Speculation: Can a deal be made for Jacob Trouba?

[ShelbyZ]

Remember the good old days where Red Wings fans acted like it was the end of the world when they didn't sign a 40-45pt dman for $7.5M until he was 40YO?

 

[SirloinUB]

Would I have signed Trouba to the deal he got? absolutely but that was not an option.

NYR traded a 1st and Pionk for him. Given how that turned out the Jets obviously liked that deal and we would have had to beat that package.

Our equivalent offer would have to have been something like hronek + 1st (seider) for Trouba and a 2nd.

 

[Claypool]

Would I have signed Trouba to the deal he got? absolutely but that was not an option.

NYR traded a 1st and Pionk for him. Our equivalent offer would have to have been something like hronek + 1st (seider) for Trouba and a 2nd. That really hurts our pipeline.

NYR traded Winnipeg back its first round pick they originally got for Kevin Hayes a few months earlier (20th overall). Hronek and a 2nd round pick would have been a competitive offer, but Winnipeg wanted back in the 1st round. Doing both Hronek and Detroit 1st overall would have been an overpayment.

 

[SirloinUB]

NYR traded Winnipeg back its first round pick they originally got for Kevin Hayes a few months earlier (20th overall). Hronek and a 2nd round pick would have been a competitive offer, but Winnipeg wanted back in the 1st round. Doing both Hronek and Detroit 1st overall would have been an overpayment.

our 2nd would have been 17 slots lower than the pick they got and Pionk was a more established piece than hronek that the Jets were clearly high on. If we offered the Jets a 2nd and hronek they are still taking the Rangers package.

You gotta beat the deal in the eyes of the jets rather than matching it in the eyes of a wings fan.

 

[ShelbyZ]

NYR traded a 1st and Pionk for him. Our equivalent offer would have to have been something like hronek + 1st (seider) for Trouba and a 2nd. That really hurts our pipeline.

I'm not really sure where that 2nd came from attached to Trouba, but Hronek and #6OA is way more than Pionk and #20OA. I also doubt the Jets wanted to give up any additional assets along with Trouba.

There's also probably no way the Wings move #6OA in any trade at that point. I don't even think Pionk and #20OA is worth #6OA at that point...

Pionk's value at the time was probably somewhere between Hronek's and Cholowski's. Hronek and #35OA that the Wings had at the time is probably closer to Pionk and #20OA. Although, I'm sure the Wings didn't want to move Hronek either, so their best course was probably to package up Cholowski with #35OA and another one of their 2019 2nd's (#54OA and #60OA) or their 2020 2nd, and possibly another later pick.

That said, I'm guessing the Jets valued getting an NHL ready dman in Pionk over a less ready (yet less cap impacting) prospect like Cholowski since they probably already anticipated losing Myers and Chiarot in addition to Trouba, and it isn't a secret they are the least considered possible landing spot for UFA's...

 

[Claypool]

our 2nd would have been 17 slots lower than the pick they got and Pionk was a more established piece than hronek that the Jets were clearly high on. If we offered the Jets a 2nd and hronek they are still taking the Rangers package.

You gotta beat the deal in the eyes of the jets rather than matching it in the eyes of a wings fan.

In what universe was Pionk more established than Hronek last season? Hronek is also two years younger and clearly has more long-term potential. Hronek in Winnipeg would be a beast offensively.

 

[SirloinUB]

In what universe was Pionk more established than Hronek last season? Hronek is also two years younger and clearly has more long-term potential. Hronek in Winnipeg would be a beast offensively.

Pionk had played 101 games before the season started. As of today Hronek has played 101 games.

 

[ShelbyZ]

our 2nd would have been 17 slots lower than the pick they got and Pionk was a more established piece than hronek that the Jets were clearly high on.

At the time of the trade, Pionk had played 55 more NHL games than Hronek. They entered the pro's in the same season, where Hronek was a lot more productive in the AHL. At the NHL level last year, in 27 less games, Hronek had 1G and 2A less than Pionk while seeing similar AVG 5v5 and PP ice time.

