Proposal: Trade Mrazek

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

If we get OEL for Mrazek I think I'd do that. You can win without a stud goalie. Wings know that all too well. I think stud d-men are more important.

Yeah i would gladly do something around Mrazek++ for OEL, Faulk or Ekblad something like that a true #1 D man for us other then that no way.

 

[Dead Thing Fan]

Mrazek

Trading Mrazek to help fill any other holes would only create another hole that would have to be filled. A lateral move at best and likely a major step back in the long run.

I truly believe that Mrazek will be a top 3 NHL tender in the not too distant future. Just needs to add some more experience to go along with his superior skills and athletic ability.
He is part of my core with DDK(our best defensive dman), Larkin, AA and Mantha.
[/B]With the understanding that Dats is not coming back and that Zetts, Kroner and the mule aren't going to be moved, I am open to moving any of the teams other assets including roster players(i.e.-Nyquist, Tatar, Smith etc.), prospects(Saarijarvi, Tuergeon, Svechnikov)-everyone in GR/Junior/Europe and draft picks(including firsts).

Dmen like Doughty, Eckblad, Karlsson and the like are too valuable(and rightly so) to their present teams to be available. However there are deals out there apparently. The guy I like to see targeted is Jacob Trouba of the Jets. 9th overall pick by Winnipeg in 2012. 6'3"/205 right handed shot. Michigan boy. A quick look at the Jets roster shows(to me anyway) that their weakest position is left wing. On the roster alone we have Nyquist, Tatar, Abby, Jurco and Pulks, any one or two who could be part of a package with the likes of Smith, a prospect and a pick(s). I personally would offer Nyquist, Smith and this years first. But I'm probably dreaming in technicolor.

PS.: Now that Howard has stated that he is open to being moved, hopefully he would consider a trade to Calgary. The Flames situation on goal is dismal. Their future tender(Gillies) is still a year or two away. Howard can be a bridge until he arrives and then act as a mentor. Trade would be Howard(plus a mid rd. pick to make up for the difference in contracts lengths)for Wideman(cap hits are almost identical-Howard is about $42,000 higher). We buy out Wideman at he cost of $1,250,000 in 16/17 and $2,000,000 in 17/18.

 

[Reddwit]

Mrazek should definitely be available for the right price. Goalies are way too volatile and good ones on teams with great skaters are good enough.

Which is exactly why they don't get much in return.

 

[Kyleftlx]

Trade the young potential star goaltender instead of the overpaid veteran goaltender?

That worked out really well for Vancouver. Let's do it!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[sarcastro]

Trade the young potential star goaltender instead of the overpaid veteran goaltender?

That worked out really well for Vancouver. Let's do it!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well the Vancouver model would be to trade them both.

 

[Retire91]

Trading Mrazek would not be a good move IMO. For example trade him for a #1 D. Ok now what do you do about a goalie.

IMO Mrazek has the potential to be an elite goalie. If he achieves it then he will be the first elite goalie the wings have had in my lifetime. Sure Hazek was elite but he was past his prime when he came aboard.

Unless the deal was an absolute windfall in Holland's favor and it included a blue chip goalie prospect, trading Mrazek would be robbing petr to pay paul because eventually whatever hole the trade fills is going to leave a giant hole in the net.

Continue to develop Mrazek is the best way forward hands down.

 

[njx9]

The reactions to this are weird, given the rest of the tenor around the board towards the end of the season. It seems like, if you want to actually tank, a la Chicago, and get some top end picks to rebuild with, you should, at best, be ambivalent about keeping Mrazek.

By that I mean, he either meets expectations and essentially Cory Schneider's a bad team to a mediocre record (and we pick in basically the same spot, give or take a few, that we are now), in which case he's preventing an actual rebuild. Or, he doesn't meet expectations, in which case there's no reason to keep him anyways, and we should be trying to trade him while his value's high.

