Proposal: Trade for Cam Fowler

[Frk It]

sure, we could give up a ton of assets to become marginally better on the back end. sounds like a good plan.

So we wait 5 years for Cholowski and Hronek to maybe become a middle pairing defenseman... while watching a defense that blows chunks?

Cause that plan isn't good either.

 

[obey86]

So we wait 5 years for Cholowski and Hronek to maybe become a middle pairing defenseman... while watching a defense that blows chunks?

Cause that plan isn't good either.

The only way the team is going to get a top tier defensemen is through the draft. I don't see what's wrong with drafting and developing. You kind of have to do that. Nothing is ever a guarantee, trades, FA signings, or draft picks. It's not like the Wings are going to compete for the cup in the next 2-3 years (at least) so who cares.

 

[Bench]

I don't see what's wrong with drafting and developing.

Well, right now, the two best Wings defenders were brought in as free agents.

 

[Frk It]

The only way the team is going to get a top tier defensemen is through the draft. I don't see what's wrong with drafting and developing. You kind of have to do that. Nothing is ever a guarantee, trades, FA signings, or draft picks. It's not like the Wings are going to compete for the cup in the next 2-3 years (at least) so who cares.

I like the idea. But our execution has been awful.

 

[Heaton]

The only way the team is going to get a top tier defensemen is through the draft. I don't see what's wrong with drafting and developing. You kind of have to do that. Nothing is ever a guarantee, trades, FA signings, or draft picks. It's not like the Wings are going to compete for the cup in the next 2-3 years (at least) so who cares.

Why sign a bunch of old UFAs then? The Wings ****ed up a golden opportunity this offseason, we should have eaten the Datsyuk contract, drafted Chychrun and enjoyed the steal of the draft.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Yep.

Here are a few that come to mind.

Zach Bogosian was a rumored target for years. We should have traded for and built around him. lol. He sucks.

Tyler Myers. 2nd pair defender. Solid, but not worth giving up a ton of assets for.

Bouwmeester. Solid but meh overall, at least at this point.

Phaneuf. $7 million contract and again, average. Yeah, no thanks.

Matt Dumba. Was a healthy scratch the other day.


Cam Fowler isn't any different than all the other rumored targets. Painfully mediocre/average but because they play for another team they are seen as much better than they are.

That's a very good summary of the trade rumor targets in the past few years.

Fowler is young enough that his future might change, and has minimal injury history.

That said, I wouldn't want to pay the assets for him.

 

[obey86]

Why sign a bunch of old UFAs then? The Wings ****ed up a golden opportunity this offseason, we should have eaten the Datsyuk contract, drafted Chychrun and enjoyed the steal of the draft.

Or Chychrun is the next Zach Bogosian, a guy who was drafted high and people thought was going to be awesome for the longest time and now he stinks.

Point is, he could be great or he could be mediocre. Lets wait more than 2 games before making that determination.

 

[Heaton]

Or Chychrun is the next Zach Bogosian, a guy who was drafted high and people thought was going to be awesome for the longest time and now he stinks.

Point is, he could be great or he could be mediocre. Lets wait more than 2 games before making that determination.

Hah OK, but I just can't get behind the do nothing approach. Wings haven't drafted or developed a top pairing defensemen in 20 years, not sure why anyone thinks we'll end up doing it now.

 

[obey86]

Hah OK, but I just can't get behind the do nothing approach. Wings haven't drafted or developed a top pairing defensemen in 20 years, not sure why anyone thinks we'll end up doing it now.

To be fair, they haven't really drafted many defensemen high in the draft and I think it's been a huge mistake not to do so which i blame them for. I think that's by far been their biggest issue. They need to draft more defensemen in the first 3 rounds....I hope they continue doing what they did this draft.

 

[Heaton]

To be fair, they haven't really drafted many defensemen high in the draft. I think that's by far been their biggest issue. They need to draft more defensemen in the first 3 rounds....I hope they continue doing what they did this draft.

My biggest gripe is why did they wait until it was painfully obvious this was an issue? They should have been drafted defensemen high in the draft since 2009.

You build down the middle, the Wings are trying to build with 2nd line wingers.

