Off-Season Thread: Free Agency & Trade Talk

[HockeyinHD]

It's insane. He was averaging 21:45 ice time per game, and was only -8 on a team that was ranked 29th in goals per game and 23rd in goals allowed.

IT is explained by a terrible roster and his +/- is explained by it being worse than Dan Hamhuis' and as bad as Edler's.

Great job by you guys focusing on a single portion of a point to ignore the context and then bungling the nit-picking anyway though.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

IT is explained by a terrible roster and his +/- is explained by it being worse than Dan Hamhuis' and as bad as Edler's.

Great job by you guys focusing on a single portion of a point to ignore the context and then bungling the nit-picking anyway though.

Chris Tanev is a vastly superior player to Brian Lashoff. It's a ludicrous comparison. They should have focused on that part.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Tanev is a second pair dman. Maybe number 2

 

[Heaton]

Doesn't cost you a thing to be optimistic

Except disappointment when it doesn't work out. Prepare for the worst, but hope for the best.

 

[Frk It]

IT is explained by a terrible roster and his +/- is explained by it being worse than Dan Hamhuis' and as bad as Edler's.

Great job by you guys focusing on a single portion of a point to ignore the context and then bungling the nit-picking anyway though.

I think your overall point was fine, just again off the mark with Tanev and its hard to see a lot of teams on the west coast for most folks.

Will point out that Winnipeg got the #2 pick with a better defense than what we have, Edmonton got the #4 pick with some consecutive top 2 picks on the roster, and Montreal got the #9 pick with a very comparable roster that just happened to lose their goalie.

So we may not be that far off from a bottom 5 finish, unless we have a big summer. A lengthy injury to Larkin or Mrazek could do it.

 

[Ezekial]

IT is explained by a terrible roster and his +/- is explained by it being worse than Dan Hamhuis' and as bad as Edler's.

Great job by you guys focusing on a single portion of a point to ignore the context and then bungling the nit-picking anyway though.

Yea man that sucks, everything except the Tanev point was pretty close to spot on.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

IT is explained by a terrible roster and his +/- is explained by it being worse than Dan Hamhuis' and as bad as Edler's.

Great job by you guys focusing on a single portion of a point to ignore the context and then bungling the nit-picking anyway though.

Well everything you said was wrong, so i only focused on the most blatantly wrong part of your post.

Otherwise i would have to quit my day job to address everything.

But yes, i'm sure Brian Lashoff would have put up similar #'s playing 21 minutes a night. Ohh wait, Brian Lashoff was -10 on a better Wings team and did so while only playing 31 games while averaging 17 minutes a night that year.

Spot on comparison.

 

[Ezekial]

If only he had based his argument on logical fallacies and conjecture.

 

[obey86]

Is there any team in the league that doesn't have better than that? The Canucks for sure. Maybe the Wild and Bruins as well. Other than them, every other team looks to have either a better future core to build around or are current contenders. They need to start making moves to build around those two because I highly doubt drafting alone is going to do it.

People have been saying that for years. So and so team has the best prospect pool in the league, so and so team will be a cup contender in a few years because they have so much young talent. It rarely ever works out as everyone expects.

Meanwhile, it's like zero of the Red Wings young players/prospects will ever surprise or turn into good players while every other team's young players are just assumed they will progress and hit their ceilings.

 

[Roomba With a Bauer]

Meanwhile, it's like zero of the Red Wings young players/prospects will ever surprise or turn into good players while every other team's young players are just assumed they will progress and hit their ceilings.

Wings haven't had terribly good luck with their prospects of late. At one point we had a top ten prospect pool, and out of that pool only Nyquist and Tatar made the NHL. Sproul/Ouelette/Backman/Almquist/Marchenko/Kindl/Smith were all at one time projected to be possible top -four D, and not a one of them even became an everyday NHLer.

 

[Ezekial]

That's unfair to Alexei Marchenko.

 

[jkutswings]

People have been saying that for years. So and so team has the best prospect pool in the league, so and so team will be a cup contender in a few years because they have so much young talent. It rarely ever works out as everyone expects.

Meanwhile, it's like zero of the Red Wings young players/prospects will ever surprise or turn into good players while every other team's young players are just assumed they will progress and hit their ceilings.

