Lazlo Hollyfeld
The jersey ad still sucks
- Mar 4, 2004
- 28,617
- 27,073
No
Depending on who's coming back in the trade? Absolutely.
They're not generational players. At this point for the Wings everybody should be on the table if the price is right.
Should we extend Vanek's contract?
- Thread starter Squirrel in the Hole
- Start date
Depending on who's coming back in the trade? Absolutely.
They're not generational players. At this point for the Wings everybody should be on the table if the price is right.
Being generational players is a very high bar. There is nothing on the trade market or rumored to be on the trade market that I'd trade either for, even considering Larkin's down year.
jkutswings
hot piss hockey
- Jul 10, 2014
- 11,041
- 8,792
And it's fine to say that you wouldn't deal those guys for the options you're currently aware of. But it's also fine to want Holland to ask around, and if a big fish that we're not currently aware of becomes available, to want him to consider making a move if it's a really good deal.
Kronwalled55
Detroit vs. Everybody
Keep him unless someone offers a lot.
You still need SOME good veteran forwards to win. We can't just have a team of Zetterberg and youngish players. Not with our pool of young players anyways, there's not enough high end talent there.
The Thomas Vanek's of the hockey world are great for rebuilds. As long as you don't have too many of them.
You still need SOME good veteran forwards to win. We can't just have a team of Zetterberg and youngish players. Not with our pool of young players anyways, there's not enough high end talent there.
The Thomas Vanek's of the hockey world are great for rebuilds. As long as you don't have too many of them.
Lazlo Hollyfeld
The jersey ad still sucks
- Mar 4, 2004
- 28,617
- 27,073
Exactly.
I'm not saying Mantha and Larkin aren't good pieces to have on the team, but if the price is right everyone should be on the market. Sometimes GM's get surprised by players other teams are willing to deal.
Zetterberg, Abdelkader, Helm, Nielsen, Kronwall, Ericsson, and Green. All vets signed next year. Add Miller and Ott to the current roster. This team isn't hurting for veterans.
Lest we forget the likes of Nyquist turn 28 next year, too.
That said I like Vanek more than most of the guys I listed, but what can you do? Most are locked up for the next 3-6 years.
Ignoring the plethora of veterans already locked into the roster, what winning are you expecting this team to do in the next 5 years?
Glendening is in that same age range, too. We talk about these guys like they are fresh out of juniors but we shouldn't need 35 yr old Zetterberg to keep 28 yr old Nyquist honest about his job and the work he's putting in. If we do, then Nyquist probably needs to go.
I get signing Nielsen if we want to shield Larkin a bit, but we could have pared $8m from the roster by not having Gator and Helm on it, while still having plenty of vets with guys like Miller and Ott on the fourth line and in the clubhouse.
HIFE
Registered User
Dotter said the same thing and comments like this are responded to with shock. It appears Wings fans are not exceptionally more progressive than the main target of the frustration here, Ken Holland. We want changes, an upgrade on defense possibly, but are unwilling to imagine letting go what another team would want from the Wings.
Larkin, Mantha, and Athanasiou are considered untradeable by this board...because get this...they actually have value right now. Same thing was said about Nyquist 3 seasons ago- we could NEVER trade away such an important piece in the future of the organization.
You're supposed to create proposals when a player is desirable, not after the fact. I'm not saying we should deal Mantha but for those that enjoy trade ruminations should accept this is the way things work. You strike while the iron is hot- and you have to give to get.
Number1RedWingsFan52
Registered User
Team would probably be even worse had we not signed Vanek, Considering he has like 27 points in 30 games or so pretty much a point per game pace.
ElysiumAB
Registered User
- Sep 12, 2013
- 5,916
- 5,571
Worse than last place in the division?
His success here is kind of the point.
They should trade him when they can get the most return. Oilers are on the verge of making the playoffs for the first time in ages and desperately need a scoring winger.
Number1RedWingsFan52
Registered User
Holland should've drafted Rubstov last summer, Some scouts have said that his ceiling is every bit as high as Larkin if not more then we could've dealt Larkin to Winnipeg for Trouba over this past summer.
