Mantha for a top 4 D?

WingNut

Registered User
Jun 21, 2016
157
44
With the addition of Zadina and with AS ready to contribute at the NHL level and does not have the trade value of Mantha would you move Mantha, AA and say Gus for a top 4 Dman?

Maybe Mantha, AA, and Gus for Jacob Trouba?
 

NickH8

Registered User
Jul 3, 2015
3,647
3,773
I think if we end up taking a forward high in the draft next year, which is likely looking at the current draft class, but things could change, he'll be a part in a bigger deal to get a young defenseman to round out our top 4 of McIsaac, Cholowski, and Hronek. Maybe the Ducks want some offense and Manson or Montour are available. Mantha + Svech could get you one of those two.
 

shanman

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
171
35
heck no. On last years crap show of a team he still managed 24 goals and 24 assists and is 23 years old. If the team and him improve, he should easily hit the 30 goals mark, and could see him doing that repeatedly.

Really feel like people are over-valuating this idea of a "top 4 dman". You win by having exceptional talent and then complimenting it with enough quality pieces. Then add in AA and gus and you pretty much have to expect that dman to be the next lidstrom. Keep mantha, think they do move gus just because he has one year left and doesnt fit in with the rebuild, and personally i hope AA gets his attitude together and becomes a key player this year with his explosiveness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaptainZetterberg40

Dead Thing

Registered User
Jun 24, 2018
91
27
Next year will be the first of 10 consecutive seasons(minimum) where Mantha scores 30 goals plus 30 assists. You don't trade(or replace) that kind of production.
 

WingsMJN2965

Registered User
Oct 13, 2017
18,106
17,699
Trading Mantha for anything less than a guarantee of a top line defender would be foolish when you consider we already have three prospects that'll likely be middle pairing guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shanman

shanman

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
171
35
Trading Mantha for anything less than a guarantee of a top line defender would be foolish when you consider we already have three prospects that'll likely be middle pairing guys.
exactly. Mantha should be the absolute last trade piece we move. Him and larkin are our future, and even our present right now. If we end up moving AA i could live with that just because im worried he might not round out his game. And perhaps we end up having like 4-5 middle pairing guys. Well then yeah we have no lidstrom type at top, but if you can roll out 3 pairings of good middle pairing guys a good forward group can lead to glory. Be similar to what vegas rode this year. Besides a player might not necessarily be an all around stud, but if you get two guys who compliment each other nothing says they can't combine to be a first pairing group that can get things done.
 

Zetterberg4Captain

Registered User
Aug 11, 2009
13,728
2,136
Detroit
No

We dont need a top four dman

We need a top two dman and really a top one dman.

Trade Svech plus AA for Faulk

Let Ras and Zadina make roster

Trade Nyquist at the deadline for a first

Once again have four picks in the first two rounds

Be bad and draft top five
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,851
8,576
If these are the expectations for trading for a defenseman, be prepared for a lot of dial tones.
 

shanman

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
171
35
If these are the expectations for trading for a defenseman, be prepared for a lot of dial tones.
fine by me. Washington just won the stanley cup with Carlson as their number 1 dman. Despite playing with some pretty talented scorers like ovechkin he still pretty much is a sub 40 point guy with a couple outlier seasons here and there. Dont see any reason cholo can't become that. Heck he was drafted higher than carlson was 27th vs 20th overall
 

shanman

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
171
35
the more i think about it, the more it becomes tougher to say if you truly need a number 1 d to win a cup, or even what that means anymore. Pretty much been the pens, hawks, and kings winning recently. Pens i think owe most of it to crosby and malkin, and then they build around it. Do i think letang is a true stud d? Prob not, just a good fit with what that team can do. Think hawks are very similar to that in building around kane/toews, and keith perhaps being closer to a stud than letang imo. Kings perhaps were built more defensively around quick. So i would def say don't do anything stupid like trade mantha for a younger d prospect just because. If anything move on nyq/aa in a package deal if need be. Personally would say just move nyq in a package with perhaps some picks for someone. Maybe if we move daley for picks use that haul plus nyq plus maybe some smaller pieces to a team desperate for offense idk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickH8

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,077
12,078
Tampere, Finland
the more i think about it, the more it becomes tougher to say if you truly need a number 1 d to win a cup, or even what that means anymore. Pretty much been the pens, hawks, and kings winning recently. Pens i think owe most of it to crosby and malkin, and then they build around it. Do i think letang is a true stud d? Prob not, just a good fit with what that team can do. Think hawks are very similar to that in building around kane/toews, and keith perhaps being closer to a stud than letang imo. Kings perhaps were built more defensively around quick. So i would def say don't do anything stupid like trade mantha for a younger d prospect just because. If anything move on nyq/aa in a package deal if need be. Personally would say just move nyq in a package with perhaps some picks for someone. Maybe if we move daley for picks use that haul plus nyq plus maybe some smaller pieces to a team desperate for offense idk.

You win with guys like Nate Schmidt or John Carlson.
 

shanman

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
171
35
You win with guys like Nate Schmidt or John Carlson.
thats why im not too worried about the lack of a stud guy like lidstrom. Think as long as we keep taking reasonable shots at finding talent on the back end we can build on what we have and not cannibalize our current squad to cause a deficiency in one area while trying to address another. Plus the fact we weren't exactly a high scoring team or really had that much forward depth going into this draft in the minors. Was pretty much Ras and then a couple bottom 6 guys really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulysses31

NickH8

Registered User
Jul 3, 2015
3,647
3,773
the more i think about it, the more it becomes tougher to say if you truly need a number 1 d to win a cup, or even what that means anymore. Pretty much been the pens, hawks, and kings winning recently. Pens i think owe most of it to crosby and malkin, and then they build around it. Do i think letang is a true stud d? Prob not, just a good fit with what that team can do. Think hawks are very similar to that in building around kane/toews, and keith perhaps being closer to a stud than letang imo. Kings perhaps were built more defensively around quick. So i would def say don't do anything stupid like trade mantha for a younger d prospect just because. If anything move on nyq/aa in a package deal if need be. Personally would say just move nyq in a package with perhaps some picks for someone. Maybe if we move daley for picks use that haul plus nyq plus maybe some smaller pieces to a team desperate for offense idk.
You need elite players, and it doesn't matter where, as long as you have good depth everywhere.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->