Given Hronek's age and his barely over league minimum cap hit for 2 seasons, he might have been more valuable to the Jets than Pionk since he'd have given them a good bit more cap space to try to replace Trouba, Myers and Chiarot (not to mention Byfuglien at the beginning of the year).

 

[SirloinUB]

I'm not really sure where that 2nd came from attached to Trouba, but Hronek and #6OA is way more than Pionk and #20OA. I also doubt the Jets wanted to give up any additional assets along with Trouba.

There's also probably no way the Wings move #6OA in any trade at that point. I don't even think Pionk and #20OA is worth #6OA at that point...

Pionk's value at the time was probably somewhere between Hronek's and Cholowski's. Hronek and #35OA that the Wings had at the time is probably closer to Pionk and #20OA. Although, I'm sure the Wings didn't want to move Hronek either, so their best course was probably to package up Cholowski with #35OA and another one of their 2019 2nd's (#54OA and #60OA) or their 2020 2nd, and possibly another later pick.

That said, I'm guessing the Jets valued getting an NHL ready dman in Pionk over a less ready (yet less cap impacting) prospect like Cholowski since they probably already anticipated losing Myers and Chiarot in addition to Trouba, and it isn't a secret they are the least considered possible landing spot for UFA's...

I threw the 2nd in there recognizing that our 1st was a lot more valuable than the 1st the rangers gave up.

I mostly find your post agreeable but from the jets perspective they were getting an NHL dman with more than a full season of games under his belt and a 1st round pick. That's a nice package and to your point Cholo and a bunch of 2nds wouldn't catch their interest in the same way. This is why I'm arguing if we wanted to be serious about adding Trouba we have to beat the package the Rangers gave up.

But the bottom line here is the discussion isn't about just signing Trouba for 8 Million per season. The convo is about giving up multiple quality assets plus signing trouba to the contract.

 

[ShelbyZ]

I threw the 2nd in there recognizing that our 1st was a lot more valuable than the 1st the rangers gave up.

I mostly find your post agreeable but from the jets perspective they were getting an NHL dman with more than a full season of games under his belt and a 1st round pick. That's a nice package and to your point Cholo and a bunch of 2nds wouldn't catch their interest in the same way. This is why I'm arguing if we wanted to be serious about adding Trouba we have to beat the package the Rangers gave up.

But the bottom line here is the discussion isn't about just signing Trouba for 8 Million per season. The convo is about giving up multiple quality assets plus signing trouba to the contract.

Yea, I think what it comes down to is that Yzerman probably didn't want to part with the assets it was going to take to get him. IIRC, the early chatter was that the Jets valued getting young NHL ready (or as close as possible) C or D, which the Red Wings had little to no expendability.

Considering the Rangers had just scored Adam Fox through the whole "75% of college prospects automatically wants to play for the Rangers" program (similar to how they got Pionk too...), had Skjei and DAngelo and probably had some idea that Hajek and Lindgren could play in the NHL, it was probably easier for them to give up Pionk than it would've been for the Red Wings to give up a Hronek or Cholowski in addition to trying to match giving the Jets their own 1st round pick back.

 

[vladdy16]

Brad Stuart hovered around .5 ppg's through much of his 20's, while also being credited for the sandpaper in his game.

People love a defensemen that has a reputation for being tough to play against. Ignoring that "tough to play against" and "tough to be successful against" aren't always the same thing. Just like they ignore the difference between "can get on the score sheet" and "creates scoring chances".

There are technically 60 top pairing D-men in the league. So "bonefide top-pairing D", it's not nearly as impressive as it sounds.

We are more than a year into this debate, and Trouba has maintained a trajectory much more modest than what was being proposed last year, yet the conversation remains speculative about whether he's going to build on his early success, in a future environment.