 

[obey86]

My biggest gripe is why did they wait until it was painfully obvious this was an issue? They should have been drafted defensemen high in the draft since 2009.

You build down the middle, the Wings are trying to build with 2nd line wingers.

I agree with you, it was a big mistake.

If they change their drafting approach to draft more, they can have success though IMO. Gotta get a little lucky too though, just like Montreal with Subban....CHI with Keith, etc.

 

[jkutswings]

I agree with you, it was a big mistake.

If they change their drafting approach to draft more, they can have success though IMO. Gotta get a little lucky too though, just like Montreal with Subban....CHI with Keith, etc.

Or the approach could flame out, like all the other approaches you listed as being questionable.

To exaggerate to prove a point, if you have Gretzkys coming out of your ears, but have zero Rafalskis, it's ok to overpay, and trade one of your Gretzkys for a Rafalski, even if the forward is "worth" significantly more, because you're trading a surplus for a need.

If Detroit depletes its forwards to improve the defense, but then continues to refill the pipeline at forward, what's the harm? The track record suggests that there's a good chance at being able to do just that, while not being able to finally get it right in drafting a good defenseman or two.

 

[HockeyinHD]

If Detroit depletes its forwards to improve the defense, but then continues to refill the pipeline at forward, what's the harm?

What you're suggesting isn't a huge risk if your entry point in the strategy session is something besides what the Wings want, but it is a much larger risk than the Wings need to take to achieve what they actually want.

 

[HockeyinHD]

My biggest gripe is why did they wait until it was painfully obvious this was an issue? They should have been drafted defensemen high in the draft since 2009.

A) Go back and look at 'defensemen taken high in the draft since 2009'. I think the list of dmen you'd think could have addressed Detroit's issue on the blue line taken over all drafts in that time frame comprises two guys: Faulk and Maataa.

Of around 60 dmen selected. 2.

B) Compare that degree of success with what Detroit actually had at forward.

The point is that suggesting merely applying draft picks to a position addresses an issue neglects to consider the actual availability in players who would truly address the issue. Detroit could have spent every single 1 and 2 on Dmen since 2009 and they'd have a 1 in 6 chance of even getting one of the guys who was any good, while costing them at least 3 and upwards of 6 actual NHL forwards, a couple of whom are legit top 6'ers.

 

[obey86]

Or the approach could flame out, like all the other approaches you listed as being questionable.

To exaggerate to prove a point, if you have Gretzkys coming out of your ears, but have zero Rafalskis, it's ok to overpay, and trade one of your Gretzkys for a Rafalski, even if the forward is "worth" significantly more, because you're trading a surplus for a need.

If Detroit depletes its forwards to improve the defense, but then continues to refill the pipeline at forward, what's the harm? The track record suggests that there's a good chance at being able to do just that, while not being able to finally get it right in drafting a good defenseman or two.

Sounds nice, but Nyquists and tatars don't get you Duncan Keiths or pk subbans via trade.

 

[njx9]

A) Go back and look at 'defensemen taken high in the draft since 2009'. I think the list of dmen you'd think could have addressed Detroit's issue on the blue line taken over all drafts in that time frame comprises two guys: Faulk and Maataa.

Of around 60 dmen selected. 2.

B) Compare that degree of success with what Detroit actually had at forward.

The point is that suggesting merely applying draft picks to a position addresses an issue neglects to consider the actual availability in players who would truly address the issue. Detroit could have spent every single 1 and 2 on Dmen since 2009 and they'd have a 1 in 6 chance of even getting one of the guys who was any good, while costing them at least 3 and upwards of 6 actual NHL forwards, a couple of whom are legit top 6'ers.

There are currently 2 real top 6 forwards Detroit drafted since 2009 (Larkin and Tatar). Mantha and Svechnikov might make 4, but it's sort of disingenuous to pile them on as anything more than distant maybes. Further, it's a bit silly to suggest we shouldn't have drafted defensemen because we might've only gotten 2 good ones while, in reality, we only got like, 3 decent forwards. It's further silly, because we're negating the possibility of moving up in the draft to find better talent. Instead of pissing away our pick in 2012 for Quincey, what would it have taken to simply move into the top ten? Trouba or Lindholm would've set the team up pretty well. What would it have taken to turn #24 in 2011 into #19? And why are we artificially cutting this off in 2009? Josi would've been a pretty decent pick over McCollum. Hamonic would've been nice. Would anyone not swap Brendan Smith for PK Subban?