The Stanley Cup champions since (and including) Detroit's most recent Cup:

2016: Pittsburgh - Built around Crosby (1 OA, 2005) and Malkin (2OA, 2004)
2015: Chicago - Built around Toews (3OA, 2006) and Kane (1OA, 2007)
2014: Los Angeles - Build around Kopitar (11OA, 2005) Doughty (2OA, 2008) and Quick (72OA, 2005)
2013: Chicago - see 2015
2012: Los Angeles - see 2014
2011: Boston - Built around Krejci (63OA, 2004) Bergeron (45OA, 2003) and Chara (56OA, 1996)
2010: Chicago - see 2015
2009: Pittsburgh - see 2016
2008: Detroit - Built around Datsyuk (171OA, 1998) and Zetterberg (210OA, 1999) [multiple honorable mentions in addition]

With scouting now on a much more even playing field, and the long-term ramifications of the salary cap having taken root, I doubt you will ever see another team like the 2008 Wings. The clear trend is building upon elite talent originally acquired via high draft picks, and (at least for the players listed) this high-end talent won their first Cup an average of 6.4 years after they were drafted.

Yes, clearly there is no foolproof strategy. But in this day and age, SMART (and lucky) drafting with high picks is the most likely route to winning it all, and it most definitely does not require decades to accomplish.

 

[KJoe88]

Marchy is a solid defender.

And I believe XO will still be a good defender. *shrugs*

 

[obey86]

The Stanley Cup champions since (and including) Detroit's most recent Cup:

2016: Pittsburgh - Built around Crosby (1 OA, 2005) and Malkin (2OA, 2004)
2015: Chicago - Built around Toews (3OA, 2006) and Kane (1OA, 2007)
2014: Los Angeles - Build around Kopitar (11OA, 2005) Doughty (2OA, 2008) and Quick (72OA, 2005)
2013: Chicago - see 2015
2012: Los Angeles - see 2014
2011: Boston - Built around Krejci (63OA, 2004) Bergeron (45OA, 2003) and Chara (56OA, 1996)
2010: Chicago - see 2015
2009: Pittsburgh - see 2016
2008: Detroit - Built around Datsyuk (171OA, 1998) and Zetterberg (210OA, 1999) [multiple honorable mentions in addition]

With scouting now on a much more even playing field, and the long-term ramifications of the salary cap having taken root, I doubt you will ever see another team like the 2008 Wings. The clear trend is building upon elite talent originally acquired via high draft picks, and (at least for the players listed) this high-end talent won their first Cup an average of 6.4 years after they were drafted.

Yes, clearly there is no foolproof strategy. But in this day and age, SMART (and lucky) drafting with high picks is the most likely route to winning it all, and it most definitely does not require decades to accomplish.

That's only the "clear trend" because 99% of the NHL (so basically every team except the Red Wings) has had high draft picks. So every time the Wings don't win the Stanley Cup "the tanking for high picks way" gets another feather in it's cap because that's the only route the entire rest of the league has taken. There are no other teams in the NHL who have been in the position the Red Wings have been in (no high picks), so there is not another sample to draw from.

In short: It's not surprising that the only teams that win the cup are teams who have had high draft picks, when EVERY SINGLE TEAM IN THE NHL outside of the Red Wings has had high draft picks. Because every team has had high draft picks, it would be impossible for that to not be true unless the Red Wings were to magically win the cup every season.

 

[obey86]

Man, the Wings should have done the Bickell/Teuvo deal and forgot about going after Stamkos. Obviously TT isn't as good as Stamkos but he's younger, much cheaper, and still has plenty room to grow.

It would have been nice to add another young guy with high upside even if it meant not being active in the FA market this offseason. Bickell sucks, but whatever, only one season of him.

Teuvo - Zetterberg - Abdelkader
Mantha - Larkin - Tatar/Nyquist
Bickell - Sheahan - AA
???? - Glendening - Miller

Then use Tatar, Nyquist, or AA as trade bait for a package for a defenseman.

 

[Mister Ed]

If I understand correctly, having some cap-space taken on forward is a lot less worse that having cap on the goalie position, right?

Columbus has been rumoured to dangle the 3rd overall pick because they are in a bit of a cap-crunch and wanting to sign Jones. So let's say Columbus offers the 3rd OA + Clarkson (5.25M for 4 years) for Nyquist (4.75M for 3 years) + 16th OA, would that be a solid deal? I'm just trying to think out of the box for a way to get help on D. In this instance, the Red Wings could draft Juolevi, considered the best D in the draft, and play Clarkson on the 4th line. He's expensive, but then again, the Red Wings would get an upgrade on their pick while only adding 0.5M.