I don't agree with the 'Chicago tank' philosophy at all (nor do I advocate trading Mrazek), but I don't understand why people who do aren't fully embracing this trade idea.

 

[PetrPumpknEatr]

The reactions to this are weird, given the rest of the tenor around the board towards the end of the season. It seems like, if you want to actually tank, a la Chicago, and get some top end picks to rebuild with, you should, at best, be ambivalent about keeping Mrazek.

By that I mean, he either meets expectations and essentially Cory Schneider's a bad team to a mediocre record (and we pick in basically the same spot, give or take a few, that we are now), in which case he's preventing an actual rebuild. Or, he doesn't meet expectations, in which case there's no reason to keep him anyways, and we should be trying to trade him while his value's high.

I don't agree with the 'Chicago tank' philosophy at all (nor do I advocate trading Mrazek), but I don't understand why people who do aren't fully embracing this trade idea.

That's not how tanking works. Tanking is about getting rid of salary and rebuilding for the future. You already have a future goalie in Mrazek. He's young. He's cheaper. You'd want to get a player like Mrazek in a tank situation, not get rid of them.

If there was a tank, you'd get rid of Howard because he's where the salary is. Same with Zetterberg and all the other high earning members of the team.

 

[njx9]

That's not how tanking works. Tanking is about getting rid of salary and rebuilding for the future. You already have a future goalie in Mrazek. He's young. He's cheaper. You'd want to get a player like Mrazek in a tank situation, not get rid of them.

If there was a tank, you'd get rid of Howard because he's where the salary is. Same with Zetterberg and all the other high earning members of the team.

"By that I mean, he either meets expectations and essentially Cory Schneider's a bad team to a mediocre record (and we pick in basically the same spot, give or take a few, that we are now), in which case he's preventing an actual rebuild. Or, he doesn't meet expectations, in which case there's no reason to keep him anyways, and we should be trying to trade him while his value's high."

I don't know what you were responding to, but it wasn't what I posted. You don't tank by dumping salary, you do it by losing. Keeping Mrazek is either irrelevant (if he isn't a great goalie) or a detriment to that effort (if he is).

 

[PetrPumpknEatr]

"By that I mean, he either meets expectations and essentially Cory Schneider's a bad team to a mediocre record (and we pick in basically the same spot, give or take a few, that we are now), in which case he's preventing an actual rebuild. Or, he doesn't meet expectations, in which case there's no reason to keep him anyways, and we should be trying to trade him while his value's high."

I don't know what you were responding to, but it wasn't what I posted. You don't tank by dumping salary, you do it by losing. Keeping Mrazek is either irrelevant (if he isn't a great goalie) or a detriment to that effort (if he is).

The point of cheering for a team is hoping that they win, not lose. The point of tanking it to build a winning team.

 

[Retire91]

The reactions to this are weird, given the rest of the tenor around the board towards the end of the season. It seems like, if you want to actually tank, a la Chicago, and get some top end picks to rebuild with, you should, at best, be ambivalent about keeping Mrazek.

By that I mean, he either meets expectations and essentially Cory Schneider's a bad team to a mediocre record (and we pick in basically the same spot, give or take a few, that we are now), in which case he's preventing an actual rebuild. Or, he doesn't meet expectations, in which case there's no reason to keep him anyways, and we should be trying to trade him while his value's high.

I don't agree with the 'Chicago tank' philosophy at all (nor do I advocate trading Mrazek), but I don't understand why people who do aren't fully embracing this trade idea.

This is what people get wrong about the group here on the board that wants to change directions. Its not about tanking, its about building a core for the future and "sinking or swimming" with your youth. Stop overbaking (nyquist) and stop signing veteran filler (Richards) and trading away youth (Legwand for Jarnkrok/2nd). We don't want the team to do horrible. We want the team managed for the future and not just to make the first round of the playoffs as long as possible before the wheels fall off completely.

