Wings trade Nyquist to SJ for 2019 2nd & 2020 Conditional 3rd

TomasHertlsRooster

Don’t say eye test when you mean points
May 14, 2012
33,361
25,423
Fremont, CA
I'm curious to hear what kind of player you guys think we are getting here. His advanced stats look very strong. Is it fair to call him a non-elite 1st line RW? Or is he more of a high end 2nd liner whose numbers are propped up by Larkin?
 
Oct 18, 2006
14,501
2,061
It’s not the most amazing return, but it’s okay. He’s a good player, not a great one, and given he’s an upcoming UFA, it’s fair.
 

Cyborg Yzerberg

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,152
2,372
Philadelphia
I'm curious to hear what kind of player you guys think we are getting here. His advanced stats look very strong. Is it fair to call him a non-elite 1st line RW? Or is he more of a high end 2nd liner whose numbers are propped up by Larkin?

He teeters between very good second line winger and good first line winger. He’s had some absolutely incredible games in his career. Larkin and him definitely complemented one another very nicely. He and Z complemented one another well too. He’s really an excellent player to fill out a line. He’s a very good play maker too. He’s honestly been one of the few bright spots of the last seven years for this dismal team, so I’m really rooting for him over there. He’s extremely likable too.
 

KJoe88

Forever Lost.
May 18, 2012
7,031
1,324
Trenton, MI
He teeters between very good second line winger and good first line winger. He’s had some absolutely incredible games in his career. Larkin and him definitely complemented one another very nicely. He and Z complemented one another well too. He’s really an excellent player to fill out a line. He’s a very good play maker too. He’s honestly been one of the few bright spots of the last seven years for this dismal team, so I’m really rooting for him over there. He’s extremely likable too.
This so much.
 

Peter Tosh

Registered User
Dec 19, 2007
729
291
I'm curious to hear what kind of player you guys think we are getting here. His advanced stats look very strong. Is it fair to call him a non-elite 1st line RW? Or is he more of a high end 2nd liner whose numbers are propped up by Larkin?
Looked like Bure when he broke into the League, scoring 28 goals in 57 games. Since then, he has played his best hockey during contract seasons. Probably a great pickup for the Sharks, and probably highly motivated now when auditioning for a new contract. My guess is that he will be back to his normal self next season (15+25), after the multi-year deal (~6Mx5Y) is signed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeThorntonsRooster

Shaman464

No u
May 1, 2009
10,271
4,466
Boston, MA
1. Retained Salary on a rental is barely worth mentioning. The money does not stay on the books longer than a few months, and it's mostly so that way SJ can even afford Nyquist to begin with. 2. I would actually argue that this is better than the Zucc deal because the condition on the pick is actually feasible. The Sharks are stacked this year and look like they might be the best team top to bottom in the West. Dallas is still in a contention for a playoff spot, let alone winning two rounds. No guarantees that Zucc will want to come back to Dallas either. 3. Nyquist is a rental, which is inherently less valuable than a player who is cost controlled/has term. 4. Nyquist also had a NTC, which thinned the market and kept the competition down some on him. My guess is that as soon as it became clear than an extension was not close, Holland began working the phones with teams on Nyquist's shortlist. On this point we can blame Holland for handing out so many NTCs and NMCs. It played a factor in why the result is so average. 5. We cannot forget that Ottawa has completely dominated the market by making Stone, Duchene and Dzingel available. If Ottawa wasn't blowing it up this year, Zucc, Nyquist and Simmonds are considerably more valuable.



1. Defense > Forwards in terms of value. Especially so for rentals. Nyquist is clearly the better player, but any semi-competent d-man is always liable to get something. 2. I think it's wiser to consider the Jensen trade more like two trades at once. Wings wanted at least a 2nd for Jensen and got it. Full stop. On the other hand, Bowey was clearly on his way out at Washington and likely was going to be put on waivers at some point. He had been passed by several younger guys for them already, writing was on the wall for both parties. Wings payed a 5th (which is basically nothing) to move in front of Ottawa, who probably wouldn't mind to take on a reclamation project. 3. Bowey no longer has a 2nd round value. If he did, no way do the Caps move him. He would be a younger Jensen. At this point, we will have to wait around and see if Bowey can actually become an NHL player at all, which, interestingly enough, is basically what a 5th round is worth.

