kipwinger

Good thing we didn't overpay for any players in free agency eh boys

Don't be so angry guys. KH tried his best and fate determined this was the best he could do. #commitedtotheyouthmovement

Soooo you'd trade Tatar or Jurco for Green?

So you're cool with doing the exact same thing to get Mike Green, except that I'll be Tatar or Jurco going the other way? Because that's why this all came up. To discuss the inherent risks associated with trading too much for guys on expiring contracts. So based on your analysis of the last trade we made for a guy on an expiring contract (Legwand) you'd say it's worth it or no?

...without giving up too much for him. Which was the central point of the last two pages worth of discussion.

It doesn't have to be "the worst move in history" to be a bad move. Also, given how recently this happened and how bad it already turned out (having a center and a 2nd might have been nice this offseason), I can't believe I'm having to defend against going it again (with Tatar instead of Jarnkrok) for Green. The point was to suggest that trading good talent for expiring contracts is risky. I'd never have said another word about it if that very obvious sentiment was immediately set upon by people hell bent on trying to make it look like that trade was anything other than a bad move by Holland. I'm not lamenting the loss of Jarnkrok. I'm hope Holland isn't dumb enough to do it again with someone better. So can you stop being condescending now?

Both the Red Wing organization, and Jarnkrok himself acknowledged the inaccuracy of any "going back to Europe" claims. You can put that one to bed. Secondly, guys like Teemu Pulkkinen and Mattias Backman are ready to play now and aren't going to make the team this year either. It doesn't mean they'll never get the opportunity to try. Why is it always either/or with everyone around here?

Maybe he wouldn't have succeeded. I don't know. But to pretend like he'd have never gotten the opportunity if he hadn't been traded is complete b.s. We gave a year and a half to Emmerton. I think Jarnkrok would have managed at least a look.

He was an AHL rookie, and there is absolutely no evidence that "he wanted to play now". That's just something people keep saying. He's far from the first Red Wings player to be expected to play a couple years in the AHL despite being older and having played professionally before. Also, you're just making things up. He doesn't have "defensive inefficiencies". He was lauded for his "Zetterberg-like" commitment to two-way play. I'm so tired of people using post-hoc justifications to try and make that trade look like it wasn't a total disaster. He wasn't going back to Europe. He wasn't demanding immediate playing time. He would surely have got a chance to be better than Andersson, Sheahan, Glendening, and/or Helm. And he DEFINITELY isn't bad defensively. It was s*** trade. That's all.

Jarnkrok was never going to play for the Wings? We had so few centers in our prospect pool that we literally just drafted 5 of them and signed another from Europe. AND, until we drafted Larkin, not a single center prospect in our organization projected as having top six upside. Not one. So yeah, he'd probably have played a game or two.

Not excited about the possibility of re-signing Cleary and Alfie? If not, here's something that will blow your doors off...if a bunch of other, less deserving guys, get injured you MIGHT see Sproul, Quellet, or Marchenko play some games this year...BOOM! *mind blown*

Thought this was funny. Over on another forum, I just heard one fan say that "the Caps can't trade Green, they need him to replace Orpik when he inevitably breaks down". Lol. If Mike Green being healthy is your team's back up plan you are in serious trouble.

True, but only if Green wants to stay. And as I said before, given how FA turned out that's not a gamble I'm willing to take. Say Tatar sucks, Green plays awesome, and Green leaves. What did we gain? Too many question marks for me to spend big assets on it. I don't mind Green, and I don't want to suggest that I don't think he'd help. He probably would. But I'm not giving up a guy that just had the year Tatar had for a guy who can't stay healthy, is very "unBabcock" in his style, and can leave in less than a year regardless of anything else. Especially when you consider his addition (if it's only short team) isn't likely to be the thing that puts us over the top.

I agree. Problem is, if they don't really impress, or you don't keep them, then you're losing a big asset for nothing. Conversely, if you lose a big asset, you've got more incentive to keep them regardless of how they play. For example: Does anybody really think Holland would have been so quick to re-sign Quincey (twice) if he hadn't spent a first on him? If it had been a third rounder Quincey would likely have left. But if you spend a big asset you want to get some mileage out of the return, regardless of how good it's been.

Look, you may be right. I'm certainly not saying it couldn't happen. But after free agency I'm a bit hesitant to just assume guys want to sign here. And that doesn't even address whether or not WE want to resign him. Say you do give up a top young player for him, at that point you almost have to re-sign him, regardless of the season he's had or whether one of your young guys is tearing it up. What if you give up Tatar or Jurco and Green struggles while Sproul has a MASSIVE season in GR. Do you let him walk? If so, you've lost a future top six winger for nothing. If you keep him, you're blocking another young guy with another ineffective vet, and you tie up money that could be used elsewhere. In any case, these are all reasons why it's not a good idea to give up good young roster players for guys on expiring contracts. Hence, you almost NEVER see anybody do it. Not necessarily, given all the talk about "stop gaps" leading up to FA it's not hard to argue that Detroit doesn't intend to keep whoever they acquire around for very long. That's the whole point of a stop gap.

A top four defenseman under contract? Sure. I'd trade almost any of our young guns in a package for Yandle. He's that good AND under contract. But losing a guy as good as Jurco or Tatar for a rental is dumb. How much developmental time and resources go into each prospect? A lot. And the absolute best you can hope for is that they turn into top six forwards or top four defenseman. In Tatar, Nyquist, and Jurco, your best case scenario has come true...and it's DEFINITELY not good value to throw that away for a guy who (if recent history is any indication) isn't going to help you compete for a Cup and probably isn't going to re-sign with your team at the end of the year.

Not so far, but he did finish a little stronger at the end of last season. Then again, he was completely buried in the depth chart too so it's not like he's had a chance to play much.

Like I said, it really seems to be a matter of fundamentals. A lot of guys on good teams get away with bad habits in juniors. And even when they come up to the AHL their skating makes up for their lack of positioning. His just doesn't, so he gets exposed. But I agree, he's not done. He's just got to learn the right way to play hockey now.

I agree. I always thought that in the best case scenario he'd model his game off of Vanek. He's not the greatest skater in the world either, but he's got a good shot, is sturdy down around the crease, and is a physically strong guy who's not afraid of contact. I don't know if it's too late for Frk to be a poor man's Vanek, but that's probably the guy I see in him the most.

I don't think anybody is saying that all the young guys are untouchable. But rather that they shouldn't be traded for peanuts. Which should be obvious, except that it isn't to some folks.

Again, clearly you're happy with White, Colaiacovo, Quincey, Sammy, Tootoo, Alfie, and Weiss, and you obviously think that's absolutely the best possible acquisitions that Holland could have made. I don't buy it. But I'm not going to argue with you about it. You win. Holland could not have possible done any better. Kudos Ken Holland. Despite your best efforts, fate has been against you for the last half decade and that's why we went from a Stanley Cup contender to barely making the playoffs. Nothing at all to do with your personnel decisions, which are the best they could be under the circumstances, and happen in a vacuum anyway.

You're totally right. I had no idea that Niskanen, Boyle, Ehrhoff, Stralman, and every single other free agent all went "home" to play this year. No wonder we didn't get any. There just weren't any FAs from Michigan this year. Totally makes sense now.

Kane's gonna get soooooooooooooo wasted tonight! PARTY!!!! WOOOO!

I definitely don't think that Garrison is as good as Green, and Garrison is under contract, but the two scenarios would be similar in that they're both cap dumps of offensive defensemen in the 30-40 pts. range. So starting with something similar is not a bad idea. If Garrison was worth a second then Detroit should probably start with a 2nd plus a little more and go from there. All this talk about starting with Tatar or Jurco is nuts.

What did Garrison go for? I'd start with a package that was just a little better than that and work my way up.