Another out of the box trade would be sending Howard to Buffalo + Pulkkinen or Jurco (who has 23.4M in cap space and an owner willing to spend to the max) for the STL Blues 3rd this year. It alleviates some cap-space and then Detroit can sign Enroth (Swede) to a 2 year 2M AAV deal.

And finally, for the Datsyuk contract, I would send him to NJ, with Pulkkinen or Jurco and 3rd in 2017 (the one from the Babcock to Toronto ''trade'') for a 6th rounder this year. NJ is 26.7M under the cap and they need some potential scorers on their rosters. Detroit can even, worst comes to worse, get the Savard contract in the deal, saving 3.9M in the process.

Flame away.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

If I understand correctly, having some cap-space taken on forward is a lot less worse that having cap on the goalie position, right?

Columbus has been rumoured to dangle the 3rd overall pick because they are in a bit of a cap-crunch and wanting to sign Jones. So let's say Columbus offers the 3rd OA + Clarkson (5.25M for 4 years) for Nyquist (4.75M for 3 years) + 16th OA, would that be a solid deal? I'm just trying to think out of the box for a way to get help on D. In this instance, the Red Wings could draft Juolevi, considered the best D in the draft, and play Clarkson on the 4th line. He's expensive, but then again, the Red Wings would get an upgrade on their pick while only adding 0.5M.

Another out of the box trade would be sending Howard to Buffalo + Pulkkinen or Jurco (who has 23.4M in cap space and an owner willing to spend to the max) for the STL Blues 3rd this year. It alleviates some cap-space and then Detroit can sign Enroth (Swede) to a 2 year 2M AAV deal.

And finally, for the Datsyuk contract, I would send him to NJ, with Pulkkinen or Jurco and 3rd in 2017 (the one from the Babcock to Toronto ''trade'') for a 6th rounder this year. NJ is 26.7M under the cap and they need some potential scorers on their rosters. Detroit can even, worst comes to worse, get the Savard contract in the deal, saving 3.9M in the process.

Flame away.

No.

If I'm moving all that cap and those trades are possible, I'm getting a better return than Clarkson, Juolevi, and Enroth. David Clarkson is just a bad hockey player.

Instead of doing your outside the box deals, just do the Devils one if possible and sign Stamkos. You are a much much much better team than if you make all those moves.

 

[jkutswings]

That's only the "clear trend" because 99% of the NHL (so basically every team except the Red Wings) has had high draft picks. So every time the Wings don't win the Stanley Cup "the tanking for high picks way" gets another feather in it's cap because that's the only route the entire rest of the league has taken. There are no other teams in the NHL who have been in the position the Red Wings have been in (no high picks), so there is not another sample to draw from.

In short: It's not surprising that the only teams that win the cup are teams who have had high draft picks, when EVERY SINGLE TEAM IN THE NHL outside of the Red Wings has had high draft picks. Because every team has had high draft picks, it would be impossible for that to not be true unless the Red Wings were to magically win the cup every season.

Another way of looking at that is to say that Holland thinks he can do something that nobody else can.

Conventional wisdom says you build it up, go for it, and tear it down to try again. With a few decent pieces already in place, this team could be in great shape in 5 years with just 2 lucky picks.

 

[Mister Ed]

No.

If I'm moving all that cap and those trades are possible, I'm getting a better return than Clarkson, Juolevi, and Enroth. David Clarkson is just a bad hockey player.

Instead of doing your outside the box deals, just do the Devils one if possible and sign Stamkos. You are a much much much better team than if you make all those moves.

The ultimate goal was clearing cap space (Howard+Datsyuk) to sign Stamkos. Then, upgrading the pick (from 16th to 3rd) while giving away something good (Nyquist) for something bad (Clarkson). Enroth would be the backup.

Are you saying that these moves would make the Wings a worst team than only signing Stamkos after trading Datsyuk's contract?

 

[VM1138]

The ultimate goal was clearing cap space (Howard+Datsyuk) to sign Stamkos. Then, upgrading the pick (from 16th to 3rd) while giving away something good (Nyquist) for something bad (Clarkson). Enroth would be the backup.

Are you saying that these moves would make the Wings a worst team than only signing Stamkos after trading Datsyuk's contract?