1. The retained salary is still a negotiating tactic. It means that the Sharks don't have to shift salary to make a deal happen. That's definitely worth mentioning.

2. Stacked teams can fail, and fail a lot. Look at the Capitals before last year. Look at the Wings 2009-2012.

3. He's still more valuable to a team in a contention window than a low first that likely won't make the league until after that window closes.

4. It wasn't a full no movement clause. Being too stringent on it in contract year would make teams less likely to offer him one in the offseason. Also from a negotiation stand point a strong playoffs and a potential ring puts him in a better position than just a strong contract season. He had incentive to waive.

5. So far they have the best assets but they don't want just a pick for those players. They want real assets coming back. A first is easier to part with for a UFA than a first plus a prospect, which by definition is a better asset.
 

Shaman464

No u
May 1, 2009
10,271
4,466
Boston, MA
I'm curious to hear what kind of player you guys think we are getting here. His advanced stats look very strong. Is it fair to call him a non-elite 1st line RW? Or is he more of a high end 2nd liner whose numbers are propped up by Larkin?

He was definitely propped up by playing with non-perimeter players. He is a perimeter player and Bert and Larkin open spaced and created opportunities that he didn't have in years prior. Don't count on him being a top line guy on a good team.
 

Cyborg Yzerberg

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,152
2,372
Philadelphia
1. The retained salary is still a negotiating tactic. It means that the Sharks don't have to shift salary to make a deal happen. That's definitely worth mentioning.

2. Stacked teams can fail, and fail a lot. Look at the Capitals before last year. Look at the Wings 2009-2012.

3. He's still more valuable to a team in a contention window than a low first that likely won't make the league until after that window closes.

4. It wasn't a full no movement clause. Being too stringent on it in contract year would make teams less likely to offer him one in the offseason. Also from a negotiation stand point a strong playoffs and a potential ring puts him in a better position than just a strong contract season. He had incentive to waive.

5. So far they have the best assets but they don't want just a pick for those players. They want real assets coming back. A first is easier to part with for a UFA than a first plus a prospect, which by definition is a better asset.

The Red Wings were not a stacked team after 2009. Also, I'd say this Sharks team this year is better than most of the Caps teams of the last decade outside of their collective goaltending issues.
 

kliq

Registered User
Dec 17, 2017
2,727
1,319
This is absolutely ridiculous. How can people defend this?

I can't wait for Holland to be gone.

I understand not loving the trade as it seems as if we simply got market value (nothing more, nothing less), but I think calling it ridiculous is a bit over the top. We got a 2nd and a 2nd or a 2nd and a 3rd depending on what happens. What were you expecting? A 1st? A 1st and a 2nd? Two 1st's?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickH8

Killerjas

Registered User
Mar 6, 2017
3,254
2,077
Netherlands
Decent return. Almost an UFA with a NTC clause, I don't think a 1st rounder was realistic. A 2nd rounder and a potential 2nd rounder is a decent haul. Not in love with the trade.

We cant have Tatar trades all day everyday.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,964
15,102
Sweden
This is absolutely ridiculous. How can people defend this?

I can't wait for Holland to be gone.
Problem is if Holland doesn’t trade him you have half the board screaming even a 7th round pick is better than nothing.
Getting a 2nd+3rd/2nd for a rental with full NTC is okay. Not great but okay. Overall Holland is having another strong TDL.
 

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,224
12,225
Tampere, Finland
This just shows what giving an NTC means.

Even as a FULL NTC, it doesn't prevent a trade, but it gives some control power for the player of the destination.

Criticising GMs about giving NTCs should end today.

Period.
 

Shoalzie

Trust me!
May 16, 2003
16,904
180
Portland, MI
Considering what Zuccarello went for...Holland got market price and who can argue that Nyquist is better than Zuccarello? And he could conceivably come back in the summer. You've now got three in 2nd round this spring.

Throw in the fact it opens a spot in the lineup for Zadina to get more ice time for next 8 games...what's there to complain about?

The Tatar trade was panned by most critics from a Vegas perspective...that was not likely going to happen here. Plus, Tatar had term left on his contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Henkka

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,045
11,764
Better than nothing.

I think the return for Tatar gave a lot of us false hopes for Nyquist this season.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad