Question 1: Yes, absolutely.
First of all your assuming the KQ trade was definitively bad. While, I would agree it was bad "trade value" but we got 4.5 seasons of service out of Quincey. Even if lost the Trade, the move had real value.
Second of all that trade has no relevance on the future trades. As we saw during the most recent trade deadline, Past moves are not predictive of future moves. ie. Holland frequently makes deadline acquisitions but avoided it last season. ergo, Its completely false to assume because Holland previously waived and traded for Quincey, he would pull a similar move.
Third, even if we assume the KQ trade was universally bad, this critique is based on an assumption that Holland can't learn from past mistakes. I realize he isn't a popular man around here, but the guy has more than bricks up in his head. He still learns from his mistakes like the rest of us.
Still many people forget, how the trade market was at trade deadline 2012. AT THE TIME OF THE TRADE.
We were at 2nd position of the Standings. Behind New York Rangers. So our 1st round pick had kind of 27th-30th overall value at the trade time.
Our team was running very well after two lesser seasons, probably at best for the last push for the Cup with Lidström since 2009.
***
We were after Gaustad, but we lost that idea for Nashville, because Buffalo preferred Nashville's 1st. They were somewhere at 10th in the standings, so it looked like a more valued higher pick. We were at 2nd.
And after trade deadline, (this is really funny example how things can change), when injuries did hit the Red Wings, we dropped behind Nashville in the standings by 2 points.
So Buffalo did get a lower pick (21st overall) for Gaustad instead they thought they could get a higher pick from Nashville. Red Wings 1st (traded in a 3-way trade COL&TBL for Quincey) finally was 19th overall Yzerman used for Vasilevskiy. Buffalo had to trade up for #14 overall in the 2012 draft because of the pick drop and did lost extra assets.
***
Still, I remember crystal clear, Holland said that scouting staff had analyzed this 2012 draft being very weak after TOP15. So he kind of said, trading a Bottom15 1st rounder out felt like trading a 2nd rounder.
That was the idea on that trade deadline.
***
What Holland learned about it? Probably that don't ever trade first round picks at the trade deadline, because the unluckiest streak of injuries can hit and you can drop 10 positions on the standings.
He learned that no matter what how good or bad you manage, luck can change things very much. And that's an element which will never go away.
He has had his streak of bad luck, Konstantinov, Fischer. Fedorov bolting out. And always survived.
***
When looking those names picked after 19th overall, there is only one name I would like to have in our team. Olli Määttä, 22nd overall. But would he have been our pick without the trade? You never know, othervise the list of guys is very poor after him.
The draft analyze during the trade could have been, that it's very minor probability, that:
A) We drop so low as we did from 2nd position of the standings, for 19th overall (pick). Realistic drop would have been probably 5 spots at maximum. You couldn't predict those injuries. Lidström missed only 12 games, but we lost at least Howard, Datsyuk and Helm also after.
B) could Määttä anyhow drop to our pick? He was ranked as 8th best of NA skaters. 16 NA draftees went before him. His drop was unpredictable, he was count to be one of TOP15 guys. Make a re-draft now, and he goes at TOP10 easily.
So I kind of agree with Red Wings management. That analyze where 1st round is weak of depth and talent will end after TOP15 picks, was pretty much a
right analyze.
Ken Holland and his staff made a right decision on that time. Bad luck changed the history.
***
So, they did trade the first, but they knew the draft is weak after TOP15, and felt trading a 2nd rounder.
Everything they said and now checked afterwards, again, they did make the right analyze.
Quincey for 1st was
Quincey for "2nd" in reality.
And people still like to freak out about this. Quincey cost us a "2nd" and a 4th, just like Brad Stuart did cost and he was good for us after a bad start. I liked him during last 2 seasons. He matured well to our mold.
Still, look at that draft. It was a weak draft. Understand our position at trade time.
They just couldn't predict two things, 2012 late-season injuries, and Olli Määttä drop at the draft. Very very minor probabilities.