Very few if any of us want the team to lose by design. We want the team to be successful and go beyond the first round after getting there without Veteran filler even if that takes a few seasons of sucking.

Mrazek is the future core why in the heck would we want rid of him.

 

[Flowah]

Well I'm sure "Arizona GM to be named" is just dying to make his first stamp on the team trading away the franchise defender for another goalie. Not like they don't already have their own Jimmy Howard in Mike Smith collecting paychecks for sub-par performances.

Of course that won't happen. I was just commenting on what someone else proposed. Sure if someone offers a young #1 d-man I take that trade. But otherwise, Mrazek needs to stay. He's going to be really good and he's got the puckhandling to make up for some of the puck moving deficiencies of our defensive group.

 

[njx9]

This is what people get wrong about the group here on the board that wants to change directions. Its not about tanking, its about building a core for the future and "sinking or swimming" with your youth. Stop overbaking (nyquist) and stop signing veteran filler (Richards) and trading away youth (Legwand for Jarnkrok/2nd). We don't want the team to do horrible. We want the team managed for the future and not just to make the first round of the playoffs as long as possible before the wheels fall off completely.

Very few if any of us want the team to lose by design. We want the team to be successful and go beyond the first round after getting there without Veteran filler even if that takes a few seasons of sucking.

Mrazek is the future core why in the heck would we want rid of him.

I think there are 3 pretty distinct groups with a few outliers in between:
1) things are generally fine, and the team is moving in a good direction
2) things aren't fine, but nothing drastic needs to happen, just stop picking up Legwands and play the youth (or trade them for actual improvements)
3) burn it to the ground and get some high end draft picks to try to be competitive in the future

I'm not surprised that groups 1 and 2 have no interest in trading Mrazek, but I figured OP would get way more support from group 3, since Mrazek stands directly in the way of that strategy. That said, and like I said, I agree, I don't think he should be moved.

The point of cheering for a team is hoping that they win, not lose. The point of tanking it to build a winning team.

This is a complete non-sequitur.

 

[SirloinUB]

Not much interest in dealing him. That said, if he on his own can land an Impact dman, you listen to offers. In reality I highly doubt that would ever happen so I can't really imagine trading him.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

mrazek will be a better goalie then larkin ever will be a forward

that is mrazek will have vezina calibre years and more of them than larkin will have hart trophy caliber years

trading mrazek is a stupid of an idea as those clowns in montreal who wanted to trade price and keep halak

dumb.. dumb.. dumb...

 

[kook10]

Earlier this year I was for moving Mrazek, as he was the only guy we had with significant value. His early season hype deflated a bit down the stretch though as he looked more human in the runup to the playoffs when others heated up. Whereas before he looked like exceptional, now he just looks very good. There isn't a great return on very good goalies (i.e. you won't get a solid D piece). No point in doing it now. My hope is by some miracle we get a favorable contract (which will never happen).

Hopefully Blash can find a better schedule balance and not drive him into the ground next year. He still has a lot of potential, but without decent defense and some run support we will just burn up all of our assets in goal and pay dearly for the priviliege.

 

[BigRangy]

I come in peace, I read most of the thread, and it seems like only 1 guy is really on the trade Mrazek train. Regardless, I have a proposal:



6th Overall
Mason McDonald



Mrazek
Martin Frk
2016 Wings 2nd round pick

I come to this value as essentially Mrazek = Schneider, but with a lesser Luongo "you have to trade one" scenario. So Mrazek + Frk for 6th to get Chychrun/Juolevi/Sergachev. Then McDonald for a 2nd so that the Wings still have a goalie prospect with starting potential.

I'd love to upgrade to Mantha from Frk, but I don't think the Flames have the expendable pieces required to do such a thing. Wouldn't blame anyone for rejecting this trade, because it just opens and hole to fill another.