 

[jkutswings]

Sounds nice, but Nyquists and tatars don't get you Duncan Keiths or pk subbans via trade.

And my point is that a Keith or a Subban is NEVER coming here, so that's not the way they'll have to fix things. They need to overpay for a Fowler-esque guy two or three times over the next few years, slowly building a respectable defense, while slowly refilling the forward pipeline. Ideally with at least one of those forwards as a top 5 pick, which would likely be draft stock of a caliber that's head and shoulders better than anything they've had thus far.

Now they won't do it, as long as there's a chance of keeping the streak going, but that's the one feasible way I see any significant transformation of the blue line, at least within a 5 year span.

 

[jkutswings]

A) Go back and look at 'defensemen taken high in the draft since 2009'. I think the list of dmen you'd think could have addressed Detroit's issue on the blue line taken over all drafts in that time frame comprises two guys: Faulk and Maataa.

Of around 60 dmen selected. 2.

B) Compare that degree of success with what Detroit actually had at forward.

The point is that suggesting merely applying draft picks to a position addresses an issue neglects to consider the actual availability in players who would truly address the issue. Detroit could have spent every single 1 and 2 on Dmen since 2009 and they'd have a 1 in 6 chance of even getting one of the guys who was any good, while costing them at least 3 and upwards of 6 actual NHL forwards, a couple of whom are legit top 6'ers.

Thank you, Captain Hindsight.

But we have no idea what would've been different, whether with those individual players, or with what players were even available at a given selection, had Detroit drafted more defensemen. We don't even know if a given player would've had a much better (or worse) career, had he been drafted by a different team. WAY too many variables to just say, "Only 2 panned out, so it would not have made a difference."

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

how do we fit him under the cap? Someone else needs to be involved.

Hopefully we just LTIR Kronwall, It's looking like he's pretty much done any ways.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

I'm not trading Mantha, and Anaheim has to take salary back in order for them to move Fowler to Detroit, which they obviously can't do. I think Anaheim is likely to move Stoner and/or Despres to cap dump teams like Carolina or New Jersey with higher draft picks as incentives.

Despres has a concussion and will be out on LTIR for the long term, And no team is taking on the Stoner contract without one of Theodore or Montour being included. Moving either one of Despres or Stoner isn't an option right now.

 

[Frk It]

Despres has a concussion and will be out on LTIR for the long term, And no team is taking on the Stoner contract without on of Theodore or Montour being included. Moving either one of Despres or Stoner isn't an option right now.

****, if they are throwing in Theodore I'd be all over that. I'd clear cap for that.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

****, if they are throwing in Theodore I'd be all over that. I'd clear cap for that.

Same here Theodore would be sweet, Doubt Murray would do Theodore though maybe Montour who i would do also. Pretty sure that you would've to look at the Chicago and Detroit deals along with Florida to get what it would take to move the Stoner contract.

 

[Martinez]

Or the approach could flame out, like all the other approaches you listed as being questionable.

To exaggerate to prove a point, if you have Gretzkys coming out of your ears, but have zero Rafalskis, it's ok to overpay, and trade one of your Gretzkys for a Rafalski, even if the forward is "worth" significantly more, because you're trading a surplus for a need.

If Detroit depletes its forwards to improve the defense, but then continues to refill the pipeline at forward, what's the harm? The track record suggests that there's a good chance at being able to do just that, while not being able to finally get it right in drafting a good defenseman or two.

I agree with this and I'm willing to trade Larkin to do it. If we can get a guy like werenski or even better a guy like Faulk I would be all over that.

 

[njx9]

The problem with trading Larkin is that we're as bad at drafting Cs as we are Ds. It just displaces the problem. I'm not saying don't do it, but I don't think it's as easy as "trade Larkin and we'll sort it out."

 

[HisNoodliness]

So Lindholm is apparently semi- available now. What about something like: Dekeyser+AA/Mantha/Nyquist/Tatar+a second. Would Anaheim listen to an offer like that?