PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Yeesh...

Nice pass by Tatar

It was actually obvious interference on Larkin. They still have to work on it seems.

Clearly Babcock has them working on their subtle interference.

That's really unfortunate. It did look bad the way he was crawling in the ice and wasn't even able to stand. It was just a regular stop when he got injured - I guess strange things happen, though. Part of me wonders if something happened when he was checked into the bench the shift before.

Mantha shoots left, but he plays RW.

For the record, I'd have preferred to have Larkin at 2C and not signed Nielsen. My point was more that those decisions were not essential and don't have that much to do with Dats leaving early. If he left after this year instead, we'd have faced the same decision of whether to have Larkin as 2C or sign a UFA - just a year later. The draft trade certainly wouldn't have happened if he finished the contract, but I think we'll have to wait many years to see if that was a good move.

First of all, I acknowledge my obvious bias, haha If Pav left after this year he would have left us in a worse position. It always happens when good players leave, no matter what the reason. Rafalski leaving absolutely left us in a worse position - we couldn't replace him until Green. I don't think the fact that Pav left a year early left us in any worse position than if he left at the time that his contract was supposed to end. To me, I think you can only really argue that he screwed us if you think he'd make us a playoff team. Even that's debateable for those who argue that missing will help longterm. If you think the Pav contract trade made us miss out in a jem in Chychyrun then maybe he screwed us. But that trade wasn't essential - we could have eaten the caphit for a year and played Larkin in Pav's spot. So, if you're one who drools over Chychyrun, you could argue Holland's decision is what is to blame. I don't think you can blame Pav for subsequent reactions that weren't necessary or without choice. If Pav left after this year, instead of Nielson, we'd probably sign a different replacement center. This year's crop could be Thornton, Mike Fischer, Hanzal, Boyle. Of those, only Thornton has more pts than Nielsen, but at 37, I don't think we'd go that way. I don't like the Nielsen deal, but nobody can act like the alternative is Pav staying and no bad deal - The likely alternative is 1 more year of Pav and a similar UFA ( also over-payed as UFAs usually are) a year later. Trying to pick up a replacement UFA would have probably been even worse in this expansion year where Vegas can throw money at all the high demand guys and talk to them early.

(For outside perspective) Larkin!!!!!!!!!!!!

HELM!!!

Hearing the CBC guy try to say Athanasiou is pretty funny. Athasuza?

Was Sheahan moved down before or after he hit the coach with the errant puck? haha

At least Sheahan isn't on the 2nd line like last game.

Well, Blashill seems to be pretty good at blocking shots... Mantha!!!!

So does.....everyone?

Yeah, I remember thinking "keep your mouth shut vanek!" haha. Here's the section: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2017/02/red_wings_thomas_vanek_prepare.html "Vanek said there hasn't been much contract talk with the club. He would prefer to explore free agency on July 1. "Really is no point to talk right now anyway," Vanek said. "July 1 is right around the corner. Again, like I said, it's a place that I like, but at the same time I might as well wait and see what's out there."" Doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't want to sign with any team before July 1st, but it might be a red flag if the thought was to get a player and up your chances to re-sign them. Although, teams don't really sign guys at the deadline with the thought of extending them often. And especially with the expansion draft and having to protect any signees, it's unlikely anyone would want to sign him before July 1st.

But Vanek publicly that he's going to free agency to see what his options are (mlive article on trade speculation). I'm sure that was heard by everyone that thought about signing him at the deadline. Plus his history of not re-signing with the Islanders or The Habs when they picked him up in years past means that teams would have definitely valued him as a rental.

Though I really like Jurco, I think it was time for him to move on. Too many years of him being scratched regularly and him struggling. Without their being anything else behind the scenes, that can be a toxic history that gets in the way of a player getting it together. A change of scenery and a fresh mindset is essential sometimes. Holland even said him and his agent said he'd rather be elsewhere (a.k.a. asked for a trade).

Jurco's an RFA after this year so he's not just a rental for the Blackhawks. That's a big difference in value for teams. It's a few years of a player vs. a few months.

Having Z, Nielson, Helm as the top 3 centers just won't be good enough in a few years so they have to have new blood going in the center position. Z's been great, but I don't think he'll be at the level of a 1st line center in a couple years. I think Larkin at least will get a shot at developing into a 1C or 2C guy. At the beginning of the year Holland said outright that their longterm plan was to have Larkin at center (I wish I remembered when he said it - maybe the "less can be more exciting" presser or he did long radio interview). It didn't work out when they've put him there, but I don't think they'll give up on that plan yet.

Agreed. Should move Helm to 4C and let Larkin be center of one of the top 3 lines.

Did they do it all on Deadline day? Jurco is a roster player next year that was traded so that is 1 roster spot created. Upfront, with Vanek, Miller, Ott and Jurco gone we have those 4 spots for young guys. Add to that the 1 spot that will be create from the Vegas draft makes 5. There was plenty of talk about Sheahan and I think there's a strong possibility that he'll be traded - maybe at the draft (just speculation, but I have a feeling). Add to that, we do have a lot of youth on the roster already... I'll go with Dickie's A- or B+. We got less than I expected for Vanek (though other deals show I expected too much), but more than I expected from everyone else and the Jurco deal wasn't even on anyone's radar. To add to perspective on Vanek, consider that we picked him up for minimal salary as a UFA, and now we've got a 3rd and a prospect out of an asset that pretty much cost us nothing. Was a great pickup from free agency.

- He has another year on his contract so we could trade him next year - He's a good Dman (maybe our best?) and offensive RH Dmen are really hard to find - He is only 31 and the Wings might want to re-sign him after his current deal. If we're contenders in 5 years time, Green could still be a part of that.

McKenzie says we retain 50% of Vanek's salary. That seems unnecessary since he doesn't make all that much. That aspect doesn't matter much, though. I guess there wasn't much of a demand for Vanek. Surprising. I expected more return, but I don't know anything about Mcilrath so if he's a solid piece, my opinion would change. Apparently he's starting in Grand Rapids.