Yes. You're giving away Nyquist for a garbage contract and hockey player. Stamkos is as close to a sure-fire success as becomes available in free agency. You WILL be a better team with him, provided he doesn't have some career ending injury, which is a risk with every player. You'd also be giving up a reliable (if frustrating) roster player for a prospect who may or may not ever make an impact in the NHL.

Of the two moves, the Stamkos one is the no-brainer. If we don't land him there are still way better moves to be made than the one you're proposing.

 

[HisNoodliness]

If I understand correctly, having some cap-space taken on forward is a lot less worse that having cap on the goalie position, right?

Columbus has been rumoured to dangle the 3rd overall pick because they are in a bit of a cap-crunch and wanting to sign Jones. So let's say Columbus offers the 3rd OA + Clarkson (5.25M for 4 years) for Nyquist (4.75M for 3 years) + 16th OA, would that be a solid deal? I'm just trying to think out of the box for a way to get help on D. In this instance, the Red Wings could draft Juolevi, considered the best D in the draft, and play Clarkson on the 4th line. He's expensive, but then again, the Red Wings would get an upgrade on their pick while only adding 0.5M.

Another out of the box trade would be sending Howard to Buffalo + Pulkkinen or Jurco (who has 23.4M in cap space and an owner willing to spend to the max) for the STL Blues 3rd this year. It alleviates some cap-space and then Detroit can sign Enroth (Swede) to a 2 year 2M AAV deal.

And finally, for the Datsyuk contract, I would send him to NJ, with Pulkkinen or Jurco and 3rd in 2017 (the one from the Babcock to Toronto ''trade'') for a 6th rounder this year. NJ is 26.7M under the cap and they need some potential scorers on their rosters. Detroit can even, worst comes to worse, get the Savard contract in the deal, saving 3.9M in the process.

Flame away.

I think Columbus can do better than that but if it were to happen we'd take Jesse Puljujarvi. I know he's a winger but he's so clearly BPA that you can't pass him up. Sure having Clarkson would suck but that trade would start us on a traditional rebuild. I'd do it every day of the week. It would be rough on the cap for a few years but we'd survive.

JP would be so good on Larkin's wing. I can't imagine running Mantha-Larkin-JP. That line would tear up the NHL next year let alone in three seasons when they matured and the rest of our team was put together.

Buffalo wouldn't accept that trade. We'd have to add a significant piece to get someone to take Howard.

Finally the Datsyuk trade is a lower cost than the rumors suggest it will be but that's your most reasonable trade and I think all of us would do it.

 

[Jkalapeno]

The ultimate goal was clearing cap space (Howard+Datsyuk) to sign Stamkos. Then, upgrading the pick (from 16th to 3rd) while giving away something good (Nyquist) for something bad (Clarkson). Enroth would be the backup.

Are you saying that these moves would make the Wings a worst team than only signing Stamkos after trading Datsyuk's contract?

If you are trading with Columbus for 3rd overall and salary dump, Nyquist is not going back because Columbus needs cap room to sign Seth Jones. It would need to be Tatar, Athanasiou, Mantha etc., then probably more. Just about every team wants that pick, so the price will be very big, much bigger than anyone would like.

I'm not saying that it's a bad idea to go for the pick. Hell, if they were fine with a Nyquist and 16OA for Clarkson and 3OA I would do it in a heartbeat.

 

[HisNoodliness]

If you are trading with Columbus for 3rd overall and salary dump, Nyquist is not going back because Columbus needs cap room to sign Seth Jones. It would need to be Tatar, Athanasiou, Mantha etc., then probably more. Just about every team wants that pick, so the price will be very big, much bigger than anyone would like.

I'm not saying that it's a bad idea to go for the pick. Hell, if they were fine with a Nyquist and 16OA for Clarkson and 3OA I would do it in a heartbeat.

Yeah, that's the problem. If we wanted 3OA the price would probably be Tatar+16OA+46OA+Mantha for Clarkson and 3OA...and that wouldn't be worth it. But the Nyquist+16OA trade is absolutely a no-brainer. We'd have to draft Puljujarvi though who very feasibly could be better than Laine and Matthews.

 

[Dotter]

Stamkos isn't a "no brainer", he's heading down the path of possibly becoming the next Stephen Weiss. Broken leg injury that slowed him down significantly and blood clot issues. Nope, easy pass!

Let someone else overpay significantly, giving him a multi-year bad contract...

 

[Vladdy84]

Lets just roll with the kids

Bert, Mantha, AA

Sproul and Russo