What reason is there to believe that Trouba has untapped offensive and possession potential? He is what he is at this point, the next generation is in full swing and a cut above.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

What reason is there to believe that Trouba has untapped offensive and possession potential? He is what he is at this point, the next generation is in full swing and a cut above.

his age? He’s what, 25? The average defenseman really doesn’t reach their peak until 27ish. He has plenty of time to improve.

p.s. I have no dog in this fight. I just don’t like someone claiming a 25 yo defenseman is a definite finished product.

 

[vladdy16]

his age? He’s what, 25? The average defenseman really doesn’t reach their peak until 27ish. He has plenty of time to improve.

p.s. I have no dog in this fight. I just don’t like someone claiming a 25 yo defenseman is a definite finished product.

But that's what I'm asking. How does that philosophy apply to Trouba specifically? What is he going to improve, other than adding some polish and experience to parts of his game that are already established?

Why are we still pontificating about it, instead of pointing to developments over the past year in which this debate has stayed stagnant?

And it's not just about improving. It's about improving relative to your piers. Heiskenen, Makkar, and Dahlin are all going to be improving in the same time frame.

The thing I'm pointing out about Trouba, is that like Brad Stuart, the foundation for him to continue to improve at a rate that would make him the franchise d-man that people want him to be, is not there. Not because he's a scrub or won't improve, but because being an elite player is incredibly rare and unlikely. Decision making, size, fine motor skills etc, you can improve. But "carrying the play" as a defensemen is not a simple skill to develop, and you would expect there to be vestiges for Trouba in that area by now, if he was poised to make a big leap in that category.

In the last 2 years, what can the "future no.1 dman" crowd point to, that makes a stronger case than the "physically mature, experienced, future career NHL top-4" crowd?

I'm not saying somebody has to have the answer for it to be possible. I can easily envision a climate where Trouba continues to improve and enforces his play style on the league in a bigger way than I am personally anticipating. But the debate isn't about the possibility, it's about the likelihood and the subsequent valuation that goes along with that. I think it's just too easy to be optimistic and offer up assets and millions of dollars hypothetically, when the consequence and likelihood that things won't work out perfectly isn't properly considered.

 

[ricky0034]

his age? He’s what, 25? The average defenseman really doesn’t reach their peak until 27ish. He has plenty of time to improve.

p.s. I have no dog in this fight. I just don’t like someone claiming a 25 yo defenseman is a definite finished product.

this sounds flat out made up as far as offensive peak goes

especially for defensemen that entered the league at a young enough age that they will already have 500+ games played by the time they are 27

 

[ArmChairGM89]

this sounds flat out made up as far as offensive peak goes

especially for defensemen that entered the league at a young enough age that they will already have 500+ games played by the time they are 27

I think it’s a pretty common sentiment.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Glad we dodged that $8 million dollar bullet.

 

[vladdy16]

I think it’s a pretty common sentiment.

It is in general. But notice you quoted me saying "offensive and possession" not "in general".

I think it's worth bringing up as a barometer for sure. I think it's part of what is making me confident in saying Trouba's ceiling is within sight though.

It's easy to see how players like Lidstrom, or Heiskenen or Cholowski can really boost their last development stage around 27. I think players like Trouba, Stuart and Foote, who are more mature out of the gate, are more likely to be dependent on their surroundings and a more static form to their games as they age into their 30's.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

It is in general. But notice you quoted me saying "offensive and possession" not "in general".

I think it's worth bringing up as a barometer for sure. I think it's part of what is making me confident in saying Trouba's ceiling is within sight though.

It's easy to see how players like Lidstrom, or Heiskenen or Cholowski can really boost their last development stage around 27. I think players like Trouba, Stuart and Foote, who are more mature out of the gate, are more likely to be dependent on their surroundings and a more static form to their games as they age into their 30's.

right, all development isn’t linear. He could still grow, he might not. I wouldn’t have traded for him. But I would have signed him for 7+ mil.