Dotter
THE ATHLETIC IS GARBAGE
At some point, all the bold players were considered "untouchable" by fans. Now that they are slumping, some fans are "open" to trade them. Mantha is hot, so he is untouchable now.
To make a trade, you have to sell when their value is high to get the best return. I would absolutely trade Mantha right now for the right return. To me, I'd prefer dangle him as trade bait before Larkin. Larkin isn't immune either, trade him for the right return. Nobody should be "untouchable" unless they are generational Nick Lidstrom or Datsyuk type young talent. Those are the type of player (and position) that should be untouchable if there ever was such a thing.
Hadoop
Registered User
Rubstov has had a very disappointing post draft season. Larkin's ceiling remains super high, he's going through a classic sophomore slump on a disappointing team.
You guys have a serious shiny new toy syndrome. Larkin is younger than Mantha who wasn't exactly a world beater until the end of last year and more valuable to DRW in the grand scheme of things due to a giant void at C position in our prospect pool. Not that I would trade either unless for a stupid overpayment. Out of the young trio I see AA as the most expendable but he is becoming harder and harder to justify trading really fast. Some combination of Gus, Tatar and veterans is what we should trade as a main piece for picks/prospects/young players moving forward.
Squirrel in the Hole
Be the best squirrel in the hole
Funny, last year it would have been "Only guy I wouldn't trade is Larkin. His ceiling is too high. For me, Mantha, AA, Gus or Tats can go for the right return."
I guess I just don't see the merit in discussing players as tradable when the bar is set so high. Everyone and their mother would accept Larkin++ or Mantha++ if Karlsson was coming the other way, but the likelihood that that happens is so negligible these days that it's almost a moot argument.
The shock with respect to Dotter comes from his internal contradictions, not from his one-off opinions.
As for the comparison between Nyquist and Tatar vs the other three, I don't see it. People have been willing to trade Tatar for as long as I can remember and withholding on Nyquist was short-lived - when he was blasting out of the gate. In the other online DRW community that I'm an active part of, Nike being a sign-and-trade was seen as an ideal course of action when he was up for renewal as a sophomore. Tatar was always seen as expendable in the right light. And ultimately, any reluctance to trade them came down as much to the novelty of a DRW youth movement as it did to skill.
But besides that, I don't see the comparison between Tatar/Nike and Larkin/Mantha/AA. All three of the latter guys don't just have skill and IQ but also have unique physical attributes. The former two were seen as improvements on Hudler/Filppula. You can find 2Cs, speedy secondary forwards, big wingers, and skilled forwards, but rarely can you find them packaged together. Similar to how a small cohort felt about shipping out Filppula after his 60+ season, I'd imagine if Nyquist blew up in the latter half of the season and nailed 55-60+ points, the majority of fans - facing an imminent rebuild - would be hawking a prime Nyquist for the most premium of prices. The same goes twofold for Tatar.
Retire91
Stevey Y you our Guy
- May 31, 2010
- 6,175
- 1,598
I don't like the idea of trading mantha. Usually outside of the top 10 picks its hard to find a winger that has skill and size. Usually in the draft you can draft someone with skill or someone with size. You rarely get both unless you get a real high pick. The mantha pick was an absolute home run. If he gets traded it better be an equally home run D and then a gaping hole of skilled winger with size is created. Our only other winger with size is Abby and he has bottom 6 skill
Most people feel like Rubstov was just not physically ready for the KHL. Looks like the KHL terminated his contract and he is coming over to develop in the juniors.
Most people feel like Rubstov was just not physically ready for the KHL. Looks like the KHL terminated his contract and he is coming over to develop in the juniors.
Last edited:
WFIAA
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2016
- 196
- 51
Personally I wanted to trade Larkin last year. I thought his value was very high, though some chinks were showing in his game. I don't think he'll end up playing C in the NHL and he's not a good enough sniper at wing to be more valuable than what Detroit truly needs, a #1 C and a #1 D. If he could have been moved for that last season, I would've taken it. Now, you are less likely to get as much.
Overall, I never say a player is untradeable, all depends on the offer.