 

[HisNoodliness]

I come in peace, I read most of the thread, and it seems like only 1 guy is really on the trade Mrazek train. Regardless, I have a proposal:



6th Overall
Mason McDonald



Mrazek
Martin Frk
2016 Wings 2nd round pick

I come to this value as essentially Mrazek = Schneider, but with a lesser Luongo "you have to trade one" scenario. So Mrazek + Frk for 6th to get Chychrun/Juolevi/Sergachev. Then McDonald for a 2nd so that the Wings still have a goalie prospect with starting potential.

I'd love to upgrade to Mantha from Frk, but I don't think the Flames have the expendable pieces required to do such a thing. Wouldn't blame anyone for rejecting this trade, because it just opens and hole to fill another.

I wouldn't do it but it's a fair proposal. We just don't really have a reason to trade Mrazek and if we do it would have to be a massive overpayment...which you have no motivation to do. So unfortunately it's a non- starter. Now if you want a goalie I would like to introduce you to Jimmy Howard

 

[Vatican Roulette]

I come in peace, I read most of the thread, and it seems like only 1 guy is really on the trade Mrazek train. Regardless, I have a proposal:



6th Overall
Mason McDonald



Mrazek
Martin Frk
2016 Wings 2nd round pick

I come to this value as essentially Mrazek = Schneider, but with a lesser Luongo "you have to trade one" scenario. So Mrazek + Frk for 6th to get Chychrun/Juolevi/Sergachev. Then McDonald for a 2nd so that the Wings still have a goalie prospect with starting potential.

I'd love to upgrade to Mantha from Frk, but I don't think the Flames have the expendable pieces required to do such a thing. Wouldn't blame anyone for rejecting this trade, because it just opens and hole to fill another.

Counter:

Mrazek
Pulkkinen


For

6th

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

I come in peace, I read most of the thread, and it seems like only 1 guy is really on the trade Mrazek train. Regardless, I have a proposal:



6th Overall
Mason McDonald



Mrazek
Martin Frk
2016 Wings 2nd round pick

I come to this value as essentially Mrazek = Schneider, but with a lesser Luongo "you have to trade one" scenario. So Mrazek + Frk for 6th to get Chychrun/Juolevi/Sergachev. Then McDonald for a 2nd so that the Wings still have a goalie prospect with starting potential.

I'd love to upgrade to Mantha from Frk, but I don't think the Flames have the expendable pieces required to do such a thing. Wouldn't blame anyone for rejecting this trade, because it just opens and hole to fill another.

will the player we get at 6 be as impactful as mrazek, the best young goalie in the nhl?

thats the question you have to ask yourself

to me no, to others maybe

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Trading Mrazek is a boat-burning maneuver.

We are not in a rebuild.

 

[Martinez]

I liked the trade our 1st and Gus for a better 1st more. We're not trading Petr

 

[Vatican Roulette]

will the player we get at 6 be as impactful as mrazek, the best young goalie in the nhl?

thats the question you have to ask yourself

to me no, to others maybe

Mrazek is good young goalie. He's not the best young goalie in the NHL. If offered the 6th for him, I take it.

Trading Mrazek is a boat-burning maneuver.

We are not in a rebuild.

Detroit is. The mgt just doesn't want to see it yet. Signing Mrazek and keeping him on is a waste of his talent and future trade value.

I liked the trade our 1st and Gus for a better 1st more. We're not trading Petr

I agree.

But, trade Mrazek while he still has value. Detroit will survive on Howard, and will be better off.

 

[Goalie guy]

No! end post this is a bad bad idea!!

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Mrazek is good young goalie. He's not the best young goalie in the NHL. If offered the 6th for him, I take it.

what young goalie is better? he just finished his first year as our starter

trading highly talented young goalies for non lottery picks dosent guarantee you squat

hello schneider for horvat(who?)

absolutely atrocious trade for vancouver, all cory has done is be one of the best goalies in the league since the trade and horvat, well, he looks like nothing special