kipwinger

I was always talking in hypothetical. I asked Dickie what kind of player he'd want in return if he was going to trade Mantha or Larkin, and then immediately suggested if I wanted to trade Larkin I'd want someone like O'Reilly in return. Go back and look. At no point did I ever suggest this was what we really should do, or that it was a realistic proposal. We're about to have a very young, and yet very experienced team in the near future. I think if ever there was a time to "sacrifice the future for the now", it would be now. Trading and 18 year old, for a 23 year old with a nearly identical skill set, who's much more proven, is not a bad move. This is all starting to sound a little bit like that time you said you wouldn't trade Brendan Smith for Keith Yandle because "Smith's going to be better than Yandle one day". I'm done. You win.

Agree. I've been talking in hypothetical this whole time. In no way to I think this actually happens. First, because of the reasons you said. And secondly, because I don't think Ken Holland would do a first rounder from a year ago wrong like that. Not his style.

Not sure where you're getting this from. I never said a "non roster player". I'd start with Helm, Larkin, 2nd but I'd give the 1st (since it will be a very late first anyway based on our record). Which should put us in the ballpark. I might even be willing to sweeten the pot with a mid level prospect too if need be (Jensen). Secondly, obviously you and I dramatically differ on how we value Smith so I'm going to leave that out. Again, because I don't think it's necessary to trade him. But I could give a damn about losing "other assets" in Helm and unproven prospects as long as I'm getting a first rate player on the front end of his career. We'd be losing Helm and an unproven prospect for a guy that does all the same things as Helm PLUS scores. The only real loss is the (very late round) 1st, and Larkin (a great, yet unproven, prospect). Losing both those things would sting, but we've got the organization depth to do it and never miss a beat. AND you'd be set down the middle for the next 7-10 years. Seriously, trading for O'Reilly means you never won't need another center for a VERY long time. Keeping Larkin means you MIGHT NOT need a center for a very long time. That's why I do it. Every single time.

Firstly, yes...I'd be totally fine trading Helm, Smith, and Larkin for O'Reilly. However, that's just the typical trade rumor overpayment bluster. Ryan O'Reilly isn't going to get that much in return. Hell, Rick Nash, Bobby Ryan, and Jason Spezza didn't get that much in return. Not sure why you think O'Reilly would be different. Secondly, I feel like I'm talking in circles. I'd be willing to give up Larkin, plus those assets, because O'Reilly can help us now AND in years to come...while Larkin can only help us in the future. And in the future we won't have Dats, Zetterberg, or Kronwall. We might find that we're actually further away from the Cup by the time Larkin can make an impact. 5 years from now our leadership will be retired, Larkin will be a rookie, and O'Reilly will be 28 and on the front side of his prime. A guy like O'Reilly is the present AND the future, while Larkin is just the future. If you trade for O'Reilly you can field this lineup tomorrow Tatar-Dats-Abby Z-O'Reilly-Nyquist Weiss-Sheahan-Jurco/Franzen Miller-Glendening-Andersson And in a few years you'll still have Tatar-O'Reilly-Mantha Nyquist-Sheahan-Jurco Pulkkinen-Athanasiou-Abby Callahan-Glendening-Whoever. You're right. Larkin has all those assets. But he doesn't have them at the NHL level for at least three more years of college and one AHL season. That's a long time to wait when you're as close as we are right now.

Because it's a civil crime and he probably hasn't pressed charges. Most of the time the state isn't going to get involved in something like this by bringing criminal charges.

I think that's understood. As I've said already, I think everybody would agree that none of our quality prospects should be traded for a tin of beans. But it's always fun to speculate on guys' values and the types of packages you could put together around them.

See, I disagree about the contract. The current one is a bit high. But that's because Colorado dicked him around and he doesn't want to be there. Secondly, the term was short. Sign him long term (which is a good investment), and that number comes down. He won't make 6-7 million on a 5+ year deal. He's just making that much because he's on 1-2 year deals. Also, I want to reiterate he's only 23. He's only going to get better. He's not even entering his prime. I'm not sure why everybody thinks he's reached his max potential. If he continues to improve and in a couple of years is putting up 60 pts. regularly and playing stud defense, which isn't unrealistic, how would he not be worth 6 million?

I'm not arguing any of that. Those young guys are better than Franzen because of a number of things. They are, perhaps, no more skilled than him. But that's not all that goes into a hockey player. They're skilled AND work hard, so they're better players. And he's unnecessary. Again, I'm not defending the guy. Or even saying we should keep him. I'm saying his production hasn't noticeably dropped this year. There's a slight drop for sure, but I see no reason to attribute that to an overall decline rather than the yearly slumps he goes through like clockwork. Knowing what we know now, I'd even have been in favor of buying him out a year ago. But again, that's because of his terribly long contract and the new punishments that go with keeping those around. Not because he's changed much (or at all) as a player. Finally, I agree with you about his work ethic being bad for the team. For a few years now I've believed this team lacked an identity. If seems like we're finally seeing a little bit of one emerging. Fast, tenacious, and often explosive offensively. He certainly doesn't fit in with that. But that's not a knock on his production, that's just a change on our organizational direction. Send him to a team like Boston or San Jose and he's flourish.

Because while a capable center, he's a better winger. He's like Zetterberg (or Kesler), his best offensive season (66 pts.) was on the wing. Something not true (or true to a much smaller extent) of Weiss or Helm. Again, he's a MUCH better player than Darren Helm. I'm not sure why this comparison is sticking around. 6 million is a little bit of an overpayment (thanks to that dumb Calgary offer sheet that drive his price up), but pretty close to what good second line centers go for these days. Especially if they're 23 years old and are only getting better. Filppula (5), Kreci (5.25) are good comparables. I'd move Larkin plus Helm (plus whatever else) to get him. And I'd sleep very well knowing that my centers of the present were (some combination of) Datsyuk, Zetterberg, O'Reilly, Sheahan, and Glendening, and my centers of the future were O'Reilly, Athanasiou, Sheahan, Nosek, and Glendening. Seriously, look at those last five centers. O'Reilly, Athanasiou, Sheahan, Nosek, Glendening. Fast, fast, fast, tenacious, hard working, and strong on the puck. That makes me drool when you add in the fact that our wingers are Tatar, Nyquist, Mantha, Abby, Jurco, Pulkkinen, etc. That team would skate you into the ground.

I wasn't implying that you'd trade them straight up. I was implying that O'Reilly is the kind of guy I'd want back if I was sending Larkin in a trade. As far as the other stuff...I don't care about his cap hit (we've got money), its always easier to re-sign a guy if you're a good team (Colorado), and players that good always make you better. Comparing him to Helm is laughable. You said you haven't seen him much, you should. He's a really good hockey player.

Franzen goes through droughts every single year. He was on a goal scoring drought this year. I don't see what the difference is? He had 16 goals and 25 assists last year in 54 games. He had 7 goals and 15 assists in 33 games this year. It's that that much of a drop off. Especially given how hot and cold he runs. Again, I'm not saying we've got to keep the guy or anything. He's clearly not necessary for the team's success. But I think this Franzen has regressed narrative is overblown. Also, can we all agree that using plus/minus to make a point you want to, and then lambasting it as a "worthless stat" the rest of the time, is shaky at best. I've seen you personally talk trash about the plus/minus stat. So I'm not sure why you're using to make a case now.

Because he's everything Larkin projects to be, but is at an age where he could help us out while we've still got Datsyuk and Zetterberg. He's a first/second line center, he's the same size as Larkin, he's super fast, he works his tail off, he's excellent defensively, has good (but not great offense) and competes like hell. Best case scenario Larkin turns into an O'Reilly type guy...but in about four or five years. At which point D and Z are gone or over the hill. Plus, losing Larkin but keeping O'Reilly, Sheahan, and Athanasiou doesn't leave us in bad shape down the middle for years to come.

I'd trade Larkin for O'Reilly. Just sayin'.

He's scoring at .67 ppg despite a pretty big slump (as you point out). He's gone through those before. Nothing about his play this year led me to believe that he wouldn't end with right around 55 pts. Which is usual for him. I dont' see some big, qualitative difference in his play. He was doing what he does every year. I agree, lots of people factor into games even when they don't score. Those guys are better than Franzen. And it's because of those guys that he's no longer necessary. But he is what he's always been. The only difference between then and now is that we no longer rely on him as much. But quite a lot of people here have said, or implied, that his performance is worse this year than in years past. I just don't see it. If Nyquist and Tatar (and Abby to a lesser extent) hadn't emerged into go-to guys, Franzen would have been glued to Zetterberg or Datsyuk's wing like he always is, and his PPG probably wouldn't even have dipped at all.

No doubt. My point is that, if you don't like having him on the team because he's no longer needed is one thing. It's an entirely different thing if you don't like having him on the team because of some perceived decline in ability...which would be a false pretense. I don't care if they got rid of him either. The emergence of the kids makes him unnecessary. But he's the same player he's always been. An injury prone, pretty consistent 50-55 pts. guy. His performance this year has not deviated from that norm.

Like who? Just for my own understanding of your position. I mean, I don't think you're saying that those guys should be traded for a tin of beans. But what kind of player are you talking about here? O'Reilly? Yandle?

Myth 1: Franzen is less productive now than he has ever been. Wrong. His points per game are right around his career average. Myth 2: Franzen is streakier, and disappears more than in the past. Wrong. He's played 33 games. He's got a point in 18 of them. 14 single point games and 4 multi point games. Again, right in line with his career trends. I don't care if he's on the team or not. We can clearly win without him, which is reason enough to want him gone. But can we stop making up crap to make him seem worse than he is? It's the same old Mule, much to the chagrin (or consternation) of the fans.

Lol. Clever girl.

I'm about 90% sure Jarret Stoll is dating, or married, to Erin Andrews. So common beach bimbos are likely beneath him lol. But not Carter and Richards...oooooh no.

Mantha. As I understand it, Larkin's greatest strength is his work ethic and smarts. But other than skating, the report on him is that he doesn't have dynamic offensive ability. As such, I doubt he ever tops out as a "franchise center". Then again, a lot can change. I'm admittedly basing this off scouting reports and other people's projections.

This perfectly illustrates my point. No way can Carter handle all four of those intelligent, young ladies. Two, maybe. But not four. Which is why he needs his wingman? And where is his wingman? Cooling his heels in Manchester, New Hampshire. Now Carter is going to have to try and entertain all four of those women by himself. It's a tragedy.

Slightly off topic, but this is hilarious. Also, we all need to take a minute and acknowledge the real victim here...Jeff Carter. What the hell is he going to do without his wingman?

The best one is of him taking a bottle of scotch to the head, but LGW won't let me post it lol. Mike Richards might be the only guy in the league that could hang with Patrick Kane in a drinking contest.

Mike Richards is the kind of leader, and veteran presence our young guys need in the locker room...er...yeah...

Our team would be better by demoting or reducing the playing time of four wingers, and bringing on another center who's only got 15 points in 47 games? AND he makes almost 6 million a year until 2019. How, exactly, would that make the team better?