to then flip at TDL for more picks while still not tanking, ie vanek

Long term so we can pay young true elite players their money when the time comes should we find them or sign them AND surround them with a better supporting cast?
 

ShelbyZ

Registered User
Apr 8, 2015
3,814
2,577
I think Booth will fetch us a draft pick. He is perfect dpeth scorer for contender 4th line. 4th liners play with limited (~10) minutes, and he donn't have to worry getting more. Score with that 1.69/60min pace from 4th line (same pace as Matthews), and he is a great asset.

6th-7th round pick.

Every team just had the chance to grab him for free, why would they send a draft pick for him?

In comparison Steve Ott was still a regular 4th line center (a position that usually gets a better return) and got only a 6th.

If Booth moves, it'll probably be for a return like the Wings got for Kent Huskins back in 2013. A conditional 7th based on whether or not he re-signs with the acquiring team.


As for Greens NTC and players refusing to waive, the Filppula example doesn't really correlate because wherever he went, he was going for another year and not just the stretch and playoffs.

The only example I could think of off the top of my head was Mats Sundin, who flat out refused to waive for the Leafs. His reasoning was that he didn't believe in rental players and said he would only want to win a Cup with team that he spent the whole season with.... Which of course made a whole lot of sense when he waited till halfway through the next season to sign a 1-year rental like deal with the Canucks and took a pay cut so they could get some rentals for a Cup run...

However, even without considering Sundins given odd reasons for refusal, we're talking about a guy that had just turned 37 and had been in Toronto for 14 years, 11 as captain. Plus a lot of people seemed to think that getting Olympic gold carried a lot more weight for Sundin than winning a Stanley Cup.

If Green has any notion of refusing, his agent ought to point out his former teammate Brendan Smith... He went to a playoff team, and it took only two playoff rounds to trick the team and their fans into thinking he was some "world class" shot suppressing defensive defenseman and got a nice windfall on his next contract. If Green has a good showing with a contender it can probably only help his value heading into unrestricted free agency.
 

kliq

Registered User
Dec 17, 2017
2,727
1,319
Every team just had the chance to grab him for free, why would they send a draft pick for him?

In comparison Steve Ott was still a regular 4th line center (a position that usually gets a better return) and got only a 6th.

If Booth moves, it'll probably be for a return like the Wings got for Kent Huskins back in 2013. A conditional 7th based on whether or not he re-signs with the acquiring team.


As for Greens NTC and players refusing to waive, the Filppula example doesn't really correlate because wherever he went, he was going for another year and not just the stretch and playoffs.

The only example I could think of off the top of my head was Mats Sundin, who flat out refused to waive for the Leafs. His reasoning was that he didn't believe in rental players and said he would only want to win a Cup with team that he spent the whole season with.... Which of course made a whole lot of sense when he waited till halfway through the next season to sign a 1-year rental like deal with the Canucks and took a pay cut so they could get some rentals for a Cup run...

However, even without considering Sundins given odd reasons for refusal, we're talking about a guy that had just turned 37 and had been in Toronto for 14 years, 11 as captain. Plus a lot of people seemed to think that getting Olympic gold carried a lot more weight for Sundin than winning a Stanley Cup.

If Green has any notion of refusing, his agent ought to point out his former teammate Brendan Smith... He went to a playoff team, and it took only two playoff rounds to trick the team and their fans into thinking he was some "world class" shot suppressing defensive defenseman and got a nice windfall on his next contract. If Green has a good showing with a contender it can probably only help his value heading into unrestricted free agency.

Good point. The only thing I can think of is if we trade Green, we have cap space. Maybe a team trades us a bad expiring contract/pick for Booth. Other then that, it doesn't make much sense.
 

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,205
12,195
Tampere, Finland
Every team just had the chance to grab him for free, why would they send a draft pick for him?

Because the roster limits are different at the moment and after the deadline.

They want to keep their own guys up for now, like 14 forwards. But after trade deadline the 23-man roster limit disappears, and many contenders want to have some experienced depth which can succeed on small 10-minute icetime, if theres injuries on a long playoff run.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kliq

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad