Value of: Larkin availability, generally and particularly to Rangers

[Henkka]

In this scenario, the Wings wouldn't have a 2019 first round pick, because it was included in this terrible Larkin trade.

Please, read my posts 1 or 2 pages behind.

In my trade proposals were the same players without any draft picks.

 

[bernmeister]

I thank everyone.
Think everyone made their points, feel free to add if something not yet said.

With respect, despite some consensus, for the most part we agree to disagree.

 

[obey86]

I guess you would do Kreider for Zadina then? Since Zadina has proven nothing in the NHL yet (neither has Hughes)

Terrible comparison for a few reasons.

#1: Larkin is a 21 year old coming off of a 63 point season. Kreider is a 27 year old with a career high of 53 points. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Larkin is younger, currently better, will be around longer, has more room to grow, and has higher upside at this point.

#2: Zadina (and Hughes) are both significantly better prospects than Andersson is. While there are still no guarantees they have higher upside and more certainty as prospects than Andersson does.

#3: The Red Wings are rebuilding and need great players, who are young. Kreider is a ~50 point, 27 year old and does nothing to help the Red Wings rebuild. By the time the Red Wings are good again (2-3 years down the road hopefully) he'll be 29-30 years old and exiting his prime. AND, as I already mentioned, he's just a 50 point player anyways, which doesn't move the needle for the Red Wings rebuild.

 

[FerrisRox]

The offer --- the following package:
To DET: Larkin (rfa)* + DET 2019 1st unprotected + cap dump Vanek 3m expiring
for
To NYR: Skjei (rfa) + Andersson elc + Buchnevich elc + NYR 2019 2nd + Halverson
*preferably 8 years at 6m per, then immediately traded to NY

So the Red Wings give up the best asset and the best draft pick and you actually call it a "probable overpayment" for the Rangers?

This is ridiculous.

 

[lilidk]

Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop

 

[Garbageyuk]

"generally and particularly" made me lol. Thanks.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Skjei Buch and Andersson for the 1st? Of course you would

Obviously that package is worth more than Duchene... But this is the exact hell Ottawa is going through right now.

I wouldn't trade a DET 1st right now for pretty much anything that's realistic.

 

[kij]

I love how much effort is put into typing out a well thought out essay connected only by the logic of delusion. Berny, please stop making NYR proposals. Also why do you trade Andersson in every single one?

 

[BinCookin]

Bern you put a lot of work into your post... So let me give you are well worded response.


NYR and DET are poor trading partners:

You are willing to move Zuccarello and Kreider for young assets.
We are willing to move Tatar (done) and Nyquist for young assets.

You are relying on your young players to play well and improve your team.
We are relying on your young players to play well and improve our team.

You need your draft picks...
We REALLY need our draft picks...

Your team is starting to improve...
Ours is still falling down...

We absolutely cannot trade our 1st round pick.... That would be insane, we could and should pick top 5 this coming year.

You said you would have to overpay for Larkin.... This is true, and we would need a potential #1 D man to even consider moving him.

You give me a 1 for 1 deal you think is fair for Larkin, and I might think about it. If you do not have 1 player roughly equal to Larkin in value... than dont make the trade suggestion. I cannot at all imagine how the red wings "move forward" AND trade Larkin... the concept would be pure stupidity on our part.


P.S. Bern sounds a lot like you have a pretty solid MO on these boards.

In my fantasy hockey leagues i will often TRY to push 2 for 1 deals, whereby I get the best player.
repeat repeat repeat until i have the best team, and win the pool. This only works vs dumb GMs
As much as all fans think their GM is an idiot... None of them are dumb enough to not see through your Quantity for Quality suggestions.

 

[Estlin]

Is there any reason why Larkin would even be available in a trade?

If he were, then Boston might have some interest. Perhaps Krug (Michigan native) and JFK (good center prospect) as part of a deal?

 

[BinCookin]

Is there any reason why Larkin would even be available in a trade?

If he were, then Boston might have some interest. Perhaps Krug (Michigan native) and JFK (good center prospect) as part of a deal?

There is basically no reason Larkin would be available.

Larkin has Skill
Larkin played most minutes on forward on the team (roughly?)
Larkin is a "hometown" kid
Larkin is still extremely young
Larkin is a C (one of the most prized positions)

Basically trading him for another prospect is really risky.
Trading him for a superstar older player would be a mistake (if it were even an option)

There are more young players around the league that would qualify as better players than Larkin. But what team is offering their young (better) player for Larkin? (No one would) and thus why Larkin is basically going nowhere.

 

[Slyfox]

Why would Detroit trade young controllable assets for older young controllable assets? Makes no sense. They aren't close to competing and need to tank for a couple more years atleast. And they should think of trading Larkin their best player moving forward?

 

[Shootertooter]

How did this get to be 7 pages long? Virtually every response was a negative, 1 guy suggested changing the deal, the OP focused on that single response as a positive. Welcome to a Berns thread. Really there isn't much to see here.
This should have been locked on day 1.

 

[TGWL]

How did this get to be 7 pages long? Virtually every response was a negative, 1 guy suggested changing the deal, the OP focused on that single response as a positive. Welcome to a Berns thread. Really there isn't much to see here.
This should have been locked on day 1.

Eh, it was civil though, for the most part.

 

[LarKing]

Eh, it was civil though, for the most part.

Yeah I explained our side like 5 times. Didn’t really flame him though.

 

[grindline]

What would it take to get Larkin for Columbus? If he were available, I would be happier trading Panarin knowing Larkin was incoming.

Dubois, Jones and Werenski would be off limits but that still leaves us with assets. How about the first we could get for Panarin plus some good young pieces for your rebuild?

Say a 1st plus Milano plus...?

 

[Tatar Shots]

What would it take to get Larkin for Columbus? If he were available, I would be happier trading Panarin knowing Larkin was incoming.

Dubois, Jones and Werenski would be off limits but that still leaves us with assets. How about the first we could get for Panarin plus some good young pieces for your rebuild?

Say a 1st plus Milano plus...?

That’s an atrocious offer

 

[Ezekial]

That’s an atrocious offer

No man, a mid first round pick and a possible 40-50 point winger is a good base for a slightly younger, better, center.

Good thing they can't offer any of their good players for him. Wouldn't want to make their team worse.

 

[grindline]

Obviously the plus is going to be larger. I’m asking what sort of sized plus.

 

[njx9]

What would it take to get Larkin for Columbus? If he were available, I would be happier trading Panarin knowing Larkin was incoming.

Dubois, Jones and Werenski would be off limits but that still leaves us with assets. How about the first we could get for Panarin plus some good young pieces for your rebuild?

Say a 1st plus Milano plus...?

Start by reading the thread. There's absolutely no reason Detroit would ever, conceivably, possibly trade Larkin for whatever leftovers you feel like offering.

It's incredible to me, from the OP through every other offer/request/idle thought for or about Larkin, how little conscious thought actually goes into these 'proposals'.

Obviously the plus is going to be larger. I’m asking what sort of sized plus.

Werenski or Jones-sized.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

What would it take to get Larkin for Columbus? If he were available, I would be happier trading Panarin knowing Larkin was incoming.

Dubois, Jones and Werenski would be off limits but that still leaves us with assets. How about the first we could get for Panarin plus some good young pieces for your rebuild?

Say a 1st plus Milano plus...?

You want our top asset but put your top 3 assets of limits.

... That alone makes this a non-starter.

 

[Ezekial]

Obviously the plus is going to be larger. I’m asking what sort of sized plus.

The plus is going to have to be a different, better player than Milano that he's some relevance to our rebuild. Not a mid 6 winger, who we have plenty of. Even adding an additional first does nothing for us in that deal.
We use those 2 firsts and pray like hell we get a player 2/3s of Larkin.
We were extremely lucky to get a player like him at 15.

 

[grindline]

I feared the hole in the proposal was Jobes-sized. I totally get that putting those three players off the table makes a deal implausible but the premise is to get better by adding Larkin rather than a sideways hockey trade (assuming we get worse by trading Panarin).

I was not suggesting low ball Ryder, Halak and a 2nd territory but apologies if that was how it came across. I was wondering what to add to a first in the way of young pieces that would help you be better in two years time.

Just out of curiosity, would you have been more positive if I had mentioned Bjorkstrand/Abramov/Carlsson by name instead of Milano?

 

[njx9]

No. You want the Wings' 22 year old 1C, you need to either give up a replacement 22 year old 1C, or a similarly aged 1D. There's no incentive to trade him for a mish-mash of wingers and a big maybe D.

 

[Kupo]

With respect, despite some consensus, for the most part we agree to disagree.

A trend that is quite common with your proposals.

Shocking. . . . . . . . . .